Re: [ARSCLIST] BWF RF64

[Eric Jacobs <ericj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gentlemen,

Thank you both for all the thoughts and guidance.

Yes, I'm dealing with preservation.  But often the tools and standards
used for preservation can take advantage of the latest commercial 
standards.  So both of your replies have been very useful with 
tackling the 4GB (and 2GB) challenge.

Thanks again,

Eric Jacobs

The Audio Archive, Inc.
tel: 408.221.2128
fax: 408.549.9867
mailto:EricJ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Parker Dinkins
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 3:17 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] BWF RF64


on 9/5/07 4:44 PM US/Central, John Spencer at js@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:

> The Grammy Foundation methodology standard is not the same document
> as the Producers and Engineers Wing Deliverables document I
> referenced. The Grammy Foundation document pulls some information
> from the P&E Wing document (see Resources, page 5).
> 
> The P&E Wing doc is meant to be used as a guideline for commercial
> born-digital recordings (of which many exceed the 4GB topic raised by
> Eric in his initial post).

Well, then I misunderstood (I am quite aware of the distinction).

I thought Eric's question dealt with audio preservation, not interchange
standards for commercial born-digital recordings.

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