Bob, you may be right.  Perhaps a comparison of free (or bundled)
softwares is in order to see how quality of the output WAV varies.
This information could then be passed on to archives who could use it.



On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Bob Olhsson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From Craig Breaden: "...If they can get
> together a volunteer (many of these archivists are virtually
> volunteers themselves), a working playback deck, a PC, and a decent
> audio interface, Audacity is their friend when they want to save a
> tape and have to count, literally, every penny..."
> I can't think of any decent audio interface that doesn't come bundled with
> better software than Audacity! If you must use a freebee, Reaper is worlds
> ahead of Audacity.
> Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
> Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
> Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
> 615.385.8051

Craig Breaden
Head, Media and Oral History
Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies
Main Library
University of Georgia
Athens, GA 30602-1641
(p) 706-542-5782
(f) 706-542-4144