2. analog
  3. 148289-85756

Why not use a non-contact stylus on a turntable?

I read comments about static-free playback of LPs with some amount of satisfaction.

When CDs were introduced, I quit worrying about the mechanics and started enjoying the music. More so with computer audio.

However, lots of folks like vinyl .... apparently. ;<)

Why not take all the worry, wringing of hands, and frustration out of the equation by insisting on touch-free stylus technology?

What is the technology? Hell if I know! But if nerds can sample the bits on a CD, they can sure as heck track the grooves on an LP!

Not only track the grooves, but filter out the grunge!

Play your oldest vinyl in complete background silence!

Put technology to work on vinyl! You’ll breathe easier for it.

Kind regards,

Greg
cgregory4
cd318
2,636 posts
 
Yes, that sounds good. A non contact laser reading the vinyl and converting the sound into a digital format. All the goodness of analogue captured and preserved in digital. Err...hang on a moment, I forgot about the troublesome D word.

I think we're stuck with simply improving mechanical tracking as far as is possible. How about something like 1000 low temperature plays with minimal stylus and record wear? 
Post removed 
cgregory4 OP
7 posts
 
"If you have a notion , instead of lambasting the forum and its members" 

Show me where I am 'lambasting' anyone? That's absurd.

"go right ahead and invest the time, money and effort required in this endeavor."

Why would I do that? I'm fine with the digital progress from my perspective.

The question, from the beginning, is why aren't you?

KInd regards,

Greg
millercarbon's avatar
millercarbon
12,531 posts
 
On the question of lambasting at least, got to say, I agree. He's not lambasting. Lambasting, done right, calls for wit and intelligence. But just look what he wrote:
By 'non-contact', I'm not implying a huge gulf between the transducer and the grooves. Quite the contrary, as tracking the extreme analog fluctuations in the vinyl implies a marriage of the closest sort.


What he wants, in other words, is non-contact contact. He's not lambasting. He's incoherent.
wlutke
716 posts
 
Could it be the "why not?" of no contact is, from a noise perspective, that once you digitize, the pops and ticks can be removed with software. It can, and is, being done now with contact styli, an ADC and the same software that would be necessary with no contact. So not much  advantage noise-wise.
More to discover