10-19-2011, 11:02 PM
It's all ancient history now, but when Emile Berliner invented the disc record, I don't think he ever thought of them being changed by some mechanism.
Disc records were sold for years before someone finally devised a gadget for handling the discs for the listener. By the end of the twenties, there were several changers, some of them so-so, and others even worse.
In 1939, the idea was finally made to design a record that was designed to be changed, and a changer to do it. That was the whole idea behind the 45 RPM system. WW II came on, and the new record system had to be shelved for the duration. As I've already said, shellac discs were selling well, and Sarnoff just left the new record system on the shelf. He could have scooped Goldmark, but just failed to make a good decision. Sarnoff, like most industrial moguls, laid quite a few eggs.
It became hard to buy just one selection from a LP format, even though it was done on 45 as well as LP. The stores just said that it wasn't available as a single, but most tunes were. The store wanted you to buy the $5 lp instead of the $1 45 RPM.
Actually, Goldmark's idea was a good idea, using a standard turntable speed, but his discs were STILL not designed to be changed. The Philco player was supposed to be able to play the equivalent of a stack of records on one disc, but of course, the public began to want a changer for those, too. They got clumsy in many forms.
By the way, Columbia DID have a 7 inch single play disc, for a short time in 1949, but it fizzled. I have a couple.
Disc records were sold for years before someone finally devised a gadget for handling the discs for the listener. By the end of the twenties, there were several changers, some of them so-so, and others even worse.
In 1939, the idea was finally made to design a record that was designed to be changed, and a changer to do it. That was the whole idea behind the 45 RPM system. WW II came on, and the new record system had to be shelved for the duration. As I've already said, shellac discs were selling well, and Sarnoff just left the new record system on the shelf. He could have scooped Goldmark, but just failed to make a good decision. Sarnoff, like most industrial moguls, laid quite a few eggs.
It became hard to buy just one selection from a LP format, even though it was done on 45 as well as LP. The stores just said that it wasn't available as a single, but most tunes were. The store wanted you to buy the $5 lp instead of the $1 45 RPM.
Actually, Goldmark's idea was a good idea, using a standard turntable speed, but his discs were STILL not designed to be changed. The Philco player was supposed to be able to play the equivalent of a stack of records on one disc, but of course, the public began to want a changer for those, too. They got clumsy in many forms.
By the way, Columbia DID have a 7 inch single play disc, for a short time in 1949, but it fizzled. I have a couple.
