Thanks so much for your considered response. While I must respectfully disagree with you as far as the amount of time it would take, I understand the the other points you make and it is disappointing that a consensus was elusive. However, my list was more a compendium of suggestions from experts in the field. It would be up to the user to determine which device was "best" at the end of the day. It sounds to me as though the internal politics and manufacturer's concerns could prevent this from coming to pass on some official basis. Perhaps I will have to write a little book on the subject and see if a music technology press would be interested in such an idea.
Aaron:
This is a great idea that has been considered by a number of other groups I belong to. Unfortunately, the idea never got past the discussion stage for the following three reasons: 1) The amount of research and work involved is tremendous. It would likely require the concerted effort of a fairly large organization or a substantial number of people who were retired and had lots of "free" time on their hands; 2) Many experts disagree on which are the "best" machines and attempts to start the project got bogged down in setting up criteria to evaluate the equipment and 3) If the project were undertaken by an organization, there is the potential (in the United States, at least) for substantial legal liability. It is surprising how many manufacturers can get bent out of shape if you imply their equipment is not among "the best" for a particular application, even if it was never designed for that application.
Certainly, any expert can openly state which equipment they prefer and any organization can openly state which equipment they use (and why). For an organization to start "ranking" and "officially" recommending one piece of equipment over another, however, can get complicated.
It's a great idea and I'm sure there must be some way to pursue the project. I've just pointed out some of the pitfalls others have encountered and hope you find some way around them.
Peter Brothers President SPECS BROS., LLC (201) 440-6589 www.specsbros.com
Celebrating 20 Years of Restoration and Disaster Recovery Service
-----Original Message----- From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Aaron Luis Levinson Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:30 AM To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] International Archive for Recording Devices
It is my suggestion that a database be created which lists the "best" machines available for archival purposes for every recording format be it analog electronic, acoustical or digital. Then offer a contact for buying and/or refurbishing and maintaing these devices. My ultimate dream would result in a master Archive of the machines themselves that would be maintained and serviced and be made available at a subsidized cost to the many hundreds if not thousands of people who need these machines on an on-going basis.
In order to serve our mission as preservationists we must not lose sight of our task as finding not only the art that must be saved but the science that must be saved if the art is to be heard at all.
Aaron Luis Levinson
On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 03:15 AM, Bewley, Nigel wrote:
Tascam 122MKIII gets my vote.
Nigel Bewley British Library National Sound Archive
-----Original Message----- From: Claudia Depkin [mailto:cdepkin@xxxxxxxx] Sent: 05 March 2003 19:43 To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ARSCLIST] seeking cassette deck recommendation
Can anyone recommend a cassette deck that will be gentle with old and potentially valuable cassette tapes? Thanks.
Claudia Depkin Project Manager, Wilson Processing Project for Performing Arts Collections The New York Public Library (212) 714-8507
********************************************************************* ** ***
Free exhibition at the British Library Galleries :
Magic Pencil : Children's Book Illustration Today (to 31 March) original graphic work of 13 contemporary artists
********************************************************************* ** **
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the postmaster@xxxxx : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
********************************************************************* ** **