----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Richter" <[log in to unmask]>
> Farris Wahbeh wrote:
> > List,
> > We are in the midst of transferring collection material into archival and
listening formats. While I will
> > continue to retain two gold discs as archival format, I wanted to nix the
idea of using a CD for the
> > listening format. Instead, I would transfer the WAV file into an MP3 and
house all those listening files
> > on an iPod for our end-users.
> > Is this audio archival transgression? Do we need to use CDs as a listening
copy, or can an MP3
> > suffice. I'm trying to cut down on space and costs.
> > Your collective wisdom would be most helpful.
> As a consumer, not a creator or archivist, I applaud your choice. I
> question the use of the iPod as the player only because it seems more
> costly than alternatives with no justifying advantage, but the idea of
> using a lossy format for listening is sound.
> After all, that's what many users are doing today even when they have
> the source available.
> Before committing to the effort, you should identify the specific format
> preferred: MP3, WMA, etc.; bitrates for monaural and stereo material.
> The tradeoff of storage against quality of approximation must be made in
> view of your expected audience and the availability of a secondary
> source (e.g., CD-DA) to complement this tertiary one.
I would guess it also would be dependent on what the library clients
use for their playback (I would also guess the library would have to
provide a player at the site?). Note that using MP3 files as your
"listening copies" does NOT necessitate the use of iPods...Apple
doesn't own the MP3 sound-file format, and there are quite a number
of MP3 players available (as well as the users' or your computers,
when equipped with the appropriate software).
Note that if you are in the US of A, there may be copyright issues
involved if you are giving clients actual playable sound files based
on commercial recordings...?!
Steven C. Barr