Re: [ARSCLIST] proper cataloging terminology: acetate vs lacquer?

[steven c <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven Smolian" <smolians@xxxxxxxxx>
> It's necessary they be described accurately enough within the catalog
system
> to be sure they are reproduced with the proper equipment.   It seems to me
> that this is one of the major functions of the catalog.  It's a
preservation
> issue.
>
> Boy, not only did our ancestors walk funny (see silent films for the
proper
> ancient gait) but they sound weird on those old graphatropes.
>
> We are all encountering a generation that cannot tell us over the phone if
> what they have are 78s, LPs or 45s.  Why, LPs are the larger ones, of
> course.
>
> Is this something the ARSC education committee sould be looking into?
>
What I would like to see ARSC do is to define the core fields (name,
size, possibly type) of data tables used to:

1) Catalog collections/accumulations of phonorecords held either by
institutions or individuals

2) Collect discographic information for the purpose of listing
78rpm phonorecords (or all phonorecords) of a particular variety
(genre, label, country, defined period, usw.)

Note that these two types of data tables, while inherently
similar, are NOT identical...and defining the differences
between the two might also be valuable.

The eventual purpose would be to standardize these data
collections and make them to a certain extent interchangeable
amongst one another...thus if I'm collecting information on
Radiex 78's, and you're collecting information on punk rock
vinyls, both could be added (in part) to an "ultimate sound
recording catalog" to be assembled at some unknown date!

Steven C. Barr