These are the exact questions I've pondered, Doug... All the companies had the technology available and in practical use for decades before 1948. Even the demonstrable stereo groove was patented (by Bell Labs, right?) in 1929, yet all these innovations didn't come together until 1959. The Vitaphones of 1927 sound better than LP's of 1932, and I have some heavy vinyl 12" vertical transcriptions from the mid-30's (WIDERANGE Western Electric Sound System, Associated Music Publishers, Inc. of NY) that sound positively fantastic and obviously had to be played with a lightweight pickup. (Did Victor actually intend the vinylite 12" PT LP's to be played with an acoustic soundbox?!) So was it greed and/or ego that kept things developing so slowly when all the pieces were right under their noses?
I have From Tinfoil To Stereo and many other books, but I was hoping to get some Phono-L perspective on things. Thanks, Robert PS - Again, Doug, endless gratitude for sharing your knowledge and research. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug" <[email protected]> To: "Antique Phonograph List" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 3:01 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victor long playing records > It's simple when goven a bit of thought. Sure, you can gear down a spring > motor, but the governor has to run at high speed to remain reasonably > smooth. This means that you use up all of your spring, keeping the governor > going, while the turntable runs at slow speed. Under those conditions, a > long playing record will play less than half the playing time on the > phonograph before you run out of spring. The listener would be cranking the > motor several times before a 33 1/3 RPM disc could finish playing. That > wouldn't go over well with customers at all! It would explain the reason > that Edison used 80 RPM for his long play records. We might say that he had > half of the puzzle solved, but he didn't go to slow playing speed because > it wasn't practical with a spring motor. > > Sort of ironic, or perhaps tragic, but Victor used the slow speed, and the > electric motor, but nearly standard groove pitch, so they had the other > half. You have to wonder why RCA didn't investigate the microgroove. It was > demonstrated by Edison, so RCA had to be aware of it. RCA had good research > capability. Why didn't they put the two ingredients together in 1932, as > Goldmark did, in essence, in 1948? > > My own comment here, and someone might bash me for it, but the RCA LP discs > of 1932-34 sounded crumby. I have about 6 of them. I also have a Vitaphone > disc from the "Jazz Singer" film, and it sounds reasonably good. The > Vitaphone discs wre pressed by Victor; it says so on the label. I wonder > what happened at RCA between 1927 and 1932? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven Medved" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 12:54 PM > Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victor long playing records > > > > Hi Doug, > > > > This is interesting, Edison had the Alva but I have never seen an electric > > motor in a DD phono, I never thought of this until your post. > > > > Steve > > > > But Edison had an aversion to electric motors > >>in phonographs, though he could have had them; others did. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Phono-L mailing list > > [email protected] > > > > Phono-L Archive > > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org/archive/ > > > > Support Phono-L > > http://www.cafepress.com/oldcrank > > > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > [email protected] > > Phono-L Archive > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org/archive/ > > Support Phono-L > http://www.cafepress.com/oldcrank >
