[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] CD markings
Use the search feature on our web site for marking issues.
There are "good" and "bad" manufacturers of both recordable discs and
replicas, thus blindly choosing a replica does not assure longevity.
Media Sciences, Inc.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Richter
> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 3:14 PM
> To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CD markings
> At 12:16 PM 10/1/2004 -0400, Steven Smolian wrote:
> >There seems a merging of technology problems here. I assumed we were
> >discussing recordable CDs rather than the manufactured kind. The issue I
> >was hoping we'd keep going on was that of how the inks may affect the
> >inkjet printable surfaces and the gold reinforced ones with a true gold
> >reflective surface.
> >If they do affect them, is it only what occurs at the time of printing or
> >does it get worse as time passes? Testing such discs at the time they
> >made and, perhaps, 6 months and a year after that time and comparing
> >should give us useful information.
> Jerome Hartke of Media Sciences ( http://www.mscience.com/ ) has studied
> the matter as I indicated. However, I have no link to offer within his
> site; in other groups, he has written of the effect of markers and labels
> on media. I recall no testing on longevity per se, but with the
> thoroughness of his analysis, he can see the effects of labelling in the
> various error rates. I have copied him on this post and will forward to
> this list any response he sends privately. (I strongly suggest reviewing
> his site and his services if you are interested in recording on optical
> As for whether recordable or pressed media should be used for
> my suggestion was that if one seeks the longest possible life, having the
> disc pressed and dispersing many copies would seem desirable. It does slow
> things down and raise the cost, but when one is talking about priceless
> material to last through Armageddon, can any investment be excessive?
> As I have said before, for any purpose - including preservation - a
> needs to be struck between the quality of the work and the cost. The
> to create an archival CD-ROM containing the best (currently) possible
> representation of a double-sided 78 ensures that very few such discs will
> be preserved in that fashion. So if one strives for the ultimate, then
> finding a few hundred abandoned mines to store pressed copies would not
> seem unreasonable. It is simply more of the same.
> (Pause for arithmetic: 9 minutes of audio, 540 seconds, at 192 ks
> two channels, 24 bits per sample = 622080000 bytes. A "74-minute" CD-R
> offers approximately 650 MB. Therefore, the indicated preservation values
> would allow two, 4.5-minute sides per CD-ROM with some space to spare for
> correlated data.)