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  December 2006

ARSCLIST December 2006

Subject:

Re: Clarifying the MAM-A gold comment

From:

Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Sun, 10 Dec 2006 12:41:11 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (150 lines)

Hi Steven:

You are correct about sticky shed not being "measured for" because all the credible stories I've 
heard from the tape-chemistry guys who were there at the time (ie the 3M vets still with us) 
indicate it wasn't a known problem until it showed up. I think what's debateable is how long it was 
clearly known about and understood before Ampex Tape in particular did anything to change their 
formulas.

As for digi-media, while I respect all the "accellerated aging" and other torture tests that have 
been done on dye-laser media, I take it all with a shaker of salt because I think the only "real 
world" conditions are, well, in the real world, and hence in real time. We can make some informed 
judgements based on simulations, but only observable facts over long time period are undisputable. 
That said, of course I hope all the predictions are right and those CDR's I burn today on good media 
will outlast me.

Here's one small but encouraging data point. I recently bought a pile of on-sale CD's (commercial 
pressed-metal CD's) at Amazon. Jazz stuff mostly. A goodly number were on sale because they are out 
of print early 1990's reissues. Some have just gone out of print but some have been remastered in 
deluxe format more recently. All were factory-new, shrinkwrapped, sealed, etc. So I ran some tests 
with the Plextor QC software. They had about the same test results as far as errors and mechanical 
consistency as pressed-this-year CD's in the same order. So the mass-produced media -- when 
manufactured correctly -- appears to be quite stable. I would guess that Amazon's warehouses and the 
record company warehouses where these products lived for 10-15 years are non-ideal as far as 
climate, perhaps much less ideal than the average well-maintained/clean/tidy home.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven Smolian" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2006 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Clarifying the MAM-A gold comment


> Re your last line, George, what problems should we be worrying about?
>
> Steve Smolian
>
> P.S.  Sticky shed was not measured for. The variations in error rates are being measured for.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "GeorgeBlood" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2006 12:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Clarifying the MAM-A gold comment
>
>
>> As I understand, the "issues" (we won't call them "problems") trace the recent history of the 
>> company, as the Gold product line has been sold several times in the last five years.  I'm not 
>> clear enough about that history to recount it, but my impression is that the underlying troubles 
>> are not "greed" but distraction.  CD manufacturing and CD-R manufacturing in particular, is 
>> extremely competitive.  Price vs. costs are driven more by survival than by squeezing the last 
>> penny out of the customer. Whatever the reason, our collective concerns are with the ends, not 
>> the means -- we don't buy media because a company makes less money than another, we buy it 
>> because it's "better."  "Better" to most consumers is "cheaper". And, sorry for this dose of 
>> reality, there aren't enough folks in archives demanding "higher quality" to show up as dither in 
>> the sales data for CD-R.  Which is where developing relationships to a niche player (like MAM-A) 
>> is potentially good.  Keeping in mind of course, my tiny media supplier moves 500,000 blank CD-R 
>> every month.  Or probably more than every CD-R used in preservation world-wide every year.
>>
>> We've had serious concerns about the "Mitsui Golds" for some time. We have test equipment here 
>> and have been monitoring their media.  It varies very widely from batch to batch, and have 
>> returned batches with poor results. We also find best results vs. burn speed vary from batch to 
>> batch.  So we lose a few dozen discs from each batch to find the best process window. (Although 
>> the MAM-A Gold, according to the company, is rated to 52x, lately we're finding the best results 
>> at 16x.  They generally have scored badly at low speeds, 1x and 2x) A new shipment just came in, 
>> so we'll be going through this again this week.)
>>
>> We have found MAM-A very responsive to our worries, have never hesitated to replace media, and 
>> seem to appreciate the feedback and test results.
>>
>> I'm not here to be apologist for MAM-A.  Back in the day when they gained their reputation they 
>> made exceptionally fine CD-Rs, better than anything we tested (and we do testing ALL the time --  
>> for some projects, every single disc; and routinely on all our burners to monitor aging and 
>> process window).
>>
>> For consistency and exceptionally low error rates (across the board, BLER, E11, E12, E21, E22, 
>> E31 and E32), TY takes our prize.  They're consistently so good I haven't bothered lately to 
>> bring in other cyanine discs for comparison.  But they do stand in stark contrast to MAM-A. 
>> Typical of CD-Rs, MAM-A Golds have high E12 errors.  Atypical of CD-Rs, TY's have very low E12 
>> errors (I'm told no one knows why CD-Rs have characteristically high E12 errors).
>>
>> But does any of this matter?  Does the error rate increase?  Does it increase perpetually or does 
>> it plateau?  Does it accelerate exponentially?  Has entropy been repealed by polycarbonate?  By 
>> the time the error rates get high enough to be un-correctable (whether the discs last for 50, 100 
>> or 300 years), will there be hardware to play them on? What do accelerated aging tests tell us? 
>> (Did accelerated aging tests predict Sticky Shed Syndrome?)  Any good mathematicians out there 
>> who can tell us, in relation to the available error correction power of the format, how much is 
>> being spent correcting for these variations in manufacturing?  Is all this a tempest in a tea 
>> pot?
>>
>> Are we worried about the right problem?
>>
>> G
>>
>>>Tom Fine writes:
>>>>Not disputing your facts at all. However, I find it curious that Mitsui
>>>>would see such a need for
>>>>cost-cutting.
>>>
>>>
>>>Of course, I am not privy to the corporate meetings that led to this
>>>decision, but I'd love to go back in time and preempt it!
>>>
>>>It's probably all about market share and dwindling profits.  We
>>>professionals aren't driving this market and will be marginalized
>>>accordingly.
>>>
>>>When I get the chance to contact Mitsui directly about all of this, I'll
>>>report to the list whatever I discover.
>>>
>>>Chas.
>>>
>>>--
>>>Charles Lawson <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Professional Audio for CD, DVD, Broadcast & Internet
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Nominated for Grammy Award 2003:Best Classical Album
>> Philadelphia Orchestra, Schumann Orchestra works
>> Producers: George Blood & Simon Woods
>>
>> George Blood
>> Safe Sound Archive
>> George Blood Audio, L.P.
>> 21 West Highland Avenue
>> Philadelphia, PA  19118
>> (215) 248-2100 (v)
>> (215) 242-2177 (f)
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL(S) TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY 
>> CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER 
>> APPLICABLE LAW. If you are not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering the 
>> message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution 
>> or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in 
>> error or there are any problems, please notify the sender immediately. Neither the sender, his or 
>> her employer nor any affiliated entity is liable for direct, special, indirect or consequential 
>> damages arising from alteration of the contents of this message by a third party or as a result 
>> of any virus being passed on.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.15/581 - Release Date: 12/9/2006
>>
> 

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

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