[geoff]

On 11/05/2019 11:59 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:

Funny, my digital files from 30 years ago are still playable, and far
better quality than my tapes of that time. But hey, some people thought
the car would never replace the horse and cart too. Some people would
prefer we live in that world now. There will always be a place for
nostalgia enthusiasts I guess.

Checked them recently?

I have boxes of CD-Rs that no longer play reliably.

Azo ? Aluminium ? Or the better Cyanine or Phthalocyanine and gold
metalisation ?

If your archive choice is optical best go with the latter, or better
still M-Disc.

Interestingly enough, DAT seems to have survived very well. Everybody is
paranoid about DAT failures but they actually have held up better than
such a horrible format has any right to.
--scott


The tapes possibly hold up better than the more fragile of the player
mechanisms.


The thing with digital is you have many choices of media and
technologies. Even chisel-and-cave-walls if you want to go back to basics.

And if you decently digitally record your precious tape master, it can
be perfectly preserved with all it's, um, 'favourable aspects'. Duping
onto another tape will accumulate another generation of its flaws.

Of course running a safety (with equal care and attention as the actual
master) when producing the original master tape will save that
generation loss.

geoff