Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amdahl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!drutx!ihnp4!nsc!amdahl!nzm10
From: nzm10@amdahl.UUCP (Neal Macklin)
Newsgroups: net.video
Subject: Laserdisc vs CD sound
Message-ID: <2266@amdahl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Nov-85 19:23:00 EST
Article-I.D.: amdahl.2266
Posted: Tue Nov 26 19:23:00 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Nov-85 07:54:53 EST
Organization: Amdahl Corp, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 32

Can someone tell me the difference between a CD, which is "digital"
information recorded as tiny pits and reconstructed by my player into an
analog signal, and the soundtrack (and picture for that matter) of a
standard type (non-digital soundtrack) laserdisk, which is also recorded
in little (on-off) pits, but which is not considered digital?  I thought
I understood this, but I guess not...

I think it has something to do with "pulse amplitude modulation" (on the
laserdisc), but isn't that digital?

What advantage, if any, does the "digital" method on the CD have?

Is there any greater immunity from noise or dirt on the playing surface
with the digital approach?

Does the analog approach offer more recording time?

Does all this have something to do with error correction?

Can't a videodisc have the same kind of interpolative error correction?

Please answer on net or by mail.  I'll summarize to the net any replies
I get by mail, if people want me to.

I don't think Mr. Video has a laserdisc, so I'm depending on the rest
of you!
-- 
				Neal Macklin
				(408) 737-5214
				...{hplabs,ihnp4}!amdahl!nzm10

              [There are no opinions expressed in this article].