For everyone who buys one, there are a hundred who will not. It will all be online eventually, so why not do it now? So everyone can be wiser and more musical. I think if someone is faced with a decision, hey, I can charge for this, or give it freely to the world, well, there is a choice that is more than a personal decision, because it is a question of whether it is part of our greater musical society. And I don't want my facsimiles cleaned up. Just put it all online please, before I croak. And thanks to those who do.
dt At 03:24 PM 11/10/2010, you wrote: >Hello David & All: > >While I agree in concept that the facsimiles should be available, >and that providing access to the source material is a good thing, I >don't necessarily believe charging for facsimiles is evil. Perhaps >you meant 'a necessary evil'? The work that goes into preparing a >facsimile; photographing, maximizing its legibility, concordances if >they are part of the package, reproducing, binding and conveying to >players, certainly is not carried out by nefarious, money-grubbing >Dick Cheney types (as a reference for evil personified). Well >probably not anyway. I appreciate all of my Boethius and Minkoff >facsimiles and, even if they cost as much as a small house, they >don't smell of sulfur when I crack the covers. > >Ron Andrico > > > Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:33:08 -0800 > > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > > From: vidan...@sbcglobal.net > > Subject: [LUTE] Re: More digital facsimiles from the (public) libraries? > > > > Although I understand all of the issues, including compensating ppl > > for their time, charging money for facsimiles is basically evil, and > > in the long run everyone will be better served by having more music > > available--more concerts, more audience, more work. > > What all libraries should do is just put it all online, and then if > > someone wants to make an edition and sell it, fine. Just make a PDF, > > and upload it, and I guarantee that everyone will benefit. > > This also prevents players from owning a repertory by limiting access. > > > > If scholars want to sell the commentary as a separate book, that is > > also fine, and continues an established tradition. > > dt > > > > > > > > At 12:32 PM 11/10/2010, you wrote: > > > Still something that I don't get: > > > > > > why are some public (public) libraries slowly making all their MS > > > available as a digital download - and I'm thinking about the the > > > Bayerisch Staatsbibliothek here in Munich, between others -, while > > > there are other PUBLIC libraries (hello, British Library ...) - that > > > still do not even seem to envisage that ... > > > > > > Shall we (as single members of the list) put some pressure on our local > > > libraries? Send an email to the curators of their music departments - > > > maybe as rightful, registered members of the library, as I guess some > > > of us are - and ask about it? > > > (Of course, this doesn't want to diminuish at all the value of such > > > pubblication as the Dd.2.11 by the Lute Society. The scholarship part > > > is something you dont get in a digital facsimile ...) > > > Your opinion, listers? > > > Matteo > > > On 10 November 2010 20:19, Denys Stephens > > > <[1]denyssteph...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > > It's also worth noting that whilst some > > > of > > > the world's libraries are making digital copies of their musical > > > sources > > > available, there is currently no expectation that this, or indeed > > > any of the > > > Cambridge University Library manuscripts will become available as > > > free > > > electronic downloads. > > > Denys > > > > > > -- > > > > > >References > > > > > > 1. mailto:denyssteph...@ukonline.co.uk > > > > > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at > > >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > >
