Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?

To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?
From: Konrad Strauss <konrad.strauss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:49:40 -0500
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@loc.gov>
In-reply-to: <000401c4a670$3ff53900$af210b04@dslverizon.net>
Message-id: <BD80B444.9498%konrad.strauss@insightbb.com>
Reply-to: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.0.0.040405

on 9/29/04 5:04 PM, David Lewiston at david.lewiston@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> 2. Digitising at 176.4kHz, 24 bits, and saving the digitised audio to two

Why 176.4kHz?

--
Konrad Strauss
Recording * Editing * Mastering * Production
http://php.indiana.edu/~kstrauss

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?
  - From: David Lewiston
- Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?
  - From: Claus Trelby

References:
- Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?
  - From: David Lewiston

Prev by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?
Next by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] 14 inch recordings (was Victor Deluxe 12 discs
Previous by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?
Next by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Table of Contents]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation method?

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