"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Paul
wrote:

[snip]

Elementary(?) physics will enlighten as to why this should be. When the
master was cut, information was lost due to the fact that it is
impossible to move mass (however small) from rest instantly. Inertia -
bang goes transient response. Try and get moving mass to change
direction instantly - bugger, more information lost. It gets worse (well
you knew that). Now we will try and get another body to 'read' the
information from the groove. Buzzzzz, repartition! I'm not even
considering the 'damage' caused to the signal by the unstable, pliable
disc. Need I say more?

FWIW The record companies (and cartridge replay companines) themselves did
a series of experiments, measurements, etc, on these things many years
ago.
I used them as sources for an article on the topic. If you visit my 'Audio
Misc' site and look at the pages called "Good Resolutions" the second page
gives the references and explains the consequences.

I haven't read your article but, if I read your post correctly, there are
consequences.


The record companies were in an excellent position to do this as they
could
compare the various stages though the process, so could establish how much
deterioration occured when a stamper was made, etc.

Exactly - 'how much deterioration', not whether there is *any*
deterioration.
The process is flawed. Why is it that it appears to 'hurt' people to admit
it?
Why is there a problem accepting a less flawed alternative to vynil?
I must conclude that High Fidelity is not the goal of many.
If people said 'I know vinyl is not High Fidelity but I prefer it' then I
could understand.

Paul


Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics
http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html