I think you could do it in one of those 90-minute blocks in a conference. Now, you have 3 
presentations in the blocks, usually somewhat related in themes or areas of interest. So I'm saying 
you could do this in the same format, splitting the histories into 3 half-hour "courses" within the 
larger "meal." The requirement would be tight integration between the presentation and presenters, 
in other words not three independent operations but rather an agreed-upon division of topics covered 
and agreed-upon "look and feel" so the whole thing feels integrated. I suppose you could go longer 
and do a full-blown seminar, but I doubt you'd get volunteers to then develop what is essentially 
course-level curriculum and activities. I know that for some veterans, guys like you and Dennis and 
Mike Beal, this is stuff you already know and even experienced some of it first-hand. But, I'm 46 
years old and I saw many people younger than me at the ARSC Conference in Rochester, and none of us 
grew up with much first-hand knowledge of the 78 era. You get someone born in the 80's and it's the 
same with magnetic tape, aside from their early years with Walkmans and duped cassettes. You get a 
kid born in the 90s and I doubt they ever fooled much with cassettes and may have owned only a few 
CDs in their lives.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Smolian" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] EARLY ELECTRICAL DISK RECORDINGS: ANOTHER UNUSUAL SAMPLE.


> Is this a conference presentation a course or a seminar?
>
> Steve Smolian
>
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Tom Fine
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 8:43 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] EARLY ELECTRICAL DISK RECORDINGS: ANOTHER UNUSUAL SAMPLE.
>
> I come down in the middle on this one. The presentation should be a "segment" in an ARSC 
> Conference,
> broken into three "presentations," as I described yesterday. That gives breaks for Q&A about
> specific parts of the history (ie WECO, Europe, non-WECO American systems), and time for people to
> shuffle around in their uncomfortable chairs.
>
> Where I agree with Don is that no presenter I saw at ARSC (myself definitely included) has the
> professional stage presence to hold an audience for 90 minutes. Die Meistersinger is inherently 
> more
> compelling a spectacle than anything I've ever seen on the agenda at ARSC, AES or any other audio
> organization conference!
>
> AES Historical Committee organizers like to set up 90-minute slots. The only way I've found to 
> fill
> them is use long music examples. I think I still maxed out at 80 minutes and I noticed a lot of
> people clicking "smart" phones and the like during the music examples.
>
> If one really endeavored to present the early history of electrical recording, say from the roots 
> up
> to when the WECO system was established in the American record business, that's a dense amount of
> history. A lot to absorb, best presented in bites. It would be a tremendous thing to see. The
> followup at the next conference could be a "segment" covering the history of magnetic recording.
> Start with early stuff, Poulsen, wire recording, invention of AC bias (by WECO), etc. Then the
> German development of both magnetic tape recording and magnetic tape itself, plus their early 
> stereo
> recordings. Then you could have a half hour on Ampex, the adoption of tape as the master medium in
> American and European professional recording, amateur formats, mass-duping, etc. Then end with a
> half hour summary on modern knowledge about tape care, degradation, mitigation and transfer 
> methods.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dennis Rooney" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 8:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] EARLY ELECTRICAL DISK RECORDINGS: ANOTHER UNUSUAL SAMPLE.
>
>
>> Dear Don,
>>
>> As the first act of DIE MEISTERSINGER lasts slightly longer than ninety
>> minutes but doesn't seem a bit too long in a good performance, I cannot
>> agree with your estimate except insofar as it might be influenced by the
>> quality of chairs we get to sit on at our conferences.
>>
>> DDR
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 5:16 AM, Don Cox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/10/2012, Dennis Rooney wrote:
>>>
>>> > Dear Tom,
>>> >
>>> > I'm inclined to agree with you; however, my experience with ARSC-ies
>>> > is that they are not a particularly technically-savvy lot, although
>>> > more and more computer mavens seem to post to this list and we do have
>>> > a Technical Committee. That feeling has certainly been reinforced by
>>> > the often comically ignorant queries that have been posted so
>>> > frequently in recent months.
>>> >
>>> > The genesis of electrical recording, presented in a detailed overview
>>> > with appropriate technical, patent and legal exhibits, and of course
>>> > with plentiful audio examples, would in my opinion be a great
>>> > presentation, just one not possible to cover in 35 minutes. To even
>>> > approach treating the subject properly, an hour would be a minimum
>>> > time and ninety minutes would be better. That sounds like a workshop,
>>> > except that it's not a how-to subject. "Too AES-y" would probably be
>>> > the response of the current worthies on the Program Committee. A
>>> > grass-roots contradiction of my thesis would be heartening. We'll see.
>>> >
>>> Ninety minutes would be a two-part presentation.
>>>
>>> No single talk should be longer than 45 minutes. People just cannot pay
>>> attention for that long.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> --
>>> Don Cox
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Dennis D. Rooney
>> 303 W. 66th Street, 9HE
>> New York, NY 10023
>> 212.874.9626
>>
>