Making the Perfect Record: From Inscription to Impression in Early Magnetic RecordingMain MenuAboutAbstract for “Making the Perfect Record,” American Literature 85.4 (December 2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00029831-2370230, Duke U PIntroductionIntroduction to Making the Perfect Record: From Inscription to Impression in Early Magnetic RecordingNotesNotes for “Making the Perfect Record,” American Literature 85.4 (December 2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00029831-2370230, Duke U PMediaMedia for “Making the Perfect Record,” American Literature 85.4 (December 2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00029831-2370230, Duke U PAcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments for “Making the Perfect Record,” American Literature 85.4 (December 2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00029831-2370230, Duke U PTechnical InformationTechnical Information for “Making the Perfect Record,” American Literature 85.4 (December 2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00029831-2370230, Duke U PReferencesReferences for “Making the Perfect Record,” American Literature 85.4 (December 2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00029831-2370230, Duke U PJentery Sayersbecbfb529bffcfafdfad6920ed57b30ccdca5339This essay is part of the “New Media” special issue of American Literature (volume 85, number 4, December 2013). See http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00029831-2370230. Version 1 of the site is (c) 2013 by Duke University Press.
The Electric Light Takes Precedence
12013-10-12T17:11:30-07:00Jentery Sayersbecbfb529bffcfafdfad6920ed57b30ccdca53392493Edison's work on the electric light takes precedence over the phonograph.plain2013-11-18T09:51:37-08:00Anonymous14. Tim Brooks (2004, 26) writes: “After the exhibition of his first crude tinfoil apparatus in 1878–79, Thomas Edison virtually abandoned the phonograph to work on the electric light. He did not return to work on it until 1886, when the expiration of his major commitments to the electric light, and the hot breath of competition from other inventors working on sound recording, brought him back into the fray.”
This page has paths:
12013-11-16T22:12:19-08:00Jentery Sayersbecbfb529bffcfafdfad6920ed57b30ccdca5339NotesJentery Sayers5All Notes for Making the Perfect Record, American Literature 85.4 (December 2013), http://10.1215/00029831-2370230, Duke U Pplain84242013-12-19T08:30:20-08:00Jentery Sayersbecbfb529bffcfafdfad6920ed57b30ccdca5339
This page is referenced by:
12013-10-14T17:45:39-07:00Not a Worthwhile Investment6Thread Was Not an Economically Sustainable Medium to Use for Magnetic Recordingplain2013-12-26T09:29:39-08:00But thread never caught on. One reason is economic. Even if thread was an affordable and lightweight medium, Smith presumably had no time to develop magnetic storage. Or he did not consider it a worthwhile investment. Like Edison and his work on incandescent light in the 1870s and 1880s, Smith put sound aside in order to pursue endeavors in other sectors, namely metal and coin press machinery. By 1910, his Ferracute Machine Company (located in Bridgeton, New Jersey, just three hundred miles south of Edison’s Menlo Park) supplied presses to the US Mint, Eastman Kodak, Chrysler, Cadillac, Ford, and many others. With a list of customers such as these, the press machinery business was obviously far more profitable and in demand than magnetic storage, especially since Smith’s conceptualization of storage was impractical at best. For instance, thread alone cannot store sound. In order for that to occur, a substance such as magnetic fiber must be spun through it, and that spinning process is laborious. True, in his writings on magnetic recording, Smith does list other possible cord substances, including wire and chain. Still, historians are unsure whether he ever invented a system where any medium reproduced audible results. They are, however, quite certain that he never obtained a patent for magnetic recording, a magnetic recording device, or a magnetic storage medium. For Smith, then, ideal sound and noise-free listening remained concepts impressed—at best—on paper in a pop review.
