Re: [ARSCLIST] Registry of Digital Masters

[Karl Miller <lyaa071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Marcos Sueiro Bal wrote:

> I just learned of this OCLC initiative and thought it could have great
> impact on future restoration projects, if it is used. I was not able to find
> one single audio recording in the registry, but it seems like it is built to
> catalogue them as well. At any rate, it seems like a step in the right
> direction.
>
> I am curious about what other list members think.
>
> http://www.clir.org/pubs/issues/issues52.html#registry

Thanks for the forward. I am not sure what to think.

According to the blub at clir, the idea is to avoid the duplication of
effort being expended to digitize monographs and serials. I wonder about
serials and monographs on microfilm and those copies that might be
available as image files, versus ASCII, versus those copies that might be
owned by copyright holders, versus the material being digitized by google
et al.

The blub at OCLC reads like an infomercial promo..."Look no farther than
the Registry of Digital Masters." Oddly, in the same blurb, they point to
"more than 3,500 records of digital masters, identified by a code in the
MARC record and stored in OCLC's WorldCat database." Well, I would guess
that 3,500 records is a drop in the basket. Also, considering the cost of
preparing a MARC record, only a select group of items are likely to be
listed...and listed by those organizations/individuals who have OCLC
affiliation.

Another aspect that would seem to be worthy of consideration is access.
Say one institution has digitized some information. Will that digital
version be available at another location. It would seem to me that another
insitution, that might not have access to that one digitized version,
might want to go ahead and digitize their own copy for their own user
base.

As an example...I may happen to have a lacquer disc of a Boston Symphony performance
conducted by Koussevitzky. In the days when our library was doing preservation work, I
would go ahead and make a copy of it, even thought I knew a line check was
likely to reside in Library of Congress. I would want my local users to
have reasonable access, something they would not have to the copy in the
Library of Congress.

Another consideration for me has to do with my belief that copies in
multiple locations is one of the best of preservation methodologies.

One can also get even more extreme...here I go...Some years ago when the
New York Phil wanted to get some copies of broadcasts I had in my
collection...well I was surprised that anything I had might be better than
what I assumed they had. No doubt Steve Smolian can tell us more about
that situation...but I remember the 1947 Szell broadcast of the Copland
Third Symphony. As I recall, Sedge, the producer, mentioned that their
copy was done for distribution south of the border and an announcer
started talking in Spanish before the piece was over. My copy was an
aircheck made in the US...no interruption. So, one might have a "better"
sounding copy, but it can also have problems that another copy might not
have.

Lastly, reading the blurb "The Registry of Digital Masters could
eventually include records for the millions of books being digitized by
Google, if the partner libraries choose to register their masters and are
committed to preserve them."

For me, this is really an amazing quote. I don't believe libraries will
take the initiative, google will and already is documenting as they go
ahead with their project. The most amazing aspect for me is the part of
the quote "If the partner libraries CHOOSE to register...and are COMMITTED
TO PRESERVE THEM." As I have written before, I haven't the foggiest notion
what libraries are trying to do these days, but that sentence reads to me
a bit like..."if doctors are committed to healing the sick and saving
lives." So, if libraries aren't committed to cataloging and preserving,
what are they doing these days besides serving coffee?

In short, I place very little faith in any OCLC initiative.

Karl