Re: [ARSCLIST] Sound card recommendations

[steven c <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

see end...
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Richter" <mrichter@xxxxxxx>
> Charles Lawson wrote:
> > steven c <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >>Keep in mind that when assembling sound recordings intended for the
> >>public,
> >>
> >>about 99.9% of that demographic has no particular interest in the fine
> >>
> >>points of sound quality/accuracy...
> > 
> > 
> > This may be true, but it is no reason for us to lower our standards. 
> > We're not going to solve the problem by contributing to it.
> > 
> > Chas.
> 
> I am struck by the persistence of such a position on this list. It is 
> both admirable and questionable. Admirable since it does represent a 
> nobility of purpose and a commitment to quality; questionable since it 
> neglects real issues of limited resources: time, funds, skills.
> 
> Even if those limits were not imposed, the fact that material is being 
> created today which requires archiving suggests that the purist approach 
> may be impractical; it can lead to preserving less and less of what one 
> hopes to retain lthat that that portion will be superbly enshrined.
> 
> I say "enshrined" deliberately since it does suggest separation from the 
> surrounding masses, isolation from the interests of the overwhelming 
> majority. Again, I mean no offense; it is appropriate that treasures be 
> protected from contamination. But that isolation may make such 
> preservation irrelevant to the many who ultimately determine the 
> allocation of resources.
> 
> There is an issue of purpose underlying the questions here and I know 
> that my own purpose - making a portion of our audio heritage available 
> to all - is not that of many in this group. But if I were to work to the 
> standards suggested here, I could do only a tiny fraction of what I have 
> been able to accomplish. I might do it very well (assuming that I 
> acquired the tools and, most important, the skills), but it would be of 
> little overall value to my goal.
> 
My original comment referred mainly to "restorations" intended for
commercial CD reissue...NOT archival restorations/conversions.

Obviously, it is in the interest of society (whether society realizes
this or not is open to question) to preserve as much of the total
of historic sound recordings (of any nature) as is feasible. Each
historic sound recording contains information, and the more
information we are able to preserve for our posterity the better
off that posterity will be!

Of course, this also suggests that the information ABOUT a sound
recording (who made it, when, and any information about the
circumstances under which it was made) must be preserved along
with the recording itself! I have a large stack of instantaneous
recordings of speeches...however, no notes were made about who
was speaking, when, where or why! As a result. what might have
been valuable to some future hearer is now a mere curiosity...
if that!

Assume that if someone assumed that a sonic event was important
enough to make a more permanent record thereof, there is likely
to be someone in the future who will have reason to access that
sound recording...for whatever reason(s)...

Steven C. Barr