LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIB Archives


ARSCLIB Archives

ARSCLIB Archives


ARSCLIB@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

ARSCLIB Home

ARSCLIB Home

ARSCLIB  June 2016

ARSCLIB June 2016

Subject:

Degralescence

From:

"Richard L. Hess" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

ARSC Library and Archives Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 1 Jun 2016 13:47:30 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (101 lines)

I am cross-posting this to all three ARSC lists to throw a wide net, but 
PLEASE let's continue the discussion on the main ARSClist.

Remember Mike Casey's word at the ARSC conference, Degralescence?
I think this inclusively describes what we are fighting. While thinking 
about degradation, please don't lose sight of the obsolescence of the 
playback machines which will cause some formats to "fail" before the 
media technically fails.

I just made a post about some laboratory work that might be undertaken 
to further enhance our understanding of degradation processes. Looking 
at that long term, we need to project what we will still have in our 
untransferred heap'o'stuff by 2031 -- the 15 year window that was 
discussed.

It seems that many repositories are ahead of us here in North America, 
based on the papers at the ARSC conference. A quick shout out to 
Australia and Belgium (among others) for jobs well done.

So to aid in the selection of analytical processes to undertake, we need 
to understand what will remain untransferred after our current surge of 
transferring is complete.

We cannot predicate broad generalities for the one-off oddball format. 
The biggest unknowns are related to what hoards of media will surface 
from private collectors/accumulators and those are the media we need to 
prepare to be able to transfer them for the long-term (>15 years).

Alternatively, we need to pro-actively identify within our archives the 
most at-risk formats.

Looking forward a decade and a half, I would like to make some broad and 
sweeping suggestions:

Must be transferred within the next 15 years:

Any format that has a moving head. Phew, that covers many. Consider:
--essentially every video tape format ever commercialized
--RDAT (DAT), ADAT, DTRS
--some dictation formats
--some voice logging systems, especially those based on DDS/DAT
       and VHS/8 mm video drives
--many instrumentation/data tapes
     --Ampex FR-900 (2" Moonviews), DST (3/4"); Sony DIR (3/4")
     --Redwood SD-3, DTF, Sony SAIT (1/2")
     --Data8, Mammoth, Sony AIT, VXA (8 mm)
     --DDS (3.81 mm - Data DAT)

Any format with known physical/chemical instability or are exceptionally 
difficult to reproduce
--acetate grooved media
--aluminum grooved media
--some acetate reel tape
--some cylinders

A host of other less widely used formats, including
--specialized cassette formats (3-, 4-, and 8-track)
--many longitudinal cassette/cartridge formats in
    special shells on 0.125, 0.150, and 0.250-inch tape
--all digital dedicated machines Sony DASH, Mitsubishi, etc.
--minidisc (especially the later HiMD and the ones used in
   MD-based "porta studios")
--longitudinal data, logging, and instrumentation formats

Any optical media that we really want to keep
--Laserdisc, Magneto-optical data discs, CD, DVD, Blue-Ray (BD)
--SACD is at risk now due to lack of players

So what does that leave us to transfer after 2031? I propose that the 
items which can be maintained the longest are open reel 1/4-inch audio 
tape machines, and equipment for playing grooved media that is not 
self-destructing (like acetates). I suspect that the ripping of CDs and 
DVDs (and possibly BDs) will continue past 2031, but there is currently 
a small, but measurable disc failure rate.

I suspect also through sheer volume we will need to keep audio cassette 
playback alive past 2031, though that is fussier than open reel tape, 
and may be more difficult.

Of course, others will pick other technologies and I fear that my 
conclusion may be affected by my personal biases and expertise, but I've 
tried to be objective looking at parts complexity and availability and 
current challenges.

What do you think of this list? What else might we maintain capability 
of playing past 2031? What will we need to maintain past 2031?

Comments to ARSCLIST please.

Thanks!

Cheers,

Richard

-- 
Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
Aurora, Ontario, Canada                             647 479 2800
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

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager