LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  March 2003

ARSCLIST March 2003

Subject:

Re: CD Burners

From:

Jerome Hartke <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 19 Mar 2003 22:36:55 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (90 lines)

matt Sohn wrote:
>
> >There is no answer to your question except the one that you determine. >For
> archiving, the question is: How well is the disc written.
>
> The Question (assuming the disc is well written) is "How long will the disc
> remain readable (or recoverable).
>
> >I find with current, quality media I can achieve that goal at 12x regularly
> >and 8x frequently. If I must write at lower speed, I'm essentially out of
> >luck since the last media I have which recorded well at that speed >passed
> their shelf life and were tossed due to excessive errors.
>
> so reasonably fast speeds are better than slower ones? This is essentially
> what I was wondering. The faster and smaller things get, the more nervous I
> am. I use a Masterlink for 24-bit preservation copies, and it gives me no
> choice for the burning speed (4X). It also gives me very reliable copies.
>
> >Note, too, that "certification" is of little value. Ultimately, it means
> >that the manufacturer will replace a disc which you can demonstrate >failed
> >because of write speed when you wrote within its limit. To the extent that
> >replacing the blank - your data are not covered - is meaningful, the
> >warranty is of value.
>
> What if the disc shatters in my burner and ruins it? Would the CD
> manufacturer be liable for damages, or would the burner manufacturer replace
> it under warranty only if I was using "certified" media for the fast speed I
> was burning at (if at all)?
>
> >a few recoverable errors are quite acceptable for ordinary
> >use and may even be acceptable for your archiving,
>
> I guess the key word is "recoverable". I can accept "recoverable" errors,
> but my question is "how long will they be recoverable?". Here I am basically
> concerned with how soon I will have to migrate the collection. This question
> applies to any medium I choose to archive in, be it CDR, DVD-R, Hard Disc or
> wax cylinder. We're all searching for the perfect long-term storage medium.
> We seem to be pretty close to the "perfect" part, but the "long-term" part
> seems questionable. I am drawn to the idea of storing data on firwire hard
> drives, but the idea of putting all that data in one spot is scary. If the
> drive goes bad, I lose 200 Gigabytes, not just 700 mB. The CDR method seems
> to be the accepted choice, as long as the format remains viable, but I was
> somewhat shocked to see how quickly vinyl disappeared from the general
> marketplace and became a "niche" market. The fact that single-well
> standalone CD players are getting difficult to find doesn't fill me with
> confidence.
> The problem we seem to be facing is that the technology we are using to
> archive our materials is becoming more and more "delicate" and complicated
> to replicate once it has become obsolete. If wax cylinders became the medium
> of choice again, it would be relatively simple to tool up a factory to
> produce players. With the miniaturization of components to the chip level,
> none of us worker bees have the ability to "get under the hood" of the tools
> they are working with. If your tool breaks, you replace it. And if the
> people that make it go out of business, you're out of luck. We are all
> banking on our technological developments as a society to continue and
> develop. With the state of the world these days, I don't take that as a sure
> bet. If our civilization crumbles, can we replicate the technology to
> recover the information we have stored?
> As archivists, we are primarily concerned with preserving audio material and
> artifacts for future generations, yes? What is the best way to do that?

No one knows precisely how long a high quality disc that is properly
handled and stored will last, but 50-100 years is not unreasonable. You
can then visit the Smithsonian Museum and use their drive to confirm
readability.

High speed drives are not better than lower speed drives. Writers tend
to record best at their top speed since vibration damping is usually
optimized for that usage. Writing at less than the top speed may give
good results or may result in a disaster.

Disc cracking and shattering at high speeds is a serious issue. Of
course the disc manufacturer will point to a bad drive, and the drive
supplier will claim that the disc is defective. In truth, the user
should be held responsible for unreasonable high speed expectations.

"Recoverable" errors normally relate to E22, E32, or burst errors. A
draft longevity standard recommends re-recording if these occur so that
a high quality disc can be obtained before the disc with errors becomes
unreadable. When that will occur is not predictable.

All archival methods have risks of degradation and obsolescence.
Archivists must confirm and monitor quality, and port the data to newer
storage technologies as appropriate. There is no "magic bullet."

For details please visit http://www.mscience.com

Jerry
Media Sciences, Inc.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager