Laser on Vinyl, the ultimate turntable?

[KA5PIU]

Hello.

Some audio purist will make noise, but how about the laser turntable?
http://www.elpj.com/about/
As the site explains, no wear, records will last forever, or at least until the vinyl degrades.
I have seen one in use, and a record that could not otherwise be played sounded just fine.

[NQ6U]

$7K for the cheapest model and it requires that "the vinyl record must be absolutely clean and free of debris." Good luck with that.

And, lest I forget:

http://i815.photobucket.com/albums/zz79/gyrogeerloose/WART-hog.png

[KA5PIU]

$7K for the cheapest model and it requires that "the vinyl record must be absolutely clean and free of debris." Good luck with that.



Hello.

Yes, it has its drawbacks, to say the least.
But when the CD player came out it was god awful expensive.
And the VCR, a mini refrigerator that cost 3 grand?
But the good news is that although a record must be clean, and dishwashing liquid works wonders, I kid you not! it will play records that are otherwise unusable.
And, yes, I really do clean records with dishwashing liquid, that and a good spray with water and they are fine.
Do not use a brush or anything else, just a quick spray with a mix of water and dishwashing liquid followed by a good rinse and air drying.
Careful of the paper label and it is all good.
A record is a mechanical device, keeping it clean is the first step to reducing wear.

[KG4CGC]

It would still read the information in ONES and ZEROS.
ONES and ZEROS create hard corners.
Hard corners follow the waveform like stair steps.
Stair steps skip pieces of the signal in the reproduction process.
Put a board along the length of a staircase.
The parts of the board that the stairs do not touch is what you miss with digital sound.

[KA5PIU]

It would still read the information in ONES and ZEROS.
ONES and ZEROS create hard corners.
Hard corners follow the waveform like stair steps.
Stair steps skip pieces of the signal in the reproduction process.
Put a board along the length of a staircase.
The parts of the board that the stairs do not touch is what you miss with digital sound.

Hello.

Incorrect, this laser pickup has nothing to do with reproducing sound in digital.
The laser unit has 3 beams that are reflected off of the walls of the grooves and are sent back to a set of phototransistors.
2 signals represent the left and right audio channels and are faithful analog reproductions, but without the wear caused by an actual stylus.

[KG4CGC]

Hello.

Incorrect, this laser pickup has nothing to do with reproducing sound in digital.
The laser unit has 3 beams that are reflected off of the walls of the grooves and are sent back to a set of phototransistors.
2 signals represent the left and right audio channels and are faithful analog reproductions, but without the wear caused by an actual stylus.
You are incorrect. The laser can only read the analog groove as a series of ONES and ZEROS.

[NA4BH]

WART

[KA5PIU]

Hello.

Why would it read an analog record as ones and zeros? remember that the record is analog to begin with.
The laser is used to provide a light source and is reflected off the walls of the record to an analog pickup, a phototransistor.
This is somewhat like how optical motion picture sound works.
The only reason a laser is used is that allows for the pinpoint accuracy of light needed to focus on the record walls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjKQNykc_04

[WØTKX]

Read the link. :whistle:

[KG4CGC]

but ... my stairs and a board analogy.
I am logical.

[NA4BH]

but ... my stairs and a board analogy.
I am logical.

Have you ever used a piece of cardboard and ridden down the stairs? It will beat your ass real hard, but it is fun.

[NQ6U]

You are incorrect. The laser can only read the analog groove as a series of ONES and ZEROS.

I never thought I'd find myself defending one of Rudy's posts but in this case, he's right:


The same audio information is engraved from the shoulder to the bottom of a record groove. Audio information read by the laser is 10 microns below the shoulder (see below). Therefore, the laser is picking up audio information which never been touched/damaged by a needle. It plays the virgin audio information on the groove without [...] digitization.

and


True Analog Playback
The laser beam travels to the wall of the groove and back. The reflection angle is transferred to the audio signal, meaning that the LT maintains analog sound through the entire process, without any digitization.

[KG4CGC]

I never thought I'd find myself defending one of Rudy's posts but in this case, he's right:



and
But I made a board and stairs analogy. That pretty much trumps everything.

[NQ6U]

But I made a board and stairs analogy. That pretty much trumps everything.

Oh, you're right. My bad, and I withdraw my comment.

[NA4BH]

But I made a board and stairs analogy. That pretty much trumps everything.

Two things you left out:

1) You forgot to say HELLO
2) You forgot about the cardboard/stair/board theory of assitivity

[KG4CGC]

I am logical.

[NA4BH]

I am logical.

Think cardboard. Now, that's logical.

[WØTKX]

http://www.trekp.com/posters/gw922-nomad.jpg

[w6tmi]

Ummm I'll take digital over Tom Audiophoolery. Nobody can perceive "stair steps" with thousands of gradients, regardless of cardboard applied to bum.

[NQ6U]

Ummm I'll take digital over Tom Audiophoolery. Nobody can perceive "stair steps" with thousands of gradients, regardless of cardboard applied to bum.

I Agree With You Completely. If there are more than 20,000 stair steps passing every second, you ain't gonna notice them.

[NA4BH]

I Agree With You Completely. If there are more than 20,000 stair steps passing every second, you ain't gonna notice them.

If your ass is on cardboard, you will notice every one of them. :lol: :lol:

[W1GUH]

Guess people still haven't heard of a dude named Nyquist.

If your CD player or other digital media device sounds crappy, you've got one with really, really bad processing. Spring a few buck for a good one.

OK, so suppose this idea of doing transcriptions of vinyl with lasers catches on and in the future you can get a turntable with a laser instead of a stylus without Ft. Knox. It'd probably sound really, really good, and your vinyl will last forever (how long does it take viny records to degrade? Seems like it's longer then an individual lifetime by now).

But you'll be missing:

1) The sound of the needle hitting the record and the "lead in" sounds.
2) The sound of the needle leaving the record.
3) The absolulte sexiness of watching a good turntable work, especially with the tone arm tracking the warps in the record, etc.

e.g., all the "great" things about listening to vinyl.


I say, if you're really, really serious about getting superb vinyl sound, the absolutly very first thing to spend your money on is a good quality phono preampl. No matter how much you spend on your control preamp or integrated amp or receiver, the phono preamp in it is probably an IC that cost them about a buck. And that includes those "USB turntables." A dedicated phono preamp will have as close to perfect RIAA curve as can be achieved....absolutely flat in the passband (e.g. perfectly matched to the RIAA curve) with very sharp cutoffs at either end. And that makes all the difference in the world when it comes to listening. One of the biggest benefits is you will NOT need a scratch filter or a rumble filter. The RIAA curve handles those functions beautifully. I promise you that if you go out and spring two or three bucks for a good preamp, you won't regret it. It's amazing how much you have to pay to get "nothing!"

IMHO...what to do is get a good setup, and make the very first playing of a new or used disk the one that you record. If you pay attention to how you record it, you'll have a superb digitization of the vinyl to listen to while the record stays in its jacket staying almost pristine.

[n2ize]

Hello.

Why would it read an analog record as ones and zeros? remember that the record is analog to begin with.
The laser is used to provide a light source and is reflected off the walls of the record to an analog pickup, a phototransistor.
This is somewhat like how optical motion picture sound works.
The only reason a laser is used is that allows for the pinpoint accuracy of light needed to focus on the record walls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjKQNykc_04

It's sort of like the old movie projectors that read a sound track using light. the only read ones and zero's. lasers can only work in ones and zero's. A lkaser is a digital device. It can't work any other way. Think of the atoms in the laser. They are either on (in an exited state) or off (in the decayed state)...ones and zeros.

[KA5PIU]

Hello.

A few of the good pickup cartridges have the preamp already inside.
But one can easily reproduce the RIAA rolloff in an equalizer.
I saw the thing on a laser record player and was impressed.
The car record player? now that was wild!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0hRzEihsR4

[WV6Z]

That is pretty sweet Rudy, I remember our neighbor in Virginia back in the mid 70's had a similar set up in a big red early 60's Ford convertible. He said it worked quite well as long as the road didn't get too rough, but would wear a record out rather quickly due to the tension against the vinyl being rather stout.

The only thing I don't understand is why the hell the jerk off who made the video of his rig actually cut off Patsy Cline to play that gay roller disco shit. What the fuck was that second tune?!?!? Was that by Frankie Goes To Hollywood? ;)

[W1GUH]

Hello.

A few of the good pickup cartridges have the preamp already inside.
But one can easily reproduce the RIAA rolloff in an equalizer.
I saw the thing on a laser record player and was impressed.
The car record player? now that was wild!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0hRzEihsR4


"But one can easily reproduce the RIAA rolloff in an equalizer."

Keep telling yourself that to save a few bucks. All the while, you're missing out.

[X-Rated]

... Nyquist.

....

Like when my head is ready to explode and I have all kinds of post nasal drip, and I feel achy, I usually will take some Nyquist to help me sleep.

[KC2UGV]

You are incorrect. The laser can only read the analog groove as a series of ONES and ZEROS.


It's sort of like the old movie projectors that read a sound track using light. the only read ones and zero's. lasers can only work in ones and zero's. A lkaser is a digital device. It can't work any other way. Think of the atoms in the laser. They are either on (in an exited state) or off (in the decayed state)...ones and zeros.

Close, but no cigar:
http://markbowers.org/home/AM-laser-transmitter

[KG4CGC]

eVEN THOUGH i DON'T KNOW WHAT i'M TALKING ABOUT, i DID MAKE THE BOARD AND STAIRS ANALOGY SO ... cap lock fail aside, I win through superior skirt blowing.

[KC2UGV]

eVEN THOUGH i DON'T KNOW WHAT i'M TALKING ABOUT, i DID MAKE THE BOARD AND STAIRS ANALOGY SO ... cap lock fail aside, I win through superior skirt blowing.

Capslock is cruise control for cool :wink:

[WØTKX]

Disco Dancin'

http://bp1.blogger.com/_O2PjHZs0PyM/SAESjFLmNRI/AAAAAAAAACI/9VxItM-woko/s320/kilt1.bmp

[NQ6U]

That is pretty sweet Rudy, I remember our neighbor in Virginia back in the mid 70's had a similar set up in a big red early 60's Ford convertible. He said it worked quite well as long as the road didn't get too rough, but would wear a record out rather quickly due to the tension against the vinyl being rather stout.

When I was growing up, the father of one of my best friends had a '55 Cadillac which had a 78 RPM turntable that folded out from under the center of the dashboard. It was tied into the radio and it still worked. You couldn't use it while the car was in motion, though.

[N5RLR]

A few of the good pickup cartridges have the preamp already inside.
But one can easily reproduce the RIAA rolloff in an equalizer.
I saw the thing on a laser record player and was impressed.
The car record player? now that was wild!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0hRzEihsR4
For the sake of history, the above was the second iteration of Chrysler's"Highway Hi-Fi" [click]. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Hi-Fi) ;)

[KA5PIU]

Hello.

Prior to that there was the RCA Auto-Victrola, a mechanical record player that used speaking tube technology to deliver the music.
This used 78 RPM records on a changer and was intended for shipboard use but was also later produced for automobiles.
The auto was in reference to automatic operation.
Later units became famous when built into a cabinet and having a coin attachment and were known as the jukebox. ;)

[n2ize]

Close, but no cigar:
http://markbowers.org/home/AM-laser-transmitter

Ah, so what do ya know... It IS possible to create an analog waveform with a beam of light...which is essentially what a laser produces.

[n2ize]

Disco Dancin'

http://bp1.blogger.com/_O2PjHZs0PyM/SAESjFLmNRI/AAAAAAAAACI/9VxItM-woko/s320/kilt1.bmp

Sun ray pleated skirts but not the legs to go with them. :(

[KC2UGV]

Ah, so what do ya know... It IS possible to create an analog waveform with a beam of light...which is essentially what a laser produces.

Well, now that I took the "board down the stairs" analogy into consideration, 'CGC's logic is irrefutable.

[KA5PIU]

Hello.

And that is part of the problem, everyone thinks that digital is better.
Fact of the matter is that records (vinyl) can do from about 5 Hz to well over one megahertz.
Quadraphonic records had an ultrasonic carrier placed on the recording and the second set of audio channels superimposed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadraphonic_sound
But with the right equipment a mechanical record could do video, well over 3 MHz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitance_Electronic_Disc

[X-Rated]

Hello.

And that is part of the problem, everyone thinks that digital is better.
Fact of the matter is that records (vinyl) can do from about 5 Hz to well over one megahertz.
Quadraphonic records had an ultrasonic carrier placed on the recording and the second set of audio channels superimposed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadraphonic_sound
But with the right equipment a mechanical record could do video, well over 3 MHz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitance_Electronic_Disc

Have you heard Mariah Carey hit 1 MHz?

[W4RLR]

I prefer analog over digital. Analog has a much better sampling rate. :-)

[KG4CGC]

I prefer analog over digital. Analog has a much better sampling rate. :-)
Because the digital signal is only a percentage of the analog waveform.

[NQ6U]

Because the digital signal is only a percentage of the analog waveform.

Imagine a set of stairs with a board laid on top of them...

[KG4CGC]

Imagine a set of stairs with a board laid on top of them...
Yeah, yeah, that.

[W1GUH]

Dudes!!!!!

Meet Mr. Nyquist: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_frequency)

In theory, a Nyquist frequency just larger than the signal bandwidth is sufficient to allow perfect reconstruction of the signal from the samples: see Sampling theorem: Critical frequency.


One more once:

If your CD player, MP3 player, or anything reproducing music from a digital source sounds crappy:

It has inadequate processing. Spend what ya gotta to get a player with adequate processing.

Has nothing at all to do intrinsically with digital audio.

[NQ6U]

Dudes!!!!!

Meet Mr. Nyquist: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_frequency)



One more once:

If your CD player, MP3 player, or anything reproducing music from a digital source sounds crappy:

It has inadequate processing. Spend what ya gotta to get a player with adequate processing.

Has nothing at all to do intrinsically with digital audio.

Roger that. The audiophool nonsense about analog vs. digital audio is just that—nonsense. The digital sampling rate on a CD is far higher than even the most discriminating human ear could ever possibly discern. The actual difference between analog and digital comes from distortion that is introduced during the analog recording process that some people find pleasing. That's fine, a matter of taste, but it has nothing do with digital sampling.

Now, on the other hand, if you want to talk about MP3s or other digital audio files downloaded from the Web, that's a whole different kettle of fish. They often do sound like crap, but that's due to the lossy compression schemes they use, not because they just happen to be digital audio.

[KC2UGV]

Dudes!!!!!

Meet Mr. Nyquist: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_frequency)



One more once:

If your CD player, MP3 player, or anything reproducing music from a digital source sounds crappy:

It has inadequate processing. Spend what ya gotta to get a player with adequate processing.

Has nothing at all to do intrinsically with digital audio.

But, look at it this way: If you have a board, and you use that to slide down a set of stairs vs. a smooth slope...

[n2ize]

I prefer analog over digital. Analog has a much better sampling rate. :-)

LOL !! :-D:-D:-D

[n2ize]

Roger that. The audiophool nonsense about analog vs. digital audio is just that—nonsense. The digital sampling rate on a CD is far higher than even the most discriminating human ear could ever possibly discern. The actual difference between analog and digital comes from distortion that is introduced during the analog recording process that some people find pleasing. That's fine, a matter of taste, but it has nothing do with digital sampling.

Now, on the other hand, if you want to talk about MP3s or other digital audio files downloaded from the Web, that's a whole different kettle of fish. They often do sound like crap, but that's due to the lossy compression schemes they use, not because they just happen to be digital audio.

Even with the compression they still sound pretty good. Thats because the compression algorithm is designed so as to primarilly affect the data the produces sound at the fringes of the human ear. If its recorded at a low crappy sampling rate and then overly compressed it may sound crappy. otherwise it should be hardly noticeable if at al.

[n2ize]

Dudes!!!!!

Meet Mr. Nyquist: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_frequency)



One more once:

If your CD player, MP3 player, or anything reproducing music from a digital source sounds crappy:

It has inadequate processing. Spend what ya gotta to get a player with adequate processing.

Has nothing at all to do intrinsically with digital audio.

True. But there is something to having a turntable with a diamond stylii traversing a vinyl groove and being fed into a vacuum tube preamp and then into a couple of pairs of 811's. The glow, the dust burning off the tubes, the heat... awesome.

[KA5PIU]

Hello.

The other trouble with digital is the dynamic range.
DVD audio and Super CD have a faster sampling rate than the CD for just such a reason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD-Audio
I am not one of the "Golden ears" but can easily tell the difference between a regular CD and the higher quality recordings.
I think FM radio sucks due to the limited high end.
Remember that analog records can easily reproduce sound in the ultrasonic range.
As one grows older the ability to hear the really high notes is lost.
http://www.argoasecurity.com/product_detail.aspx?productID=812

[W7XF]

Have you heard Mariah Carey hit 1 MHz?

No, but I'm sure Cyndi Lauper and Minnie Pearl could xD

[W1GUH]

Hello.

The other trouble with digital is the dynamic range.
DVD audio and Super CD have a faster sampling rate than the CD for just such a reason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD-Audio
I am not one of the "Golden ears" but can easily tell the difference between a regular CD and the higher quality recordings.
I think FM radio sucks due to the limited high end.
Remember that analog records can easily reproduce sound in the ultrasonic range.
As one grows older the ability to hear the really high notes is lost.
http://www.argoasecurity.com/product_detail.aspx?productID=812

You're full of it.

[X-Rated]

What I can't stand on the FM broadcast is the 38 kHz subcarrier whistling constantly.

[W3MIV]

What I can't stand on the FM broadcast is the 38 kHz subcarrier whistling constantly.

Are you sure you're not being called home?

[X-Rated]

I am such a dirty dog.