Re: Re[2]: arsclist CD-DA versus CD-Rom (.wav) for archiving

["George Brock-Nannestad" <gbn.av@xxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

I was shocked to see the conclusion that a data format should be 
better ("in the long term"??) than an audio format. Hence I would 
subscribe to the approach of Peter Copeland ("Peter") and Mark 
Tolleson.

I do not believe that anything done today need not be transferred or 
converted in a foreseeable future. Hence a format which provides 
the greatest functionality and still retains all the audio data is 
preferable. Today that is the audio CD-format (if you can afford it) or 
CD-R (audio).

However, "We are interested primarily in preserving the music." 
was the introducing statement in Jean-Pierre's original discussion 
item. Now, this calls for a precise consideration of what is actually 
"the music". Is it a signal taken "straight" (and please, what is 
that??) from a lacquer (acetate) or Gallotone record or from tapes? 
Is it a signal obtained from the above by editing, such as noise 
reduction? No transfer project should apply for funding or start 
before a clear and well-argued policy on the very fundamental 
replay matters has been defined. And control measures must be 
instituted to see that internal rules are adhered to. This is the only 
way that traceability can be obtained.

A preservation effort cannot take responsibility for anything that is 
not defined. If the music is the primary interest, then a transfer 
which will optimise the preservation of that (optimised according to 
present-day standards, mind you!) will not optimise the 
preservation of ancillary information (such as annotations on the 
carrier or sleeve/box or background noises in the signal itself). 
Future potential users of the material should be kept in mind. And 
as far as possible, the originals must be given a healthy 
environment.

There may exist situations in which the above would seem very 
ivory towery. Such situations would be those where it is a question 
of retaining at least a trace of a lot of items, rather than saving in 
first-class quality only a handful. I would go for variety ("breadth") 
rather than quality, if this kind of compromise has to be made.

The ethical aspects of sound archiving and of transfer - from media 
to media - are not yet well understood. In all cases that involve an 
analog transfer there is a possibility for voluntary or involuntary 
manipulation. The manipulations occur as the result of the 
adjustment of equipment (or on the internal circuits in the 
equipment). One requirement must be that the manipulation is 
conscious - and well argued.

I do hope that I have opened a can of worms!



George Brock-Nannestad
Preservation Tactics