[muzician21]

Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

Just got a 45 off Ebay - brand new condition. As I do with any vinyl
before it gets played I hit it with vacuum irrigation using the Disc
Doctor solution and brushes, distilled water rinse.

Yup, sounds distorted with a buzzy, grainy edge. My turntable is an
SL1200 MK2 with an Audio Technica catridge in good condition. While
not a $100k exotic setup it should be up to the task of playing the
disc. Clean condition Direct To Disc albums sound great on it.

What's the story with 45's?

[gjsmo]

On Jun 23, 12:59*pm, muzician21 wrote:
Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

Just got a 45 off Ebay - brand new condition. As I do with any vinyl
before it gets played I hit it with vacuum irrigation using the Disc
Doctor solution and brushes, distilled water rinse.

Yup, sounds distorted with a buzzy, grainy edge. My turntable is an
SL1200 MK2 with an Audio Technica catridge in good condition. While
not a $100k exotic setup it should be up to the task of playing the
disc. Clean condition Direct To Disc albums sound great on it.

What's the story with 45's?

I've always thought they just sounded "harsh" - like some part of the
recording chain was putting in some horrible-sounding EQ. Or maybe
it's the cutting heads they used.
Of course, I don't this the RIAA EQ standard existed yet. You may not
have the right eq applied if your sound system applies the standard
RIAA curve.
Then again, I have a LP-size (12" I think) recorded at 45RPM - it's
organ music, sounds great. I've always thought that this would be
great if it were adopted, but it's a bit late now...
Just my thoughts,

[Mike Rivers]

On 6/23/2011 12:59 PM, muzician21 wrote:
Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

Just got a 45 off Ebay - brand new condition. As I do with any vinyl
before it gets played I hit it with vacuum irrigation using the Disc
Doctor solution and brushes, distilled water rinse.

Yup, sounds distorted with a buzzy, grainy edge.

What's the story with 45's?

They're mastered for maximum juke box volume, and they're
often as not pressed on ground up vinyl statuettes of Elvis
mixed with asphalt driveway scrapings.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Scott Dorsey]

So, these 45s you have... are they actually vinyl, or are they the normal
styrene pressings?

The styrene sounds okay when it's new and clean, but one or two plays with
a worn stylus and it's horrible.

A fineline stylus can help a lot playing back worn styrene.

Note that a lot of 45s were cut incredibly hot in order to make them loud
on jukeboxes. Sometimes there are playback linearity issues, sometimes
there were record linearity issues. A 50x microscope will tell you which.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[muzician21]

On Jun 23, 4:35*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Note that a lot of 45s were cut incredibly hot in order to make them loud
on jukeboxes. *


Yes, that's the other thing I noticed, it's a lot louder at the same
volume knob setting on the amp.

[muzician21]

On Jun 23, 4:44*pm, muzician21 wrote:
On Jun 23, 4:35*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Note that a lot of 45s were cut incredibly hot in order to make them loud
on jukeboxes. *

Yes, that's the other thing I noticed, it's a lot louder


....a lot louder in comparison to LP's is the rest of that thought if
it wasn't obvious.

[Carey Carlan]

Mike Rivers wrote in :

On 6/23/2011 12:59 PM, muzician21 wrote:
Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

Just got a 45 off Ebay - brand new condition. As I do with any vinyl
before it gets played I hit it with vacuum irrigation using the Disc
Doctor solution and brushes, distilled water rinse.

Yup, sounds distorted with a buzzy, grainy edge.

What's the story with 45's?

They're mastered for maximum juke box volume, and they're
often as not pressed on ground up vinyl statuettes of Elvis
mixed with asphalt driveway scrapings.

Lastly, is it really a "new" 45? A record in a jukebox gathers no
fingerprints and no scratches, except in the grooves where it is ground to
dust.

[PStamler]

On Jun 23, 4:57*pm, Carey Carlan wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote :

On 6/23/2011 12:59 PM, muzician21 wrote:
Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

Just got a 45 off Ebay - brand new condition. As I do with any vinyl
before it gets played I hit it with vacuum irrigation using the Disc
Doctor solution and brushes, distilled water rinse.

Yup, sounds distorted with a buzzy, grainy edge.

What's the story with 45's?

They're mastered for maximum juke box volume, and they're
often as not pressed on ground up vinyl statuettes of Elvis
mixed with asphalt driveway scrapings.

That's your problem; the cartridge can't track the incredibly
overmodulated groove. Particularly if it's worn, and it usually is.

Peace,
Paul

[muzician21]

On Jun 23, 5:57*pm, Carey Carlan wrote:

Lastly, is it really a "new" 45? *A record in a jukebox gathers no
fingerprints and no scratches, except in the grooves where it is ground to
dust.


While I can't say for sure, I'd be surprised if it was ever in a
jukebox. It's an obscure title by an artist who never had any radio
hits.

[Olafur Gunnlaugsson[_2_]]

Þann 23/06/2011 17:59, skrifaði muzician21:
Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

singles usually not pressed on virgin vinyl unless they are coloured
vinyl, in some countries (USA etc.) singles were cut at a considerably
higher modulation rate than LP's, in Jamiaca they were way above LP's
and so high that only moving coil cutterheads could handle them

not a problem for the crystal/ceramic pickups in jukeboxes and budget
home hi-fi sets nor for the MC pickups used by broadcasters but MM
pickups (and some MI designs as well) like used in mid-end hi-fi have a
tendency to distort at high modulation levels

the high modulation rate and a tendency to maximise the volume of
singles also creates a mild compression effect not unlike that of tape
(but coarser) but if overdone simply becomes distortion

[Olafur Gunnlaugsson[_2_]]

Þann 24/06/2011 15:50, skrifaði Olafur Gunnlaugsson:
Þann 23/06/2011 17:59, skrifaði muzician21:
Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

singles usually not pressed on virgin vinyl unless they are coloured
vinyl, in some countries (USA etc.) singles were cut at a considerably
higher modulation rate than LP's, in Jamiaca they were way above LP's
and so high that only moving coil cutterheads could handle them

not a problem for the crystal/ceramic pickups in jukeboxes and budget
home hi-fi sets nor for the MC pickups used by broadcasters but MM
pickups (and some MI designs as well) like used in mid-end hi-fi have a
tendency to distort at high modulation levels

PS. the quality of the stylus also helps/hinders with high modulation
levels, elliptical and line contact's are noticeably better than spericals


the high modulation rate and a tendency to maximise the volume of
singles also creates a mild compression effect not unlike that of tape
(but coarser) but if overdone simply becomes distortion

[Scott Dorsey]

Olafur Gunnlaugsson wrote:
Þann 23/06/2011 17:59, skrifaði muzician21:
Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

singles usually not pressed on virgin vinyl unless they are coloured
vinyl, in some countries (USA etc.) singles were cut at a considerably
higher modulation rate than LP's, in Jamiaca they were way above LP's
and so high that only moving coil cutterheads could handle them

Very few of them were pressed on vinyl at all.

The amount of regrind, though, really doesn't affect distortion substantially
on vinyl pressings. It will affect noise floor a lot (and surprisingly,
adding maybe 10% regrind in there gives you a pressing that is quieter than
'virgin vinyl.'

The higher modulation rate is 90% of the problem.

not a problem for the crystal/ceramic pickups in jukeboxes and budget
home hi-fi sets nor for the MC pickups used by broadcasters but MM
pickups (and some MI designs as well) like used in mid-end hi-fi have a
tendency to distort at high modulation levels

And that distortion is a side effect of mistracking which tends to cause
permanent groove damage. On styrenes it only takes one play to wreck a
record.

the high modulation rate and a tendency to maximise the volume of
singles also creates a mild compression effect not unlike that of tape
(but coarser) but if overdone simply becomes distortion

Sure, but it's loud on the jukebox.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[muzician21]

On Jun 23, 4:35*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
So, these 45s you have... are they actually vinyl, or are they the normal
styrene pressings?


No idea. I just generically refer to 45's and LP's as "vinyl". Not
versed on the specifics and how one would determine this.

[Scott Dorsey]

muzician21 wrote:
On Jun 23, 4:35=A0pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
So, these 45s you have... are they actually vinyl, or are they the normal
styrene pressings?

No idea. I just generically refer to 45's and LP's as "vinyl". Not
versed on the specifics and how one would determine this.

They look and feel completely different. The styrene is much harder
and makes a different sound when you tap on it with your finger.

Pick up an old 45 and a modern LP and you'll see they are made of very
different material.

There were 7" vinyl pressings in the seventies and eighties but they
were pretty much only cost-effective for small runs. Today I don't
think any of the styrene injection-molding machines still exist, so any
7" discs you see being made today are going to be vinyl.

The styrene injection molding process was faster and cheaper than the
vinyl pressing process for large runs. However, it results in discs
that wear very differently.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[geoff]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Pick up an old 45 and a modern LP and you'll see they are made of very
different material.

And wrt tracking,the velocities and acceleration needs to be more for 45s.
The rock on the stick has to wiggle quicker. Electrons have much less mass,
which is why CDs can be better.

geoff

[malachi[_5_]]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...

They're mastered for maximum juke box volume, and they're often as not
pressed on ground up vinyl statuettes of Elvis mixed with asphalt driveway
scrapings.

--

I KNEW it!

malachi

P.S. I just dug through my old stuff at my folks' house and found my old 45
of "Popcorn" by Hot Butter.

I too noticed how fuzzy and overcompressed it sounded.

Good thing here in the 21st century we now know not to overcompress/limit
our music.

[Trevor]

"geoff" wrote in message
...
And wrt tracking,the velocities and acceleration needs to be more for 45s.
The rock on the stick has to wiggle quicker. Electrons have much less
mass, which is why CDs can be better.

Surely that would be photons not electrons, IF it were not for the fact that
the laser head still has to follow the disc pits and maintain focus as well.
Of course the servo's and error correction generally allow it to do that
quite well, but when the mechanics are bad, the disc is even more unplayable
than any vinyl/turntable combination. With vinyl you still get some sound,
with a faulty CD player you often get a "disc error" displayed on the front
panel and no sound at all.

Trevor.

[Mike Rivers]

On 6/26/2011 8:28 PM, malachi wrote:

Good thing here in the 21st century we now know not to overcompress/limit
our music.

But knowing it and not doing it anyway are two different
things.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Pick up an old 45 and a modern LP and you'll see they are made of very
different material.

And wrt tracking,the velocities and acceleration needs to be more for 45s.
The rock on the stick has to wiggle quicker. Electrons have much less mass,
which is why CDs can be better.

Not really. The linear velocity on a 7" 45 isn't much different than for a
12" 33.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[William Sommerwerck]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
geoff wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...

Pick up an old 45 and a modern LP and you'll see they
are made of very different material.

And wrt tracking,the velocities and acceleration needs to be more
for 45s. The rock on the stick has to wiggle quicker. Electrons
have much less mass, which is why CDs can be better.

Not really. The linear velocity on a 7" 45 isn't much different than
for a 12" 33.

OUCH, Scott. Would you care to retract that? (And I'm not talking about the
Zenith Micro-Touch 2G stylus.)

The velocity he's referring to is the modulation velocity, not the linear
velocity of the groove.

[Scott Dorsey]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
geoff wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...

Pick up an old 45 and a modern LP and you'll see they
are made of very different material.

And wrt tracking,the velocities and acceleration needs to be more
for 45s. The rock on the stick has to wiggle quicker. Electrons
have much less mass, which is why CDs can be better.

Not really. The linear velocity on a 7" 45 isn't much different than
for a 12" 33.

OUCH, Scott. Would you care to retract that? (And I'm not talking about the
Zenith Micro-Touch 2G stylus.)

Let's do the numbers and see what the linear velocity of the stylus actually
works out to. Diameter X pi X rotation rate:

Outer Groove:

11.5 inches at 33 rpm = 1192 inches/min
6.75 inches at 45 rpm = 954 inches/min

Inner Groove:

6 inches at 33 rpm = 622 inches/min
5 inches at 45 rpm = 706 inches/min

So, the LP is a little better at the beginning, but gets worse at the end
if you really try and push toward the label.

As always, the farther from the label you can get the last track, the higher
the linear velocity you can get on that track.

The velocity he's referring to is the modulation velocity, not the linear
velocity of the groove.

The modulation velocity is a function of the modulation level and the linear
velocity of the groove.

Because the linear velocity of the groove is so much lower on the inner track,
we have to cut the inner track more quietly so as not to exceed the maximum
linear velocity of the cutting and playback styli. This is a pain in the
neck for symphonic works where the last bit is the loudest.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[William Sommerwerck]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
William Sommerwerck wrote:

Not really. The linear velocity on a 7" 45 isn't much different than
for a 12" 33.

OUCH, Scott. Would you care to retract that? (And I'm not talking
about the Zenith Micro-Touch 2G stylus.)

Let's do the numbers and see what the linear velocity of the stylus
actually
works out to. Diameter X pi X rotation rate:

Outer Groove:
11.5 inches at 33 rpm = 1192 inches/min
6.75 inches at 45 rpm = 954 inches/min

Inner Groove:
6 inches at 33 rpm = 622 inches/min
5 inches at 45 rpm = 706 inches/min

So, the LP is a little better at the beginning, but gets worse at the end
if you really try and push toward the label.

As always, the farther from the label you can get the last track, the
higher
the linear velocity you can get on that track.

The velocity he's referring to is the modulation velocity, not the linear
velocity of the groove.

The modulation velocity is a function of the modulation level and the
linear
velocity of the groove.

Nope. Actually, it's determined by the amplitude of the groove displacement
and modulation frequency. Other than friction between the tip and groove,
the stylus doesn't "know" the record is turning. All it "sees" is a
displacement. The amplitude of that displacement, and its frequency,
determine the output of a velocity pickup. (Right?) If this were not so, the
cutting amplitude would have to be continually increased as the head moved
toward the center of the disk. Adn it isn't.

To put it a different way... The output of such a pickup is specified for a
particular "velocity" -- and this velocity has nothing to do with how fast
the record turns. Modulation amplitude (distance) multiplied by frequency
(1/time) eauals distance/time -- velocity.

Specific example... Many moving-flux pickups are spec'd at 1mV per cm/s. If
the RMS groove modulation of a 100Hz signal were 0.1 mm, then the pickup's
output would be 1mV. This relationship has nothing to do with how fast the
record is turning, but how fast the stylus is moving with respect to the
pickup body. (Or more accurately, how fast the magnet is moving with respect
to the coils.)


Because the linear velocity of the groove is so much lower on the inner
track,
we have to cut the inner track more quietly so as not to exceed the
maximum
linear velocity of the cutting and playback styli. This is a pain in the
neck for symphonic works where the last bit is the loudest.

Actually, this is a wavelength-related phenomenon, not a "velocity"-related
one.

[Scott Dorsey]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
The modulation velocity is a function of the modulation level and the
linear
velocity of the groove.

Nope. Actually, it's determined by the amplitude of the groove displacement
and modulation frequency. Other than friction between the tip and groove,
the stylus doesn't "know" the record is turning. All it "sees" is a
displacement. The amplitude of that displacement, and its frequency,
determine the output of a velocity pickup. (Right?) If this were not so, the
cutting amplitude would have to be continually increased as the head moved
toward the center of the disk. Adn it isn't.

You're correct, but....

The maximum modulation velocity you can achieve is limited by the linear
velocity of the groove and by the frequency of the signal. If you put too
much high end in with a low linear velocity, you get distortion due to
mistracking.

To put it a different way... The output of such a pickup is specified for a
particular "velocity" -- and this velocity has nothing to do with how fast
the record turns. Modulation amplitude (distance) multiplied by frequency
(1/time) eauals distance/time -- velocity.

This is true. However, the maximum level that you can put on the disc is
strongly related to the linear velocity of the disc. The actual ability
of the stylus to track the groove becomes far poorer when the width of a
wave is physically much smaller.

Because the linear velocity of the groove is so much lower on the inner
track,
we have to cut the inner track more quietly so as not to exceed the
maximum
linear velocity of the cutting and playback styli. This is a pain in the
neck for symphonic works where the last bit is the loudest.

Actually, this is a wavelength-related phenomenon, not a "velocity"-related
one.

It's the physical dimension of the wave on the disc.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ron Capik[_3_]]

On 6/27/2011 11:30 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
William wrote:
The modulation velocity is a function of the modulation level and the
linear
velocity of the groove.

Nope. Actually, it's determined by the amplitude of the groove displacement
and modulation frequency. Other than friction between the tip and groove,
the stylus doesn't "know" the record is turning. All it "sees" is a
displacement. The amplitude of that displacement, and its frequency,
determine the output of a velocity pickup. (Right?) If this were not so, the
cutting amplitude would have to be continually increased as the head moved
toward the center of the disk. Adn it isn't.

You're correct, but....

The maximum modulation velocity you can achieve is limited by the linear
velocity of the groove and by the frequency of the signal. If you put too
much high end in with a low linear velocity, you get distortion due to
mistracking.

To put it a different way... The output of such a pickup is specified for a
particular "velocity" -- and this velocity has nothing to do with how fast
the record turns. Modulation amplitude (distance) multiplied by frequency
(1/time) eauals distance/time -- velocity.

This is true. However, the maximum level that you can put on the disc is
strongly related to the linear velocity of the disc. The actual ability
of the stylus to track the groove becomes far poorer when the width of a
wave is physically much smaller.

Because the linear velocity of the groove is so much lower on the inner
track,
we have to cut the inner track more quietly so as not to exceed the
maximum
linear velocity of the cutting and playback styli. This is a pain in the
neck for symphonic works where the last bit is the loudest.

Actually, this is a wavelength-related phenomenon, not a "velocity"-related
one.

It's the physical dimension of the wave on the disc.
--scott

I believe slew rate needs to be part of this discussion.


Later...
Ron Capik
--

[Olafur Gunnlaugsson[_2_]]

Þann 24/06/2011 16:07, skrifaði Scott Dorsey:
Olafur wrote:
Þann 23/06/2011 17:59, skrifaði muzician21:
Hadn't played a 45 in a long time. It seemed to me they always sounded
"overloaded", distorted, never as "clean" as an LP.

singles usually not pressed on virgin vinyl unless they are coloured
vinyl, in some countries (USA etc.) singles were cut at a considerably
higher modulation rate than LP's, in Jamiaca they were way above LP's
and so high that only moving coil cutterheads could handle them

Very few of them were pressed on vinyl at all.

In Europe at the least in the countries were I had records pressed the
same vinyl was used for 7 and 12", never bought the service in the
Americas so cannot possibly comment.

I countries were LP's and EP's (12" singles) dominated and 7" singles
were just a small part of a plants output the singles were as often as
not made out of nothing but reclaimed vinyl, you could sometimes see
fibres sticking out of the material where it had not melted properly.
That was the reason I always paid a few extra pounds for a coloured
vinyl, only way to guarantee a virgin vinyl for a pressing

[Bill Graham]

Scott Dorsey wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
geoff wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...

Pick up an old 45 and a modern LP and you'll see they
are made of very different material.

And wrt tracking,the velocities and acceleration needs to be more
for 45s. The rock on the stick has to wiggle quicker. Electrons
have much less mass, which is why CDs can be better.

Not really. The linear velocity on a 7" 45 isn't much different than
for a 12" 33.

OUCH, Scott. Would you care to retract that? (And I'm not talking
about the Zenith Micro-Touch 2G stylus.)

Let's do the numbers and see what the linear velocity of the stylus
actually works out to. Diameter X pi X rotation rate:

Outer Groove:

11.5 inches at 33 rpm = 1192 inches/min
6.75 inches at 45 rpm = 954 inches/min

Inner Groove:

6 inches at 33 rpm = 622 inches/min
5 inches at 45 rpm = 706 inches/min

So, the LP is a little better at the beginning, but gets worse at the
end
if you really try and push toward the label.

As always, the farther from the label you can get the last track, the
higher the linear velocity you can get on that track.

The velocity he's referring to is the modulation velocity, not the
linear velocity of the groove.

The modulation velocity is a function of the modulation level and the
linear velocity of the groove.

Because the linear velocity of the groove is so much lower on the
inner track, we have to cut the inner track more quietly so as not to
exceed the maximum linear velocity of the cutting and playback styli.
This is a pain in the neck for symphonic works where the last bit is
the loudest. --scott

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will play the
old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It seems to me that
modern technology could manage this.....

[John Williamson]

Bill Graham wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
geoff wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...

Pick up an old 45 and a modern LP and you'll see they
are made of very different material.

And wrt tracking,the velocities and acceleration needs to be more
for 45s. The rock on the stick has to wiggle quicker. Electrons
have much less mass, which is why CDs can be better.

Not really. The linear velocity on a 7" 45 isn't much different than
for a 12" 33.

OUCH, Scott. Would you care to retract that? (And I'm not talking
about the Zenith Micro-Touch 2G stylus.)

Let's do the numbers and see what the linear velocity of the stylus
actually works out to. Diameter X pi X rotation rate:

Outer Groove:

11.5 inches at 33 rpm = 1192 inches/min
6.75 inches at 45 rpm = 954 inches/min

Inner Groove:

6 inches at 33 rpm = 622 inches/min
5 inches at 45 rpm = 706 inches/min

So, the LP is a little better at the beginning, but gets worse at the
end
if you really try and push toward the label.

As always, the farther from the label you can get the last track, the
higher the linear velocity you can get on that track.

The velocity he's referring to is the modulation velocity, not the
linear velocity of the groove.

The modulation velocity is a function of the modulation level and the
linear velocity of the groove.

Because the linear velocity of the groove is so much lower on the
inner track, we have to cut the inner track more quietly so as not to
exceed the maximum linear velocity of the cutting and playback styli.
This is a pain in the neck for symphonic works where the last bit is
the loudest. --scott

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will play
the old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It seems to me
that modern technology could manage this.....

I thought that it had been done, but the disadvantages outweighed the
advantages?

It played back the microscopic grains of dust that a normal stylus
ignores or wipes away. The laser spot is also probably going to be
bigger than the contact area of a stylus, so bandwidth and tracking
distortion would be a problem.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Charles Tomaras]

"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will play
the old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It seems to me
that modern technology could manage this.....

http://www.elpj.com/

[Trevor]

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will play
the old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It seems to me
that modern technology could manage this.....

I thought that it had been done, but the disadvantages outweighed the
advantages?

Right it was done a LONG time ago. Quality improvements did not match the
price however, and you only ever need to play a disc once these days to
record it, so wear is no longer an issue.


It played back the microscopic grains of dust that a normal stylus ignores
or wipes away. The laser spot is also probably going to be bigger than the
contact area of a stylus, so bandwidth and tracking distortion would be a
problem.

I don't think that would be a problem for current technology lasers. The
ones used in blu-ray players are pretty fine focus (and cheap), but you can
go even smaller if it were actually necessary.

Trevor.

[Bill Graham]

Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will
play the old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It
seems to me that modern technology could manage this.....

http://www.elpj.com/

Nice, but a bit pricy....
http://www.elpj.com/purchase/index.html

[Charles Tomaras]

"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...
Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will
play the old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It
seems to me that modern technology could manage this.....

http://www.elpj.com/

Nice, but a bit pricy....
http://www.elpj.com/purchase/index.html

No need to buy the expensive model...you can get by just fine with the $8000
unit!

[Trevor]

"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...
http://www.elpj.com/

Nice, but a bit pricy....
http://www.elpj.com/purchase/index.html

No need to buy the expensive model...you can get by just fine with the
$8000 unit!

Right, $8,000 is not expensive for playing crappy old vinyl, "High end sound
quality NOT included"!
(specs are no better than standard turntables at 1/10th the price)
And don't forget to add shipping cost, plus the cost of a proper disc
cleaning machine. Plus a 4 month wait!

And can you tell my why it's phono level out, and why they aren't sure
whether it's actually $300 or $500 extra for line level out? :-)
Given the processing needed, I can't see why it would ever be phono level at
all.

Trevor.

[Scott Dorsey]

Bill Graham wrote:

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will play the
old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It seems to me that
modern technology could manage this.....

Finial (and successors) have made such a thing for twenty years. It has
advantages and disadvantages; it can track very badly worn grooves but it
also has serious trouble dealing with dust and dirt that a stylus would knock
right away. Still, the main linearity issues these days are in the cutting
side.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Charles Tomaras]

"Trevor" wrote in message
u...

"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...
http://www.elpj.com/

Nice, but a bit pricy....
http://www.elpj.com/purchase/index.html

No need to buy the expensive model...you can get by just fine with the
$8000 unit!

Right, $8,000 is not expensive for playing crappy old vinyl, "High end
sound quality NOT included"!
(specs are no better than standard turntables at 1/10th the price)
And don't forget to add shipping cost, plus the cost of a proper disc
cleaning machine. Plus a 4 month wait!

And can you tell my why it's phono level out, and why they aren't sure
whether it's actually $300 or $500 extra for line level out? :-)
Given the processing needed, I can't see why it would ever be phono level
at all.

Trevor.

Pretty sure both models sound better if you can set them up in a vacuum so
that the space between the laser and the vinyl is oxygen free!

[Bill Graham]

Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...
Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will
play the old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It
seems to me that modern technology could manage this.....

http://www.elpj.com/

Nice, but a bit pricy....
http://www.elpj.com/purchase/index.html

No need to buy the expensive model...you can get by just fine with
the $8000 unit!

Oh! In that case, I'll take two......

[Steve King]

"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...

"Trevor" wrote in message
u...

"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...
http://www.elpj.com/

Nice, but a bit pricy....
http://www.elpj.com/purchase/index.html

No need to buy the expensive model...you can get by just fine with the
$8000 unit!

Right, $8,000 is not expensive for playing crappy old vinyl, "High end
sound quality NOT included"!
(specs are no better than standard turntables at 1/10th the price)
And don't forget to add shipping cost, plus the cost of a proper disc
cleaning machine. Plus a 4 month wait!

And can you tell my why it's phono level out, and why they aren't sure
whether it's actually $300 or $500 extra for line level out? :-)
Given the processing needed, I can't see why it would ever be phono level
at all.

Trevor.

Pretty sure both models sound better if you can set them up in a vacuum so
that the space between the laser and the vinyl is oxygen free!


If you'd like an Excel spread sheet with the double-blind test results on
that, I'll send it to your private email.

Steve King

[Arny Krueger]

"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...

"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will play
the old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It seems to me
that modern technology could manage this.....

http://www.elpj.com/

The well known problem with this device is that there is no needle to sweep
debris from the groove and distort the groove as was intended when the
record was cut. The former is the big problem, and many transcriptions are
almost unlistenable without computer tic reduction. I don't know if this is
still true, but at one time a copy of a well known computer tic removal
program was included.

[Trevor]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
to sweep
debris from the groove and distort the groove as was intended when the
record was cut. The former is the big problem, and many transcriptions are
almost unlistenable without computer tic reduction. I don't know if this
is still true, but at one time a copy of a well known computer tic removal
program was included.

Which would kind of defeat their claim that no digital procesing is involved
however!

Trevor.

[David Gravereaux]

On 06/27/2011 06:23 PM, Bill Graham wrote:

Somebody needs to develop a laser tracking/reading device that will play
the old records without putting any wear on the grooves. It seems to me
that modern technology could manage this.....

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=3098

Was done just at the time CDs came to market. It cost a fortune then,
but didn't really make it to market before the venture capital was
exhausted.

Oh, and it sounded great. I had one of the 10 or so sample Finials for
a time. Top-end was more "accurate" compared to a stylus, but liked the
sound of a V-15typeV-MR better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable
--



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy. -- Philip Zimmermann

iEYEARECAAYFAk4KsrkACgkQlZadkQh/RmGlpACg7VDtwAyNZuz58tPGwIQkT+UU
Ve0AnR4tRXqSg5xqtETV/Dg15IrZUI69
=m+Mt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[David Gravereaux]

On 06/28/2011 06:15 PM, Trevor wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
to sweep
debris from the groove and distort the groove as was intended when the
record was cut. The former is the big problem, and many transcriptions are
almost unlistenable without computer tic reduction. I don't know if this
is still true, but at one time a copy of a well known computer tic removal
program was included.

Which would kind of defeat their claim that no digital procesing is involved
however!

tic removal was done in the analog domain on the Finial.
--



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy. -- Philip Zimmermann

iEYEARECAAYFAk4KtVMACgkQlZadkQh/RmFYywCgiiCB87EJM2e7OXW+M3Tp/a5H
w5sAn0mtiDleJkrKRGaAXYXUD00MghP0
=mmrq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----