"Geoff Mackenzie" wrote in message
...

Wasn't there a turntable in the seventies which dispensed with the stylus
altogether, using instead some sort of optical pickup? Called the Finial,
or something like that.

You're off by about a decade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable

"In 1983 Reis and fellow Stanford engineer Robert E. Stoddard founded Finial
Technology with $7 million in venture capital. A year later servo-control
expert Robert N. Stark joined the effort. A non-functioning mock-up of the
optical turntable was shown at the 1984 Consumer Electronics Show (CES),
generating much interest and a fair amount of mystery, since the patents had
not yet been granted and the details had to be kept secret. The first
working model, the Finial LT-1, was completed two years later and presented
at the 1986 CES."

Got reinvented and asked for more funding every six months or so.

"With over US$20 million in venture capital invested, Finial was faced with
a Hobson's choice: a selling price that was out-of-range for most consumers;
or gamble on going into mass production (thus lowering the selling price) at
the very moment the bottom was dropping out of the market (not to mention a
simultaneous recession). In late 1989, Finial's investors finally succumbed
to their bad timing and liquidated the firm, selling the patents to Japanese
turntable maker BSR, which became CTI Japan which in turn created ELP Japan
for continued development of the "super-audiophile" turntable. It finally
reached the market in 1997 as the ELP LT-1XA Laser Turntable with a list
price of US$20,500 (since reduced for subsequent models)."

IIRC only one escaped and was reviewed in HFN - worked reasonably well,
but was completely defeated by surface pops which came out at
ear-shattering levels.

"The prototype had an interesting flaw: it was so accurate that it played
every particle of dirt and dust on the record, rather than pushing them
aside as a conventional stylus would. "

I've seen one at CES and heard several transcriptions of LPs played with it,
and processed with computer software which can be pretty effective.

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Patrick James
wrote:


The LP does not behave like a diaphram on the platter for the very
simple reason that for an LP to behave like a diaphram it would need
to be *secured* at the edge, like a drum skin for example.

Really? Is a loudspeaker cone 'secured' at the edge? Hint. It's not - if
anything it's secured by the spider in the middle. But works very
effectively as a microphone. In just the same sort of way as a pickup
does on a poorly supported disc.

The problem does seem to be that Patrick has simply defined the word
'diaphragm' simply so he can say that an LP isn't one. Thus evading the
more significant point that the LP mounted a la the Transcriptor can
indeed
vibrate in response to acoustic energy.


It has yet to be proved to me (at least) that this has any audible effect at
'normal' (even 'normal' to 'quite loud') listening levels, irrespective of
any wriggly lines on any graphs that anyone might want to wave about.


I have a feeling that the highly regarded audio maker, Amstrad, also made
a
look-alike with multiple point support for the LP. They came up with a
hilarious technogabble description of it IIRC. I'll see if I can find a
copy of the advert I have in mind as it was very funny. This was about the
time Alan Sugar was apparently telling his 'engineers' that if other
makers
had four knobs on their amp, he had to have five or six. Didn't matter
what
they did, just more knobs. :-)


'S'rallan' is the most consistent manufacturer in the history of consumer
electronics, AFAIC - he has yet to make anything that a) would interest me;
b) I would buy....

(Odious little barrow boy....)


big snip


Erm. I have the feeling that the Linn was also based on another deck whose
name is now largely forgotten. I seem to recall some patent arguments
about
this which only stopped when the (probable) real inventor died. There were
some interesting reports on this some years later by Barry Fox IIRC.


I think this is the one:

http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/hfw/olde...turntable.html



Anyway I won't be posting again in this thread so please do enjoy
music no matter what the medium! -- Patrick

Good luck, I'm sure you will find a buyer.


While the credit card statements with the holiday spending on are still
rolling in? Hmm, he might not or at least not to the level he was probably
hoping and 'collect only' from the outskirts of Timbuktu is a *sure way* of
decimating your potential customer base!! :-)

Good luck anyway, Patrick - I'm watching the auction!

"Keith G" wrote

'S'rallan' is the most consistent manufacturer in the history of consumer
electronics, AFAIC - he has yet to make anything that a) would interest
me; b) I would buy....

(Odious little barrow boy....)


Your lack of interest in his products doesn't seem to have done Sir Alan any
harm. Here he is, rolling in dough, TV star and government supremo for
something or other (I forget).

David.

On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:49:56 +0100, Patrick James
wrote:

A prime example of design over engineering. Ideal coffee table exhibit.
Just don't try and use it.

I've used it for over twenty years and found it to be quite superb.

I can't believe it was designed on any engineering principles except
"this looks impressively hi-tec and expensive". Despite it's apparent
failure to provide the basic function of a platter - solid support for
the disc - did it really manage to sound special?

In article ,
Laurence Payne wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:49:56 +0100, Patrick James
wrote:

A prime example of design over engineering. Ideal coffee table
exhibit. Just don't try and use it.

I've used it for over twenty years and found it to be quite superb.

I can't believe it was designed on any engineering principles except
"this looks impressively hi-tec and expensive". Despite it's apparent
failure to provide the basic function of a platter - solid support for
the disc - did it really manage to sound special?

Absolutely not. Far worse than a good cheap deck. All it mananaged was to
go round at roughly the correct speed.

I'll bet Russ Andrews sold them. ;-)

--
*What happens if you get scared half to death twice? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:49:56 +0100, Patrick James
wrote:

A prime example of design over engineering. Ideal coffee table exhibit.
Just don't try and use it.

I've used it for over twenty years and found it to be quite superb.

I can't believe it was designed on any engineering principles except
"this looks impressively hi-tec and expensive". Despite it's apparent
failure to provide the basic function of a platter - solid support for
the disc - did it really manage to sound special?


It was a triumph of style over function, designed to appeal to those (who
are still with us today, of course) to whom what a HiFi system looks like is
more important than what it sounds like. And you have to admit it does look
"special".

David.

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
It was a triumph of style over function, designed to appeal to those
(who are still with us today, of course) to whom what a HiFi system
looks like is more important than what it sounds like.

In one. The ideal, of course, is something which works well *and* looks
good.

And you have to admit it does look "special".

Yes. I actually have one. Was given it broken. But don't use it. It just
looks nice on a shelf. Along with a Nagra. Which does work well.

The reason it was broken? It belonged to a mate who was so fed up with the
faults in performance I described earlier, that he through it out of a
window...

--
*How many roads must a man travel down before he admits he is lost? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
David Looser wrote:
It was a triumph of style over function, designed to appeal to those
(who are still with us today, of course) to whom what a HiFi system
looks like is more important than what it sounds like.

In one. The ideal, of course, is something which works well *and* looks
good.


I'll defer to your knowledge of mechanics (etc), but why would he do
this if he (presumably) knew, like you, it's about the worst method
possible of supporting a record? A bit about the designer:

http://www.transcriptors.net/history.htm

I'd assume your answer would be to make as much money as possible? So,
they 'work' in that sense. Mitchell also made his designs it seems,
citing 'reduce electrostatic charge' as the reasoning behind the method.

Also, what's all that about the Design Council award - you can't award a
prize for design if the thing doesn't work?!

Mind you, having just looked at the Design Council's website, I'm not at
all confident in their design skills.

Rob