Print

Print


Part 2 - sorry - my macro got away from me!

One frequently needs the original to help determine provenance -
particularly important in the digital age. Which is THE original can
frequently only be determined by the physical asset as opposed to a variety
of digital "clones" which may in fact not be a clone at all depending on
what you are looking for. Forensics is all about that. In certain cases
even from a legal perspective, an original object may have particular
importance, and may contain physical evidence that is important.

In many disciples the process may be as important or more important then
the end result. The process of creating a painting for example most likely
could not be discerned by a scan. And what type of scan? White light? Many
secrets are revealed in when examined with other spectral components. If
you are interested in the sound, are you going to take the same level of
concern when digitizing the label or the jacket? Likely not.

There are many reasons to keep the original.

Jim Lindner
Media Matters

On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 2:31 PM Steven Smolian <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steven Smolian
> Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2020 2:18 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Question for Archivists and Preservationists
>
> There are audio-focused archives and those where the object is also of
> importance.  The ability of scholars to examine a record is important when
> they are being scholarly.  Clues about a recordings history are embedded in
> shellac rather than amber.  One example that comes to mind is if the matrix
> number of a pressing is in the same typeface as its earliest issue.  If
> not, it may indicate a later stamper, a reworked groove or a dubbing.
> Labels often change when repressings are made.  Electrical records made by
> the Western Electric method are coded differently from those using other
> systems, information helpful when making equalization choices.
>
> Speaking of dubbing, are we commiting hubris by assuming that a copying
> job can never be done better in the future?
>
> Steve Smolian
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen M.H. Braitman
> Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2020 2:03 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Question for Archivists and Preservationists
>
> Hello, one and all:
>
> We almost made it through this mad year. Glad you’re all still around.
>
> I’d appreciate some feedback to this issue directed to those of you who
> manage collections and archives and are tasked with preservation,
> acquisition, and/or “refinement” :
>
> Is the importance of physical material in libraries and archives
> decreasing due to the surge in usage of digital files?
>
> Do you see a future when physical artifacts are no longer collected,
> archived, preserved, once they have been effectively digitized or otherwise
> electronically manifested?
>
> And, finally, is this situation causing institutions to, at least, look
> more seriously at their archives and collections for their pertinence and
> relevance, thus causing a paring down or refocusing of their priorities?
>
> Sorry to be long-winded, but thanks for any thoughts you might have.
>
> Happy new year!
>
>
> Stephen
>
>
>
>
> Stephen M.H. Braitman, ASA
> Accredited Senior Appraiser of Music
>     Archives & Memorabilia
> American Society of Appraisers
>
> www.MusicAppraisals.com
>
> 415-897-6999
>