[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: arsclist record archive
OK, as a librarian and sometime cataloger, I have to make an observation.
Regarding Frank's observation below, book (monograph) catalogers may or may
not be excellent catalogers of sound recordings. The primary obstacle is
that the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR), which are the most widely
used standard for cataloging in OCLC (or RLIN and other utilities) seem to
based on the assumption that all cataloging of formats other than monograph
(sound recordings, maps, computer files, microforms, music, motion
pictures, 3-dimensional objects, etc.) can somehow be based on the model
provided by books. This just does not work and much time has been spent,
largely by frustrated music librarians, trying to address the failings of
AACR in cataloging music and sound recordings. I don't have time here and
now to delve deeply into the philosophical and pragmatic issues inherent in
cataloging in general and of recordings in particular. For starters, it
might give some idea of how far one might have to go create a truly useful
and all-inclusive catalog to consider that most "popular" catalogs are
arranged by "artist" which is usually synonymous with performer and
"classical" catalogs arranged by composer as a rule. This basic initial
divergence is already likely to cause major problems. There are also
various "rules of three" in AACR that determine where and how individual
works and "artists" (performers, composers and others) are entered (or not
entered, depending on the rules and local custom set by the institution).
These rules, as the name implies, are based on whether the number of
individuals (or other entities) involved exceed three. Most people with a
serious interest in recordings and discography (i.e., all of you - and
myself) want ALL the pieces of music and ALL of the performing individuals
(clearly associated with the proper pieces) , along with full label,
catalog number at a minimum and would certainly appreciate recording dates,
venues and information on the accompanying material (liner notes, libretti,
artwork, etc.). The fact is, this is extremely cumbersome, verging on
impossible in the mold provided by the AACR chapter 6 guidelines for sound
recordings. Another fact is that most libraries would like their catalogers
to produce more than 2 or 3 catalog records a day and so limit the
"enhancement" of records to a practical level.
The preceding is not meant in any way as an indictment of professional
catalogers. In fact, projects like the Rigler-Deutsch Index, that involve
huge quantities of input with little regulation or control by trained
catalogers leave even more to be desired, IMHO. The fact that union
catalogs like OCLC and RLIN exist and have established standards for
cataloging is a good thing. As has been mentioned earlier, there are tens
of thousands of LPs in these systems.
Cataloging and discography intersect at times and discographer's hopes
frequently are dashed by the realities of existing catalogs and are not
likely to be more than partially satisfied by systems based on current
standards.
Well, by now I've probably wandered way off topic.... I'll stop now.
Peter Hirsch
Head Archivist for Music and Recorded Sound
Wilson Processing Project
The New York Public Library
phirsch@xxxxxxxx
521 West 43rd Street
New York, New York 10036
(212) 714-8570
(212) 714-8508 - fax
Premise Checker
<checker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ftware.com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: arsclist record archive
owner-ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
r.edu
12/12/2002 01:57 PM
Please respond to ARSCLIST
I can supply a temporary password to this database to anyone who sends me
an e-mail. Book librarians do a mediocre job catalog sound recordings. I
used this database when searching for post-acoustic recordings of works in
my acoustic chamber music sets discography. (The majority of the works
made it to electric 78s.) Also to find alternative issues of Mravinsky
recordings. For records that have several works, you'll find that each
work gets a separate entry, that some works don't make it at all, that
it's impossible to find who performed what work, and so on. (I used a
CD-ROM version, actually, not the online version.) The coverage is spotty
and I'd never use it to find the run of all Westminster WLs, for example.
One problem is that each library does its own entering, resulting in
little standardization. I use this resource only to see if a work has been
very recenly recorded, as a last resort, or to touch up some other work.
But it's great for books and you can find out which libraries contain
_The Metaphysics of Liberty_ (Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer Academic, 1989),
by me, for example.
Frank
On 2002-12-10, John Ross opined [message unchanged below]:
> It certainly won't include "every LP ever made", but it seems likely that
> the OCLC database used by library catalogers might have a very large
> proportion of them. It's a common online catalog that includes entries
for
> a huge number of books, documents and other items, including
phonorecords.
>
> Bruno, the cataloging specialists at your university's library probably
> already have access to OCLC or will know how to get access for you. Or
> failing that, it has been my experience that the OCLC staff are extremely
> helpful and quite willing to lead non-librarians through the necessary
> steps toward using the resource. Their Web site is at www.oclc.org.
>
> John Ross
> Northwest Folklife
> Seattle, Washington USA
>
> At 03:28 PM 12/10/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> >As I understood the post, Mr. Weber was looking for a data archive...as
it
> >turned out, on LP records...with the intention of copying data records
on
> >phonorecords he (or his institution) holds, which would reduce the
amount
> >of data entry needed to catalog the holdings. As I see it, much of the
point
> >of collections, particularly institutional collections, is to keep an
> >adequate
> >and current catalog of the holdings; first, so that the collector
> >(individual
> >or institutional) knows exactly what they do (and don't) own, to avoid
> >duplicate acquisitions, and, second, because many users (in the case of
> >institutional collections) are looking for the information rather than
the
> >actual sound contents of the recordings. The alternative..."oh, if we
have
> >it it's somewhere in that stuff on those shelves over there..." seems an
> >illogical way to run a library (and possibly a personal collection?).
>
>
> -
> For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
> http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
> 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.
>
>
-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
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.
-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
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.