Re: [ARSCLIST] Cataloging sound recordings

[Steven Smolian <smolians@xxxxxxxxx>]

Please remember, my proposal, etc., is to meet the needs of private
collectors first.

Card based thinking, even when using the computer, is only a baby step
toward what the computer can do.    Cataloging has to be rethought to give
people what they have a right to expect, no matter how painful it may be to
those rooted in old ways of doing things.

MARC has always been a kludgy compromise.

Steve Smolian


----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Snyder" <msnyder@xxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cataloging sound recordings


> Karl Miller <lyaa071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Subject:
> Re: Cataloging sound recordings
> On Wed, 4 May 2005, Matt Snyder wrote:
>
> > What do you see as being the function of the MARC record?
>
> Whether the repository in question has a particular item, and, via the
> rules of descriptive cataloging, what that item says about itself. If the
> record sleeve or cd insert doesn't say who was conducting the Beethoven
> piano concerto, or was on drums for this Henry Mancini recording session,
> or whatever other particular information you're looking for, the MARC
> record will not contain it. But, if such information is available to
> someone doing discographical research, that data will go into a
> discography. Catalogs contain info about sound containers, and can have no
> information other than what is on those containers. Discographies (and I'm
> speaking of session-based discography), suck up as much information as is
> available to the discographer.
>
> Matt Snyder
> Music Archivist
> Wilson Processing Project
> The New York Public Library
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.5 - Release Date: 5/4/2005



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.5 - Release Date: 5/4/2005