[Table of Contents]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ARSCLIST] proper cataloging terminology: acetate vs lacquer?

To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ARSCLIST] proper cataloging terminology: acetate vs lacquer?
From: Eric Jacobs <ericj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:47:45 -0800
Comments: To: ARSC List <ARSCLIST@loc.gov>
Importance: Normal
Message-id: <018701c61c5f$abe091d0$0c00a8c0@thetick>
Reply-to: ericj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I recently heard a discussion among catalogers on whether to describe an
item as an "acetate" or a "lacquer".  Said item would be an instantaneous
recording cut into nitrocellulose on an aluminum, glass or other substrate.

So which is the more appropriate term for cataloging - acetate or lacquer?

Eric Jacobs
The Audio Archive
tel: 408.221.2128
fax: 408.549.9867
mailto:EricJ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Prev by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] New challenges for audio preservation
Next by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] Memorex CDs and more!
Previous by thread: [ARSCLIST] New challenges for audio preservation
Next by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] proper cataloging terminology: acetate vs lacquer?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]