4 ms·
Not sure about hobbyists, and the price point. Lasers are cheap, tracking for them is less so. To accurately read these grooves with sufficient resolution, you
by Const-me 7y ago
Not sure about hobbyists, and the price point.
Lasers are cheap, tracking for them is less so. To accurately read these grooves with sufficient resolution, you need 2 lasers (LPs are stereo), both looking at 45 degree inclination from different angles, and focused at the same point. That kind of accurate spatial + temporal sync ain’t trivial to accomplish. CDs/DVDs are much easier to implement. They don’t need similar resolution because digital, and they light their laser along the normal, only need to track 2 axes.
Even if you’ll manage to accurately focus both lasers, another problem is interference between left and right channel lasers.
- rangibaby 7y ago> Even if you’ll manage to accurately focus both lasers, another problem is interference between left and right channel lasers. Would aiming the lasers at slightly different spots and putting the channels back together in software work?
- srean 7y agoWould polarization angle have enough signal to be useful ?
- Const-me 7y agoProbably yes but it’s not trivial. If lasers are 10mm apart from each other, a radial track curves by 3.8° between them at outer radius, by 9.5° at inner radius. Probably too large difference to neglect. The sensors probably need to rotate around vertical axis too, to compensate for decreasing track radius. Technically doable, just all these precise mechanical parts add cost, and unlike electronics or software they eventually fail due to mechanical wear. The technical problem is already solved, but the product costs $15k: https://diffuser.fm/laser-turntable/ https://diffuser.fm/laser-turntable/ As you see from the description, they did it with 5 lasers instead of 2.