Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Firsssssssst Posssssssst (Score 3, Informative) 397

by useridchallenged (#24592903) Attached to: Digitizing Rare Vinyl
Just to clear up some confusion, 78 RPM records are not made out of vinyl. They are made from shellac (for the most part) and are far noisier than vinyl because of the roughness of the shellac. In early 78s they would even add abrasives to the shellac so that the record would literally sharpen the steel needle as it was played. The SNR (Signal-to-Noise-Ratio) of the best 78 RPM record is horrible when compared to even the worst vinyl (ie. LP, 45). The work that the person is digitizing from 78s pre-dates the LP - which means that this is pre-1960s music. However, great music can transcend the medium - in spite of the hiss, crackle and pop of the shellac, you will still find yourself tapping your toes. I think people can get too caught up in format (uncompressed vs compressed, encoding type, digital vs analog) and hardware (like turntables, speakers, tubes vs solid state, etc.), and completely miss the music itself. But if you take the best that analog can offer and the best digital can offer and put them side by side, for the most part you will be splitting hairs technically, and aesthetically you will be down to subjective preferences.

Brain off-line, please wait.

Working...