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  January 2008

ARSCLIST January 2008

Subject:

Re: CD-R question

From:

John Spencer <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:57:24 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (334 lines)

I can say with a pretty good amount of certainty that I won't be  
around to see if my positions were correct...

.....so I guess I'll have to go with a cold cerveza rooting my Titans  
this afternoon. Red wine would probably be a better choice, but  
doesn't go with nachos!

John

John Spencer
BMS/ Chace LLC
email: [log in to unmask]
web: www.bmschace.com



On Jan 6, 2008, at 10:28 AM, Tom Fine wrote:

> Hi John:
>
> We are both speculating, heavily.
> I hope we are both around in 50 years to see if 5" digital reader/ 
> playback devices are still readily available. I would argue, they  
> will be. I would say there is too much installed base all over the  
> world not to make it a viable business model for decades more.
>
> But again, we are both speculating and only living 50 more years  
> will give us the answer. I will toast both of our good health over  
> a glass of red wine with dinner!
>
> --- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Spencer"  
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 10:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CD-R question
>
>
>> Good Morning Tom,
>>
>> I don't think you snipped the point I was trying to make. Here is  
>> a  part of my post:
>>
>> <snip>
>>> The quality of the music may be better, but the quality of the   
>>> media (as evidenced by the dumping of crappy CD-R media in every   
>>> store, from Wal-Mart to Walgreens) does not relieve my confidence.
>> <snip>
>>
>> My point here is that if someone is going to use CD-R media,  
>> PLEASE  don't use the cheap-o stuff that you find literally  
>> everywhere.  Furthermore, make multiple copies if you can with  
>> different batches  of media. There have been many posts by experts  
>> about good and bad  media types.
>>
>> Regarding any difference of opinion we may have, please  
>> understand  that I am not advocating "managed storage with off- 
>> site backup" for  the casual collector that wants to digitize his  
>> or her holdings.  That's a pretty long leap from burning CD-Rs,  
>> and not one that I  would recommend given the scenario.  
>> Additionally, I've never  recommended people store files on hard  
>> drives - BAD decision.
>>
>> The points I tried to make (and obviously didn't do a good job!)  
>> were:
>>
>> 1. We don't have any idea if optical media PLAYERS will be  
>> available  in 50 years
>> 2. Even if I bought a pallet full of CD players, I cannot  
>> guarantee  they will operate in 50 years (even if I shrink-wrapped  
>> a technician  to store with them)
>> 3. The proliferation of various formats is not necessarily a good   
>> thing (you mention photoCD, I could add many more)
>> 4. The CD players that are being built now are essentially "throw-  
>> aways" (read - junk)
>>
>> As you mentioned, there are many "in the cloud" storage options  
>> that  could be considered as alternate backup locations (Amazon  
>> S3, .mac  accounts, etc.). They are popping up every day -  
>> however, they too  may go out of business and I'm out of  
>> luck....but for now, they are  realistic backup alternatives that  
>> are extremely cheap. External  drives as you mentioned are good as  
>> well. In the archival world, I  guess they call it "geographical  
>> separation" - I would refer to it as "covering your backside".
>>
>> It is not a "Kia" vs. "Cadillac" scenario, there are many  
>> "Chevrolet  - Ford" solutions out there (but ouch, I hate making  
>> digital storage  comparisons to car manufacturers.....).
>>
>> At the end of the day, the collector that occasionally scans this   
>> list and draws the conclusion that "make a CD-R and you'll be  
>> fine"  is, in my opinion, leaving with a misguided mandate.
>>
>> I have NO problem with well-made CD-Rs - but you have to factor  
>> in  the reality that you will probably have to migrate those as  
>> well  sometime, to whatever "flavor of the year" is regarding  
>> digital  storage available to the masses.
>>
>> Actively managed storage can take many forms, from full-scale   
>> monoliths with high costs, to simply pulling the CD-Rs you have  
>> off  of the shelf every 3-5 years and bumping them to another batch.
>>
>> John Spencer
>> BMS/ Chace LLC
>> email: [log in to unmask]
>> web: www.bmschace.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 6, 2008, at 7:18 AM, Tom Fine wrote:
>>
>>> Hi John:
>>>
>>> Happy New Year all around.
>>>
>>> I think a big difference of opinion we have is that I think it's  
>>> a  Great Thing to have many different formats/standards for the  
>>> 5"  laser disc. To me, that's insurance that reader/playback  
>>> drives  will be made for a long time. The trend so far is that  
>>> every time a  new format/standard comes along, soon afterward the  
>>> manufacturing  MO becomes universal players/drive that read/play  
>>> ALL previous  formats.  Look in a modern DVD player user manual  
>>> and check out how  many formats you can play on these things,  
>>> including photoCD  (something I'd argue is a fringe format that  
>>> never really caught on  with the masses) and data CD's full of  
>>> MP3 and sometimes WinMedia  files. And some players now accept  
>>> flash media so you can take pix  and video cards right out of  
>>> your digi-camera and look at them  right on your widescreen flat- 
>>> panel (sometimes the flat-panels themselves take the cards  
>>> directly). My point is, this is truly a  massive Mass Market and  
>>> it's not going to just dry up anytime soon.  All these "issues"  
>>> about the hi-def formats will get settled in the  market and  
>>> universal players will then quickly happen -- if that  doesn't  
>>> happen in a couple of years please regurgitate this message  and  
>>> tell me "I told you so."
>>>
>>> As for CDR media, I don't see what your issue is. Of course a  
>>> long- term archive should be on migrated and mirrored hard  
>>> drives  nowadays. But CDR is cheap and available and I'd bet that  
>>> higher- grade media will be OK in proper storage conditions as a  
>>> backup.  What is much more worrisome to me is a newcomer to this  
>>> list  getting an idea that CDR is a "bad format" and then doing a  
>>> bunch  of transfers onto a single hard drive and having all that  
>>> work just  blow up and be unusable one day. Hard drives are KNOWN  
>>> to fail, and  usually in a lot fewer than 10 years. CDR is  
>>> THEORIZED to fail at  some point (what exact point seems to be a  
>>> matter of great debate) when stored under proper conditions (ie  
>>> low dust, low light, low  humiditiy, proper temp). So I would say  
>>> to the small-scale  archivist or collector -- most certainly do  
>>> make liberal use of CDR media but don't rely on it as your ONLY  
>>> digital format for the long- term. And for goodness sake, invest  
>>> in a second disc drive and at  least keep a local mirror of  
>>> everything. You'll be so grateful when  that computer konks out  
>>> one day (hopefully the konk-out didn't take  out your second hard  
>>> drive, but my experience is you're relatively  safe if the second  
>>> drive is external -- barring something like a  massive power  
>>> problem or a house fire, of course).
>>>
>>> If you have an extensive investment of time or your transfers  
>>> are  of great monetary or cultural value, I'd argue that you  
>>> gotta bite  the bullet and go with managed storage with an off- 
>>> site secure  backup system in place. But this expensive/complex/ 
>>> industrial-grade  solution is just not appropriate or in  
>>> financial reach for most  people on this list (ie small-scale  
>>> archivists and collectors). One  relatively cheap/easy thing to  
>>> do if you have just a few real  treasures among an otherwise  
>>> ordinary collection of digital media  is to simply FTP those  
>>> treasures to your website if you have one.  Most website hosts  
>>> these days give you a 1 gig or more of storage  as part of the  
>>> package, and more gigs usually doesn't cost  anything. The idea  
>>> is, there's your remote backup. You of course  can do much  
>>> better, but this is the cheap/easy/available solution for the  
>>> small archive or collector. Make the files inaccessible  from  
>>> your website if they have copyright or other sensitivities, of   
>>> course. There are also plenty of 3rd parties online who offer  
>>> free  or near-free file storage. For instance, gmail and yahoo  
>>> give you a  1 gig mailbox, so you can simply e-mail yourself a  
>>> file or two. I'm  sure this all sounds crazy to the inustrial- 
>>> strength crowd, but  like I said, most members of this list don't  
>>> work for well-funded universities or professional data-management  
>>> companies so they need  small-scale/low-cost solutions. I'm  
>>> throwing out some "Kia" ideas  here. If you can afford  
>>> "Cadillac," definitely go that way.
>>>
>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Spencer"   
>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 10:17 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CD-R question
>>>
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Here's where we diverge on opinion - there are currently (I  
>>>> think)  13  DVD specs (at least 6 of which are not recognized by  
>>>> the DVD  patent- holder consortium), and now we have blu-ray and  
>>>> DVD-HD - a  battle on  many levels (one is the movie studios  
>>>> desire to  continue to have a physical disc to sell that is not  
>>>> easily  copied). This convoluted  "soup" of formats  
>>>> (notwithstanding  patent issues) does not convince  me that the  
>>>> life of the CD will  be greatly enhanced.
>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>> John Spencer
>>>> BMS/ Chace LLC
>>>> 1801 8th Ave. S.  Suite 200
>>>> Nashville, TN 37203
>>>> office (615) 385-1251
>>>> fax (615) 385-0153
>>>> cell (615) 714-1199
>>>> email: [log in to unmask]
>>>> web: www.bmschace.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 5, 2008, at 8:15 PM, Tom Fine wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You could think, once a medium goes out of "mass" status, how   
>>>>> many  years until all the playback equipment dies and nothing  
>>>>> new  is  being made? Well, when exactly? LPs haven't been a  
>>>>> mass  medium for  almost 2 decades now. Still plenty of  
>>>>> turntables and  cartridges  available and the LP medium has a  
>>>>> healthy niche (some  could argue  more economically viable than  
>>>>> most CD releases). How  about cassettes? They seem to be a  
>>>>> quicker-to-the-grave medium.  CD's  passed cassettes in I  
>>>>> believe the early 90's. But cassettes  are  still a mass medium  
>>>>> in some parts of the 3rd world. You can  still buy a variety of  
>>>>> cassette decks and walkmans:
>>>>> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_kk_1?ie=UTF8&search-alias=audio-  
>>>>> video&field-keywords=cassette%20player
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, there's also the argument that magnetic tape and grooved   
>>>>> disks  are technologies that can be replicated with mid-20th   
>>>>> century level  or older technologies whereas CD playback is,  
>>>>> well, somewhat akin  to rocket science.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, 5" discs got another leg with the DVD medium and they  
>>>>> might   get yet another fresh wind with hi-def discs. Blowing  
>>>>> the other  way  is the wind of downloads and iPods -- where  
>>>>> there are not  physical  mass media but rather computer files  
>>>>> transmitted over  the Internet  and then perhaps around homes  
>>>>> to media-less  playback systems. I  don't doubt the future is  
>>>>> one without  packaged physical mass media  for audio and video  
>>>>> content, but  it's not all there yet and the  installed and  
>>>>> owned base of 5"  discs is enormous (I _think_ that  more CD's  
>>>>> were sold worldwide  so far than all mesaured sales of all  LPs  
>>>>> since 1949 -- and  that's not counting the fact that there  
>>>>> might be a 1:1 ratio or  greater of pressed CD's to legal or  
>>>>> illegal copies that are  essentially bit-by-bit replicas).  
>>>>> Plus, as of now  the quality of  the 5" disc media is usually  
>>>>> better than what you  can get over  the ether on your media- 
>>>>> less playback system (that  will not be  true forever, indeed  
>>>>> hopefully not for much longer).
>>>>>
>>>>> So bottom line, I'll give the 5" discs another 50 years of    
>>>>> viability but I don't think they will be the dominant mass   
>>>>> medium  in the "first world" for too much longer -- and I  
>>>>> think  the places still cassette-dominant will leapfrog over  
>>>>> the 5" disc  media and go  right to the over-ether media-less  
>>>>> model. For what  it's worth, I  have a 1986 CD player that  
>>>>> still works just fine.  To my great joy,  it was designed  
>>>>> future-looking enough to be  able to play most CDR  media. The  
>>>>> make is Teac and the price was  not very high when I  bought it  
>>>>> as a poor college kid blowing  some summer loot, so this  was  
>>>>> no high-grade special machine in  its day. My point is, 20- 
>>>>> year- old CD technology works fine in a  modern context. I have  
>>>>> no reason  to believe my 2005 vintage  Marantz SACD/DVD/CD  
>>>>> player won't work in  20 years. That would  get past the 50- 
>>>>> year-viability mark for the CD  medium  (introduced 1982) and I  
>>>>> betcha 5" disc players will be  rolling  off Asian assembly  
>>>>> lines for at least another decade,  probably longer.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me just add that I think managed hard-drive-based  
>>>>> archiving  is  a better idea nowadays and will be an ever- 
>>>>> better idea as  the  storage media get cheaper, denser and  
>>>>> hopefully more reliable.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard L. Hess"    
>>>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 8:36 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CD-R question
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> At 08:11 PM 2008-01-05, John Spencer wrote:
>>>>>>> Richard (and more so to Mr. Friedman),
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do we have any concrete expectations that CD drives will be    
>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>> in 50 years? Please point me to the information that   
>>>>>>> guarantees  that,
>>>>>>> I would be happy to be reassured that CD drives will be  
>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>> then. I tend to be much more pessimistic about hardware/  
>>>>>>> software
>>>>>>> availability given the 50-year target mentioned.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi, John,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Happy New Year!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we'll be in as good or better shape playing back CDs  
>>>>>> in  50  years as we will be playing back reel tapes in 35-40  
>>>>>> years  which  is approx the 50-year time frame that LoC was  
>>>>>> still  advocating  transfers to 2-track tapes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are just too many, and they're not going to all break.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As with any media, as the supply of machines dries up it's  
>>>>>> the   archive's responsibility to migrate/reformat before they  
>>>>>> cannot.  I  think we've had this discussion before <smile>.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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

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