Re: [ARSCLIST] Format conundrum

["Steven C. Barr" <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeffrey Kane" <jeffkane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Now you're talking about technology that's beyond obsolete with perhaps a
> handful of functioning units in the world if even that. I'm sure a new
paper
> tape writer/reader could be fashioned (as well as media) but again the
> amount of media necessary for this amount of data would make storage a
> difficult proposition. As an example, a 1" wide paper tape can store 70
bits
> per linear inch. Figure with lossless compression you can reduce the
> datasize by half. Thus, that's 1.1 million bits per second. For every
second
> of data at 88.2Khz/24 bits you'd need approximately 1309 FEET of tape.
Each
> minute of sound would be 78,540 feet of tape. Now, paper tape is MUCH
> thicker than magnetic... One CD worth would conceivably fill a very large
> storage space.
>
> I realize my point of view is an uneducated one but IMO the most stable
> archival method I've seen thus far is vinyl. It's a shame pressing records
> is so prohibitive as we all have countless examples of records that have
> survived 50-100 years with minimal degradation. I personally have new old
> stock 78s in my collection from the late 30s that look and play as though
> they were just pressed. The microgroove records perform even better. I'm
> sure metal parts would last even longer. Could something like a Vestax
> VRX-2000 be modified for archival purposes?
>
However, keep in mind that 78's are a shellac-based compound, whilr 33's
and 45's are vinyl. The main disadvantage of vinyl is that it can be
incoorectibly warped by high temperatures, while shellac discs need
only be rewarmed to flexibility and bent back to flat!

The question would be whether it is possible to find a less-grainy
"filler" for the compund, since that is what causes the surface noise...
Steven C. Barr