PipeChat Digest #3442 - Sunday, February 9, 2003
 
Changw of Address
  by <PipeO52@aol.com>
RE: Copying LPs to CD/Rs
  by "Amy Fleming" <docamy@alltel.net>
St. Louis
  by "Amy Fleming" <docamy@alltel.net>
Re: St. Louis
  by "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com>
Re: St. Louis
  by "jch" <opus1100@catoe.org>
Copying old LPs
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
Archival copying to a CD
  by "Ray Kimber" <ray@kimber.com>
transferring LP, cassette  to CD
  by "Hugh Drogemuller" <hdrogemuller@sympatico.ca>
Re: Archival copying to a CD
  by "Antoni Scott" <ascott@ptd.net>
Re: St. Louis
  by "Jim Clouser" <CromorneCipher@hotmail.com>
RE: Archival copying to a CD
  by "Bill Sebring" <baircub@austin.rr.com>
Re: Archival copying to a CD
  by "Darrell Coons" <dcoons03@rochester.rr.com>
RE: Archival copying to a CD
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
INHARMONICITY
  by "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com>
Felix Hell In Hartford
  by "mack02445" <mack02445@mindspring.com>
Re: St. Louis
  by "Jim Hailey" <jhaileya10@charter.net>
INHARMONICITY (lONG)
  by "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com>
Re: Archival copying to a CD
  by "Nelson Denton" <ndenton@cogeco.ca>
 

(back) Subject: Changw of Address From: <PipeO52@aol.com> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 08:23:12 EST     --part1_1cf.21a1c55.2b77b040_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Salutations!   Please:   1) Discontinue sending email to the present address of Pipeo52@aol.com.   2) Direct future email to the following email address: = Orgelmeister01@aol.com   Thanks you!   Art Pipeo52@aol.com   --part1_1cf.21a1c55.2b77b040_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   <HTML><FONT FACE=3D3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D3D2 = FAMILY=3D3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D =3D3D"Arial" LANG=3D3D"0">Salutations!<BR> <BR> Please:<BR> <BR> 1) Discontinue sending email to the present address of = Pipeo52@aol.com.<BR> <BR> 2) Direct future email to the following email address: = Orgelmeister01@aol.co=3D m<BR> <BR> Thanks you!<BR> <BR> Art<BR> </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D3D"#0000ff" style=3D3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" = SIZE=3D3D2=3D FAMILY=3D3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D3D"Arial" LANG=3D3D"0">Pipeo</FONT><FONT = COLOR=3D3D"=3D #ff0000" style=3D3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D3D2 = FAMILY=3D3D"SANSSERIF" F=3D ACE=3D3D"Arial" LANG=3D3D"0">52</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D3D"#0080c0" = style=3D3D"BACKGROU=3D ND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D3D2 FAMILY=3D3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D3D"Arial" = LANG=3D3D"0"><=3D I>@aol.com<BR> </I></FONT></HTML> --part1_1cf.21a1c55.2b77b040_boundary--  
(back) Subject: RE: Copying LPs to CD/Rs From: "Amy Fleming" <docamy@alltel.net> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 07:39:07 -0600   Thanks for all the information. That sounds like something I can do, I = have a lot of LP's that I never listen too bcs it is either too much bother to get them out or they have pops and noise that detracts from the music. I enjoy reading all the posts. Amy Fleming    
(back) Subject: St. Louis From: "Amy Fleming" <docamy@alltel.net> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 07:43:12 -0600   We may be traveling to the St. Louis area in the near future. Are there = any great pipe organs there, preferably in an LCMS church where we can worship on Sunday? My daughter has never heard a pipe organ live (gasp!) even though she is doing quite well in piano. (we live in rural USA) Amy Fleming    
(back) Subject: Re: St. Louis From: "John L. Speller" <jlspeller@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 08:49:12 -0600   I live in St. Louis and can tell you that there are some quite nice new instruments in Kirk of the Hills Presbyterian (PCA) -- Schantz; Twin Oaks Presbyterian (PCA) -- Quimby Pipe Organs; Parkway U.C.C. -- Quimby Pipe organs; Hope U.C.C. -- Harrison & Harrison, Durham, England; St. Peter's Episcopal Church -- Mander, London, England; First Unitarian Church -- Dobson; There are also some fine older instruments in Christ Church Episcopal Cathedral -- Aeolian-Skinner; St. Joseph's Shrine (R.C.) -- Pfeffer; Memorial Presbyterian (PCA) -- Aeolian; But I don't really know of any tremendously interesting ones in LCMS churches. Across the river in St. George's, Belleville, Illinois (joint Episcopal/ELCA) there is also a new Buzard.   John Speller,   Amy Fleming wrote: > > We may be traveling to the St. Louis area in the near future. Are there = any > great pipe organs there, preferably in an LCMS church where we can = worship > on Sunday? My daughter has never heard a pipe organ live (gasp!) even > though she is doing quite well in piano. (we live in rural USA) > Amy Fleming  
(back) Subject: Re: St. Louis From: "jch" <opus1100@catoe.org> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 10:12:20 -0600   At 07:43 AM 2/9/03 -0600, you wrote: >We may be traveling to the St. Louis area in the near future. Are there = any >great pipe organs there, preferably in an LCMS church where we can = worship >on Sunday?   I know your question was directed toward liturgal organs, but if you = should by chance be in St. Louis on the first weekend in March, the local theatre =   organ chapter has a weekend of programs including concerts on the St. Louis FOX Theatre organ (4/36 Wurlitzer) and including a tour of the Wicks =   organ factory in Highland Ill. More information is available on their website at: http://www.sltos.org/   Jon Habermaas      
(back) Subject: Copying old LPs From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 14:35:18 -0500   This might be a bit off topic for the list, but I have received a number = of messages regarding copying LPs to CDs.   I have tried out the demo version of Groove Mechanic, which Mack = suggested, and I think that it works better than the DART software that I have been using up until now. You can obtain the Demo version from   http://www.coyotes.bc.ca/   I have been using it to "De-click" and "De-rumble" an old organ recording by Feike Asma that I found in the local March of Dimes store, and the = sound is so much improved that it is hard to believe how scratchy the original LP is.   I think that this will be the software that I shall be using after the 15 day trial period is over!   If any one else has any ideas on getting the best results for copying LPs to CDs I hope that they will post them, - assuming the List Owner doesn't = mind!   Bob Conway      
(back) Subject: Archival copying to a CD From: "Ray Kimber" <ray@kimber.com> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 12:47:17 -0700   Hi List,   A couple of years ago I wanted to know if one brand blank CDr was better than another. After much questioning I am confident that there is one = that is truly better than all the rest. Mitsui Gold, in either 74 or 80 = minutes. This is also available as a re-branded Apogee CDr (Apogee is a brand of = Pro audio euipment). the Apogee might be easier to find.   The dye used is more durable and does not easily fade if exposed to UV. = The reflective coating is 24K gold, which does not oxidize like an aluminum reflective layer.   I use the version that has an opaque plain white inkjet printable back.   It is rated to 100 years of data life, other good ones have a rated life = of less than half that, or NO rating at all.   So if you are transfering from LP to CDr to preserve the audio, you shouldn't be using a CDr blank that will self erase after just a few years   Kind regards,   Ray Kimber    
(back) Subject: transferring LP, cassette to CD From: "Hugh Drogemuller" <hdrogemuller@sympatico.ca> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 14:54:38 -0500   Romain Kang a list member of Piporg-L provided me with the following URL which I believe deals with the topic very thoroughly. http://www.delback.co.uk/lp-cdr.htm      
(back) Subject: Re: Archival copying to a CD From: "Antoni Scott" <ascott@ptd.net> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 19:15:18 -0500   Ray brought up an interesting point. I have heard several mentions of shelf life of recorded CD's. However, I have NEVER heard any mention of the shelf life of a commercially purchased CD. I was unaware that a CD self erased or died after so many years. Although I tried many brands and versions of CD's (i.e. computer data storage vs. audio optimized) I have not been able to tell the difference using my equipment. Since I bought my CD recorder some 4 years ago, it allowed me to use both types of CD's to record music. I remeber back then, you could only use one type of CD in some recorders, not the much cheaper data storage CD's used to back up computer data. When I bought some blamk CD's I was told you could only play them 200 times and they were done. I figured that was OK for me, since they are so cheap today I can easily afford to re-record my CD's. I guess I better hang on to my vinyl recordings. Some date back to the mid 50's are are still fine (they don't self destruct or erase !!!)   Has anybody heard of a shelf life issue or a limited number of playings issue allowable with commercially available recordings (i.e. ERATO) ???   Antoni Scott  
(back) Subject: Re: St. Louis From: "Jim Clouser" <CromorneCipher@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 20:06:42 -0500   I remember there being a large Kilgen at the Cathedral of St. Louis (http://www.cathedralstl.org/music/organ.html) on Lindell Boulevard, close to Washington University.   Jim Clouser BM candidate, Cleveland Institute of Music Music Director/Organist Reformation Lutheran Evangelical Chuch Eastlake, Ohio   ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy Fleming" <docamy@alltel.net> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 8:43 AM Subject: St. Louis     > We may be traveling to the St. Louis area in the near future. Are there any > great pipe organs there, preferably in an LCMS church where we can = worship > on Sunday? My daughter has never heard a pipe organ live (gasp!) even > though she is doing quite well in piano. (we live in rural USA) > Amy Fleming > > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org >  
(back) Subject: RE: Archival copying to a CD From: "Bill Sebring" <baircub@austin.rr.com> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 20:02:56 -0600   How old are your CD's? My other 1/2 and I have cd's in our collection = that go back 15 years, and we've never heard of this. :-{ O}   -----Original Message----- From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of Antoni Scott Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 6:15 PM To: PipeChat Subject: Re: Archival copying to a CD     Ray brought up an interesting point. I have heard several mentions of shelf life of recorded CD's. However, I have NEVER heard any mention of the shelf life of a commercially purchased CD. I was unaware that a CD self erased or died after so many years. Although I tried many brands and versions of CD's (i.e. computer data storage vs. audio optimized) I have not been able to tell the difference using my equipment. Since I bought my CD recorder some 4 years ago, it allowed me to use both types of CD's to record music. I remeber back then, you could only use one type of CD in some recorders, not the much cheaper data storage CD's used to back up computer data. When I bought some blamk CD's I was told you could only play them 200 times and they were done. I figured that was OK for me, since they are so cheap today I can easily afford to re-record my CD's. I guess I better hang on to my vinyl recordings. Some date back to the mid 50's are are still fine (they don't self destruct or erase !!!)   Has anybody heard of a shelf life issue or a limited number of playings issue allowable with commercially available recordings (i.e. ERATO) ???   Antoni Scott   "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org        
(back) Subject: Re: Archival copying to a CD From: "Darrell Coons" <dcoons03@rochester.rr.com> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 21:11:13 -0500   You have been sold a bill of goods. CDs do NOT self-destruct after 5 years or 200 playings or anything else of the sort. Put this on the same shelf with those virun hoaxes going around.     > How old are your CD's? My other 1/2 and I have cd's in our collection that > go back 15 years, and we've never heard of this. :-{ O} > > -----Original Message----- > From: pipechat@pipechat.org [mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org]On Behalf Of > Antoni Scott > Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 6:15 PM > To: PipeChat > Subject: Re: Archival copying to a CD > > > Ray brought up an interesting point. I have heard several mentions of > shelf life of recorded CD's. However, I have NEVER heard any mention of > the shelf life of a commercially purchased CD. I was unaware that a CD > self erased or died after so many years. Although I tried many brands > and versions of CD's (i.e. computer data storage vs. audio optimized) I > have not been able to tell the difference using my equipment. Since I > bought my CD recorder some 4 years ago, it allowed me to use both types > of CD's to record music. I remeber back then, you could only use one > type of CD in some recorders, not the much cheaper data storage CD's > used to back up computer data. When I bought some blamk CD's I was told > you could only play them 200 times and they were done. I figured that > was OK for me, since they are so cheap today I can easily afford to > re-record my CD's. I guess I better hang on to my vinyl recordings. Some > date back to the mid 50's are are still fine (they don't self destruct > or erase !!!) > > Has anybody heard of a shelf life issue or a limited number of playings > issue allowable with commercially available recordings (i.e. ERATO) ??? > > Antoni Scott > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > > > > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > >      
(back) Subject: RE: Archival copying to a CD From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 21:39:32 -0500   I bought my first classical CDs about 20 years ago, and they play well. Having said that, CDs that I have bought since then have improved in the sound quality, - at least to my ears.   However, I think that what Antoni Scott was referring to were the early discs of CD/Rs, I am sure that some of the ones that I made some while = back are not as "clean" as they used to be, - this is only referring to CD/Rs, not original bought CDs.   I think that he may be right, for there are a plethora of oddball makes = out there, - I have found the best ones that I use in my set-up are either = Fuji or TDK, - some of the other well known brands do not play back as well as these, on my equipment.   It's like cassette tapes used to be, some were fine, others were not so good, - it all depended upon your equipment. Tapes that I made at home were often better than tapes that I made at the radio station on professional equipment!   As for DAT tapes, we found that they stretched with playing, and we soon stopped using them at the radio station.   "Yer pays yer money, and yer takes yer choice!"     At 08:02 PM 2/9/03 -0600, you wrote: >How old are your CD's? My other 1/2 and I have cd's in our collection = that >go back 15 years, and we've never heard of this. :-{ O}      
(back) Subject: INHARMONICITY From: "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 18:57:48 -0800 (PST)   A few weeks ago, I made reference to the word "inharmonicity", and several members ask about that word, and wanted to know more about it. Because of computer difficulties, I am giving a rather long-delayed response.   Before I begin, I would like to give you my idea of how I refer to the harmonic series so that you will know exactly what I'm talking about.   I think of the fundamental as being exactly that -- a fundamental and not a harmonic. When I refer to the first harmonic, I am referring to the octave harmonic which some people refer to as the second harmonic.   Lest I be accused of being off topic by referring to the piano, I will simply say that inharmonicity exists in a piano string because of the fact that the tones of a piano are produced by tightly stretched strings. Inharmonicity does not exist in the organ, because its tones are produced by a vibrating column of air within a pipe, or by digital circuitry as the case may be. Because of this, I will be writing mostly about the piano.   Let us say, for example, that the A above middle C (A=3D440) is produced by a string that is exactly 36 inches long. When it is set in vibration, it divides itself into two 18 inch sections; the node occuring at precisely haflway down the string. These two sections produce the first harmonic, which on paper should be A=3D880.   However, there is a factor that causes these harmonics to deviate slightly from their mathematical frequencies. The string producing the fundamental is the same string that produces the other harmonics. The proportion of the string's thickness, length, and thickness come into play here. The proportions of the string's overall length producing the fundamental, and the proportion of the string's dimentions producing the first harmonic are quite different. The thickness and tention are exactly the same, but the length is quite different. The thickness is much greater in the 18" sections than the thickness of the 36" section. It is much THICKER than the length producing the fundamental. Because it is THICKER, it is thrown a little sharp, so that the fundamental of the A one octave higher than A=3D440 which should be A=3D880, might end up being A=3D881.5 instead.   The fundamentals of these notes are one octave from each other, and that is too great a distance to cause beats. Therefore, we tune A=3D880 to THE FIRST HARMONIC   __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Felix Hell In Hartford From: "mack02445" <mack02445@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 22:06:53 -0500   Greetings listers, today I drove from Boston to Hartford to hear Felix Hell give recital at South Congregational Church on a 3/31 Aeolian=3DSkinner c. 1948 restored by Thompson-Allen.   For a smallish sized organ with no pedal reeds and one 3 rank mixture on the Swell Felix played a superb recital I am sure Malcolm will review it in detail later. It was sad to see so few people attending, maybe 100, but they were a very appreciative group and heard an awesome recital There was also released a new 2 disc CD of the Sacred Heart Recital of November, which I was lucky enough to be at also, along with other members of these lists.   Felix will next play in the New England area ion April 6, 2003, at Old First Church, Springfield, Massachusetts at 4PM. This is another Aeolian-Skinner larger.   Cheers, Mack    
(back) Subject: Re: St. Louis From: "Jim Hailey" <jhaileya10@charter.net> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 21:33:33 -0600   Amy,   You may try going to Concordia Seminary. They have a beautiful pipe = there. I am not sure of the make. Also, there is one at Gesthsemane Lutheran at 765 Lemay. There is also a pipe at Lutheran Church of the Resurrection in Sunset Hills, 9907 Sappington.   This will name a couple. While they may or may not be "noteworthy", they will offer you the chance to worship in an LCMS setting, while allowing = your daughter to hear a pipe organ.   You may wish to go to the LCMS.ORG site go to find a church and then spell out Saint Louis and phone some of the churches that are listed. It will also help you if you know what part of St. Louis in which you are staying.   Hope this helps,   Jim H ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy Fleming" <docamy@alltel.net> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 7:43 AM Subject: St. Louis     > We may be traveling to the St. Louis area in the near future. > Amy Fleming > > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > >      
(back) Subject: INHARMONICITY (lONG) From: "D. Keith Morgan" <aeolian_skinner@yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:58:55 -0800 (PST)   A few weeks ago, I made reference to the word "inharmonicity", and several members asked about that word, and wanted to know more about it. Because of computer difficulties, I am giving a rather long-delayed response.   Before I begin, I would like to tell you my way of referring to the harmonic series so that you will know exactly what I'm talking about.   I think of the fundamental as being exactly that -- a fundamental -- and not a harmonic. When I refer to the first harmonic, I am referring to the octave harmonic which some people refer to as the second harmonic.   Lest I be accused of being off topic by referring to the piano, I will simply say that inharmonicity exists in a piano string because of the fact that the tones of a piano are produced by tightly stretched strings. Inharmonicity does not exist in the organ, because its tones are produced by a vibrating column of air within a pipe, or by digital circuitry as the case may be, and not from tightly stretched strings. Because of this, I will be talking mostly about the piano.   Let us say, for example, that the A above middle C (A=3D440) is produced by a string that is exactly 36 inches long. When it is set in vibration, it divides itself into two 18 inch sections; the node occuring precisely haflway down the string. These two sections produce the first harmonic, which on paper should be A=3D880. (Many more divisions occur giving us the upper partials, but at this time, we will consider only the first harmonic).   However, there is a factor that causes these harmonics to deviate slightly from their mathematical frequencies. The string producing the fundamental is the same string that produces the other harmonics. The proportion of the string's thickness, length, and tension come into play here. The proportions of the string's overall length producing the fundamental, and the proportion of the string's dimentions producing the first harmonic are quite different. The thickness and tention are exactly the same, but the length is quite different. Therefore, the proportion of the thickness is much greater in the 18" sections than the proportion of the thickness of the 36" section. It is much THICKER than the length producing the fundamental. Because it is THICKER, it is STIFFER, and because it is STIFFER, it is thrown a little sharp, so that the first harmonic might end up being, let us say, A=3D881.5. The fundamentals of these two notes are one octave from each other, and that is too great a distance to cause beats. Therefore, we tune A=3D880 to THE FIRST HARMONIC of A=3D440 (which is the same pitch), and that harmonic is now called a PARTIAL because it no longer conforms to exact multiples of the fundamental. Since this harmonic (A=3D880) has been thrown a little sharp (A=3D881.5), we must stretch the fundamental of A=3D880 to A=3D881.5 in order for the notes to be beatless, and to keep the treble from sounding flat. This stretch factor extends to all the upper harmonics causing them to become sharper and sharper as we go up the series. Because of this, these harmonics are now referred to as upper partials, and not harmonics.   Many people incorrectly think that the treble should be streched audibly sharp where we can hear beats. This is not so. When the fundamental of the upper note has been stretched sharp enough that it does not beat at all with the first harmonic of the lower octave, the note has been correctrly stretched.   This is the reason that electronic tuning aids got such a bad reputation. The first ones did not take into consideration the existance of inharmonicity and the upper octaves were tuned to exact doubles of the octave below them leaving the treble sounding quite flat. On paper this seemed correct, but to our ears, the result was completely unacceptable.   The new electronic tuners of today do take into account the need for a stretch factor, and the end result can be entirely satisfactory.   Pianos differ considerably in inharmonicity. Concert grands have relatively little inharmonicity, whereas spinets have a great deal of inharmonicity. This is why it is a physical impossibility for a spinet and a concert grand to be in tune with themselves and with each other simultaneously, and needless to say, tonal quality is drastically different as is evidenced by the beautiful sound of the rich bass of a concert grand compared to the tinny, foolish sound of a spinet. The low A string of a spinet is less than 1/3 the length of the low A in a concert grand, and much thicker. That factor gives it a much different tonal envelope resulting in a much different sound.   That factor (inharmonicity) goes to show you that in a piano, we are dealing with an imperfect device, and compromises must be made. That really makes me laugh when people tell me that they have "perfect pitch". Octaves are stretched quite differently from piano to piano, and with that in mind, we can quickly see that there is no such thing as perfection. Everything is a compromise.   When a piece is performed requiring two pianos, both pianos should be the same size -- two concert grands; two 7' grands; two spinets; whatever. If you ever use a spinet and a concert grand together, you are asking for trouble.   D. Keith Morgan   __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Re: Archival copying to a CD From: "Nelson Denton" <ndenton@cogeco.ca> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 23:02:05 -0500   According to a series of tests by a major computer magazine there are = major differences in recordable CD's and they do fade in time if exposed to = strong light/heat. Of course most CD's are ruined by scratches just like any LP = is. The bigger problem I forsee is the obsolecense of older versions of CD's = and the machines they were played on. How many of us have WORKING 8 track tape players, Beta video tape players, 5 1/4" floppy drives and all those other nice toys we couldn't live without a few years ago.   78's LP's, player piano rolls and the rest do still exist but the technology to operate them was simple and an amatuer can restore the machines. A CD player or the next generations the DVD player, MP3 or whatever is getting to the point that we will no longer be able to repair these = machines soon.   I've got CD's and computer hardware/software here that I can't use any = more because Windows XP will not support it and my stuff is only 2 years = old! My 1982 Chrysler Cordoba? It's almost impossible to get parts for it.   The 1895 Edward Lye Tracker I saw yesturday? Still goin' strong. - And at least it's repairable.   Well it can be repaired - the guys who did some "restoration" on it's winding system this year really "blew it" :-((( Can you spell "Flexible Wind"?   The solution? Back-up Back-Up BACK-UP!   Preferably to whatever newer form of tech is available and keep doing it.