I can't see how its a bodge, its a filter, that is designed to be
matched with a inverse on replay. Remember there is a similar (though for
different reasons) filter employed in the recording and replay of CD's,
again, without that filter the CD experence would be equally appalling
(maybe worst without the initial filter before the AD, and even with a DDD
disk, somewhere there will be a AD step unless you are listening to just a
digital synth).

If it gets you less upset don't think of it as a filter, think of it as a
converter from a position detection to a velocity detection system and the
reverse at playback.

--
Nick

Hold on a mo. We are drifting aware from my original purpose.
My interest is with High Fidelity and how best it can be achieved with
available technology.
It is probably clear that my preference of those available is CD. However, I
am not saying CDs don't have issues. I have no desire to tread this well
worn path.
It is also clear to me that CD is today's more capable medium. It can be
proven to be the better of the bunch! Consequently, it demonstrates that the
others aren't.
High Fidelity is my holy grail. I don't care what is inside any little black
box as long as it produces a sound output closest to the original sound
producing source. That's the one I would go for until something better (or
indeed the grail) comes alone. If it can be demonstrated to me that a wax
cylinder is the better of those available then I would be legging it down to
the shops! I really don't give a monkeys if it is something out of the
Flintstones or a 'doesn't it glow lovely with the lights out' rig as long as
it gets as close as possible. That can only be determined by comparison with
the original sound producing source. I have no interest in the 'Emperors new
coat' style of evaluation.

Going back to my synth experiment. Does anybody see a problem? Am I missing
something? A simple 'no' would suffice if you believe it to be sound.
On the other hand, if you consider it to be flawed then a please tell me
where I am going wrong.

Paul