One line that sparks debate for me is “The ongoing costs faced by sound and audiovisual archives justify, in specific cases, charging fees for access” (IASA 2.5). The specific cases portion probably answers my question, but I thought that the point of archives was unlimited access, or at least that is the point in my mind. There seems to be an unfortunate disconnect between what an archive wants to have and what makes fiscal sense if it wants to acquire, preserve, and present said items in an acceptable manner. Are government subsidies the answer? Maybe, but it seems like it would be hard to make voters accept that their tax dollars could be spend preserving films or sounds they don’t care about (just like people that ask why we are fighting wars in places they’ve never heard of.” Archiving and preserving right is very expensive, and I wonder if there have been any recent breakthroughs that have cut costs? Is preservation more or less expensive today in comparison to the past, or is it about the same? How can we not make the same mistakes again in terms of documenting new releases (this opens an entire new can of worms as seen in the Library of Congress reading around page 70, as the concept of ownership and sale changes)? As far as quantifying and making the issue of preservation relevant, the Cost of Inaction article seems to be something to plaster across the internet.
What I found really interesting about the Cloonan reading is the prospect of preserving items and thus adding to the usable intellectual stock of the world making us go insane; is too much a bad thing? To me, all recorded things should be preserved and given access to, but I also feel strongly that some cultures’ practices should go undocumented in the first place so we don’t run into the problem of infringing on their privacy.
The disconnect between Americans’ apparent care for the preservation for historical artifacts in general but lack of care or use for them was also interesting. I also think lots of things should be preserved, but I will probably use a fractional percentage of a percent of what is available in the world. This leads me to the question of whether preservation is more for indulgence in curiosity and research, or if it is truly a public service.
Questions for Scott Colbum:
In the time you’ve been recording, have there been choices of how to record? Has future preservation been a part of your considerations?
What is your favorite genre or setting to record? Dream recording?
How has working for radio been different from working to record as freelance or other purposes?
How do you feel about the “loudness war”, effects, distortion, and the mixing process? Vlado Meller and the Chili Peppers records come to mind.
Making records sound like live performances?