Talk:Vinyl record

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Professional sound production (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject icon This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Professional sound production, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sound recording and reproduction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 NA  This redirect does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

non vinyl recordings[edit]

IMO this article is something of a mess. The worst problem is that it deals with non vinyl recordings. Vinyl records were first produced experimentally int he 1930s and then first mass marketed in the 1940s. The talk about earlier cylinders and shellac records is rather like saying something like "earlier plastic toys were made out of metal and wood"-- before things were made out of plastic or vinyl, they can't properly be refered to as being plastic or vinyl. This needs to be reworked. Either this should be broken up into seperate articles about different types of records, or changed to an article about disc records in general. -- Infrogmation

Removed a bit of needless attribution -- the difference in sound quality clearly varies among CD players, dependding on the quality of the DAC, speakers, cables etc. -- Tarquin 18:06 Dec 5, 2002 (UTC)


I reworked most of the article into terms I think are much more coherent and moved it to Gramophone record. -- Infrogmation 08:33 Jan 21, 2003 (UTC)

Shouldn't this page just be made a redirect[edit]

Shouldn't this page just be made a redirect to Gramophone record? (172.192.243.63)

I agree. It should forward to gramophone record...the only difference is a gramophone record might not be made out of vinyl. :p I see no reason to provide them with a lesser page if a better one exists. They'll think this is it. - Brandon.irwin 00:32, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I am bringing this suggestion up at Talk:Gramophone record; let's discuss it there. -- Infrogmation 20:33, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Needs to mention 16" Transcription Records[edit]

Yes, 16" in diameter, either 33 1/3 or 16 2/3 RPM, were commonly used by radio stations but rarely seen now outside of ebay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.186.242.82 (talk) 17:19, March 22, 2005‎

Litefantastic likes the title "Disc record"[edit]

I'm going to go ahead and do this. Contact me if you have problems; otherwise I'm compiling everything onto disc record and making 'gramophone record' and 'vinyl record' into redirects. I have chosen this over the other two names because 1 - not all records were vinyl, and 2 - both phonograph and gramophone are used for the same machine, which is confusing. Better just to make a wholley separate page, I think. -Litefantastic 00:41, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

But "disc record" is a neologism that more people will be unfamiliar with. Not only that but the term on its own merits would also apply to a CD. Better to use "gramophone record" as the main title. And don't forget to put in the redirect from "phonograph record". The first is British and the second is American. Or use "phonograph record" as the main article simply because the US population is 5X the British population so phonograph would theoretically reduce the server redirect activity. --Blainster 06:02, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
No! Not that I think "disc record" is a bad title off hand, but having the main article at gramophone record was the result of CONSIDERABLE discussion and a vote where it was decided that "gramophone record" was all and all the least objectionable of the possible titles. Please see Talk:gramophone record before deciding to rehash this issue unilaterally. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 12:55, 19 July 2005 (UTC)