Submitted 2 days ago by Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com to showerthoughts@lemmy.world
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/0da2ddc0-1b5a-482b-95e8-e8469bf924ff.webp
If the information is stored at some value of bits per cm… There’s less bitrate (bits per revolution) in the middle of the record vs the outer edges.
I always assumed that the initial cutting of the record accounts for the variation in speed as the needle moves towards the center. If that’s the case, the information density would be relatively consisten, because the size of the bits of information would get smaller as the speed increases. But I don’t actually know if that’s how it works.
I checked, audio quality can degrade at the center, I guess since the needle can’t read fine enough details. Also probably why the label size is similar on full size records and singles…
Yep its called IGD or inner groove distortion , reason why old albums almost always had the quiet ballads at the end.
Rush 2112 has real bad igd because it ends very loudly.
The angular velocity is always the same during recording and playback
So the arc speed increases as the radius decreases, both in cutting and reading.
I like the idea of you bringing your record player and records into the shower with you. (Is there a community here simmalar to vinyljerk?)
The outerwards part of the record can hold louder signal without the needle jumping.
That’s why there’s actually a record that plays backward www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Afikv6k1-c because Bolero gets louder and louder as the song progresses,
Which is why Macintosh floppy disk drives were changing their rotational speed depending on which cylinders were being accessed, so that the information density would in fact be uniform.
Which is why a Mac floppy could hold 400/800k compared to a DOS floppy’s 360/720k.
So do CDs. If you have a player with a see-through lid, you can see the disc rotate around 2.5 times slower on the last track of a near-74/80-minute disc as opposed to the first. This might not apply with modern (2000+) and/or portable ones with cache (ESP) − MP3 support is a good clue it has the advanced electronics for that.
Players regulate the motor speed based on the data clock (and burners too: there is a pre-recorded “timing” signal even on blank CD-Rs) so technically, a constant-angular-velocity CD could be pressed and played on most players, just with no real benefits.
Huh. Cool facts.
That’s a lot of complexity added for 80kb. Curious if there was much software that just wouldn’t have fit on a single floppy otherwise.
It’s an 11% increase, that’s huge. Floppies weren’t just used to store programs, also to store files.
That's correct. Reason why the inside track will usually be a song with less bass, etc...
Or you have the bit rate high enough so you only max it out at the inner song and just don't need it at the start.
There's a lot pumped into a single groove, based on Technology Connections video on how stereo works on vinyl.
That depends on the quality of the turntable and the vinyl, and the rotation speed. Early on, the quality wasn’t enough for dense stamping, so vinyls played at 78 rpm. With time, 45 and 33 rpm became possible as the tech improved, allowing for longer play times per vinyl.
Regardless, from what I’ve heard back in the day the producers took care to put more demanding track on the outside, which led to the phenomenon of CDs suddenly having some busy and loud tracks in the middle of the album.
That makes sense. The record always rotates at the same speed, therefore the surface speed of the needle vs the record is slower towards the center and faster towards the outside. The music towards the middle is literally compressed. Never thought about that, mind kinda blown.
I’ve heard that good songs were put on the outside and the shittier ones were relegated to the inside since the quality is worse. But a vinyl has two sides to it, which lead to the phenomenon that when listening to a CD, there was suddenly a big loud and busy number right in the middle of the album, after a lull.
I used to work for a few record companies, including a small one that was very influential, and I was in the middle of everything, from album concepts, through recording and production, artwork, liner notes, etc., as well as the largest record company in America at the time, and never once in 30 years did I ever hear anybody suggest that the “shittier” songs should be relegated to the inner rings, because the sound is inferior.
That’s just nonsensical on multiple levels, and it has NEVER happened.
News flash: vinyl records existed before 1995.
That is just how rotating things work. This is why vehicles need a differential, so that when you turn a corner the inside wheel can rotate at a different speed as the outside wheel.
You mean it doesn’t depend on how much groovin’ is on the record?
This is a lot of really cool discussion guys
in theory, maybe yes. but this is not how analog signalling and producing vinyl works
bryndos@fedia.io 2 days ago
That's why true audiophiles only listen on phonograph cylinders.