In Reply to: By the way... posted by Charles Hansen on January 7, 2008 at 09:50:51:
"It's not clear to me that the performance of the VRDS couldn't be equaled by using a good full size damping disc (necessitating a top-loader) on a massively built conventional transport."
I realise that politically it would be a nightmare, but if a few specialists companies like your own could put their funds and expertise together to design a high-end transport to rival the VRDS would be great.
If one designer was agreed on and an R&D figure agreed and funded collectively to spread the cost, perhaps a universal transport mechanism far better than the norm but a fraction of the cost of the VRDS could be developed which could also be sold to other companies and the development costs even recuperated?
It just seems like there's basically the VRDS mechanism and nothing else approaches it at the moment, whereas at one time we did have the Pioneer Stable Platter as you mentioned and the Philips die-cast swing-arm designs which were both excellent.
The shame is that digital playback has improved beyond recognition in the last few years in spite of flimsier transport mechanisms, so better mechanisms would be the final piece of the jigsaw.
Of course, having competing companies coming together in the spirit of co-operation and mutual advantage is something I can't actually remember happening in my lifetime, but it doesn't hurt to dream. :0)
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: By the way... - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 13:36:29 01/07/08 (5)
- what about ... - TBone 15:39:22 01/07/08 (4)
- RE: what about ... - Charles Hansen 17:02:20 01/07/08 (3)
- RE: what about ... - TBone 18:33:52 01/07/08 (2)
- RE: what about ... - HighEndWire 15:54:53 01/08/08 (1)
- nope ... it's a unique proprietary transport ... - TBone 16:59:23 01/08/08 (0)