Re: [ARSCLIST] Podcasting--explained a bit...

[steven c <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Fine" <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> There's definitely a difference between an archivist and a collector. And
there's also a big
> difference between a true collector and an accumulator. As any fan of jazz
knows, true collectors
> are gold because they'll have a great-condition version of a record -- be
it 78RPM or 45 single or
> even LP -- for which the master tape is lost or deteriorated. You see
transfers of 45 and 78
> versions end up on Mosaic sets all the time, for instance. On the other
hand, the accumulator is not
> as useful because has just, well, accumulated. He probably doesn't even
know what he has because he
> doesn't stop to take measure -- he just keeps filling his space with boxes
and boxes and boxes of
> records. Most of them are junk, not even worth the sweat equity of hauling
in. The junk clutters the
> whole scene, making it nearly impossible to find the gems. There's a
psychological problem related
> to blind acquisition of things, I forgot what it's called. Collectors (and
archivists) have our own
> psycho problems, so I certainly  shouldn't throw stones! An archivist is
one step beyond a
> collector. He's usually a funded professional, who has learned the
standard methods of preserving
> and cataloging his material. He is focused on preserving and accumulating
excellent samples of
> whatever genre his archive is all about. The achivist is a natural friend
and sometimes student of
> the collector, whose passion may have led to arcane knowledge way beyond
the scope of the
> archivist's formal education. The accumulator is kind of a pilot-fish to
the whole process. He might
> well have some very deep and arcane knowledge, and is thus worth knowing,
but usually he doesn't
> even really know what he has and is too busy accumulating to take the time
to dig deep and see.
> Sometimes, though, he's generous enough to let the archivist or collector
sift thru the mountains of
> junk (hopefully wearing masks and gloves to avoid mouse contamination) and
there may be gold in them
> thar stacks -- not likely but it does happen.  As time goes on and the
genre or artist or subject of
> interest becomes more and more out of date and obscure, the accumulator
becomes more valuable to the
> archivist because history has a tendency to become more and more
completist over time. You get 50
> years out and the only "new" shine you can put on something is to release
every rejected take or
> amateur live recording you can find. You get a thoroughly mined artist -- 
and legend -- like Charlie
> Parker, and all you're left to do is release amateur wire recordings of
solos only (not even
> complete tunes). And lo and behold, there will be at least a few buyers
for all of it! Meanwhile,
> out in the real world, the vast majority will have long forgotten the
whole thing and the archivist
> will have to fight for every penny every year. Guys, we live in a strange
universe.
>
Well, by Mr. Fine's high standards, I have to admit that I am an
"accumulator"
(as are about 95% of the people who think of themselves as 78 collectors!).
I've never been able to afford E+ copies of extremely rare and thus highly
valuable phonorecords (like the $7,000+ Robert Johnson Vocalions that pop
up on net auctions...!) and thus have to acquire the copies I can afford!

However, the above compendium completely overlooks collector/accumulator(s)
of my ilk! I acquire 78's primarily for discographic research (though I also
listen to my hoard...even the thousand-odd Grey Gull items!). One of the
fruits of this research, of course, has been "The (Almost) Complete 78rpm
Record Dating Guide." When I first offered this to the world, it was the
only work of its kind to be had...Bob Daniels, after corresponding with
me, offered his volume covering the period I intentionally didn't (now,
sadly, out of print)...and, as I understand it, the second edition of
Sutton's work offers some date information as well.

As he notes, "archivists" are usually institutionally-based and thus
funded (although "fully" may be open to question, especially as
neo-conservatives acquire political power through promises of tax cuts?!).
These are privileges, sadly, that I don't enjoy. In fact, I can't
even be sure there will be any institutional interest in my
shellac should I happen to go see Jesus...!

So, my goal (insofar as I have one...or am allowed to given my status
as someone dependent on official assistance) is to come as close as I
can to a shellac equivalent to Steve Abrams' C8T-file discographic
information archive. I don't expect to come close, though...!

In the meantime, it would be nice to have some of the contents made
available in a more portable form (it's difficult to make a bus trip
to Toronto carrying a hundred 78's, a player for them and a 40-mile
extension cord?!) and/or made available to others who might wonder
just what music sounded like back in them days (well, more or less...)

So...I'm archving discographic data more than music...the hard way...

Steven C. Barr