• Welcome to Tux Reports: Where Penguins Fly. We hope you find the topics varied, interesting, and worthy of your time. Please become a member and join in the discussions.

Long term storage

R

R. C. White

Flightless Bird
Hi, Lee.

And where will I buy a player for that disk? In 40,000 years?

A few years ago, I had some trouble just finding a turntable to play vinyl
LPs and transfer them to my magnetic disk and optical disks. I understand
that vinyl has regained some popularity recently, but those gold disks may
be functionally unreadable in 40 years, much less 40,000. :>( Of course, I
might be dead by then, I suppose.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc@grandecom.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
Windows Live Mail 2010 (15.3.2804.0607) in Win7 Ultimate x64

"Lee Rowell" wrote in message
news:7NadnYmGX6lckP7RnZ2dnUVZ7oSdnZ2d@bt.com...

You should back up to a 12-inch gold-plated copper disk designed to be
played by a cartridge and needle at 16 2/3 rpm. Should be good for about
40,000 years.

> "Gene E. Bloch" <not-me@other.invalid> wrote in message
> news:1ddb73dia96e1$.18c28evc68ht8$.dlg@40tude.net...
> Well, don't feel too bad - even film photos fade with time.
> Silver corrodes and dyes lose color...paper oxidizes...acetate film
> liquefies...
> Geez - I've been raining on parades today :)
> Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:04:23 -0500, Antares 531 wrote:

> I was suggesting that someone or some company might develop a very
> reliable, very long lived storage means (maybe something that operates
> at the quark level) that could be used for decades or even centuries
> without losing the stored data. This device obviously could not be
> accessed straight forward by the later generation computers, but
> perhaps something like a (again, for example) USB hub might be
> developed as an interface means that could be replaced when the new
> computers needed a different setup to read this storage means. We
> could buy a new hub every few years, but would not have to buy new
> storage means for a long time, and our back-up storage process would
> be a lot less of a problem.

I don't see the need for this. Not that it's a bad idea, I just think it's
redundant. BTW, I'd call it a converter, not a hub.

For instance I have a USB floppy drive that can read several 3.5" formats.
If USB is going to die in 2020, I can just copy all of my floppies to a
directory on my new 2020 model Optical Strudel drive and I won't need the
old floppies any more. OK, OK, I really don't need them now, but I still
have the drive :)

Another reason is all the problems various people (including me) have had
with serial devices using USB to serial converters. This is worse than
media, of course, since my above method makes no sense in controlling a
printer or some such. But these devices seem to create more problem than
they solve...

<RANT>
Right now I have a friend who is having a problem with newer computers with
USB and an older printer that has serial and parallel interfaces only. I
have no idea what his problem is, unfortunately. I haven't been at his
house, and he's way too untechnical to give a coherent answer to any of my
questions. I think he has two computers, one or two USB to parallel (or
serial?) converters, and a parallel (or serial?) two-to-one (or
one-to-two?) switch. It's kind of a challenge...
</RANT>

....Maybe I should have put the rant flags earlier in my post :)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 16:47:43 -0500, R. C. White wrote:

> Hi, Lee.
>
> And where will I buy a player for that disk? In 40,000 years?
>
> A few years ago, I had some trouble just finding a turntable to play vinyl
> LPs and transfer them to my magnetic disk and optical disks. I understand
> that vinyl has regained some popularity recently, but those gold disks may
> be functionally unreadable in 40 years, much less 40,000. :>( Of course, I
> might be dead by then, I suppose.
>
> RC

Heck, in 40,000 years you'll just hand the disk to your amanuensis[1] robot
and say "Read this, Jeeves".

Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old records
are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser optic
device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are even
devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in a
mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to rotate
the record.

[1] It's not quite the right word, although close - I just wanted to show
off that I know it.

[2] In use or under development, I'm not sure.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
 
K

Ken Blake

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:29:44 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
<not-me@other.invalid> wrote:


> Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old records
> are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser optic
> device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are even
> devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in a
> mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to rotate
> the record.


I've never heard of this before. Can you point me to a link about it,
or source to buy one? Thanks.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:34:34 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:29:44 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>> Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old records
>> are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser optic
>> device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are even
>> devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in a
>> mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to rotate
>> the record.
>
>
> I've never heard of this before. Can you point me to a link about it,
> or source to buy one? Thanks.

I'd have to Google too, so I'll leave that up to you.

As for buying it, I'm under the impression that either one won't fit your
budget, unless you're far wealthier than I am :)

Possibly the laser tracker would someday be affordable. BTW, it would not
require rotating the platter specifically at 33-1/3 or any other standard
speed. All it needs is the groove shape, and the rest is software.

The laser tracker I have read about, but I can't recall whether online or
in a paper magazine. I have heard - I believe on NPR, inter alia - of
people using them to read old Edison cylinders. The advantage, of course,
is that it's non-destructive as well as adaptable to all sorts of recording
methods.

The hi-res photo method I have heard about from other people in
conversation, so you'd have to trust my judgment of them, which I grant you
is a bit of a stretch :)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
 
K

Ken Blake

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:45:42 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
<not-me@other.invalid> wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:34:34 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:29:44 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> > <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old records
> >> are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser optic
> >> device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are even
> >> devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in a
> >> mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to rotate
> >> the record.
> >
> >
> > I've never heard of this before. Can you point me to a link about it,
> > or source to buy one? Thanks.
>
> I'd have to Google too, so I'll leave that up to you.


LOL! I would have if I could have figured out what to search on.


> As for buying it, I'm under the impression that either one won't fit your
> budget, unless you're far wealthier than I am :)


I was afraid of that.
 
I

i76GLappie

Flightless Bird
"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:rha6661fmac50ie7gmc9icgkh3e8h7vhrv@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:45:42 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:34:34 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:29:44 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
>> > <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old
>> >> records
>> >> are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser
>> >> optic
>> >> device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are
>> >> even
>> >> devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in
>> >> a
>> >> mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to
>> >> rotate
>> >> the record.
>> >
>> >
>> > I've never heard of this before. Can you point me to a link about it,
>> > or source to buy one? Thanks.
>>
>> I'd have to Google too, so I'll leave that up to you.
>
>
> LOL! I would have if I could have figured out what to search on.
>
>
>> As for buying it, I'm under the impression that either one won't fit your
>> budget, unless you're far wealthier than I am :)
>
>
> I was afraid of that.
>

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11851842
 
P

Peter Foldes

Flightless Bird
Purchase a MS Storage Server. Cost is cheaper than putting data on DVD\CD's in the
long run.
You can instantly call up whatever you put in storage on there and backup is a snap

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"Antares 531" <gordonlrDELETE@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:eqv266pa0ho2f20uu5g52jjgghlvg56r7c@4ax.com...
> What is the best choice for long term storage of computer data files?
> I am running Windows 7 - 64, and have a lot of accounting, tax
> records, genealogy, pictures, etc., files that I would like to make
> back-ups onto some media that I could expect to be able to read on a
> new computer, 10 or more years in the future. Is there any storage
> media similar to the old style CDs that might be reliable for very
> long time spans?
>
> Gordon
 
K

Ken Blake

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:08:59 -0400, "i76GLappie" <i76G@PC.lap> wrote:

>
> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:rha6661fmac50ie7gmc9icgkh3e8h7vhrv@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:45:42 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> > <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:34:34 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:29:44 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> >> > <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old
> >> >> records
> >> >> are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser
> >> >> optic
> >> >> device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are
> >> >> even
> >> >> devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in
> >> >> a
> >> >> mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to
> >> >> rotate
> >> >> the record.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I've never heard of this before. Can you point me to a link about it,
> >> > or source to buy one? Thanks.
> >>
> >> I'd have to Google too, so I'll leave that up to you.
> >
> >
> > LOL! I would have if I could have figured out what to search on.
> >
> >
> >> As for buying it, I'm under the impression that either one won't fit your
> >> budget, unless you're far wealthier than I am :)
> >
> >
> > I was afraid of that.
> >
>
> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11851842



Thanks very much.
 
Y

Yousuf Khan

Flightless Bird
On 8/11/2010 11:51 AM, Ted wrote:
> A few years ???

I was being charitable. :)

> I just had a re-writable DVD fail after just a few months!
> It was used for data backup (not the only backup, fortunately), and about 10% of
> the files became unreadable.

I was getting such bad results with storing things directly on optical
media that I started to encode them into split-rar archives, and then
running QuickPAR and/or SmartPAR over them to get parity files. I would
then store the archives along with the parity files on the disks. That
way if any defects crop up any individual archives the parity files can
fix them up again. I got the idea from downloading binaries on
newsgroups. :)

Yousuf Khan
 
Y

Yousuf Khan

Flightless Bird
On 8/11/2010 12:09 PM, Antares 531 wrote:
> Why doesn't someone "invent" a really reliable, economically
> practical, always readable backup system? I would think that something
> similar to a USB hub could serve as an interface between any such
> storage medium and all future computers. That is, when a new computer
> would no longer communicate with this "hub" and the backup media, a
> new hub could be purchased that would interface the new computer with
> the very old permanent storage media.

It's called enterprise backup solutions, the media and the readers for
such things are humongously expensive for home users.

> I'm guessing the market for such a device would be humongous!

As would the cost. Check out the prices of enterprise tapes like DLT or LTO.

Yousuf Khan
 
R

Roy Smith

Flightless Bird
On 8/11/2010 5:56 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:45:42 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:34:34 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:29:44 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
>>> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old records
>>>> are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser optic
>>>> device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are even
>>>> devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in a
>>>> mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to rotate
>>>> the record.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've never heard of this before. Can you point me to a link about it,
>>> or source to buy one? Thanks.
>>
>> I'd have to Google too, so I'll leave that up to you.
>
>
> LOL! I would have if I could have figured out what to search on.
>
>
>> As for buying it, I'm under the impression that either one won't fit your
>> budget, unless you're far wealthier than I am :)
>
>
> I was afraid of that.

OF course it's going to be way out of anyone's budget right now. But
after it's been out for a while the price will drop. For example take a
look at the pocket calculator. I can remember when a basic four
function calculator sold for over $100.00 and now you can pick one up at
a local Wal-Mart for around $5.00 or less and it even does more that the
$100.00 calculator did in the first place!

I could go on and on... like VCR's once were sold for over $1000.00 and
now they're less than $50.00 and do more than it's predecessor. So in
time this technology will become affordable for the average person. I'm
just glad that I won't be the poor sap that pays out the nose for it! :)


--

Roy Smith
Windows 7 Professional
Thunderbird 3.1.2
Wednesday, August 11, 2010 7:32:56 PM
 
C

Char Jackson

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:04:23 -0500, Antares 531
<gordonlrDELETE@swbell.net> wrote:

>I think you may have missed my point, here. I was not advocating the
>use of floppies, or any other currently popular storage means. I was
>using the 3.5 inch floppy as an example.
>
>I was suggesting that someone or some company might develop a very
>reliable, very long lived storage means (maybe something that operates
>at the quark level) that could be used for decades or even centuries
>without losing the stored data. This device obviously could not be
>accessed straight forward by the later generation computers, but
>perhaps something like a (again, for example) USB hub might be
>developed as an interface means that could be replaced when the new
>computers needed a different setup to read this storage means. We
>could buy a new hub every few years, but would not have to buy new
>storage means for a long time, and our back-up storage process would
>be a lot less of a problem.

If I understand, you'd like an alien race to visit us and leave behind
something which we are unable to invent by ourselves at this time, but
as time goes on we would continually be able to create the needed
interfaces to that thing which we did not create. :)

But seriously, technology continually marches on, and by most
accounts, it marches ever faster. So no matter what super duper
storage type someone could invent today, an improved version would
more than likely be right around the corner, making this one obsolete.
So simply creating new interfaces without improving the underlying
technology seems to be a dead end.

Or, more likely, I'm still off on my own tangent.
 
K

Ken Blake

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:33:03 -0500, Roy Smith <rasmith1959@live.com>
wrote:

> On 8/11/2010 5:56 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:45:42 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> > <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:34:34 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:29:44 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> >>> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old records
> >>>> are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser optic
> >>>> device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are even
> >>>> devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in a
> >>>> mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to rotate
> >>>> the record.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I've never heard of this before. Can you point me to a link about it,
> >>> or source to buy one? Thanks.
> >>
> >> I'd have to Google too, so I'll leave that up to you.
> >
> >
> > LOL! I would have if I could have figured out what to search on.
> >
> >
> >> As for buying it, I'm under the impression that either one won't fit your
> >> budget, unless you're far wealthier than I am :)
> >
> >
> > I was afraid of that.
>
> OF course it's going to be way out of anyone's budget right now. But
> after it's been out for a while the price will drop.


Maybe, maybe not. Since very people still own LP records, very people
need or want such a device, and with a tiny market, I would be very
surprised to see the price drop substantially.
 
L

Lee Rowell

Flightless Bird
No need to buy a player.

When you encounter Voyager I or II you will find that each record is encased
in a protective aluminum jacket.

Instructions are included, in symbolic language, to indicate how the record
is to be played.


"R. C. White" <rc@grandecom.net> wrote in message
news:XKKdndxk0uMeh_7RnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@posted.grandecom...
> Hi, Lee.
>
> And where will I buy a player for that disk? In 40,000 years?
>
> A few years ago, I had some trouble just finding a turntable to play vinyl
> LPs and transfer them to my magnetic disk and optical disks. I understand
> that vinyl has regained some popularity recently, but those gold disks may
> be functionally unreadable in 40 years, much less 40,000. :>( Of course,
> I might be dead by then, I suppose.
>
> RC
> --
> R. C. White, CPA
> San Marcos, TX
> rc@grandecom.net
> Microsoft Windows MVP
> Windows Live Mail 2010 (15.3.2804.0607) in Win7 Ultimate x64
>
> "Lee Rowell" wrote in message
> news:7NadnYmGX6lckP7RnZ2dnUVZ7oSdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> You should back up to a 12-inch gold-plated copper disk designed to be
> played by a cartridge and needle at 16 2/3 rpm. Should be good for about
> 40,000 years.
>
>> "Gene E. Bloch" <not-me@other.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:1ddb73dia96e1$.18c28evc68ht8$.dlg@40tude.net...
>> Well, don't feel too bad - even film photos fade with time.
>> Silver corrodes and dyes lose color...paper oxidizes...acetate film
>> liquefies...
>> Geez - I've been raining on parades today :)
>> Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
>
 
D

Doum

Flightless Bird
Antares 531 <gordonlrDELETE@swbell.net> écrivait
news:eqv266pa0ho2f20uu5g52jjgghlvg56r7c@4ax.com:

> What is the best choice for long term storage of computer data files?
> I am running Windows 7 - 64, and have a lot of accounting, tax
> records, genealogy, pictures, etc., files that I would like to make
> back-ups onto some media that I could expect to be able to read on a
> new computer, 10 or more years in the future. Is there any storage
> media similar to the old style CDs that might be reliable for very
> long time spans?
>
> Gordon

After reading many of the responses here I have a suggestion,
you could burn your data to CDs or DVDs and then take those to some
commercial duplicating facilities to have them PRESS a few copies like they
do for audio and movie disk you buy in stores.

As I understand this, those disks are not burned but press in some ways.

For example: http://www.discmakers.com/

I'm not sure about the technique they use so you should contact them first.

I have audio CDs that are over 20 years old and they still play just fine.

Of course you have to pay but your data might be worth it.

HTH
 
S

Sunny Bard

Flightless Bird
Doum wrote:

> you could burn your data to CDs or DVDs and then take those to some
> commercial duplicating facilities to have them PRESS a few copies like they
> do for audio and movie disk you buy in stores.
>
> As I understand this, those disks are not burned but press in some ways.
>
> For example: http://www.discmakers.com/

They class short runs as "duplication" which seems to be using CD-R or
DVD-R, for quantities over 1000 they class it as "replication" which
does involve a glass master so they will be pressed. Presumably 1000 is
the break-point where replication becomes cheaper than duplication.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Flightless Bird
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:56:00 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:45:42 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:34:34 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:29:44 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
>>> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Even today a turntable as we know it is no longer necessary. Old records
>>>> are being read by turntables that don't have a stylus, but a laser optic
>>>> device that tracks the grooves and measures the data - but there are even
>>>> devices[2] that just take a very hi-resolution picture (or several in a
>>>> mosaic) of the platter and extract the data without ever having to rotate
>>>> the record.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've never heard of this before. Can you point me to a link about it,
>>> or source to buy one? Thanks.
>>
>> I'd have to Google too, so I'll leave that up to you.
>
>
> LOL! I would have if I could have figured out what to search on.

LOL! Why do you think I didn't Google it myself?

>> As for buying it, I'm under the impression that either one won't fit your
>> budget, unless you're far wealthier than I am :)
>
>
> I was afraid of that.

(I'm now back from a trip with no newsgroups access...)


--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Flightless Bird
Here's my take on those instructions:

1. Purchase turntable from Amazon/Intergalactica.
2. After arrival, place record on turntable centered on spindle.
3. Press Play. Note: an atmosphere is required to hear the sounds.

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 16:30:18 +0100, Lee Rowell wrote:

> No need to buy a player.
>
> When you encounter Voyager I or II you will find that each record is encased
> in a protective aluminum jacket.
>
> Instructions are included, in symbolic language, to indicate how the record
> is to be played.
>
>
> "R. C. White" <rc@grandecom.net> wrote in message
> news:XKKdndxk0uMeh_7RnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@posted.grandecom...
>> Hi, Lee.
>>
>> And where will I buy a player for that disk? In 40,000 years?
>>
>> A few years ago, I had some trouble just finding a turntable to play vinyl
>> LPs and transfer them to my magnetic disk and optical disks. I understand
>> that vinyl has regained some popularity recently, but those gold disks may
>> be functionally unreadable in 40 years, much less 40,000. :>( Of course,
>> I might be dead by then, I suppose.
>>
>> RC
>> --
>> R. C. White, CPA
>> San Marcos, TX
>> rc@grandecom.net
>> Microsoft Windows MVP
>> Windows Live Mail 2010 (15.3.2804.0607) in Win7 Ultimate x64
>>
>> "Lee Rowell" wrote in message
>> news:7NadnYmGX6lckP7RnZ2dnUVZ7oSdnZ2d@bt.com...
>>
>> You should back up to a 12-inch gold-plated copper disk designed to be
>> played by a cartridge and needle at 16 2/3 rpm. Should be good for about
>> 40,000 years.
>>
>>> "Gene E. Bloch" <not-me@other.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:1ddb73dia96e1$.18c28evc68ht8$.dlg@40tude.net...
>>> Well, don't feel too bad - even film photos fade with time.
>>> Silver corrodes and dyes lose color...paper oxidizes...acetate film
>>> liquefies...
>>> Geez - I've been raining on parades today :)
>>> Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
>>


--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
 
A

Allen

Flightless Bird
R. C. White wrote:
> Hi, Lee.
>
> And where will I buy a player for that disk? In 40,000 years?
>
> A few years ago, I had some trouble just finding a turntable to play
> vinyl LPs and transfer them to my magnetic disk and optical disks. I
> understand that vinyl has regained some popularity recently, but those
> gold disks may be functionally unreadable in 40 years, much less
> 40,000. :>( Of course, I might be dead by then, I suppose.
>
> RC
If you still need a turntable, drive 28 miles north on I35 and go to
Waterloo Records at 6th and Lamar. They have a large number of several
different brands stacked on the floor by the registers. Also a growing
stock of LPs, new and used, but unfortunately for me none of them are
classical. I hope I'm remembering correctly--you do live in San Marcos,
don't you?
Allen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top