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 2016

ARSCLIST January 2016

Subject:

Re: A case in point why CDText should have been used for metadata from Day 1

From:

Mark Donahue <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Thu, 7 Jan 2016 10:29:58 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (166 lines)

Oops, my mistake, I meant 1994-5 not 2004-5. That's what I get for typing
while making masters.....
All the best,
-mark

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Shai Drori <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I started including CDText earlier than that, around 1998, but it was
> limited and most reader ignored it altogether.
> Cheers
> Shai
>
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Mark Donahue <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > Tom,
> > One or two quick comments.
> > The first I saw of CDText in the mastering business was around 2004-5.
> You
> > supplied a .bin file on a floppy with your 1630 master and Sony DADC was
> > the only one doing it. It was crude and only allowed for 2000 characters
> > total.
> > A few years later when the 1630 went the way of the Dodo along with most
> of
> > the old replication hardware, we started encoding CD+Text info on all
> > masters supplied for replication. Most of the record companies
> immediately
> > stripped this information out during replication. Warner was still doing
> > this as late as 2005.
> > All the best,
> > -mark
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Shai:
> > >
> > > My understanding is that CDText was always available in Red Book. It
> > > doesn't matter what the original players could display, that's my
> point.
> > > Anyone who was using a Commodore or Apple computer in the early CD era
> > > could see where media was going. Metadata was going to be very
> important
> > to
> > > digital media. My contention is, by surrendering control of their
> > metadata,
> > > the CD producers, owners, manufacturers and sellers surrendered a key
> > part
> > > of marketing -- clear, uniform explaination of the product. Depending
> on
> > > booklet text and/or physical packaging was short-sighted. To this day,
> > the
> > > metadata released from the record companies to such massive retail
> forces
> > > as Amazon are inconsistent, often confusing and often incomplete,
> because
> > > it's usually a job left to interns and clerks instead of being a
> topline
> > > responsibility of project producers. This is a really important
> > discussion
> > > that should have been had at the beginning, but should still be had. It
> > > would behoove the copyright owners to come up with standards and
> release
> > > all media going forward with uniform naming of artists, songs, etc, and
> > > uniform formats for how to express, for instance, classical works'
> > > movements or other track-title information.
> > >
> > > And by the way, the sloppy metadata has now spread into the streaming
> > > services, because they just use the same gobbledygook that is on Amazon
> > and
> > > iTunes. If we want "the kids" to use music as something beyond
> background
> > > noise, it is necessary for them to have a clear understanding of what
> > they
> > > are listening to. In the purely digital realm (streaming and
> downloads),
> > > the only clue beyond sound is good metadata.
> > >
> > > -- Tom Fine
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shai Drori" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 9:34 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A case in point why CDText should have been
> used
> > > for metadata from Day 1
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Tom, you're forgetting that the original red book didn't even have a
> > > provision for the text addition. Players were very crude with just a
> four
> > > digit numerical display that could show time or track. All the other
> > > additions that came later were additions that some players were not
> even
> > > aware of. Case in point, the CD can actually be 4 channel from day one
> > > (part of the red book), but have you ever seen a 4 channel CD or
> player?
> > On
> > > the other hand there was never the foresight to change bit depth or
> > sample
> > > rate. Can you imagine what the CD road map would look like if there
> was a
> > > provision for 20 or 24 bit recordings and even 88.2kHz sample rate? And
> > > yes, the original authoring software was terrible. I still remember by
> > > heart most of the PQ code rules for track placement and spacing. I'm
> more
> > > of an old fart than I care to admit. haha 😉
> > > Cheers
> > > Shai Drori
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > The 1995 Smithsonian collection "Big Band Renaissance: the Evolution of
> > >> the Jazz Orchestra" is a great example of group-source metadata FUBAR.
> > >> dBPowerAmp's CD ripper program allows use of multiple metadata
> sources,
> > >> and
> > >> by default does some sort of amalgam of whatever sources you've told
> it
> > to
> > >> check. The amalgam on this set is comical! So I manually checked
> > metadata
> > >> from each source. They are all different, and only GD3 (whatever that
> > is)
> > >> is anywhere near accurate. I find this often happens with compilations
> > --
> > >> for instance freedB and/or AllMusic will have different top-level
> stuff
> > >> like titles and whether or not it's a compilation for different
> > individual
> > >> CDs in the same box set.
> > >>
> > >> All of this could have been prevented if the industry embraced CDText
> > from
> > >> the get-go and agreed on uniform naming standards for artists and song
> > >> titles. I remember the arguments back in the 80's --  it's hard enough
> > to
> > >> enter PQ codes into these balky Sony editing systems, and no CD
> players
> > >> have displays for CDText, so why bother. Very short-sighted. The
> net-net
> > >> today is that anyone who wants uniform naming and accurate information
> > in
> > >> a
> > >> digital library has to spend a lot of time editing the crappy metadata
> > >> that's out there in group-source land. And, copyright owners have
> ceded
> > >> control of their metadata to a group-source no-QC
> cluter-you-know-what.
> > >>
> > >> -- Tom Fine
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Shai Drori
> Expert digitization services for Audio Video
> Hi Res scanning for film 8mm-35mm
> www.audiovideofilm.com
>

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

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
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