Re: archiving methods

["mr.monk" <monk@fuse.net>]

i think you may be missing the point here. if you mix to something like 1/2" ampex 499. it will probably be in pretty good shape 30 years from now. and though there are other advantages to digital, no one who seriously listens thinks that a cd  or a DAT sounds as good as a half inch master. as the digital teechnology gets better, you can take the half inch and make better digital recordings. DVD audio is a great example. if everyone had mixed to dat or cd then when higher fidelity reproducers became available, there would be no point in out. why limit yourself forever to 16 bit /44.1 when someday the standard will be much higher. i understand that not everyone has an ATR102 1/2 machine in the studio (i'm very lucky...) but there is a reason that when folks get enough cash together to make a modest priced record that they don't mix to DAT...


On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 04:07 PM, S.P. Goodman wrote:

> Jeepers folks,
>  
> All of us should already know how fast tape degrades, no matter how much you paid for it.  I suppose if you don't like the idea of Bad CD Mixdown Syndrome one can just keep it in storage, on tape, and hope for the best.  Each dupe you make loses more and more - but we know that too.  The way I figure it, as long as I can make a CD containing the archives formerly saved on tape, I can freeze that degradation, yes?
>  
> I'm in the long process of archiving old recorded material of mine to CD, dating back to 1979.  Boy, is there a lotta hiss in those early ones!  But a lot less than there would be if I put this off, hm?
>  
> S.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nemoguitt@aol.com
> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 20:32:PM
> Subject: Re: archiving methods
>
> In a message dated 12/4/02 3:22:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, das@ubuibi.org writes:
>
>
> your tapes are falling apart as you read this....
>
>
>
> well so am i....:).....what to believe?.....michael