Subject: [removed] Digest V2001 #357
From: "OldRadio Mailing Lists" <[removed]@[removed];
Date: 11/7/2001 6:25 PM

To: <[removed]@[removed];

    ------------------------------

                                The Old-Time Radio Digest!
                                  Volume 2001 : Issue 357
                             A Part of the [removed]!
                                     ISSN: 1533-9289

                                     Today's Topics:

      Re: Anticipation of TV on OTR         [ Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed]; ]
      #OldRadio IRC Chat this Thursday Nig  [ lois@[removed] ]
      in defense of AFRS programs           [ "Joe Salerno" <sergei01@[removed] ]
      RADIO VS. TV DRAMA                    [ "Owens Pomeroy" <opomeroy@[removed]; ]
      Re: better than the original!         [ Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed]; ]
      BBC Goon Show                         [ garcher@[removed] ]
      rule of thumb for creating quality m  [ "Henry Brugsch" <henry@listentohear ]
      Radio preacher                        [ "David L. Easter" <david-easter@hom ]
      MP3 quality                           [ Bob Noble <bobnoble@[removed]; ]
      Be bop she bop!                       [ "David Phaneuf" <otr_fan@[removed]; ]
      Alan Freed's CBS "Camel Rock 'n Roll  [ "Dave Walter" <fredallenfan@hotmail ]
      HS Resurfaces                         [ hal stone <dualxtwo@[removed]; ]
      World Series                          [ nicoll <nicoll@[removed]; ]
      Rio 500                               [ "Scott business" <[removed]@worldne ]
      Re Twelfth Night                      [ steve mcguffin <earl22002@[removed] ]
      Archiving Wrinkles                    [ Jim Widner <jwidner@[removed]; ]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 00:06:09 -0500
    From: Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Re: Anticipation of TV on OTR

    From: "Mark Kinsler" <kinsler33@[removed];

>     Seems to me that I recall a certain amount of discussion of
>     television on various OTR programs: how we'll have TV after the
>     war, how radio personality so-and-so would look on TV (generally
>     an uncomplementary comment), and how we'd been promised TV since
>     1939 and it isn't here yet.

    But we HAD television in 1939, although it was limited to the NorthEast
    and a few other major cities.  And although the hours per week were
    reduced as the war went on, most of the few stations were still on the
    air at the end of the war.  To again stick it to TV Guide today, for the
    50th anniversary of the end of the war they had an article about RADIO
    in WW II, and they mentioned that it was too bad that there was no TV
    coverage of things like the celebration in Times Square.  But there WAS
    TV coverage of that very event!  There was a TV camera on the marquee of
    a hotel on the West side of the square, and it can be seen in some of
    the pictures shot that day.

>     I don't have any specifics, but it's difficult to imagine that the
>     more self-referential people--George and Gracie, Arthur Godfrey,
>     Fibber McGee--would _not_ have mentioned the long-anticipated
>     Wonder of the Age, and probably had a good laugh over it.  M Kinsler

    Yeah, didn't Jack Benny start his first TV appearance with the line "I'd
    give ANYTHING to know how I look right now."  But I don't think there
    was that much of a mystery of how the great radio stars would look on TV
    because most of them had appeared in films, either feature films or at
    least short featurettes.

    To bring this discussion back on topic, in recent days there have been
    discussion as to why OTR died.  One reason that was not mentioned is
    that as the major stars moved over to TV they found that it took so much
    time to do TV programs--far more than it took to do a radio
    program--that they didn't have the time to continue to do their radio
    programs.  Some of them tried--Jack Benny is one of the more notable
    ones.  And some TV programs were either simulcast or were re-edited for
    radio.  But even most of these ended by 1957.

    Television did not sweep the country overnight after WW II.  Because of
    the freeze on TV station applications between mid-1948 and 1952, many
    parts of the country did not get their first TV station until 1954 thru
    1956.  THAT is why so many stars did continue their radio programs until
    that time.  But listenership dropped so quickly once TV arrived in a
    market, that the major stars knew it wasn't worth their while to do what
    they would have considered to be a second-rate attempt to continue a
    radio program alongside their TV program.

    I am surprised that nobody mentioned that radio actually grew faster
    than TV in the immediate post-war years.  The number of radio stations
    was about 900 at the end of the war, and this number doubled and doubled
    again in the next 5 to 7 years.  Ironically, as national network
    entertainment programming became scarcer, there were now more radio
    stations on the air than ever before.  As was mentioned a few days ago,
    the stations did resort to the less expensive use of a DJ in a studio.
    But also, as more and more radio stations hit a market, these stations
    could start to specialize into narrow programming formats instead of
    trying to reach everyone at the same time.  And as the available
    advertising dollars in a market got cut up into more--and
    smaller--pieces, it would be too expensive to continue to do large-scale
    productions.

    Our family got our TV set in the fall of 1948--I still have it, a DuMont
    Chatham, RA 102.  But we still continued to listen to radio.  I remember
    listening to Jack Benny in the car as we drove home from visiting
    relatives on Sundays, but we still also listened at home--and tuned into
    his TV program which "followed IMMEDIATELY on most CBS-TV stations."
    When I'd come home for lunch when I was in elementary school, my mother
    and grandmother were listening to the Hummert package of soaps, but just
    before I trudged back up the hill to Lowell School, my grandmother and I
    would watch Bill Layden's "It Could Be You" on the basement TV. The
    radio news was always on during breakfast and dinner, and after dinner
    we would go upstairs and watch John Cameron Swayze's carnation on the
    Camel News Caravan.  And I did watch Howdy Doody; Kukla, Fran and Ollie,
    Uncle Fred's Junior Frolics, Captain Video, Pat Mikel's Magic Cottage,
    Mr. I. Magination, Lucky Pup, The Lone Ranger, and even You Are There,
    but I still listened to Bobby Benson and the B Bar B Riders, The Lone
    Ranger, and was devoted to the Saturday morning radio version of Howdy
    Doody much more than I was to the TV version.  (Every week they used as
    a musical interlude Bob Smith singing "Loch Lomand."  When we visited
    Scotland we made it a point to spend a day on a boat traveling up Loch
    Lomand.  I never knew the song was about a dying soldier who would make
    it back to Scotland via the low road--death--before his living
    buddies.)  When I was home ill I always listened to Breakfast Club
    followed by My True Story.  And depending on what day it was I could
    either watch or listen to Arthur Godfrey or Garry Moore.  And both the
    radio and TV versions of Art Linkletter's House Party was a must.
    (Funny, I can't remember what they taught us in school on the days I
    wasn't ill, but I remember THESE days at home with the radio and TV!)

    Michael Biel  mbiel@[removed]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:52:01 -0500
    From: lois@[removed]
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: #OldRadio IRC Chat this Thursday Night!

    A weekly [removed]

    For the best in OTR Chat, join IRC (Internet Relay Chat), StarLink-IRC
    Network, the channel name is #OldRadio.  We meet Thursdays at 8 PM Eastern
    and go on, and on! The oldest OTR Chat Channel, it has been in existence
    over four years, same time, same channel!

    Our numerous "regulars" include one of the busiest "golden years" actors in
    Hollywood; a sound man from the same era who worked many of the top
    Hollywood shows; a New York actor famed for his roles in "Let's Pretend" and
    "Archie Andrews;" owners of some of the best OTR sites on the Web;
    maintainer of the best-known OTR Digest (we all know who he is)..........

    and Me

    Lois Culver
    KWLK Longview Washington (Mutual) 1941-1944)
    KFI Los Angeles (NBC) 1944 - 1950
    and widow of actor Howard Culver

    (For more info, contact lois@[removed])

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:24:58 -0500
    From: "Joe Salerno" <sergei01@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: in defense of AFRS programs

    AFRS programs may not be complete and they are all dubs of programs, but in
    some cases they are all that's left.

    Joe Salerno

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:25:26 -0500
    From: "Owens Pomeroy" <opomeroy@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: RADIO VS. TV DRAMA

    I just finished watching an excellent TV Series "Band Of Brothers" on HBO.
    As I was watching I couldn't help but wonder what an excellent vehicle that
    would be to produce on NPR radio today.  As I understand it, each episode
    cost close to i million dollars to produce.  The cast wer all unknowns.  So,
    with todays economic scale, this series could probably be oroduced for about
    10,oo oer episode, considering the actors working for union scale ($300) per
    episode. Does anyone think tghis would be fesiable with other TV series into
    radio?  I know I am "whipping a dead horse" to expect a miracle like this -
    but - I think it would be worth a try.

    Owens

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:27:02 -0500
    From: Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Re: better than the original!

    Mark Kinsler's relating of the discussions between archivists and
    technicians is generally right on the money.  I've sat thru many of
    these discussions.  And generally the outcome is that two copies are
    made--an "archival preservation" copy which is unmodified, and a
    "listening" copy which has been cleaned up for the usual casual
    listener.  And the original is also maintained for re-use when
    technology improves.

    When I need a recording for my research into the history of the
    technology of recording I have to remind them that I need the unmodified
    archival type of copy--I can clean it up myself if I so choose.  But the
    archivists are not unmindful of what wonders can be worked, but we know
    that in the hands of anyone but an expert these devices can destroy a
    recording.  (I hear so many loused up recordings in the OTR trading
    circuit, and I cringe almost every time I hear a Radio Spirits CD--what
    they did to "War of the Worlds" and "We Hold These Truths" should be
    considered a felony.)

    But a few years ago Seth Winner gave a presentation at the Association
    for Recorded Sound Collections where he played a step-by-step analysis
    of what he did on some Columbia-Sony Legacy recordings, playing for us
    the original source lacquer "safeties", the original 78s that had been
    dubbed off of the safeties, the LPs that had been dubbed off the 78s,
    later LPs and early CDs that had been poorly dubbed off the safeties,
    the various intermediary steps he had done to play and restore the
    safeties correctly, and both CDs that had been issued and then revised
    when a new CEDAR unit had been developed that could fix a problem that
    had happened to one short segment of the safety that couldn't have been
    fixed before his first CD was released.  It was an awe-inspiring piece
    of work.  But it was only possible because the original lacquer safeties
    still existed and he could play them with modern disc playing equipment
    which is so much superior to what was available the last time they had
    been played in the 1950s.

    If Columbia Records had destroyed the lacquer safeties after dubbing
    them to tape in the 1950s like other companies did, the only things that
    could have really been done would be reduce the tape hiss that shouldn't
    have been there in the first place.  Another friend of mine, Doug
    Pomaroy, was stuck with the job of restoring the Leonard Feather From
    Spirituals to Swing concerts from the Vanguard tapes because the
    lacquers were dumped because the 1960s engineers felt that nobody would
    ever be able to play them better than they could.  Wrong.  What is
    worring some people, including some Sony producers, is that Sony might
    not continue to maintain the originals that they are dubbing to
    digital.

    The analogies hold true for OTR.  Most OTR collections are not of
    originals.  They are multi-generational copies, and often there are
    better copies elsewhere.  It is the collections that ARE of orginals
    that must be carefully preserved.  Naturally, lacking these, the
    multi-generational copies must also be carefully preserved, but it
    sometimes seems so pointless to hear how collectors work over their
    deficient copies when there are far better originals already out
    there.

    Michael Biel  mbiel@[removed]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:27:15 -0500
    From: garcher@[removed]
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: BBC Goon Show

    Many thanks to all who offered recordings or online resources for the Goon
    Show. I'll follow up with you off line. The list's support to "off the
    wall" questions is truely stupendous. Thanks again.

    George Archer

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:29:25 -0500
    From: "Henry Brugsch" <henry@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: rule of thumb for creating quality mp3s.

    First off, let me say, there probably ain't one.
    But, here is what I have done, and I reckon it's the best definitive
    approach.
    There's a program called Audio catalyst.
    It's out there on some sites, since the original vendor has gone out of
    business.
    Originally the program cost about $20, and worth every penny.
    I think it has one of the smoothest mp3 compressors I have seen, and it is
    quick.
    The next thing is to set the program so that it will make a variable bit
    encode at the highest cbit rate.
    You set the quality level which is on a tracker bar to the highest quality,
    and this works only in variable bit encoding, all of which can be selected
    from the program's menus.
    When you set the program for this, you are getting bitrates somewhere
    between 128, and 200kbits per second. The sampling rate will govern the
    final outcome to a degree of the mp3, in as much as [removed] will run its
    conversion based on the original sampling rate of the file you are changing
    to mp3.
    I am now using 32khz sampling rate for any files I am converting from my
    tape collection.
    Some reckon that this is a good compromise between 44100khz, which is
    generally used in creating cds, and 22050khz which seems to be the sampling
    rate of choice amongst many collectors.
    Disadvantage here could be that with the lower sampling rate, you are
    already possibly compromising your source material.
    I think with 32khz, you are allowing for a real upper-end limits of
    16000khz, which is more than you'll need for your tape collections.
    Yet, it will give you optimum performance at the other end.
    I may be getting a bit long in the tooth, and my upper end hearing isn't
    what it could be.
    But, visit my web site,and listen to some of the locomotive sounds I have up
    there, most of these, especially the more recent recordings which begin the
    recordings page were done with audio catalyst.
    Well, these are one person's thoughts, hope they have sufficiently served to
    muddy the waters, or what ever.
    At least, perhaps created some discussion, or added to the misinformation.
    (g>)

    --
    MAILTO:HENRY@[removed]
    [removed]
    g0gku/k1hbj

    [ADMINISTRIVIA: Again, folks, I must ask that if you are going to reference
    compouter software, you note the operating system it runs under. Not everyone
    on this list uses an OS produced by that company currently trying to settle a
    court case with the Feds; I know there are Macintosh, linux, and other OS
    users on this list.  --cfs3]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:30:54 -0500
    From: "David L. Easter" <david-easter@[removed];
    To: "Old-Time Radio Digest (E-mail)" <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Radio preacher

>     Tim Taylor wrote: My wife remembers a radio preacher who had listeners
>     touch their radios as certain moments so he could heal them. This was the
>     1940s. Anybody know who this might be?

    While I don't know the name of the referenced preacher in the 1940s, I do
    remember one of my high school social studies instructors (Baltimore
    suburbs, c. 1961) who had a recording (current at the time) of a West
    Virginia radio preacher doing the same thing. He instructed his listeners to
    place their hands on the radio and the "manna from heaven" would flow
    through him to them.

    My teacher created this image, reminiscent of OTR, for the class: Why would
    God sent his "manna from heaven" by some godly manner to this preacher, just
    to have it flow into a microphone, through wires, tubes, etc., out to the
    antenna, through the air, into another antenna, wires, tubes and finally a
    radio cabinet (which, incidentally was insulated from all of the above) to
    get to a listener? Why not just send to directly?

    David L. Easter

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:30:00 -0500
    From: Bob Noble <bobnoble@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: MP3 quality

    Folks, as we continue to beat away at this topic, what I meant by my
    observation that the MP3s are only as good as the original was simply
    this: They are only as good as the person who made the MP3 files went to
    the trouble to make them.

    If he/she used a fuzzy 17th generation r/r and just played it "as-is,"
    then that's what you'll get on your CD. Whether it's archiving or
    restoration isn't the issue. On something as recent as the CBS RMT, when
    the available recording techniques were clearly of high quality, I was
    disappointed to find that the MP3 files I received were so marginal. I
    recorded my RMT programs on good quality cassettes on a decent receiver,
    then transferred to r/r, removing only the ads and keeping all the rest.
    As a result, most of my programs are of fairly good audio quality, and I
    just made a bad assumption that MP3s of them would be equally good. The
    quality of the MP3 stuff floating around out there varies tremendously.
    Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a good way of determining how
    well the MP3s were recorded until you actually buy them.

    Side issue: I know some purists say its improper to edit out the
    commercials, but they used the same spots day after day, and this was a
    daily program. Saving the 55-minute originals w/o the ads makes a show
    fit nicely onto one side of a cassette C-90. And since there are 1,000+
    programs, and mine are stored on reels, I'd lose a heckuva lot of shelf
    space if I had kept all those repetitive commercials.

    -bn

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:30:18 -0500
    From: "David Phaneuf" <otr_fan@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Be bop she bop!

    Oh no!  The thing I have feared the most has finally [removed] OTRR (Old
    Time Rock-n-Roll) has infiltrated OTR.

    Now we have Elizabeth singing:  "dub of a dub of a dub of a dub of a dub of a
    dub"

    [removed] ramma lamma ding [removed] [removed] doo wah diddy diddy dum diddy doo!

    [removed] ya, Elizabeth!  Thanks for your wonderful and enlightening --
    and well-researched -- posts.

    Dave Phaneuf

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 11:03:50 -0500
    From: "Dave Walter" <fredallenfan@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Alan Freed's CBS "Camel Rock 'n Roll Dance

    Party"?
    Approved: uyDjd7sF

    Are there any circulating airchecks of Alan Freed's "Camel Rock 'n Roll
    Dance Party" series over CBS in '56-'57? Of course, there was that Radiola
    LP from the late '70s, but that was pasted together from AFRTS edits that
    clipped out every time Freed uttered the brand name "Camel." It seems to me
    that the station Freed's nightly show was airing over at the time, WINS,
    also issued a couple of compilation albums of performances from the series
    (was the Camel series carried on WINS instead of WCBS locally in New York?)
    But I've never heard any actual unedited airchecks of a complete broadcast
    of this one; it seems to me that, since Count Basie's was the house band for
    much of the run, the show should be of interest to jazz historians at the
    least.

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 12:26:45 -0500
    From: hal stone <dualxtwo@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: HS Resurfaces

>     badaxley@[removed]
>     To: [removed]@[removed]
>     Subject: Hal Stone

>     Hal, where are you?  I sure have missed your informative
>     and down right funny inputs lately.
>     Bob Axley

>     [ADMINISTRIVIA: Right now, he's in Seattle or thereabouts, after attending
>     the REPS meeting.  --cfs3]

    How nice of you to ask about my whereabouts Bob. And thanks, Charlie, for
    keeping Bob posted.

    As to my lack of postings lately, I tend to "lurk" in the background until a
    subject comes up that I feel I can either contribute to, or perhaps answer a
    specific question. I'm not one to blab, rant, rave or stick my two cents in,
    unless I think it's going to be "on target". I don't post just to see my
    name in print. When the topics are technical in nature, I stay clear, and
    leave it to the experts.

    As to my recent trip to Seattle, I had a blast. I'd like to take this
    opportunity to publicly thank the folks at REPS who invited me to be their
    guest November 3rd. I have never been made to feel more welcome.

    Although I intend to send private e-mails to the REPS powers that be, I see
    no  reason why I can't tell the WHOLE WORLD (Is there a "World" outside the
    digest?) just how much my wife and I enjoyed ourselves, and how gracious
    everyone was to us from the moment we arrived.

    I have only one problem, and that concerns a female "blabbermouth" who was
    in the audience. (See her recent digest posting below).

>     From: "J. Pope"

     >Just thought I'd pass on some of the juicy tidbits we got from Hal

>     Stone at the REPS meeting today.  First off, Jughead isn't as squeaky
>     clean as we all thought - during the later years of 'Archie Andrews,' he
>     and a few friends would spend the break between show's end and rehearsal
>     for next week [removed] spaghetti joint and burlesque show.

    Just like a female!!! Tell 'em something in strictest confidence, and
    gossip, gossip, gossip! Then to top it all off, she goes on to totally
    destroy my image with this disclosure.

>     However, redemption comes from the fact that his position while in the Air

    National Guard was (believeit or not): chaplain's assistant.  I'll let him
    explain that one ;)

    Isn't it amazing how information can be taken totally out of context, have
    the truth be twisted beyond recognition, and then hang me out to dry? (It
    was all an Air Force bureaucratic mistake). But does she mention that I got
    a reprieve, and eventually defended my Country admirably. Oh No! Not that
    one. I think she's just [removed]'d that I cast her in the part of Veronica when I
    auditioned some of the REPS members to do a fun scene from the "Archie"
    show. I think she's miffed because she wanted the part of "Archie" instead.
    :)

>     BTW, any reports of me performing as "Veronica Lodge" are greatly
>     exaggerated.

    See what I mean?

    But all kidding aside. "Jennifer" is a young college student who did a
    superlative job in the part, as did the other members of the cast. With
    Smart a-- youngsters like Jennifer, there is definitely hope for the future
    of OTR.

    Again, my heartfelt thanks to Dave, Mike, Mike, (who's confused) Marilyn,
    Joy, Paul and Christopher, and the entire membership for making an old actor
    feel young again.

    (And to top off the fun filled day, following the meeting, my wife and I
    made it back to the hotel in time to turn on the TV and watch the
    DIAMONDBACKS clobber the Yankee's in game 6 of the World series. AND WE ALL
    KNOW WHO WON GAME 7. Go D'backs!!!!)

    And special thanks to Lois Culver for sending me the secondhand "Hug" from
    such a cute surrogate Hugger.

    Hal(Harlan)Stone
    "Jughead"

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 13:04:02 -0500
    From: nicoll <nicoll@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: World Series

    A little late with this but I thought a mention might be made how the World
    Series impacted OTR.  Of course in 30's and 40's the whole country was at
    their radios, hanging on every pitch.  Unlike today, there was no worry
    about ratings.

    They even piped the games into our grade school over the intercom.  Maybe
    this was because the school was in the St. Louis area - 1942 - Cardinals
    vs. Yankees.   :>)

    Will Nicoll

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:44:08 -0500
    From: "Scott business" <[removed]@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Rio 500

    John Davis said:

>     I prefer the 500 for everyday listening
>     because of it's very small size and the Bookmark feature. One thing if you
>     have or get a 500, search around the Internet for some of the free software
>     programs that have been written specifically for loading programs to the
>     500. There are a number of software programs that are much better than the
>     clunky program that comes with the 500.

    ** I couldn't agree more. I personally use Music Match Jukebox. Works like a
    charm and is much easier to use than the software that comes with the 500.
    Be aware that the last firmware update for the 500 was [removed] which I don't
    think is available anymore from the Sonicblue site. I have a saved copy
    should anyone need it. Just emaiol me off list.
    I too own a Rio Volt 100 but for convenience and size I don't think anything
    out there beats the 500. I think it's the bookmark feature that makes it so
    valuable.
    Scott

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 15:27:29 -0500
    From: steve mcguffin <earl22002@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Re Twelfth Night

    According to the "old calendar" still followed by the
    Orthodox Church, Christmas does not fall until January
    6, new calendar.  I am not sure why this would have
    been an Ozark custom, since I do not think that this
    region has a very high percentage of Orthodox
    individuals.  Maybe it had just hung on among some
    people in much the same way as "Elizabethan" speech
    held on among many people in the southern Appalachians
    until the early parts of the 20th century.

    Steve (a native of the southern Appalchians who is
    currently exploring Orthodoxy, not to mention OTR!)

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 19:06:30 -0500
    From: Jim Widner <jwidner@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Archiving Wrinkles

    Brian Johnson poses a question:

>     If you were archiving history, which version do you choose? What happened or
>     what aired?

    For me, both. I think they both have value to have in one's collection for
    the obvious reason that as you say - one is the broadcast and one includes
    the never aired. I think both deserve equal places in "archive history."

    I am like several who have mentioned on this site that the original must be
    preserved. I believe it was Mike Biel who said it, but if we cannot go back
    to the original then we must look for as close to it as possible. Like
    others I like to "fiddle" with the shows I have, but only for my own self.
    I would never trade for a copy that I personally altered even if it did
    sound better. I think each of us have either the archivist or the casual
    listener in us or sometimes both. It is only with the advent of mp3 that I
    have begun to listen to shows that have been in my collection for years. I
    started and continue to collect on reel (over 30 years now) and that is how
    I store my collection. It was always a hassle to pull out a reel and try to
    find a show to listen to. mp3 has changed all that and I can now afford to
    listen readily. I have a lot of cassettes too and those tended to be what I
    listened to, but even those were sometimes a problem because of the size of
    my collection (digging them out is always a time consumer given that I work
    full time and only spend time on my hobby in non-work time).

    I like mp3 but even at high bit rates do not feel they should be the
    archive method of choice. It is a lossy medium and once you've gone there
    and the original is lost, you can never go back to what I deem original
    (analog) sound where despite the potential problems with that original be
    it the disc or the first generation copy.

    Jim Widner
    jwidner@[removed]

    --------------------------------
    End of [removed] Digest V2001 Issue #357
    *********************************************

    Copyright [removed] Communications, York, PA; All Rights Reserved,
      including republication in any form.

    If you enjoy this list, please consider financially supporting it:
       [removed]

    For Help: [removed]@[removed]
    To Unsubscribe: [removed]@[removed]

    For Help with the Archive Server, send the command ARCHIVE HELP
      in the SUBJECT of a message to [removed]@[removed]

    To contact the listmaster, mail to listmaster@[removed]

    To Send Mail to the list, simply send to [removed]@[removed]