Early german advertisement for the Philips Compact disk system depicting the first prototype CD player, nickname "Pinkeltje" Video captured from a demonstration VLP video disk
Translation for those interested: "A revolutionary new music system, Philips compact disc digital audio. A new player and a new disk. And a completely new technology for hifi. The boost in quality is enormous. The compact disc player is easy to use. The desired tracks can be accessed directly, or the desired sequence can be pre-programmed. There is no mechanical contact between disk and pickup system, because it is scanned optically. Experience the sensational improvement in sound quality. No wow and flutter, no rumble, and a very high dynamic range of over 90dB. More advantages: There is no wear at all, no deterioration from dust, scratches or fingerprints on the disk. Much simpler to handle and to archive than conventional records. The single-sided compact disc has a playing time similar to both side of a regular LP, at a diameter of only 12cm. The compact disc is scanned by a semiconductor laser with a finely focused beam of light. The laser beam gets reflected by the surface of the disk, which is embossed by billions of indentations, so-called pits. Each change of reflecitivity of the light beam gets transformed into an electrical impulse. The beam of light guides itself and follows the track precisely. The track of pits is furled up so tightly, that a single disk contains dozens of kilometers of track. The pits on the disk are read by the laser beam like by an optical pickup, and its digital output is routed to a digital to analogue converter. After conversion and filtering, and overwhelming audio signal is created. It is handed down to the hifi amplifier. The small size of the compact disc, its immunity to dust and wear, and notably the marvellous quality mean that Philips compact disc digital audio will be the audio system of the future."
You still need to clean them and make sure they are not scratched. Unlike lp, one scratch can render a cd unplayable...altho yes...quieter and more dynamic range.
In general the CD seemed to first be designed with the intention of pretty much being a smaller, more efficient LP record. In addition to the similarity in label design, prototype packaging was pretty much just a scaled-down record sleeve, and the prototype CD player seen here seems to be evocative of a turntable in both design and control. By comparison, the direction they ultimately went off in feels more evocative of cassette tapes, a possibly intentional decision given that A: Philips invented the Compact Cassette, and B: cassettes were already surpassing LPs in popularity by 1979 thanks to their portability (even if they typically sounded worse). Funnily enough, given how some CD reissues of older albums-- especially Japanese reissues-- design themselves after the original LP packaging, I'd say things came full circle from a packaging perspective.
It seems they thought people would be reluctant to adopt a new format if it was too different from what they already knew. That's why the first genertion of players had a window so that you can see the disc spinning.
@@VinchVolt I think quite a few things like the Jewell Case were added to try and justify the initially high prices. I have just been looking at a 1983 catalogue and the first CD players were over £400, the same as a HiFi reel to reel deck (which were still being sold back then). I recall the first CDs themselves being about £15 - far more than a vinyl LP and the equivalent of £50 in todays money.
How is it interesting? What else are they going to display on the front of it as an image if the product they are advertising isn’t a CD for an artist, or music album, it’s the CD itself? What would they have as the CD’s display? That’s what it would look like without the paint on it
@@lovehatelove2594 Those were Phillips's prototype discs before the definitive compact disc format standards and red book digital audio specs were established in conjunction with Sony.
There's something kinda funny about seeing this ad take a very '70s approach to what would ultimately be an '80s invention (I assume this was made around 1978-1979, a few years before the 1982 launch, based on the prototype discs and players).
that prototype disc actually seems to be dual sided (if it actually has stuff on it), it looks like a disc that's been written to a bit but isn't full. you can see a distinction between where it looks like it has data and where it is blank. either it's just for looks or they actually planned to do that
@@revokdaryl1 I have a two CD's, 1 album and a 1 single made in gold. Both CD's made in Japan, and audio is in DDD mode. Sounds better than the non gold CD versions made from Alu and in DAD mode.
@@pqrstzxerty1296 It's probably placebo effect. If you do compare the signal with the exact same album on a normal CD and it does objectively measure better, this is purely due to different mastering. The normal CD's fidelity is comfortably past the limits of human hearing; the bitrate can be cut in two with no audible difference. In fact, what we perceive as better sound is simply higher loudness, which is why DR compression is used so widely.
@@Unbrutal_Rawr It was made of gold to stop disc rot, and have better lastable abilities. To make them cheapet they started to use Alu. Alu made the disc rust (oxidise) more and thus the data gets miss read. Disc rot is caused by a bacteria, mainly happens to CDs in Africa (dry areas). The other main cause of data loss, was they made the poly (plastic) protection layer thinner, so bacteria (disc rot), oxidisation, and scratches could happen more.
@@Unbrutal_RawrIts about have better source material ( the data, how its sourced and recorded ). Personally I think DAD sounds worse than ADD, as to me when recorded as DAD mode sound more squared parts (jaggerdy). Its the same for digital cameras, higher megapixels doesn't mean alot. Better optics and compression methods give better pictures. I had a one megapixel camera that gave better colours and focus, than a six megapixal camera. Digital cameras need a good light source to bring in the data. Black and white analog film is still better for detail. Analog zoom lenses are far better than digital zoom. Rubbish data (recording) in then you get the rubbish same out, regardless of what digital format is used. recording, edit, format ADD = Analog, Digital, Digital DAD = Digital, Analog, Digital DDD = Digital, Digital, Digital I have seen, DAA, DDA and AAA before on cds, um people have no clue what they are doing.
By the 1990's Music Labels were cramming almost 80 Min capacity on those discs! Oh well, more 'bang for your buck' they were very expensive for what they were back then. Also, check the girth of that Cable!
The first cd players could not extend the lasers to the end of the tracks to get to this extended timeframes the music producers are cramming on to these cds, so the cd laser head used to crash or the laser worm drive gets stuck. Also the more the laser is tracking away from the centre of the cd the more wobble of the disc occurs due to the head distance laser to disc, so more prone to skipping. Thats why when you calibrate a cd dvd laser head you have to calibrate on track 1, then again on track 18, as you find track 1 iz ok but not track 18 as its starts skipping. DVD do this skipping on more outer tracks than inner track due to the diameter increase to wobble giving micro changes in distance which the laser focus has to keep up with to prevent skipping. Hence why the Philips CDM 12 head laser optics drive modules where better than others, and the CDM 12 was industry standard in expensive other branded cd players such as Audiolabs, Mission and commercial (pub) jukeboxes.
Interessantes Video, wusstest du, dass es auf Deutsch ist? Außerdem spreche ich gerade Deutsch. Wenn du das übersetzst, siehst du meine Nachricht auf Englisch
Philips claimed that it would give us "perfect sound forever" I attended the training courses that Philips ran for Hi-Fi techs. To create a test disc to check for skipping, you took a sharp blade across a new disc to try to distort the beam. I just used the damaged discs from the demo room, The early players error correction was weak. Fine scratches soon rendered the discs unplayable. Remember all the magic polish kits that claimed to repair the damaged discs. What ammused me that despite all the problems Philips had with laserdisc or laservision ase they called it, they didn't learn. It was only a matter of time before discs made in less than perfect clean rooms started to rot, plus some rotted due to no sealing on the edges. The sad part is that you can't even give CD's away now, the charity shops struggle to sell them.
@@tomservo5007 That is very true, the early discs were made with thicker clear coating and the edges were smoothed off. The ones made in the mid 90's were not of the same quality, and hence more prone to fine scratches which were impossible to polish out. To create the "damaged" test disc, you need a very sharp knife and use a lot of pressure to make a deep scratch
@@revokdaryl1 So have i, with CD and laserdiscs it is just down to your luck as to any disc developing laser rot, many as you have said are still fine today, others started to fail only a few years after manufacture. Laser Rot is not as big a problem as the press would have us belive, it affected laserdiscs far more than CD's as any imperfection shows up on the screen, they have no error correction that CD players have. I have a Japan market only Pioneer HLD-X9 laserdisc player that has a red laser than can play some of the rotted discs that other players can't play.
Lol I remember my french teacher at high school back in year 8 try to tell us that French was the biggest language and most important in the world. Things like this always take me back to the patronising comment she made as if songs and practically everything you come across isn’t in English in brands etc.
Eine der besten Entwicklungen der Achtzigerjahre und nach über vierzig Jahren noch immer der beste Tonträger. Doch 0:46 Ein Werbefilm für CDs - und die Schauspielerin macht es gerade falsch! Nie eine CD auf der zu lesenden Seite ablegen, in Staub und Dreck. Auch eine Schallplatte durfte immer nur am Rand und in der Mitte angefasst und nie ungeschützt abgelegt werden, wenn man daran Freude haben wollte. Sie sollte bei Kassetten bleiben.
A decir del cd la tenían ya en la mitad de los 70 (76) pero la lanzaron mucho después. Seguro por la vorágine del Long play y que hubiesen perjudicado su mercado....esperaron al 82', Joer!!
Can't understand a word! 😂 There doesn't appear to be any magnetic disc clamp in that player? I hate those modern cd player spindles where you press the cd on to three ball bearings. So cheap and nasty!
Mass production after years 1986-88 gave CD a bad reputation. Too many bad releases with cheap design of jewelcase. It just became a digital successor for a cheap cassette tape. The vinyl revival and downfall of a CD gave this format a new chance. Japanese reissues on special CD formats, but also expensive are great if you want to enjoy this format.
Even the worst cd transfers or new DDD recordings were far superior to cassette tapes. Japan still has a hi fidelity music industry hence high quality CD transfers and SACD releases. Vinyl was and still is uniquely tactile and wonderful to listen to on a very good system. A reminder of the days when records were a serious cherished mainstream medium and not a trendy boutique statement which the vinyl "revival" is today.
Translation for those interested: "A revolutionary new music system, Philips compact disc digital audio. A new player and a new disk. And a completely new technology for hifi. The boost in quality is enormous. The compact disc player is easy to use. The desired tracks can be accessed directly, or the desired sequence can be pre-programmed. There is no mechanical contact between disk and pickup system, because it is scanned optically. Experience the sensational improvement in sound quality. No wow and flutter, no rumble, and a very high dynamic range of over 90dB.
More advantages: There is no wear at all, no deterioration from dust, scratches or fingerprints on the disk. Much simpler to handle and to archive than conventional records. The single-sided compact disc has a playing time similar to both side of a regular LP, at a diameter of only 12cm. The compact disc is scanned by a semiconductor laser with a finely focused beam of light. The laser beam gets reflected by the surface of the disk, which is embossed by billions of indentations, so-called pits. Each change of reflecitivity of the light beam gets transformed into an electrical impulse.
The beam of light guides itself and follows the track precisely. The track of pits is furled up so tightly, that a single disk contains dozens of kilometers of track. The pits on the disk are read by the laser beam like by an optical pickup, and its digital output is routed to a digital to analogue converter. After conversion and filtering, and overwhelming audio signal is created. It is handed down to the hifi amplifier. The small size of the compact disc, its immunity to dust and wear, and notably the marvellous quality mean that Philips compact disc digital audio will be the audio system of the future."
Pro trick: you can watch series at Flixzone. Me and my gf have been using it for watching lots of of movies lately.
@Jabari Rhys definitely, I have been using Flixzone for years myself :)
@Jabari Rhys Yup, have been using Flixzone for years myself =)
You still need to clean them and make sure they are not scratched. Unlike lp, one scratch can render a cd unplayable...altho yes...quieter and more dynamic range.
You forgot to say - from the BBC Tommorows World episode you can put a big slab of strawberry jam on the CD, and it still plays.
Clip is on CZcams.
Ein CD-Player, die beste Erfindung ohne diese Blu-ray, wäre niemals erfunden worden. Videospiele würden immer noch auf Kassetten basieren
"DIG" - "IT" - "TAL" 😂😂😂
Its interesting to see the prototype disc label. Using the same style as LP record but also weird as the disc uses only one side for audio recording.
In general the CD seemed to first be designed with the intention of pretty much being a smaller, more efficient LP record. In addition to the similarity in label design, prototype packaging was pretty much just a scaled-down record sleeve, and the prototype CD player seen here seems to be evocative of a turntable in both design and control. By comparison, the direction they ultimately went off in feels more evocative of cassette tapes, a possibly intentional decision given that A: Philips invented the Compact Cassette, and B: cassettes were already surpassing LPs in popularity by 1979 thanks to their portability (even if they typically sounded worse).
Funnily enough, given how some CD reissues of older albums-- especially Japanese reissues-- design themselves after the original LP packaging, I'd say things came full circle from a packaging perspective.
It seems they thought people would be reluctant to adopt a new format if it was too different from what they already knew. That's why the first genertion of players had a window so that you can see the disc spinning.
@@VinchVolt I think quite a few things like the Jewell Case were added to try and justify the initially high prices. I have just been looking at a 1983 catalogue and the first CD players were over £400, the same as a HiFi reel to reel deck (which were still being sold back then). I recall the first CDs themselves being about £15 - far more than a vinyl LP and the equivalent of £50 in todays money.
How is it interesting? What else are they going to display on the front of it as an image if the product they are advertising isn’t a CD for an artist, or music album, it’s the CD itself? What would they have as the CD’s display? That’s what it would look like without the paint on it
This is from 1979.
The actual CD?
@@lovehatelove2594 Those were Phillips's prototype discs before the definitive compact disc format standards and red book digital audio specs were established in conjunction with Sony.
@@diegorivas1991 Would they play on a modern CD player?
@@lovehatelove2594 A player with a spindle would be ideal, since those prototypes CDs were 1.2 cm smaller in diameter.
Omg it's you
Marvellous,ingenuity
Gracias por compartir!!!!!!!!!
There's something kinda funny about seeing this ad take a very '70s approach to what would ultimately be an '80s invention (I assume this was made around 1978-1979, a few years before the 1982 launch, based on the prototype discs and players).
that prototype disc actually seems to be dual sided (if it actually has stuff on it), it looks like a disc that's been written to a bit but isn't full. you can see a distinction between where it looks like it has data and where it is blank. either it's just for looks or they actually planned to do that
I see that early covers for CD are not the typical jewel case? they look like LP covers, which is nice.
Awesome
Its Compact Disc not CDDA red book (Sony had to sort out the maths for skipping). Early discs where made out of real gold, for laser reflection.
There were some audiophile labels that also produced 24kt gold CDs. Mobile Fidelity Soundlab is the big one.
@@revokdaryl1 I have a two CD's, 1 album and a 1 single made in gold. Both CD's made in Japan, and audio is in DDD mode. Sounds
better than the non gold CD versions made from Alu and in DAD mode.
@@pqrstzxerty1296 It's probably placebo effect. If you do compare the signal with the exact same album on a normal CD and it does objectively measure better, this is purely due to different mastering. The normal CD's fidelity is comfortably past the limits of human hearing; the bitrate can be cut in two with no audible difference. In fact, what we perceive as better sound is simply higher loudness, which is why DR compression is used so widely.
@@Unbrutal_Rawr It was made of gold to stop disc rot, and have better lastable abilities. To make them cheapet they started to use Alu. Alu made the disc rust (oxidise) more and thus the data gets miss read. Disc rot is caused by a bacteria, mainly happens to CDs in Africa (dry areas).
The other main cause of data loss, was they made the poly (plastic) protection layer thinner, so bacteria (disc rot), oxidisation, and scratches could happen more.
@@Unbrutal_RawrIts about have better source material ( the data, how its sourced and recorded ).
Personally I think DAD sounds worse than ADD, as to me when recorded as DAD mode sound more squared parts (jaggerdy).
Its the same for digital cameras, higher megapixels doesn't mean alot. Better optics and compression methods give better pictures. I had a one megapixel camera that gave better colours and focus, than a six megapixal camera. Digital cameras need a good light source to bring in the data. Black and white analog film is still better for detail. Analog zoom lenses are far better than digital zoom.
Rubbish data (recording) in then you get the rubbish same out, regardless of what digital format is used.
recording, edit, format
ADD = Analog, Digital, Digital
DAD = Digital, Analog, Digital
DDD = Digital, Digital, Digital
I have seen, DAA, DDA and AAA before on cds, um people have no clue what they are doing.
By the 1990's Music Labels were cramming almost 80 Min capacity on those discs! Oh well, more 'bang for your buck' they were very expensive for what they were back then. Also, check the girth of that Cable!
The first cd players could not extend the lasers to the end of the tracks to get to this extended timeframes the music producers are cramming on to these cds, so the cd laser head used to crash or the laser worm drive gets stuck.
Also the more the laser is tracking away from the centre of the cd the more wobble of the disc occurs due to the head distance laser to disc, so more prone to skipping.
Thats why when you calibrate a cd dvd laser head you have to calibrate on track 1, then again on track 18, as you find track 1 iz ok but not track 18 as its starts skipping. DVD do this skipping on more outer tracks than inner track due to the diameter increase to wobble giving micro changes in distance which the laser focus has to keep up with to prevent skipping.
Hence why the Philips CDM 12 head laser optics drive modules where better than others, and the CDM 12 was industry standard in expensive other branded cd players such as Audiolabs, Mission and commercial (pub) jukeboxes.
Interessantes Video, wusstest du, dass es auf Deutsch ist? Außerdem spreche ich gerade Deutsch. Wenn du das übersetzst, siehst du meine Nachricht auf Englisch
Sleek design. Ahead of its time.
1978
Philips claimed that it would give us "perfect sound forever"
I attended the training courses that Philips ran for Hi-Fi techs.
To create a test disc to check for skipping, you took a sharp blade
across a new disc to try to distort the beam.
I just used the damaged discs from the demo room,
The early players error correction was weak.
Fine scratches soon rendered the discs unplayable.
Remember all the magic polish kits that claimed to repair the
damaged discs.
What ammused me that despite all the problems Philips had with
laserdisc or laservision ase they called it, they didn't learn.
It was only a matter of time before discs made in less than perfect
clean rooms started to rot, plus some rotted due to no sealing on
the edges.
The sad part is that you can't even give CD's away now, the charity
shops struggle to sell them.
as a consumer, early CDs were much better at playing with scratches than newer (mid 90s on) discs. Perhaps because the early discs were thicker
@@tomservo5007 That is very true, the early discs were made with thicker clear coating and the edges were smoothed off.
The ones made in the mid 90's were not of the same quality, and hence more prone to fine scratches which were impossible to polish out.
To create the "damaged" test disc, you need a very sharp knife and use a lot of pressure to make a deep scratch
That's very interesting because I have CDs in my collection that are 35 years old and they don't skip at all or have any trace of disc rot 🤔
@@revokdaryl1 So have i, with CD and laserdiscs it is just down to your luck as to any disc
developing laser rot, many as you have said are still fine today, others started to fail only a few
years after manufacture.
Laser Rot is not as big a problem as the press would have us belive, it affected laserdiscs far more than
CD's as any imperfection shows up on the screen, they have no error correction that CD players have.
I have a Japan market only Pioneer HLD-X9 laserdisc player that has a red laser than can play some of the
rotted discs that other players can't play.
Ja die 90db Geschichte hat ja net lange gehalten :( [Edit: Die Musik im Hintergrund heißt "Second Flight" von Birdy
Danke
Lol I remember my french teacher at high school back in year 8 try to tell us that French was the biggest language and most important in the world. Things like this always take me back to the patronising comment she made as if songs and practically everything you come across isn’t in English in brands etc.
Needs more jam.
I GET UP
😮😮😮
Couldn't have used a CD without scratches on it no?
Screams 1985 the second u click!!
what is the cd player called at 0:48
@Mateusz Tadeusz Never thought of that
It's a prototype, it resembles to the Philips CD-100
@@angelfoto4795 thank you
1:46 This ads is so old... Bach was still alive 😂
😂
more like Trevor Pinnock albums were new! That's how old it is...
Eine der besten Entwicklungen der Achtzigerjahre und nach über vierzig Jahren noch immer der beste Tonträger. Doch 0:46 Ein Werbefilm für CDs - und die Schauspielerin macht es gerade falsch! Nie eine CD auf der zu lesenden Seite ablegen, in Staub und Dreck. Auch eine Schallplatte durfte immer nur am Rand und in der Mitte angefasst und nie ungeschützt abgelegt werden, wenn man daran Freude haben wollte. Sie sollte bei Kassetten bleiben.
A decir del cd la tenían ya en la mitad de los 70 (76) pero la lanzaron mucho después. Seguro por la vorágine del Long play y que hubiesen perjudicado su mercado....esperaron al 82', Joer!!
Das Auto
Can't understand a word! 😂 There doesn't appear to be any magnetic disc clamp in that player? I hate those modern cd player spindles where you press the cd on to three ball bearings. So cheap and nasty!
I wish the Jewell case was never invented! Waste of plastic!
what language this guy talking? i don't fcking understand
It's German
I don't understand how someone could think this is anything but German lmao.
@@elcanalpersonaldeldostor1289 It's Dutch. Philips is a Dutch company
@@KylesDigitalLab It's German, Philips was widely advertised in Germany, and their CD pressing plants were located in Germany
Mass production after years 1986-88 gave CD a bad reputation. Too many bad releases with cheap design of jewelcase. It just became a digital successor for a cheap cassette tape. The vinyl revival and downfall of a CD gave this format a new chance. Japanese reissues on special CD formats, but also expensive are great if you want to enjoy this format.
Even the worst cd transfers or new DDD recordings were far superior to cassette tapes. Japan still has a hi fidelity music industry hence high quality CD transfers and SACD releases. Vinyl was and still is uniquely tactile and wonderful to listen to on a very good system. A reminder of the days when records were a serious cherished mainstream medium and not a trendy boutique statement which the vinyl "revival" is today.
diggytal audio