Re: [ARSCLIST] Can 78s sound better than LPs?

[George Brock-Nannestad <pattac@xxxxxxxx>]

From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad

re-reading Don Cox quoting me, I discovered that my "dictum" had become 
"befuddlum":

> On 25/08/06, George Brock-Nannestad wrote:
> > From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad
> > 
> > Marcos Sueiro Bal wrote:
> > 
> >> I have noticed that when recommending sound cards for podcasting 78s,
> >> some on the list have not chosen top-of-the-line models with the
> >> assumption that the sound quality of 78s is inherently inferior to
> >> that, of, say, LPs. T...................................
............................................... 
> > 4) however, I must be true to my dictum "low quality sound is worse
> > than no sound at all", so if you want to provide low-quality podcast,
> > and nobody produces any better, you are still the best in the field.

----- what I meant was: "low-quality sound is BETTER than no sound at all". 
It was at first considered very provocative in the archiving community, but 
it was only my deep-felt response to the expressed need for selection and for 
waiting for the "ideal transfer system". 

SELECTION is saddening, because we cannot know what queries will be put to 
the material

WAITING is saddening, because in the meantime material will rot

- so I said - "why not just transfer the lot, at the cheapest rate possible, 
and to a format that will be preserved in the future". All modern 
preservation relies on migration, high- or low-quality alike, so that is not 
where we can save money. The only money-saving possible comes from not 
processing at all in the original transfer and perhaps because "right now" 
storage is just the little bit too expensive to permit the high resolution.

Kind regards,


George