Farrington PrevMaintenanceForAudioDiscs

8/12/2019 Farrington PrevMaintenanceForAudioDiscs

1/10

Preventive Maintenance for Audio Discs and TapesAuthor(s): Jim FarringtonSource: Notes, Second Series, Vol. 48, No. 2 (Dec., 1991), pp. 437-445Published by: Music Library AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/942028.

Accessed: 25/02/2014 07:25

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Music Library Associationis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toNotes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 200.49.222.98 on Tue, 25 Feb 2014 07:25:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=muliashttp://www.jstor.org/stable/942028?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/942028?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mulias


2/10

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE FORAUDIO DISCS AND TAPESBY JIM FARRINGTONHow can libraries handle their audio material to insure that it will beavailable for future generations of users? Short of abdicating respon-sibility by donating collections to one of the major sound archives, li-brarians can accomplish much at their own institutions, even without

large amounts of money. The conditions, equipment, and proceduresdescribed below are just as pertinent for "non-important" material as forrare or one-of-a-kind concert and field recordings. This paper focuseson the preservation and maintenance of relatively good copies; the res-toration of worn or damaged items generally requires the attention ofspecialists. Libraries with collections of material in some of the moreproblematic formats, such as cylinders and wire recordings, are urgedto seek the help of professional audio consultants.All sound-carrying media share certain characteristics that make theirpreservation difficult. First, sound recordings have rarely, if ever, beenmanufactured with long-term use in mind.1 Second, they all requiresome intermediary device in order to be used. These devices unavoid-ably induce a certain amount of wear and tear, and weigh heavily intothe preservation equation.

BASIC NECESSITIESEnvironmental control is the single most important factor determin-ing the longevity of a sound carrier. The guidelines most often rec-

ommended call for a temperature of 68 degrees Fahrenheit and arelative humidity of 40 percent, + 5%. More crucial than maintainingthose precise readings, however, is that the temperature and humiditymust not fluctuate. It cannot be emphasized enough that when either isallowed to cycle or to deviate regularly, deterioration is accelerated tomany times the normal rate. This occurs because since the late 1940sJim Farrington, music librarian and head of the World Music Archives at Wesleyan University, iseditor of the MLA Newsletter.This paper originated as a presentation for the MLA Preservation Com-mittee's plenary session at the 1990 MLA meeting in Tucson, Arizona.1. Every new format introduced by the recording industry in recent times seems inferior to itspredecessor in its ability to survive long-term use. For example, the earliest home recording for-mat, ," open-reel tape, is still, after nearly half a century, the only reliable long-term storage medium;analog cassettes are not archivally viable, and the new digital cassettes are less so.

437

This content downloaded from 200.49.222.98 on Tue, 25 Feb 2014 07:25:19 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/10

NOTES, December 1991most sound carriers have been made with plastics, such as polyester andvinyl, which expand and contract according to environmental condi-tions. Every time that happens, the audio signal carried by a disc or tapeis distorted, becoming less and less like the original. All other preser-vation matters are secondary to environmental control.The other major environmental consideration is pollution-dust andother contaminants that may come into contact with discs and tapes. Anyroom in which sound recordings are stored and played back should bekept as dust-free as possible. To accomplish that, a number of guidelinesmust be followed. Air conditioning units and other machines controllingthe environment should be well filtered so that they are not contributingdust from the outside. Vacuum cleaners should be used sparingly, if atall, partly to keep the magnetic fields generated by their motors awayfrom magnetic media, but mainly because most vacuum cleaners stir upmore dust than they remove. If vacuum cleaners must be used, the can-ister should be left away from the recordings. Dusting may be done witha damp rag or treated cleaning cloth, so that dust is not simply movedbut removed. In an ideal situation, the air pressure would be slightlyhigher than it is in surrounding areas to inhibit dust from entering inthe first place.

Sound recordings are probably best stored on grounded metal shelv-ing. Both wood and metal shelves have positive and negative attributes,but metal is, in my opinion, "less bad," provided that it is grounded.Shelving depth should be at least 1/2" eeper than the container; that is,for standard 33/3-rpm LPs, the actual depth should be at least 121/2".An argument could be made for shelving that allows the containers tohang over the edge slightly, allowing for their easier removal from theshelf. However, one then runs the risk of damage to the exposed edgeof the container.Shelves should be fitted with sturdy, full-sized dividers 4" to 6"apart.Full-sized dividers ensure uniform pressure over the surface of the con-tainer, and spacing them closely will prevent recordings from leaningvery much when spaces are created by use. Sound recordings shouldalways be stored vertically, never laid flat and stacked nor allowed tolean. They should fit on the shelf snugly, without being jammed to-gether. Shelving them too tightly encourages reckless handling duringremoval and does not provide even pressure.Sound recordings, like other library materials, should be located away

from potential sources of water leakage, such as overhead plumbing.Also, ultra-violet light is just as damaging to sound recordings as it is tobooks, and for that matter, the paper cases in which many sound re-cordings are kept. Therefore, whenever possible it is best not to expose

438



4/10

PreventiveMaintenancefor Audio Discs and Tapesrecordings to fluorescent lights or direct sunlight. If fluorescent lightsare the only available option, the bulbs should be covered with UVshielding.Security and playback capabilities are important components of pres-ervation. The more control a library has over its recordings, the betterit can limit damage to them. A closed-stack policy offers more protectionthan one that permits open access. If closed stacks are impractical, thenat least the most important recordings-those designated as being es-pecially worth saving-should be located in a safe area to which only afew staff members have access. Theft protection is problematical. If theinstitution uses an electronic book-detection system, containers can bestripped, but doing so does not protect the disc or tape itself. The 3Mcompany has developed a detection tape that affixes directly onto thelabel side of a compact disc. However, attaching anything to a CD's sur-face cannot be recommended from a preservation standpoint. On theother hand, there may be no better options to protect discs and tapes,and where theft is a real problem, no alternative may exist.One must also deal with the matter of circulation and who plays backthe recording. Preservation money should not be wasted on recordingsthat circulate outside the library. Discs can be cleaned every time theyare returned (if there is available staffing), but while they are out onehas no control over their storage, their handling, or the equipment onwhich they are played. Given a choice between hands-on or remotein-house playback setups, remote is more desirable. Staff can be trainedmore easily than patrons can be in the proper ways to handle recordingsand equipment.Equipment represents another area of recordings preservation thathas largely been ignored. The details of equipment maintenance will notbe belabored here.2 The main point is that when playback equipmentfails to meet a certain level of quality, when it is not set up properly, orwhen it is not cleaned and maintained often enough and replaced whenneed be, then the sound recordings played on it deteriorate with everyuse. Even the most expensive, well-conceived Nakamichi tape deck, ifit is misaligned or dirty, can "eat" a tape. The most exquisitely craftedVan den Hul moving-coil cartridge can ruin a record if the stylus is dirty,damaged, worn out, or incorrectly installed. Along with environmentalcontrol, playback equipment is the other most important factor in thepreservation of sound recordings.

2. For a more detailed discussion see Jim Farrington, "The Enhancement of Audio Playback in aLibrary,"in Planning and CaringforLibraryAudioFacilities,ed. byJames P. Cassaro (Canton, Mass.: MusicLibrary Association, 1989), 21-42.

439



5/10


6/10

Preventive Maintenancefor Audio Discs and Tapeshours apart.5 Subsequent studies have resulted in some contradictoryfigures, but it nevertheless stands to reason that the less frequently arecord is used, the less damage it will sustain. Some of the availableproducts that are said to aid in the fight against groove wear are SoundGuard, LAST, and Nitty Gritty's First. These are all liquids applied toa new disc's surface that serve to lessen the friction between stylus andvinyl.6 While the premise may be laudable, and these products may infact work as claimed, until one knows their long-term chemical effects,it is difficult to recommend them. I am unaware of any objective, sci-entific studies that support or contradict the claims of these manufac-turers. The gut reaction of a preservationist, however, is not to coat theobject to be preserved with any untested foreign material.There are many options for cleaning discs, some worthwhile and somepositively awful. Many institutions use dedicated cleaning machines,which are available from three companies: Keith Monks, VPI, and NittyGritty. In all of them, a cleaning liquid is applied to the disc's surfaceand then vacuumed off. Though they can be expensive (the KeithMonks sells for many thousands of dollars, although Nitty Gritty makessome very affordable models), these machines provide the best way toclean LPs. The method touted by the British equipment manufacturerLinn lies at the other extreme: don't bother cleaning records at all Theidea is simply that the stylus is the single best record cleaner, and thatonce it passes through the grooves they are clean again. The problemis that the high pressure of the stylus will embed in the groove walls anyforeign particles it encounters, resulting in permanent "tics" at thosepoints.Between these two positions are all sorts of variations. Dry brushes,disc washing kits, numerous "cleaning" gadgets found in catalogues andat record stores (most of which in fact do more harm than good), ul-trasonic baths, and plain detergent and water have all been used, withvarying degrees of success. Carbon fiber brushes, for example, excel atsweeping dust particles off discs and lessening static buildup, but donothing about fingerprints or other such oily contaminants. Washingdiscs by hand in very mild soapy water is a proven but highlylabor-intensive cleaning method. Whatever method is chosen for a par-ticular situation, we must bear in mind the conservationist's credo: first,do no harm.

5. Warren ("Blob") Cook, "Paper and Plastic," Record Exchanger 4, no. 4 (n.d.): 15, and JerryMcWilliams, The Preservationand Restorationof Sound Recordings(Nashville: American Association forState and Local History, 1979): 55-57.6. A few years ago there was controversy around a particular product being marketed on this samepremise that turned out to be nothing more than shoe polish

441



7/10

NOTES, December 1991Of course, one of the best ways to deal with contaminants is to keepthem from the discs in the first place. The key to doing so is proper

storage, beginning with the jacket and inner sleeve. The inner sleeveshould be polyethylene-lined; if the original sleeve is not of this type,then it must be replaced.7 The only other acceptable sleeves are thosemade of Japanese rice paper, although they are somewhat flimsier thanpolyethylene-lined sleeves and more expensive. Plain paper sleeves canscratch discs and shed fibers, and contain acids that can infect the disc'ssurface. Sleeves lined with clear plastic are too susceptible to temper-ature and humidity fluctuations to be recommended. Sleeves shouldhave no folds or wrinkles. Also important is the position of the sleeve:its opening should be perpendicular to the jacket opening, not only tohelp keep away dust, but also to help keep the disc from rolling out ofthe jacket.CompactDiscs

When the Compact Digital Audio Disc (CD) was introduced in theearly 1980s, the marketing departments of the various manufacturersdevised the slogan, "Perfect sound forever," and consumers (and librar-ians) fell for it. To be sure, the claim was furthered by magazines suchas StereoReview, giving it credence that in retrospect was unwarranted.In fact, no one knows for sure how long CDs will last. No objectivestudies have been concluded (although the Audio Engineering Societyand the American National Standards Institute have started workingtoward that end), and some manufacturers probably would rather notknow the answer.Certainly in the short term CDs seem sturdier than any other format,8but there are at least three ways in which a CD might fail. Since, liketape, a CD is a laminated object, it is possible for the disc to come apart-not easy, necessarily, but possible. It is also possible that the plastic mightdiscolor, making it difficult for the laser to read the data. Finally, if theintegrity of the unit is breached, the aluminum substrate on which thedata resides can oxidize. All these conditions would result in an inabilityto play the disc.

7. A handy way to identify the proper sleeve lining material is this: translucent is good, clear is bad.While clear polyethelyne could be used for sleeves, the only kind I have ever seen is translucent. Sleeves(as opposed to sleeve linings) made out of translucent material are likely to be glassine, which is notdesirable.8. The particular polycarbonate resin used for the playing side of the disc is optically one of thebest grades made, but unfortunately it is also apparently one of the least sturdy. For cleaning CDs,see the Music Library Association Preservation Committee's recommendations in the MLA Newsletter85 (May-June 1991): 3.

442



8/10

Preventive Maintenancefor Audio Discs and TapesTape

Almost every library has some kind of tape medium present in itscollections. All tape formats-open reel, cassette, digital audio tape(DAT or DCC), eight-track-share certain problems to a greater orlesser extent. Environment plays the largest part in determining a tape'slongevity. All the literature suggests that care and handling are the ma-jor determinants of tape life and that everything else is secondary. Oneaspect of care is the problem caused by magnetic fields. Any stray mag-netic field-from a vacuum cleaner, theft detection system, loudspeaker,transformer in an amplifier, or bulk eraser, to list common sources-canhave harmful effects on magnetic tape. These can take the form ofsound dropout, excessive print-through, or, in the worst case, completeerasure of the tape.Different tape formats and types pose different sets of problems. Forexample, the bases used for the earliest tapes-paper and acetate-areboth unstable, but the tapes are cared for somewhat differently. And notall polyester tapes, which account for virtually all of today's production,are made the same. Some have a backing, some do not. Thicknesses vary,and the thinner the tape, the more unstable it is and the more susceptibleto print-through, breakage, and stretching. Tapes from different man-ufacturers vary in their chemical makeup, and even a specified tapeformulated by a single manufacturer will likely be altered during itsproduction history.9Cassette tapes, it must be stated, simply cannot be recommended forlong-term preservation. (Les Waffen, of the National Archives, callsthem "inherently evil."'0) The tape is extremely thin (especially thelonger C-120s and C-180s), the speed is too slow to allow gracious ed-iting, the cassette's internal construction is best described as a problemwaiting to happen, and the sound quality is too poor for archival pur-poses. Except perhaps for their better sound quality, the same can besaid about any of the digital tapes now on the market or soon to beintroduced. Cassettes, analog or digital, should be regarded only as car-riers of expendable material and should not be relied upon for storinganything of permanent value. Whatever is recorded on cassette that isdeemed important to preserve must be transferred to high-quality

9. For more information about tape, there are two very good introductory articles: Steven Smolian,"Preservation, Deterioration and Restoration of Recording Tape," ARSCJournal 19/2-3 (1987): 37-53,and MagneticTapeRecordingfortheEighties,ed' by Ford Kalil, NASA Reference Publication 1075 (Wash-ington, D.C.: NASA, 1982).10. Les Waffen, "Sound Recordings," in PreservingAmerica'sPerformingArts:Papers rom theConferenceon PreservationManagementor PerformingArts Collections,ed. by Barbara Cohen-Stratyner and BrigitteKueppers (New York: Theatre Library Association, 1985), p. 63.

443



9/10

NOTES, December 1991open-reel tapes, which are at present the only proven archival tape me-dium. Cassettes do, however, have their place and function: they areexcellent for service copies of any material that is not available forhands-on use, such as archival master reels, LPs withdrawn from activeservice, or 78s.178-rpm Recordings

If there are certain 78-rpm recordings that a library has decided itmust keep, then the librarian must understand precisely what main-taining them involves. Presumably an institution takes on the respon-sibility of preserving a collection of 78s for the sonic content and notnecessarily for the intrinsic value of the physical objects. As we all know,78s are fragile and should be handled accordingly. Each disc should bestored in its own individual container; the original book-like containersin which sets were issued should not be used for storage.Devising proper playback of 78s is extremely difficult.12 Most 78s werenot cut at exactly 78 rpm, so the correct speed must be determined foreach disc. Groove size varies considerably among 78s, so that using thewrong stylus will at best simply make the recording sound bad, and atworst cause damage to the grooves. It is also necessary to select the ap-propriate frequency curve for playback. The RIAA equalization curvewas introduced in 1953, but it was not until the advent of stereo recordsin the early 1960s that the recording industry accepted it as a standard.Fortunately much of the guesswork about playback equalization curveshas been eliminated by James Powell in a 1989 article,13but determiningthe correct speed and stylus size is still a problem. It should be clear thatextracting all the information held in a 78's grooves is not as easy as itmight seem, even without taking the physical maintenance of the discsinto account.

Formats deemed to lie beyond the scope of this article include cyl-inders of all kinds, wire recordings, aluminum discs, instantaneous ac-etate discs, film, piano rolls, music boxes, video tape, video discs, anda number of other sound carrying media (including chocolate discs ). Ofcourse, the more rare or fragile the object, the more care is necessaryto treat it. It can take hours to capture fully and truthfully the sonic11. Any reformatting from an existing medium onto tape should be done with full understandingof all copyright laws and other legal and ethical issues.12. For an outstanding survey of everything that goes into playing 78s correctly, see Michael R. Lane,"Sonic Restoration of Historical Recordings," Parts 1 and 2, Audio, 75/6 (June 1991): 35-44, and 75/7(July 1991): 26-37.13. James R. Powell, Jr., "The Audiophile's Guide to Phonorecord Playback Equalizer Settings," ARSCJournal 20/1 (1989): 14-23.

444



10/10

PreventiveMaintenancefor Audio Discs and Tapes 445content of a given recording, and each medium, especially some of theolder or more esoteric ones, poses its own unique set of preservationproblems.Without going into further specifics, I hope this discussion has pro-vided the reader with a sense of what recordings preservation entails andsome hints on preventive maintenance. If a given set of recordings isimportant to an institution, and the equipment and expertise to handlethem properly are not available in-house, then outside professional helpmust be sought, just as it would be for rare printed material. Audiopreservation can be arduous and time-consuming, but it is the only wayto ensure that our recorded heritage will be available for future gen-erations to study and enjoy.

Documents

Farrington PrevMaintenanceForAudioDiscs