[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: arsclist storing
On 14-Jul-02, Daniel Leech-Wilkinson wrote:
> At 10:43 12/07/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>> What kind of research requires that they handle the records? Can you
>> do a high res scan of the label and give a detailed physical
>> description? I would think that would satisfy the majority of
>> research questions. Anything beyond that you could handle on an
>> individual basis.
> Not sure that I agree about this. Matrix numbers (almost never fully
> printed on the label) and other data stamped outside the label don't
> always show up adequately in a scan. Besides which, as scholars become
> increasingly inclined to think of 78s as primary sources, they want to
> see them just as they do other kinds of sources like manuscripts. In
> particular they want to experiment with different stylus sizes and
> shapes, different equalisation settings, and so on, and it's just not
> practical to do that at one remove, somebody else doing the work and
> playing back the results. We need at least some archives where
> hands-on work is encouraged. That's going to be our policy at the
> emerging King's sound archive, anyway.
The originals are of interest to historians of technology as well as to
those studying performance.
And what librarian can honestly say that all the information has been
extracted from the original? You have only to listen to several
different transcriptions of a 78 onto CD to realise that an instrument
may be almost inaudible on one and clearly audible on another.
Or compare different CD reissues from the same tape from the same
company ("Kind of Blue" is a good example).
Obviously the advantages of access have to be weighed against the risk
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.