Re: [ARSCLIST] WHY save as WAV's when Mp3's can do??? (was Podcasting of 78's)

[steven c <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andes, Donald" <Donald.Andes@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Regardless of whether this is a preservation project of not, and
> regardless of what bit rate or file format you go to, the process is as
> follows:
> 
> 1) The discs should be prepared properly (cleaned) prior to transfer.
> -The time involved here depends on the state of the collection.
> 
> 2) The Playback device should be calibrated properly. In this case the
> 78 player should be of good condition, and have the correct stylus for
> the record to be played.
> -The time here again depends on the state of the playback
> device.
> 
> ***At this point regardless of what you say to inside the computer, at
> least you know you have the best (within reason) sound you can.
> 
> 3) The record should be played back directly into the computer sound
> card at robust enough level without clipping. (Since this is a 78, you
> WON'T need to shoot the moon for a A/D that's $$$.)
> -The fact that this needs to be done real time, depends on
> program length.
> 
> 4) The file is recorded in the computer and saved.
> -This happens simultaneously with 3) above, except the "save"
> part which takes seconds.
> 
> 5) The files should be edited and correctly labeled. 
> -Time here depends on whether you are trimming heads/tails,
> applying processing, and the amount of metadata you collect for each
> file. (This is where preservation projects CAN eat time.)
>  
> 6) The files SHOULD BE backed up.
> -This will take time and $ depending on what your plans are, but
> is the only way to safeguard the time and work invested in the steps
> above. (Again, this is where preservation projects CAN eat time.)
> 
> 7) Enjoy/Use/Compiled Radio Show with recorded files.
> -Time again depends on what the final output will be.
> 
> Since there's so much time/work taken to transfer each record, you might
> as well do it at the best quality (resolution) you can. 78's are mono,
> and don't require "extreme" sample and bit rates, so if you did 16/44.1
> BWF's you'd have something that was very good sounding. As for the
> "prettied up grandparent analogy" you'd only run into that if you sent
> time on 5) doing a lot of audio processing.
> 
> The Wav files can be EASILY batch converted down to a variety of formats
> (including Mp3's). If you commit to Mp3's now, and in the future get to
> do your show "on the air" you may be happy you can create a few CD's of
> wav files to play instead of risking the transport of your 78's dealing
> with stylus issues at the station.
> 
> There have also been a great deal of posts over the quality of Mp3's.
> They CAN sound great and they CAN sound horrible. After admitting that
> your hearing is hampered, I'd especially choose to save everything as
> Wav files. What happens when you transfer everything to Mp3's that YOU
> think sound good, but you audience cringes over? At least if you have
> the original Wav files you can RE-convert them at a higher bit rate, or
> change the compression scheme.
> 
> Last note, I'd worry about them limits of an 80 Gig hard drive, when
> you're down to you're last 10 gigs of free space. You may be surprised
> at how long it takes to get you there. Remember all the steps above need
> to be taken for EACH side transferred.
> 
Well, understand that I'm not "saving my 78's for the ages" (Though I
think that such a project should be accomplished, and include as many
78 sound recordings as possible, now that we have the technology for
the necessary creation and storage...and I'd be happy to contribute
my (non-monetary) assistance to the aforesaid!).

OTOH...it's more like what I used to do 20-25 years ago, when I'd
grab milk boxes of 78's and tape them onto cassettes, with the
objective being the creation of more "portable" playable archives
(NOT in the official sense of that word!) for my own entertainment.

So...what THE WORLD needs is an archive of all (or as close as possible)
surviving 78rpm phonorecords...saved in as much detail as operationally
possible (including stereo, since that often allows correction of
wear or damage affecting only one groove wall!). Note that such a
thing is now entirely possible and practical given advances in
computer/digital technology!

However...what *I* need is a way to produce reasonably listenable
portable copies of my half-vast shellac archive (or at least the
part thereof that I would enjoy hearing on a regular basis). I
could then make the above available via web site/Internet to
interested parties (with a caveat warning them the sound won't
equal that of *some" modern CD's) or via "burnt" CD-R quasi-CD's
(same caveat).

However...until the (provincial) powers that be see fit to grant
me more than my current below-poverty pittance (and I ain't holdin'
my furshlugginer breath thereanent!) or my standard of living is
otherwise improved...to use an old expression from my USAF past:
"Nevah hoppen, GI!"

Steven C. Barr