With all due respect, how is vertical cut recording inferior to lateral cut? Certainly in the phonograph's first 25 years, Edison's machines sounded substantially better than respectively contemporary lateral phonographs. I hear more treble extension on direct-recorded 4M amberols than any acoustic lateral recordings, as well as more general naturalness. I must respectfully disagree that vertical recording can be regarded as inherently inferior to lateral recording, generally speaking.
I should perhaps mention that I have no allegiance to one method over the other whatsoever. Greg B., may I ask your thoughts on this? Any information about specific frequency responses, and especially, the physics involved with both the recording and playback (and duplication if you care to get that deep) processes, would be fascinating and greatly appreciated! Best to all, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> <snip> > Obviously the great weakness of Edison phonographs (aside from vertical > cut > recording)...
