What a tragedy this is.

[Hardbopjazz]

WASHINGTON – New digital recordings of events in U.S. history and early radio shows are at risk of being lost much faster than older ones on tape and many are already gone, according to a study on sound released Wednesday.

Even recent history — such as recordings from 9/11 or the 2008 election — is at risk because digital sound files can be corrupted, and widely used CD-R discs only last three to five years before files start to fade, said study co-author Sam Brylawski.

"I think we're assuming that if it's on the Web it's going to be there forever," he said. "That's one of the biggest challenges."

Shows by musicians Duke Ellington and Bing Crosby, as well as the earliest sports broadcasts, are already gone. There was little financial incentive for such broadcasters as CBS to save early sound files, Brylawski said.

Digital files are a blessing and a curse. Sounds can be easily recorded and transferred and the files require less and less space. But the problem, Brylawski said, is they must be constantly maintained and backed up by audio experts as technology changes. That requires active preservation, rather than simply placing files on a shelf, he said.

Full Article

[Big Beat Steve]

Not wanting to sound cynical, but hasn't this been known for as long as people have handled diskettes (remember how they used to come down from 8" to 5.25" to 3.5"?) and have copied their favorite music (or data) on CD's (CR-R's)?

I have some music in my collection that was burnt onto CD-R's more than 10 years ago and they still play fine but honestly, I would not want to trust them forever. Especially since even the life of commercially released CDs might be (relatively) limited too.

And seeing how often my assertions that the pictures I still take on good ol' film rolls (with negatives being developed 'n all) will certainly outlast most photo files stored on some hard drive (external or not) have been met with condescending smiles I have now come to the point where problems such as those described in your post will raise nothing but a sneer from me.

These people MUST have known better and acted accordingly or else they are just way too DUMB to manage archived materials at all - unfortunately!

Edited September 30, 2010 by Big Beat Steve

[Christiern]

One day we all agree that X is detrimental to our health—we had all heard a quote to that effect, published in a leading journal. It placed a researcher in the spotlight and the ensuing, repetitive follow-up stories embedded it in our mind. The government stepped in and took X off the shelves, Then, just as that theory was firmly established as fact, someone else seeking attention releases the result of his/her study and, guess what? X made a whole bunch of mice feel a lot better—it seems to have prevented cancer and may even cure it in people of Asian descent who have passed their 27th birthday!

A couple of years later, that last bit of hope having run its course and served it promotional purpose, we are told by a not-yet-leading researcher that 19 out of 34 Scandinavians tested with X also showed marked improvement and felt better.

Of course, after a proper period of that news being digested, someone else will make the startling revelation that X not only does not prevent or cure cancer, it causes it and may well be the leading killer of middle-aged Indonesian fishermen. Clearly, a new study is needed and, duly, grants are sought.

Sam Brylawski strikes me as someone who knows how to wring the last bit of attention from a "study."

[Claude]

If people care about backup, digital files are much easier to preserve for eternity than analogue tapes and films. The tragedy is that many omit even the most basic backup steps.

Edited September 30, 2010 by Claude

[Hardbopjazz]

So true. Backups are the way to go to ensure if the master copy failes you can use the backup.

[AllenLowe]

I always bring backup.