Re Tom's dream of the future when all the masters have been transferred and
nobody needs the commercially produced records any more, there's a huge
factor in that fantasy that I think is overlooked.  When transfers are made
from original sources, be they masters or the commercial records resulting
therefrom, and particularly so in the realm of 78's, there is human
judgment involved at every step of the way.  Creating the digital transfers
is anything but a simple mechanical exercise.  What is the right speed of
the record?  Were the performers actually performing at the standard pitch?
 What phono EQ is built into the record, if any (a huge factor)?
 Has/should any noise be removed?  If so, how, how much and at what
frequencies?  The record needs to be well centered properly.  What is the
stylus that will yield the best result?  How good are the analog
electronics before the signal is digitized?  What sampling rate and bit
depth has been used?  Most importantly, does the person doing all this have
any conception of what the performers would have sounded like when they
made the recording?  There are choices and decisions to be made at every
step of the way. There really is as much art as science involved in this
process, and one person's transfer result will definitely not be the same
as another person's result.  We all know examples where lots of time,
energy, and fancy equipment have been used, with all good intentions, to
get a lousy result.  I don't think we can ever really throw out ANY high
quality source material that will persist, be it the masters, original
pressings, whatever.  Although, yes, I will let you throw out all the
digital lossy format copies!  And while you are at it, any 8-track car tape
releases too.

Best,
John Haley



On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Frank Strauss <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I'm sorry to interrupt this most fascinating conversation; although my
> collection isn't as extensive as many of you have, I have enough, and am at
> an age, that I share the concerns.  Tom has brought this up before, and I
> really would like to make the correction-I wonder if anyone knows how to
> fix the Reply To: setting for ARSCList mail using Gmail?  I can change the
> Reply To: setting, but it would apply to all my emails, so that all replies
> to all my emails would go to the ARSCList, and I know you don't want that.
> Thanks for help. You could contact me off-list so as not to bother others
> engaged in this conversation.  (You can just hit reply)
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi David:
> >
> > Still haven't fixed that reply-to setting, but anyway ...
> >
> > -- Tom Fine
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> --
> Frank B Strauss, DMD
>