IASA TC-04 sets 48 kHz, 24 bits as a recommended minimum for
preservation reformatting with much material benefiting from 96 kHz
24 bit sampling.
In order to decide whether or not to use 48 or 96 ks/s, there are two options:
(1) Do everything at 96 ks/s which I contend is wasteful.
(2) Intelligently (and conservatively) apply when to use 96 ks/s
My current recommendations for this are:
For music and all tapes of 7.5 in/s and all discs use 96 ks/s
For spoken word reels at 3.75 in/s and slower and spoken word
cassettes use 48 ks/s.
Then you place the files in your digital repository and it's done.
In an overall archival context, CD is a stopgap, as is anything short
of a managed digital archive.
The options for copying are:
RAID hard drives
non-RAID hard drives
Each has its proponents and each has its detractors. Each has
benefits and each has liabilities.
I am currently working on a 700 hour reformatting project for an
organization loosely tied with the University of Toronto and we're
placing the files on the UofT T-Space (implementation of D-Space)
digital repository. The storage costs there were 1/4 of the cost of
two CD sets for this material and they handle future reformatting
(and possibly even migration) for the up-front fee.
What is Yeshiva University doing for a digital repository?
This is your best bet. I would assume that YU is doing something.
Most universities are. D-Space was developed jointly by MIT and
Hewlett Packard. There is other software that may be superior to
D-Space--at least that's what I've been told, but I'm not judging
that, I trust and entrust the selection to the people responsible for
long-term digital preservation and access within each community. I
know Stanford as a digital repository--I've digitized material that is in that.
Access copies would be MP3s or the WAV files themselves.
I hope this helps.
At 12:12 PM 2007-04-16, Deena Schwimmer wrote:
>(Apologies for cross-postings of this question)
>I would be interested in hearing from colleagues who work with or are
>otherwise familiar with preservation of sound collections.
>We are reformatting a sound collection, for improved access and long
>term preservation. I was wondering if there is an industry standard for
>the preservation component. Would CD ever be considered adequate? Or
>is the best practice still to convert to reel? Or some other media?
>What do you do at your institutions?
>If this helps, we do not have a lot of sound in our collection, and
>therefore would not be in a position to set up something that involves a
>lot of up-front work or that makes sense for a high volume.
>Thanks in advance,
>Yeshiva University Archives
>Mendel Gottesman Library
>500 W. 185th St.
>New York, NY 10033
>[log in to unmask]
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.