Re: [ARSCLIST] cataloging sound recordings

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Miller" <lyaa071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Steven Smolian wrote:
>
> > Before spending time on the same-old same-old, I'd have to be convinced
the
> > time spent in looking over any propsed matrix, will  reveal that it is
> > capable of doing what will satisfy the experienced collector.
> >
> > Otherwise, we DO need a different system, one that puts their need
first.
>
> Reading Steven's remarks...I am reminded of the staying that library
> catalogs were designed for librarians. I still believe that is true. When
> I look at what our local system does to the MARC record...something, as
> has already been pointed out, not designed for recordings (not to mention
> its encumbered methodology)...I will have to spend more time than I think
> I should to figure out what is exactly in the bibliographic record. For
> example..."conductor in the first work." How can I remember the ordering
> of the pieces on the disc when it took enough time to even find the piece
> I was looking for in the contents listing. As a discographer, looking in
> OCLC is a nightmare for me. Then, if you can find a record for a
> recording, often times it doesn't tell you what you want to know...plus,
so
> many errors...I know, I have corrected plenty of them. MARC had its place
> when it was used to make cards for card catalogs and was limited to books.
>
> I would love to see a cataloging system designed by users...I think we may
> have that in many of the popular search engines.
>
> I find it amusing that I get my best information on subject headings by
> consulting allmusic.com
I have had a chance to look at various library sysyems, and I would agree
wholeheartedly that they were designed to catalog paper items (most notably
books) and that is a totally different entity than cataloguing phonorecords!
Books, for example, don't have (or need) matrix numbers, control numbers,
composer credits...and so on, and so forth. For this reason, looking up
a recording in, for example, your nearest public library can be a confusing
and frustrating task.

As I noted before, I will send, on request, a phonorecord cataloguing
application I created in MS Access...it's about a 250KB file, and needs
at least Access 98 to open it, and as well is not 100% completed...but
I can send it to interested parties and welcome comments on it.

Also, as I have commented before, I think that ARSC might try and define
a basic core set of fields (in the sense of field types and mimimum sizes
as well as names) for phonorecord cataloguing. Each user could, of course,
augment this core set of fields as he/she/it saw fit...but it would at
least guarantee data interchangibility for the core fields, which would in
turn make it possible to create an "uber-catalog" comprising as many
collections as possible. This could be used to:
1) Collect data on as many sound recordings (I'm thinking of 78's, but
   others could be included) as possible. This could be used as a data
   source on recordings.

2) Establish, for researchers and other interested parties, a guide to
   which sound recordings still exists and where they can be accessed.

There are all sorts of other possible uses which suggest themselves,
or will if this is discussed!

I know of at least present or proposed institutional collections of
sound recordings aimed at collecting either all such recordings or
different subsets of them. There were/are other collections of data,
Not standarizing the digital portion of the process(es) means at
the very least these projects may wind up working at cross-purposes
with no practical means of sharing or comparing information on
activities.

Thoughts?

Steven C. Barr
stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx