Re: [ARSCLIST] Fw: [ARSCLIST] Gold CDs

[Mike Richter <mrichter@xxxxxxx>]

At 10:27 PM 9/24/2004 -0400, Sara Velez wrote:
> Bravo, Duane, I could not agree more with your sentiments. I still love the
> warmth and resonance of my old 78s and LPs, pops, clicks and all. And
> they're still around to tell their stories.  Realistically, though, the
> preservation and access needs of the 21th century, are driving us further
> into the digital sound domain.

There is a trap in this discussion, one which we are approaching if not
falling into. It is the equating of archiving and providing access.
Libraries may do both, of course, but when a single effort aims at that
dual purpose, it is prone to accomplish neither.

Archiving entails maintaining primary materials and providing such
representation of them for preservation as the institution can afford. In
archiving, any compromise of fidelity can only be justified when cost and
circumstances dictate. To provide access, compromise is mandatory; use of
the information embodied in the material demands user economy and
convenience. Thus, an archive of acoustic recordings may well demand
shellac and cylinder preservation; very high rate digital capture in
multiple channels; storage on archival media under controlled conditions.
For accessiblity, those same materials may best be available in
moderate-rate MP3 - with hundreds of sides per disc and extensive indexing.
Intermediate stages, such as commercially released redbook CD-DA, have
their place as well.

Because of limited skills and resources, my own focus is on making a part
of our musical heritage accessible. I rarely enter discussion on archival
requirements, having only perfect ignorance there. However, I will suggest
that excessive focus on the best possible archiving ensures that a minimum
of material will be saved - at least until unlimited resources become
available. Thus, a compromise is needed which, in my judgement, should be
tuned to the materials and the functions of the archive.

Perhaps it would be useful to identify grades of archiving so that
discussion can remain focussed. The ultimate which can reasonably be used
with today's technology would be worth defining. An intermediate grade -
perhaps controlled, pressed CDs at redbook quality (CD-DA) - may be
achievable as well as sufficient for some materials. The grade I use would
clearly be near the lowest level of interest, but it does serve to provide
access to many times more users and to preserve materials in institutional
and private libraries which could not be so widespread otherwise.

Let me offer an instance. There is a priceless trove of recordings made by
Lionel Mapleson at the Metropolitan Opera House between 1900 and 1903. The
known cylinders are in the custody of the New York Public Library, who have
issued a set of LPs and a handsome book. Unfortunately, making that
transfer entailed yet another playing of each disc, so earlier transfers by
Seltsam issued on UORC (78s and LPs) are in many ways superior. At some
time, the funds and personnel to transfer them still more accurately may
well become available. One question is when the technical improvement
justifies yet another playing.

More to the point, the $100 LP set is inconvenient to access. It requires
that each disc be in ideal condition, that suitable playback equipment be
available, and that the user have the patience to search the documentation
to find the selection desired. I have digitized my copies of the
recordings, including the UORC LPs as well as the NYPL, and correlated them
using multiple indexes as part of a single, $10 CD-ROM. To the student, the
loss of quality has proved negligible, where the improvement in
accessibility is critical. If that disc were issued formally, it would make
that part of our legacy available in many libraries and schools which now
commit their funds elsewhere.

To the extent that ARSC is concerned with all sorts of collections or
recorded sound, I suggest that its interest extends beyond the best current
archiving methods. It may even include my own efforts.


Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/