At 11:20 AM 2/13/2006, Language Laboratories and Archives (Barbara Need) wrote:
>I agree with Marie. Many spoken word recordings have the potential
>for phonetic analysis--whether that was the original intention for
>the recording or not. Get the best digital signal you can (though,
>frankly, in my experience, more than 24-bit, 48 kHz is a waste of
>space), which means doing it in real time.
>
>At 9:31 -0600 13/2/06, Marie O'Connell wrote:
>>I work with spoken word/oral histories all the time, and it is my
>>recommendation that to make a digitized preservation copy/master, that it is
>>done in real-time. I work with both reel-to-reel and cassettes, with speeds
>>ranging from 15/16ths to 15ips.

While in general I agree with what my friend Marie O'Connell has
said, I would like to suggest that if we're using Barbara Need's
criteria of anything over 24 bit 48 ks/s as a waste for spoken word
recordings (and for a variety of record-chain technical reasons I
agree with her), I would like to point out that if all the
engineering "i"s are dotted and the "t"s crossed, we can achieve the
same result at 2x using 96 ks/s digitizing and at 4x using 192 ks/s
digitizing. But there are issues with recorder reproduce bandwidth,
equalization, and head gap pole spacing. These can theoretically be
dealt with -- and have been in the dying art of high-speed analog
tape duplication, but not in (m)any products that might become
available for this purpose.

Cheers,

Richard


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
Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm