That paper was written by my then colleague, Tim Bathgate, who presented
the paper at one of the IASA conferences. I'll ask him to pipe up here!
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Jim Sam <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There was a paper published in the last few years in the IASA journal
> about DAT ripping in DDS drives. Fascinating read. I wasn't totally
> convinced it's "we have to implement this now!" worthy, but I was
> going to run some tests before implementing it here on a collection of
> hundreds of DATs. However, this never happened due to
> inconsequentially boring internal reasons.
> Jim Sam
> Hoover Archives, Stanford
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Matthew Sohn <[log in to unmask]>
> >>That whole DAT-extraction thing seems very kludgey. Also, reports seem to
> >>indicate that few people get it working reliably and use it for large
> >>collections. I'm sure there are some >experts on-list who do this all
> the time,
> >>but that doesn't seem common. For a small or medium-sized collection
> (fewer than
> >>a few hundred DATs), I think it's much easier to just use >SPDIF and go
> >>real-time with somewhat common regular DAT machines. If you monitor in
> >>time, you can clearly hear if there are the problems that plague some
> >>>uncorrectable errors, mutes, dropouts, etc.
> >>-- Tom Fine
> > Yes it is kludgey to get the unit to work, but once it is configured, it
> > work like a charm. Any errors are easily viewable in a competent DAW
> such as
> > Wavelab. In such cases, I try a pass on the Sony R500. 9 times out of 10
> > works fine.
> > I must admit that this is a repurposing of already outmoded technology.
> It is
> > difficult to find the drives, and you have to seek out the software, plus
> > figuring out how to make it work.
> > But if your collection is very large, it may be worth looking into.
> > Of course, all this assumes a competent engineer, who can recognize
> errors when
> > they see them..
> > -Matt Sohn