[78-L] How vinyl is produced..from a sapphire supremacist group!

[Michael Biel]

David has the correct answer, but there is one instance where they did
use diamond as a recording stylus.  The embossing stylus for uncoated
aluminum was a diamond ball.  Because it did not cut the aluminum but
embossed or knurled it, the diamond was a good material because it would
not need resharpening like a cutting stylus would.  The fact that so
much of this was correct with the usage of correct terminology that we
have promoted on this list makes me wonder if one of these truly evil
people is reading OUR list!!  (If you dare look at some of the other
threads on that message board you will see what I mean -- but you really
don't need to be reading that bilge.)

Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com


-------- Original Message --------

From: david.diehl at hensteeth.com
"Outlast" is the term used here. Sapphire stylii could be resharpened
many times since they consisted of a very long shank which could be
returned to the manufacturer for an inexpensive retool. A piece of
synthetic diamond of similar dimensions would have been very costly both
in its initial cost and to refurbish. I don't think that I have ever
seen a reference to a diamond cutting stylus in the 78 era. Steel was
only for voice applications and home use (noticeable deterioration after
30 MINUTES), alloys like "Stellite" tried to straddle the mid-range. 
DJD


From: Rodger Holtin [mailto:rjh334578 at yahoo.com]

And... I see he got the terminology right about "acetate" vs "lacquer"
but I have to ask the 78-L Board of Experts about the veracity of this
statement:"Diamond is not agood material for a cutting stylus, but is
excellent as a reproducingstylus. Home cutting styli were commonly made
of a steel alloy becauseit was inexpensive to manufacture but most
cutting styli forprofessional use are made of corundum, better known as
sapphire whichwill outlast a diamond and produce superior
recordings."Diamond not as hard as sapphire? Really?Holy mackerel,
there, Sapphire!Rodger

 On Mon, 1/4/10, martha wrote:  The reply near bottom of page ... all
about the "100 foot tall shaft" off the recording room, for the falling
weight. Apparently they had no way of knowing how fast the turnt
 able was going (couldn't count, didn't have watches with second hands,
and no governors, I guess) so needed gravity to determine the speed.
Okay. (Actually, about 4 feet was all they needed for the weight to fall
... )