While I will agree that widespread availability of material is a
viable methodology for dissemination, I was trying to point out that
for "preservation files" (typically either born-digital or migrated
at a higher sample rate than Redbook CD), one might wish to consider
another carrier for the data. Supplemental migration of this data is
essential for preservation.
The "operating system" for books hasn't changed very much over the
years, but the same cannot be said for computers.
On Oct 4, 2005, at 6:35 AM, Tom Fine wrote:
> And this again falls into my belief that many copies in many
> places, readily
> available so more copies in more places may be created, is the best
> preservation strategy for the long haul. This theory is nothing
> new, it's
> the genesis of book publishing. For a tale of what happens to locked
> archives in hard-to-access places, see Alexandria.
> -- Tom Fine
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jerome Hartke" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 7:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Requiem for the DAT (redux, was Storage of
>> Just a reminder that archivists are utilizing storage products
>> that are
>> designed and manufactured for the mass market. This has two
>> First, cost is very low because of the very large consumer market.
>> compatibility is high because of the very large installed base.
>> When professional users are given the cost of products tailored
>> for their
>> needs, the usual response is that the high cost cannot be justified
>> of the ready availability of cheap, consumer grade discs and drives.
>> Gentlemen, we usually get what we pay for.
>> Media Sciences, Inc.
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Spencer
>>> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 10:41 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Requiem for the DAT (redux, was Storage
>>> of audio
>>> Dear Tom,
>>> Considering all of the variables that surround the creation (and
>>> retrieval) of optical media archival storage, I must say that
>>> "industry standardization" regarding CD-R is at best a misplaced
>>> argument. Many users of CD-R media for backup look for the best
>>> (100 spindle for $25, total junk) and expect that to be a good
>>> archival format. Even if you are using the best archival Gold CD-R
>>> media out there, you have (at best) a perilous digital archive.
>>> It is not about the shelf life, it is about the availability of
>>> drives (and perhaps compatible software/ firmware) on which you
>>> your assets.
>>> Regarding DVD+/-R, I would say that your hopes may or may not
>>> have an
>>> influence on which camp wins (DVD-HD/ Blu-Ray), and no one knows the
>>> backwards compatibility of the next generation readers.
>>> John Spencer
>>> On Oct 3, 2005, at 7:49 PM, Tom Fine wrote:
>>>> That's a good harbinger
>>>> for the long-term viability of the CDR format. This is an example
>>>> industry standardization on a method and form factor is a very Good
>>>> I'm hoping very much that DVD+/-R is a continuation of the Good
>>>> Thing but
>>>> it's pretty early to pass judgement.