[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] CD differences



Hi Will,
Thanks for the info....yes it seems the slower the burn the better...I will check with Mitsui and get the ammunition I need.
 
As a point of interest I've been using TDK and Fuji so called archival CDR's. Not my idea but others (or as Horace Rumpole might say...Those who must be obeyed)
Cheers
Paul Tombleson
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:57 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CD differences

hi Paul,
 
I can't say for sure that it's the only difference, only that it's the only concrete difference I'm aware of. We (and our equipment) prefer lower burn speeds, so we're happy to stick with the Prostudios. Your Mitsui dealer should be able to find answers to any further questions - our dealer here hs been pretty good in that respect (Mitsui here are now known as MAM-E however).
 
Best
 
Will
 
-----Original Message-----
From: prabhupada.com [mailto:pr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 25 June 2003 13:27
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ARSCLIST] CD differences

Thanks Will,
 
The Mitsui archival gold discs (marked as "Prostudio" in Europe) are designed to be burned at lower (1-12x) speeds, whereas the "non-archival" equivalents are apparently optimised for higher burn speeds. Not sure of any other differences.
 
 
So if that is the only difference....then what's makes the Gold disk markedly better (archival)  than non-archival? Or is there no real big difference regarding the longevity, stability etc?
 
Paul Tombleson
Director of Preservation
Bhaktivedanta Archives


**************************************************************************


Now exhibiting at the British Library Galleries:


Painted Labyrinth : the world of the Lindisfarne Gospels


Until 28 September 2003. Admission Free.


*************************************************************************


The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the postmaster@xxxxx : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.


The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.


*************************************************************************



[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]
https://cool.culturalheritage.org/byform/mailing-lists/arsclist/2003/06/msg00147.html
cool.culturalheritage.org
CC-MAIN-2023-40
11052
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:MOIRJYBWYYKJMZ3A4SMVFMBSBVYCLDJI
<urn:uuid:72b9a4ea-091b-41f4-bb96-37b4ac561655>
2023-09-25T13:07:47Z
3.162.103.97
text/html
sha1:CDPYTUWLIRLPSPF3RENEIK52YOFPPOGQ
<urn:uuid:2ec0c60b-9e85-4528-ad3e-248724a568ca>
https://cool.culturalheritage.org/byform/mailing-lists/arsclist/2003/06/msg00147.html
response
<urn:uuid:ba59f36c-9c0c-4285-8af0-0d22622f15f3>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2023-40
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for September/October 2023
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-20
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.5-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/