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  June 2005

ARSCLIST June 2005

Subject:

Re: Longevity of data tape?--

From:

Claus Trelby <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 9 Jun 2005 22:01:42 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (158 lines)

Hi Everyone,

The last time I commented on a physical archival issue I ran into a fairly
solid fundamental disagreement... regarding artificial ageing

I tend to base my numbers and facts on what I have experienced and learned
from many companies venturing into our field of work, and obviously what my
own company has had to deal with. I would do OUR (this list) communication a
injustice if I did otherwise.... I test all our materials very frequently,
and even if my company has only been in business for the last couple of
years, my professional audio experience spans a couple of decades.

Just to clarify some of my past opinions I would love to share an experience
I had today with one of our engineers (Heath).

We were asked to do an analog dub (some call it clone)... we quote the price
and move forward. Well...

We spend 4 hrs in the studio essentially rebuilding a Studer  827, trying to
find out why we can't print solid reference tones on track 3 (out of 24),
and without boring anyone with the details it turns out that the physical
analog media (a tape from the last run of GP9) had a slit error in the
physical coding process that revealed a "pumping" error in the flux levels
on this specific latitude of the tape...

We (this list) have several times talked about analog backup vs. digital,
but we still have to remember that the digital info has to go somewhere...
and due to cost concerns, most clients will go for LTO, AIT, etc.

Here is where I hit this thread...

Even if we trust the data tape we use we can get in trouble.... just to give
and example (I could have used PCM DAT tape).... We deal with ADAT mulitrack
tape all the time... from within the last 10 years... Essentially they took
a VCR transport and made it run faster... still recording 8 channels of PCM
audio on a regular SVHS tape. That, in it self, turned out to be a problem,
because any drop out will be across ALL 8 channels, due to the way they laid
out the data.

These machines were the beginning of the demise of the "professional"
studio. I would be the first to admit that the hourly prices in the
professional studios were way too high when these machines hit the street,
but AT LEAST the recording engineer and artist could be fairly certain that
the machines were aligned. I have experiences where a "rich" artist went to
ADAT because they could now build their own home studio for a reasonable
cost. It just so happens that they never spend money on a "tech" for the
studio... """ these new machines were flawless"""

Well the original recording machine is now in a dump heap somewhere, and
they were not aligned to ANY standard. In the archival world we now have to
"take a sledgehammer" to the playback machine to make the tapes play back...

At least we have auto aligning data machines when we deal with LTO's etc,
but it is not perfect...  getting an LTO tape from one studio to recover it
in another, often entails shipping the LTO drive with it.... the same goes
for Exabyte and AIT etc... this reminds me of shipping 2" quad video tapes
in the past, where we had to ship the head with the tape... remember that
the self aligning mechanism only works across about 40% of the possible
physical aligning area... centered around the physical placement of the
recording.

It's presently about getting the best odds possible... I store the LTO tape
drive with my tapes.... it's not perfect, but at least we have a chance, if
the client doesn't migrate 10 years from now.

I am not giving anyone the solution to a problem... I'm trying to convey a
mentality we all need to have... let's talk... let's learn from each
other... and no matter how invested we are in a single technology in our
practices or local studio, we have to understand that no solution is perfect
yet... more importantly we have to remember that it is OUR job in the
archival industry to make it work...

I hoping this email will give me (reveal) the perfect solution, but I'm not
holding my breath...

Sincerely with hope,

Claus.

Claus Trelby
Managing Engineer/Partner

XEPA Digital
1137 Branchton Road, 19-N-3
Boyers, PA 16020-0137
www.xepadigital.com
[log in to unmask]
P:724-794-3686
F:724-794-3292
C:805-490-1730

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Richard L. Hess
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 9:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity of data tape?--


John,

As I know you're aware (I'm writing this to the others on the list, really,
not you), there is a huge difference between most of the "backup" tape
solutions that have been sold over the years and the enterprise-class tape
solutions like LTO. We definitely need clarification here.

However, as you are aware as well, the roadmap for LTO and AIT and S-AIT
make keeping a given format around much more than five years questionable,
I believe most of these formats will read back two generations and write
back one generation, but the space saving with a doubling of capacity per
generation makes you want to upgrade the library. The only downside of this
is it generates a lot of trash for the landfill and also costs some money,
but the upgrades are probably close to free compared to adding slots to the
robotic library system.

Cheers,

Richard

At 09:10 PM 6/9/2005, John Spencer wrote:
>Ken,
>
>were you using a specific software backup application, or using
>Windows generic backup utility, or a TAR archive?
>
>John
>
>John Spencer
>www.bridgemediasolutions.com
>
>
>On Jun 9, 2005, at 7:46 PM, Ken Hansen wrote:
>
>>I also would never trust DATA backup for longer than 5 years.
>>The past two places I worked I found this out the hard way.
>>Trying to restore 5 and 8 years old data respectively yielded horrible
>>results.
>>We then implemented a policy to have all Data tapes checked and re
>>backed up to new AIT tapes with the understanding that those tapes
>>would then be checked in 5 years time.
>>
>>-Ken
>
>Richard L. Hess                           email: [log in to unmask]
>Vignettes
>Media                           web:   http://www.richardhess.com/tape/
>Aurora, Ontario, Canada             (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.6 - Release Date: 6/8/2005

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.6 - Release Date: 6/8/2005

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

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