[Table of Contents]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

arsclist Fwd: submission from [Richard Warren <richard.warren@yale.edu>]

Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 16:02:08 -0500
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Richard Warren <richard.warren@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: arsclist Analog reformatting tape specs-Advice sought
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <sc3c4689.082@xxxxxxx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Dear Richard,

After long years of experience with most known formats of 1/4-inch
audiotape, I'd go with full-track mono for the sake of your and your
clients successors, but I can't quote any authorities other than archival
experience. You could look at the situation as allowing additional security
for the reel-to-reel copies (in full-track, if one tape degrades or gets
sticky "too soon", only one hour would be lost).

Best, Richard

At 12:33 PM 1/9/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>Sorry for the cross posting...please ignore this if you get it more than
>once. I can never figure out where the best place(s) is/are to post these
>types of queries.
>I have been asked to propose the reformatting of a small but important
>collection of audio recordings. These are field oral histories made with
>presumably inexpensive portable recorders. I have not heard them yet.
>The originals are on C-120 cassettes. (pray for me if I get the project)
>The potential client has requested analog audio reels as well as CD-R red
>book audio copies. They are committed to making the reels and have the
>money to pay for them. I have already discussed whether or not they should
>do this and they want to do this to be safe.
>I see this as an audio-domain reformatting process that does not involve
>the computer.
>The CD-Rs will be provided in dual, single-wide jewel boxes, one CD-R per
>cassette side. This will provide easy tracking of the reformatted copies.
>The analog reel tapes pose a challenge. After research I've pretty much
>decided on Emtec 911. That was pretty easy.
>Certainly 7.5 in/s will be more than adequate to capture the fidelity of
>the original and allows one hour to be recorded on a 10.5 inch reel of
>tape, keeping 1:1 correspondence among the original, the CD-R, and the reel.
>I am torn between recording two reels, one for each side of the tape, in
>full-track mono (the original cassette tapes are currently assumed to be
>mono) and recording one reel per cassette in half-track mono. This latter
>option would mean that there are two programs on the tape, each going in
>opposite directions.
>After looking at the bob-and-weave of the 50+-year-old Magnetophonband
>tapes that I recently transferred, I feel better with full track mono. In
>fact, the Magnetophonband tapes sound as good as they do ONLY because they
>are full track and 30 in/s.
>I'm leaning towards the full-track mono, 2-reels-per-cassette solution,
>but does anyone think this is total overkill?
>Any thoughts or standards you could point me to would be appreciated.
>Oh and I think setting up the machine to record on Emtec 911 will be a
>piece of cake after setting it up for Magnetophonband Typ L!
>For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
>Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
>permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
>from the author of the post.

Esther Gillie, Sound Recording Archivist Phone: 716-274-1330 Eastman Audio Archive Fax: 716-274-1380 Eastman School of Music, Sibley Music Library esth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 27 Gibbs Street, Rochester, NY 14604

For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]