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  May 2006

ARSCLIST May 2006

Subject:

Re: National Recording Preservation Board (NRPB) Study

From:

"Richard L. Hess" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Sat, 13 May 2006 15:53:58 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (104 lines)

Rob,

I could be brought into any conversations you wish. Although a member 
of the ARSC TC, many other commitments have kept me from attending 
ARSC this year. See my inline comments, below.

At 05:26 PM 5/12/2006, Rob Bamberger wrote:

>II.     Sound engineers and technicians: [1] perceived needs for
>standards or "best practices" to facilitate sharing of preserved
>material,

We already have standards for audio files that provide a lot of 
benefit. I am seeing an attempt to use 24/96 as a standard for 
everything. While I agree that 24/96 (or I actually prefer 24/88.2) 
should be the norm for musical recordings, I see the uncritical 
application of this standard to voice recordings as a waste of money. 
I do not subscribe to the argument that disks are cheap - their 
management is not. If the difference in archiving the oral history 
archive is between 300 TB and 1 PB, there is a huge cost difference 
there, long-term.

>how such standards/practices should be determined,

Both scientific testing and industry consensus

>and how
>often they should be subject to review

Probably every five years or so. Perhaps more frequently at the cusps 
of technology.

>and by whom;

Industry experts as well as scientists

A note: Standards are useful for the new technology that we are 
moving towards or into. I think the term "recommended practices" 
applies more to how to address the reproduction of older recordings. 
For example, suggesting appropriate stylus widths for grooved media 
reproduction would be very useful, but I suspect the best transfers 
come after analysis, not rote following of a particular standard.

A risk we have is authoring a recommended practice that is blindly 
followed. There are an extreme number of subtleties that must be 
addressed. I'm about to write an article for my Web Blog on tape 
restoration which I think I'll call "Let Sleeping Dogs Lie: Why you 
do NOT want to rewind problematic tapes except immediately prior to 
digitization and transfer."

Metadata interchange is still a challenge as the typical metadata is 
larger than the usually supported space in a B-WAV file. On a recent 
project I delivered TXT files with the metadata in a structured 
format that had the same base file name as the WAV and the MP3 access copies.

I would have preferred to use XML files, and this is an area where 
some standardization would be useful.

>and [2] the
>challenges and practicality, in the face of limited resources, of
>automating preservation activity.

There are stepping stones between manual, one-at-a-time preservation 
reformatting and full-bore robotic preservation reformatting.

Jim Lindner is certainly the person to ask about high-end automated 
preservation reformatting. Eric Jacobs is also studying this area.

I think multiple simultaneous ingests can be managed with audible 
monitoring for technical flaws. Since my studio is set up for 5.1 
surround monitoring, I do up to four simultaneous ingests. I also 
transfer reels in a way that I grab all tracks in one pass, and 
invert those that need inverting. I do NOT do that for high-quality 
music, but it is acceptable for oral histories and other projects.

For automation to work, there still needs to be a triage process.

The more I work in this, the more I think prep work is important.

>
>  The study will be one of the items on the agenda at the Friday evening
>Archives Update Session (8:00-9:30 P.M.) at the ARSC conference.
>However, I'd welcome your thoughts at anytime (well, almost anytime)
>over the course of the conference.  There have been a number of relevant
>and useful threads on the list, and there are certain to be more. It's
>all grist for the mill.

As I said, I would be pleased to join in this by telephone.


>Additionally, the Library plans to create a formal opportunity or two
>for specialists and members of the general public to weigh in on matters
>included in the study.

Please keep us informed and thanks for doing this work.




Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
Aurora, Ontario, Canada       (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes. 

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