Re: [ARSCLIST] Cataloging sound recordings

[Thom Pease <thompease@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just one note I wanted to mention:

Obviously, MARC catalog records are not just for
English-library consumption.  The structure of AACR(x)
in its punctuation, capitalization, and various other
standardization of elements are there so that anyone
whether they speak English or not can understand the
semantics of a MARC record.

You know, I've heard no mention of this in the current
discussion, but there is another organization besides
MLA working on these issues.  That's the OLAC (Online
Audiovisual Catalogers)--they seem to have a lot more
pull in the broader cataloging community.
Organizations like them, MLA, and AES have projects
they are working on.  Maybe if efforts at reform were
done by lobbying or collaborating with them, MLA/MOUG,
LC, and OCLC, it wouldn't be just sound and fury.

Thom

Thom Pease
Graduate Student, School of Library & Info. Science
Indiana University-Bloomington
tpease@xxxxxxxxxxx

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, A. Ralph Papakhian wrote:

> on the other hand and as an alternative view point,
i would like to
> celebrate the cooperative work of hundreds of
library catalogers
> over the past ca. 35 years. oclc's worldcat now
includes some
> 1,947,819 catalog records for sound recordings
(along with
> 22,367,876 locations for those recordings). and all
of those
> records have been produced with fairly well defined,
structured
> standards designed to meet the needs of many if not
all "information
> seekers."

It would be foolish to deny the remarkable
accomplishments of OCLC and
RLIN, yet, I believe there are technological
developments, coupled with
the quanity of information created, that should prompt
a
reconsideration
of the methodology of cataloging.

I believe that the process of compiling a MARC record
is unnecessarily
encumbered and much of the search mechanisms of most
online catalogs,
depending on your local system, are not easy to use
and/or interpret.

> reach of those who could benefit from it" i think it
is fairly
> evident there is also quite a bit of information
available for
> those who could and do benefit from it. having a few
individual
> collectors energetically cataloging their
collections using
> idiosyncratic home-grown cataloging systems cannot
(and i predict
> will not) take the place of systematic and organized
cataloging
> provided by (mostly non-profit) libraries who are
committed to
> following nationally and internationally agreed upon
standards.

I don't recall anyone suggesting that home grown
catalogs will take the
place of "home-grown" cataloging...however, I do not
believe all
"home-grown" cataloging is idiosyncratic. While OCLC
was not the result
of
the disposition of an individual, and while it was
assembled with some
of the
finest minds in technology and librarianship, it was
designed for a
technology that is almost 40 years old, designed to
print cards and not
designed for sound recordings.  Further, it seems to
me that our
entire conceptualization of the use of the digital
technology is
evolving.
While OCLC and RLIN have adapted to some extent, they
are designed to
control information versus, navigate information.

As I mentioned, I don't know the answers, nor do I
even suggest I know
the
question, but what I personally encounter is a
difficult time locating
recordings, and should I find a cataloging record, it
often leaves me
with
many more questions. I question why this is so.

You mention that world cat contains information on 1.9
million
recordings.
Consider the era of the wide groove recording. I know
of no estimates
of
the number of cylinders that were recorded, yet very
few have been
given
MARC records. The Rigler Deutsch project addressed the
basics of discs
through the introduction of the microgoove recording.
While some discs
of
that period have been given MARC records, it is a very
small percentage
of
the approximately 750,000 titles addressed in Rigler
Deutsch. I have
read
that there have been estimates of an additional
250,000 discs from that
period. I believe LC is adding wide groove disc
listings (discs not
listed
in Rigler Deutsch) to Sonic. For starters, we have
about 1Million items
not addressed with MARC records.

As for the LP era...estimates range from two to five
million titles
produced. I have never read any estimates on the
number of cassettes
and
CDs issued commercially.

So what would one consider as a reasonable estimate of
the total number
of
recordings issued commercially? For a guess, I will
offer a range of
1Million wide groove discs, ? cylinders, 3 Million
LPs, ? 45 rpms, 2
Million CDs, ? cassettes. 1.9 million OCLC records
would seem to be
perhaps 20% of the total?

While there are MARC records for some non-commerical
recordings, the
bulk
of the non-commercial recordings are not
cataloged...let alone
reformatted.

So what of the non-commercial materials...

The Commission on Preservation Access has offered the
notion that
"humans
will create more information in the next three years
than in the
300,000
years of history dating to the earliest cave paintings
and beyond..."

What needs to be saved? Addressing this question our
Vice Provost said
to
me..."well we are forming a faculty committee"...What
do they know of
preservation...nothing...what do they know of what
might be
unique...nothing.
As Henry Gladney wrote in the Journal of the Audio
Engineering Society,
"Selection even by disciplinary experts is as much
governed by fashion
as by
stable, objective criteria, exacerbating an already
formidable
challenge."
It would seem that we might even be clueless as to
what to save.

Gerry Gibson's survey published back in 1994 by IASA
suggests that the
world wide holdings of audio to be about 50 Million
hours with an
annual
growth rate of 5-10%. Whew!

Then consider the quality of the data in OCLC.

Catalogers have a very great challenge with every item
they catalog. It
is
always a question of how much information should be
included and what
can
be omitted. Even when I find a "hit" in OCLC, I
usually spend, on
average,
about 30 minutes expanding the 511 field, and, in
turn, rekeying
that information in a 700 field. I look at things like
the 007 field
with
its delimiters (can you believe having to use
delimiters these days!)
which includes information also noted in the 300
field. Why
must this information be duplicated and why is some of
that information
included in the fixed fields as well? These are some
of the more
obvious
aspects of the format that I see as keeping the
cataloger from making
the
most of the use of their time.

Why such an encumbered process? The only responses I
ever get are,
"this is the way the system is set up," or, even
worse, "there is a
substantive infrastructure that supports MARC." From
my perspective,
considering the exponential growth of information, we
have are left
with
the information haves and have nots. For me the system
is
self-defeating.

Then, what about the recordings not extant in the form
of an object?

Having minored in Musicology, I can appreciate the
notion of order and
control of information. I appreciate the immense
knowledge required to
prepare a MARC record, yet I am also appalled how
encumbered the
process
is...even if some catalogers are not. I am concerned
because I wonder
if
what I might be looking for really does exist
somewhere and yet I don't
know that for a fact.

Then, what of private collections. I think of the
listing Allan Ho has
done on his research on concerted works for piano and
orchestra. I can
look at his online listing and at least find out if a
work exists in a
recording...not that his listing is complete, but, I
would wager that
at
the very least, 10% of his listings cannot be found in
OCLC or RLIN.

Again, I don't mean to belittle in any way the
remarkable
accomplishments
of catalogers and MARC...yet I wonder how much more
could be done
making
use of the technology of today; making a format that
would be easy
enough
for a private collector to use and one which would
place the emphasis
on
navigation over "control." I dread my first encounter
with AACR 3. Will
that mean that every time I encounter an A level
record will I need to
upgrade it as well? I dread the thought that AARC 3
might be another
attempt to beat, if not a dead horse, a very over
burdened one.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com