Panel Session

Mark Roosa
Director of Preservation
Library of Congress

The final session of the symposium focused on shaping an applied research and education agenda. To address this area of concern, a panel of experts, composed of Tom Clareson, OCLC; Carl Fleischhauer and Sam Brylawski, Library of Congress; Ellen Cunningham-Kruppa, The University of Texas at Austin; Alan Lewis, National Archives and Records Administration; and Sarah Stauderman, Smithsonian Institution, discussed a series of questions posed by moderator Mark Roosa The questions were:

1. What are the two-three most pressing preservation problems we face (in the field of audio) that could be informed by research and education?

2. What sorts of research projects (technical studies, demonstration projects, etc.) might be configured to address these problems?

3. Where might such research take place?

4. Who might be the leaders and collaborators?

5. How would this benefit the field, and how would results be shared?

6. Who might be interested in funding this work?

Panelists shared their views with the audience and answered questions. A rich discussion followed which produced a substantial number of ideas concerning the current state of research and education and some valuable thoughts on what might be done to address these concerns.

Education and Training

There was an enthusiastic consensus among panelists on the need for a core educational curriculum for audio preservation to be used in library schools and in conservation training programs. Ellen Cunningham-Kruppa (The University of Texas at Austin) suggested that such a curriculum should build on the well-established and proven preservation approaches and philosophies that are taught in conservation and preservation graduate training programs around the world today, and not be developed independently of these approaches, which have proved successful in training professionals to meet the changing preservation challenges affecting library and archival collections.

At a minimum, the core elements of such a curriculum should include courses in:

• History, philosophy, ethics of preservation

• Science and physical characteristics of materials

• Storage and handling of materials

• Remedial preservation (e.g., reformatting, physical treatment, etc.)

• Management and administration of programs and projects

• Selection for preservation

Carl Fleischhauer (Library of Congress) added that a well-rounded curriculum should also include technically-oriented courses on topics such as audio transfer, understanding the audio signal chain, and courses that build computer literacy, such as how to set up a database, how to command UNIX, and how to use XML.

Mr. Fleischhauer emphasized the growing need within the field for individuals with technical skills in preparing audio materials for digitization. He also cited the need to train students in, for example, XML markup language. Another area of critical importance is developing skills, expertise, and tools for signal extraction from analog carriers and reliable methods for measuring the quality of a digital transfer. Recognizing that extracting signals from analog carriers is "a little bit art and a little bit science," one panelist suggested the need for individuals doing this work to be able to answer the question, "how do I know when I have all of the signal?"

More training is needed, not only in selecting which tools are generally best suited for extracting signals from sound carriers (styli, pieces of equipment in the transfer chain, etc.), but also in the area of critical listening and perception. Several participants suggested that internships and fellowships for individuals interested in developing practical skills in audio preservation would be a way to begin to address this need.

Concern was also raised about the growing number of technical experts with extensive knowledge of the older antique formats and playback systems who are retiring (or about to retire) and will take with them intimate knowledge about how best to use and maintain these older analog systems. One way of transmitting this knowledge to the next generation of practitioners might be to hold a series of "summer camps" for audio technicians, where a small group of individuals could work directly with a senior engineer in a laboratory setting on a variety of technical issues (stylus selection, tape machine maintenance tips, etc.). It was suggested that several locations with audio labs (i.e., Library of Congress, University of Texas, Indiana University, etc.) might initially host such camps. As an adjunct to this approach, "catch up sessions" for working professional librarians and archivists were also suggested to help practicing professionals keep abreast of technical issues.

Research and Development

Alan Lewis (National Archives and Records Administration) suggested that one of our key challenges for many years to come would be to develop reliable methods of copying materials. This is an area that is ripe for research. He noted that equipment to copy the antique formats is becoming increasingly difficult to find and suggested that we may want to explore engaging a company (or several) to actually produce new machines to do this work. Alan also reiterated the value and economic sense of providing temperature- and humidity-controlled storage for both antique and transitional media (magnetic tape) as a way of buying time while we develop cost-effective and faster methods for reformatting.

Several individuals suggested the need for a central research center, (e.g., an equivalent of the Rochester Institute of Technology's Image Permanence Institute) devoted to sound preservation, where research and development could be undertaken. The emphasis here would be on physical materials regarding conservation and playback, and also on computer-related elements that pertain to digital reformatting, technical metadata, and the handling of digital signals and files. These comments raised the question of where in the academic or private sectors an institution of this type might be located and who might fund it. Several participants commented that the computing centers on some campuses might provide the necessary IT setting for digital work. Others mentioned the suitability of existing labs (e.g., labs at Indiana University, Stanford University, LC) as possibilities for developing into focal points for audio preservation research. There was broad consensus regarding the need for diagnostic tools to predict media deterioration and methods for predicting system obsolescence. In this regard, more scientific data on the physical characteristics of media (ageing profiles and deterioration curves) are needed, and more information about commercial products is needed from vendors and manufacturers. Laboratories could address these issues.

Treatment

Sarah Stauderman (Smithsonian Institution) expressed concern about treatment protocols for tapes that are being used by some institutions prior to playback, and commented on the particular lack of research to support, for example, the baking of tapes to consolidate binder chemistry prior to copying. She pointed out that this is only one of a number of practices that require scientific research so that we might better understand their long-term preservation benefits and/or drawbacks. We need to understand the mechanisms of problems such as "sticky shed" (i.e., degradation of the binder material) and "vinegar syndrome" and develop predictive methods for identifying these conditions in our collections. If we know the factors that trigger chemical and mechanical deterioration, we can better understand what we need to do to avoid those conditions. Similar concern was expressed regarding the various untested chemistries that are being used to clean tapes and records. Again, more research is needed to understand the near- and long-term effects of these practices.

Tools

Sam Brylawski (LC) suggested the need for a series of tools that would help sound archivists better do their jobs. One useful tool would be a "Merck manual of maladies" for sound recordings that could perhaps build on the Web site that Sarah Stauderman presented on endangered audio formats. Tied to this might be a series of "good, better and best" preservation solutions that could be applied to collections of various types and sizes. Other suggestions included the need to develop a preservation matrix of types of sound recordings and their inherent chemical, physical and system-dependent characteristics, including their projected life expectancies. Interest was also expressed in the creation of a written guide on the care, handling, and storage of audio materials, as well as a guide to current reformatting practices, with a recognition that in the digital domain viable approaches to reformatting are changing on a regular basis and a guide or manual would need to be updatable as approaches change. Participants suggested that, along with guidelines for caring for collections, the guide include a glossary of terms such as "tape squeal," a list of supplies and suppliers, a directory of sound collections, a directory of service providers that do transfer work (this raised the question of how one goes about evaluating lab work and the notion of certifying service providers, which led to an observation that before we had microfilming standards to guide service providers, product quality was uneven), examples of laboratory setups and estimated associated setup and operational costs, and sample statements of work and sample requests for proposals to assist in contracting out for services.

Standards, Guidelines, and Best Practices

It is old news to anyone who has been involved in audio preservation for the past decade or so that there are no hard and fast standards to guide individuals and institutions in the responsible preservation of audio collections. During the analog tape era, many technical standards for calibrating tape machines were developed and common preservation practices (e.g., recording master tapes at 15 inches per second) were developed. As institutions move increasingly into digital recording, preservation guidelines are needed. Participants also suggested that a guide to pertinent standards for reformatting analog and digital would also be a useful tool for collection managers and sound engineers.

Intellectual Control

One of the recurring comments heard throughout the conference and again in the panel session was the need for the field to develop a comprehensive database of what is held across institutions, as well as a registry of items and collections for which digitization is planned, in progress, or completed. This tool would be particularly useful in helping institutions know what exists, what has been preserved, and what is in need of preservation.

Partnerships and Collaborations

Mention was made throughout the panel session of the need for institutions to work collegially and collaboratively on projects of mutual interest and for institutions to do ample research before embarking on pilot projects, because this work may already have been done. For example, training in sound and moving image is underway in several institutions, including New York University, and the University of California, Los Angeles, maintains a program in film preservation. One person suggested that a survey of programs, classes, and laboratories should be carried out to help identify unmet training needs.

Advocacy and Support

Several of the panelists raised the point that there is a need for the audio preservation community to be more visible and to make its voice heard. Tom Clareson (OCLC) suggested that the audio preservation community create an agenda and then develop a strategy for advancing that agenda through advocacy at the local, regional, and national levels. This dialogue led into a discussion of funding strategies, to which Charles Kolb (National Endowment for the Humanities, Division of Preservation and Access) commented that NEH has seen a dramatic rise in applications dealing with sound preservation and that institutions interest ed in seeking support should consult NEH's newly-revised guidelines. On the topic of advocacy, several participants suggested that as a community we should be encouraged to rally historians, scholars, users and creators of sound materials in support of its preservation. A suggestion was also made to increase public awareness of what is at risk through a targeted marketing advocacy campaign.

Future Actions

Based on the rich discussion that took place throughout the conference and in the final panel session, there seem to be several immediate actions that stakeholders agree upon, including:

1. Develop undergraduate and graduate level classroom and laboratory curricula for audio preservation. Create fellowship and internship opportunities to build practical skill, knowledge, and ability within institutions.

2. Develop a comprehensive catalog of sound recordings held in public and private institutions and a digital registry of what has been (or will be) preserved.

3. Develop a manual on the care, handling, and storage of audio materials, including sections on analog and digital reformatting, citing pertinent standards and best practices.

4. Develop of a series of training workshops for professional librarians and archivists focused on specific topics and involving seasoned engineers.

5. Develop, in collaboration with the stakeholder community, a research agenda and strategy for addressing key technical and scientific issues.

6. Develop an advocacy campaign targeting the public and private sectors focused on what is at risk.

7. Form a coordinating group to advance these actions.

This paper represents work carried out for a federal government agency and is not protected by copyright.