Re: [ARSCLIST] Is recording to Reel-to-reel still the preferred preservation ...

[Mwcpc6@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 9/30/2004 4:51:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
mastering@xxxxxxxxx writes:

And there should be absolutely no need to go higher than 96 kHz except
for those recording bats.
****************

The comments I've seen regarding the advantages of DSD for remastering
multitrack analog have to do with the spatial coherence of the acoustical image.
Human hearing is capable of locating sound sources within a few degrees,
requiring a time resolution on the order of tens of microseconds.  This can be
preserved only by sampling at hundreds of kilohertz.

This is probably of little concern to ARSC members because few recordings of
the past were multichannel or made on equipment this precise.  However as
consumer entertainment migrates to HDTV/multichannel sound, production and
distribution media formats will also migrate to new forms to handle the vastly higher
data rates. The result will be that the present CD audio disc will eventually
be as obsolete as the shellac 78.

With the present rate of technological development, it is hard to imagine any
medium or format suitable for UN-maintained preservation of sound (or video)
for a human generation or more.  However, I'll bet that fifty years from now
you will still find people collecting and restoring Ampex 300 tape decks.

Mike Csontos