<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Digital Gramophone</title>
	<atom:link href="http://classicalconvert.com/2007/12/the-digital-gramophone/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://classicalconvert.com/2007/12/the-digital-gramophone/</link>
	<description>A beginners guide to classical music, by someone who switched at 23</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: JonJ</title>
		<link>http://classicalconvert.com/2007/12/the-digital-gramophone/#comment-2140</link>
		<dc:creator>JonJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 14:45:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://classicalconvert.com/2007/12/the-digital-gramophone/#comment-2140</guid>
		<description>I wouldn't be surprised that the result was unsatisfactory, if the records were stereo, since the two channels were recorded in one groove by cutting them at 45-degree angles to the vertical, or something like that (can't remember the details). So a simple scan from above the record would not necessarily come up with anything useful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wouldn&#8217;t be surprised that the result was unsatisfactory, if the records were stereo, since the two channels were recorded in one groove by cutting them at 45-degree angles to the vertical, or something like that (can&#8217;t remember the details). So a simple scan from above the record would not necessarily come up with anything useful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
