I would think one of the dividing lines is when record companies began using
barcodes on their records, 1979 according to one source.  The decoded data
for this exists in some kind of digital form.  It is used by the companies
tracking record sales and of airplay who will have their own iterations of
it.

Steve Smolian
.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 9:39 AM
Subject: [ARSCLIST] More on cataloging


> As I continue researching alternatives to MARC, I came across an article
> from the 7 August 2005 NY Times. I quote a portion of it below.
>
> While I realize that the 1.9 Million catalog entries for recordings in
> OCLC are
> not limited to individual song titles, and that the points of access are
> limited in the commercial databases, when I read this quote below, it did
> give me food for thought...perhaps comparing apples and oranges (pun
> intended)...
>
> "If it comes to that, they'll find
> that a lot has changed in the online music business since Apple
> opened its wildly successful buck-a-song iTunes Music
> Store in 2003. In that time, Apple's catalog has grown
> from 200,000 songs to nearly 1.5 million, Apple has
> sold half a billion songs and it has been joined by
> similar stores run by Microsoft, Yahoo, Sony, Real
> Networks, MusicMatch, Dell and even Wal-Mart."
>
> My guess is that people are able to find what they want, and it took
> the for-profit sector less than 2 years to create a database of 1.5
> million records, when it has taken OCLC 40 years to create a database of
> 1.9 million catalog records for sound recordings. I wonder, what am I
> missing in this comparison...besides the fact that I would guess the
> various
> labels are supplying their own information, information which is created
> digitally (40 years ago I would wager all record companies
> were probably using typewriters), hence a great deal of information in the
> early years did not exist in any digital form, hence the time required to
> enter that information, which would require more time to get information
> in the database...yet the information created by the
> companies these days could possibly be shared by OCLC/RLIN or whatever, a
> notion which several have suggested is not viable...that the information
> in the commerical databases is not subject to authority control...etc.
> Further, iTunes is not describing an object...
>
> However, I would assume people are able to find what they want.
>
> What else am I missing in my admittedly flawed, but for me (and I hope
> others), thought provoking comparison?
>
> Thoughts on the subject are most welcome.
>
> Karl
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.5/67 - Release Date: 8/9/2005
>
>