4 ms·

4 styluses... Why not a laser reader[0]? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable

meatsock 6y ago
laser readers are worse than using a needle because you can't rely on the laser to push dust & detritus out of the way nor to ignore smaller faults that would not even register using a stylus, so the recording ends up requiring more noise reduction and attention than using bog standard low price styli. previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14964384 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14964384
whanamura 6y ago
I work with the Internet Archive, and asked George Blood about the wear and tear using a stylus. Here's what he had to say: "LPs are soft and played with a very small diamond. 78s are made from shellac which is hard and abrasive. Originally they were played with steel needles at 10x the tracking weight used by our modern equipment. They also use a much larger diamond with 5-10x the surface area. The tracking force is spread over a larger area than vinyl playback. The contact pressure is less than 10% of vinyl playback. "
whanamura 6y ago
Ok, I turned to the expert himself, George Blood, who responded: "laser turntables are designed to play 33rpm discs. Most will not spin at 78rpm. There is broad agreement they do not sound as good as stylus playback. I.R.E.N.E. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRENE_(technology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRENE_(technology)) captures the disc as an image, then transforms that into sound. It is not way slower than real time, and while it is arguable that the resolution of the image is superior to stylus playback, the software is not yet able to produce results as good as stylus playback. And it introduces it’s own, idiomatic noise spectrum. On the other hand it is far and away the best system for ‘playing’ damaged or compromised discs, such as lacquers that are beginning to delaminate."

meatsock 6y ago

laser readers are worse than using a needle because you can't rely on the laser to push dust & detritus out of the way nor to ignore smaller faults that would not even register using a stylus, so the recording ends up requiring more noise reduction and attention than using bog standard low price styli. previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14964384 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14964384

whanamura 6y ago

I work with the Internet Archive, and asked George Blood about the wear and tear using a stylus. Here's what he had to say: "LPs are soft and played with a very small diamond. 78s are made from shellac which is hard and abrasive. Originally they were played with steel needles at 10x the tracking weight used by our modern equipment. They also use a much larger diamond with 5-10x the surface area. The tracking force is spread over a larger area than vinyl playback. The contact pressure is less than 10% of vinyl playback. "

whanamura 6y ago

Ok, I turned to the expert himself, George Blood, who responded: "laser turntables are designed to play 33rpm discs. Most will not spin at 78rpm. There is broad agreement they do not sound as good as stylus playback. I.R.E.N.E. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRENE_(technology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRENE_(technology)) captures the disc as an image, then transforms that into sound. It is not way slower than real time, and while it is arguable that the resolution of the image is superior to stylus playback, the software is not yet able to produce results as good as stylus playback. And it introduces it’s own, idiomatic noise spectrum. On the other hand it is far and away the best system for ‘playing’ damaged or compromised discs, such as lacquers that are beginning to delaminate."