h a l f b a k e r y
Apply directly to forehead.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
|
I love records. Nothing beats the warmth of old vinyl. And a lot of the stuff I like to listen to (new romantics, synth pop, dog training records) is cheaper and more authentic to listen to on vinyl.
But sometimes I'm in the bath, or otherwise occupied, and simply can't be arsed with playing a
record and having to turn it over half way through.
So how about this: it's a new type of record player. The record, instead of sitting flat on a platter, is now suspended on the spindle, so that the underside is accessible when spinning. Along with the normal needle tracking and playing the record on the top side, there's a second needle playing the record on the underside. The audio from the underside is then held in a digital buffer, and when the top side runs out, side 2 can start automatically without me having to change the record.
Naturally it will be an absolute nightmare to get the thing balanced correctly, but true audiophiles love doing that sort of thing.
And of course the underside of the record is actually travelling in the other direction to the top side, so to speak, so the needle on the bottom would have to start in the middle, and work it's way out, playing the music backwards. But that's not a problem - it can easily be reversed in the digital buffer.
[link]
|
| |
Some of the old juke-boxes worked like this. Which is not to say that this is a bad idea. + for vinyl. |
|
| |
I don't see any need for the digital buffer - apart from that I like very much. |
|
| |
I guess I didn't make it clear enough, but it's not that underside plays after the top side, it's that they both play at the same time, the underside being recorded and stored until the top side has run out. That's what the buffer is for. I guess it could also record to some sort of tape, recording side 2 in one direction, then playing it back in the other. |
|
| |
Bang and Olufsen made a vertical turntable that would play either side of the record. The record went into a slot similar to the way car CD players work. |
|
| |
I wonder if playing the underside backwards and then digitally reversing it would give the same sound as playing it forward (if the physical oscillations would be mirrored). |
|
| |
I'm sure i read about a record player that used lasers to read the disc, if memory serves it used 1 as a datum shined across the record and 1 or 2 more to read the groves. to implement your system iivix you would need to put 2 of these in one above one below and possibly move the heads rather than the record. |
|
| |
[FarmerJohn] hmm... I reckon that any sounds recorded that sounded different when reversed would be artifacts of the actual mechanical movement, ie. all the subtle creaks and clicks from a needle moving... Actually, recording records backwards and then playing them forwards might actually clean them up a bit - all the epiphenomenal sound such as pops and stuff would be reversed, with a long attack and short decay, hopefully making them sound a little better. |
|
| |
"epiphenomenal"..Congratulations,[iivix]. I was sure you had coined a new word, but Webster's confirms your usage. First time I've ever seen "epiphany" and "phenomenon" conjoined to explain a secondary conditon. lernt sumthin. Thanks. |
|
| |