Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar

To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar
From: Parker Dinkins <parker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 22:01:42 -0500
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@loc.gov>
In-reply-to: <001f01c79f28$0e0a1b00$0100007f@sympatico.ca>
List-archive: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=ARSCLIST>
List-help: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=ARSCLIST>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV?body=INFO ARSCLIST>
List-owner: <mailto:ARSCLIST-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
List-subscribe: <mailto:ARSCLIST-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ARSCLIST-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
Message-id: <C27D0D46.29112%parker@masterdigital.com>
Reply-to: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx>
Thread-index: AcefQi+ublrU+As1EdygDgAWy4RdmQ==
Thread-topic: [ARSCLIST] Cedar
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.3.061214

D P Ingram wrote:

> I am not entirely sure I can justify the c 40,000 dollar to 70,000
> dollar price tag that was quoted for the Cambridge system presently.

Perhaps a complete CEDAR Cambridge system might cost around that amount, but
I fail to see why any record collector would ever need the extensive
forensic and dialog enhancement tools that would be included in such a
system.

--
Parker Dinkins
MasterDigital Corporation
Audio Restoration + CD Mastering
http://masterdigital.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar
  - From: D P Ingram

References:
- Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar
  - From: Steven C. Barr(x)

Prev by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] was Mass Digitization-now why preserve
Next by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar
Previous by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar
Next by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Table of Contents]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar

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