Coverage of the

Chicago Meeting

(part 2)

Allow me to pick up where I left off in the last issue of the Newsletter—appointment letters. I’ve sent seventy-one of them so far. Mind you, I’m not complaining. Getting all those letters sent was proof of the continuing vitality of MLA and our ability to (quoting John Cleese) “adopt, adapt and improve” as the structure morphed into its new form as recommended by the MLA Task Force on Committee Structure. When you look at the revised structure you will also note that we have done away with Standing or Special Committees as specific categories. This change also grew out of one of the recommendations of the task force; it is the amendment which was voted upon and passed in the fall election. As a reminder, the newly revised Article VI is printed here (see the accompanying text box). It is gratifying to see the work of the Task Force on Committee Structure become part of the fabric of MLA. My thanks to that group for their foresight and their creativity. Their work has gone a long way towards refreshing how the work of MLA is being accomplished.

Another interesting perk of working on the Administrative Structure was spending so much time with our new online membership directory. I referred to it so many times over the last few weeks that on some days, I kept it open for the entire day, bouncing in and out of it for verification of membership, e-mail addresses, and so on. Our friends at A-R Editions have created a wonderful utility for us in this directory. Jim Zychowicz and our Treasurer/Executive Secretary Michael Rogan continue to think of more ways to make it even more useful for all of us. Of course, we will all have the opportunity to use the directory when we all renew our dues very soon.

The Executive Board will be meeting at A-R Editions in Middleton, Wisconsin during the first week of June. At that meeting we will be working on the budget for fiscal year 2009-2010 and addressing action items submitted by special officers and committee chairs.

We will also welcome to the board meeting our new Development Officer, Jim Cassaro. Jim’s tenure as Notes editor is nearly at an end, and not being one to rest on his laurels, he applied for this key position as one of MLA’s Special Officers. Jim brings with him substantial development experience, along with a deep understanding of the workings of our association, having served as Treasurer and, of course, President. Paula Matthews, our first Development Officer, did a great deal towards raising awareness among the membership and I have every confidence that Jim will build on that foundation. I look forward to working with him; I just hope I can keep up!

There were four applicants for the position, all of whom brought impressive credentials, making the search committee’s task both a pleasure and a challenge. Thanks to Pam Bristah, search committee chair, and committee members Ginny Danielson, Laura Gayle Green, Peter Munstedt, and Misti Shaw for their speedy and excellent work. Sincere thanks go to all the applicants as well. The decision to apply for such a position doesn’t come lightly and I appreciate their willingness to “step up.”

In closing, I’ll leave you with this thought as we all look forward to the slower pace of summer:  “Rest is not idleness, and to lie sometimes on the grass on a summer day listening to the murmur of water, or watching the clouds float across the sky, is hardly a waste of time” —John Lubbock.

MUSIC LIBRARY ASSOCIATION
CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS

ARTICLE VI: COMMITTEES

A. The Board of Directors shall establish committees to consider affairs of the Association that require continuous or repeated attention by members. A list of the committees and their charges will be maintained in the MLA Administrative Structure. These committees shall be responsible to the Board of Directors, which will delegate such powers and functions to them as the Board finds desirable for carrying out the objectives of the Association.

B. The President, in consultation with the Board of Directors, has responsibility for appointment of chairs and members to the committees.

C. The Board of Directors shall authorize the dissolution of a committee when in the opinion of the Board its usefulness has ceased. This decision and reasons for the dissolution shall be reported to the membership.

D. Task forces may be created and appointed by the President, in consultation with the Board of Directors, to perform charges as defined in letters of appointment. Each task force is by definition ad hoc, and shall continue in existence until its purpose is accomplished or it is discharged by the President, in consultation with the Board of Directors.

E. Committee membership shall be open to all individual members of the Association and to all persons designated as institutional representatives.

F. Each committee shall submit to the Board of Directors a written annual report of its activities that shall contain any recommendations considered necessary or advisable. Additional reports may be submitted at the option of a committee or as requested by the Board or the President.

Anne Shelley
University of Iowa

The final plenary session of the 78th annual MLA meeting, “What’s Next? The Compact Disc as a Viable Format in the Future of Music Libraries,” was driven by the thoughts of five panel members, each with varied backgrounds relating to the session topic. Panelists spoke to their own unique experiences regarding changes in media formats and, specifically, the relevancy of the compact disc to libraries in the not-so-distant future.  Prior to the session, the panelists were asked to consider three questions:

1. What is the likelihood that the compact disc will cease to be a viable format?
2. If CDs do cease to exist, what will take their place?
3. How will current practices be altered in response to this shift in format?

Session moderator Greg MacAyeal of Northwestern University recalled discussions on upcoming challenges in audio collection development that emerged at the previous national meeting. He stated that libraries have been aware of an evolving business model, yet “only recently have we realized that we have to respond.” MacAyeal then turned to the panelists for their perspectives.

As a professional violinist and active soloist with thirteen albums to her name, Rachel Barton Pine’s remarks reflected her role as both a consumer and a performing artist. Pine took the position that, at least for now, compact discs are a necessary medium. She focused on two areas in which download-only audio files are lacking as compared to compact discs: sound quality and description, two attributes of recorded sound that are vital to arguably every musical genre, but especially so in regards to classical recordings. She also commented on the fact that portable audio players typically display minimal metadata when, again, certain genres may require rich description for the listener to have the greatest context possible. While her opinions as a customer seemed to resonate with most attendees, Pine spoke more extensively about how it is important for an artist to have a physical item to market at a concert, and that the benefits run both ways. Obviously, the artist can make a profit in such a situation (Pine estimated that half of her album sales are made at concerts); in addition, listeners high on their enjoyment of the event have the convenience of taking that artist’s work home with them, after seeking personal advice from the performer on which album they should purchase and have personally autographed. Pine does try to stay current when communicating with her fan base (she has a regular podcast to prove it), but she doesn’t think music can afford to go all digital just yet. Recalling a complimentary e-mail she received recently from a violin student, Pine said, “If she downloaded my [albums] instead of buying them, I hope she went to my Web site and read the booklets.”

Henry Fogel, Dean of the Chicago College of Performing Arts at Roosevelt University, has a personal audio collection of physical materials that, at over 20,000 items, could rival the size of many institutional music libraries. He made the point that the compact disc will have to remain a viable format because, in many ways, the long-playing record is still a viable format. The real question, according to Fogel, is whether the compact disc will remain the principle format or not. The music industry is currently entangled in a movement in which consumers demand several different choices—some want only a physical product, others want both physical and download-only recordings, and still others are only interested in downloaded music—and the industry’s slow response to changes in technology has complicated matters further. Moreover, the proliferation in recordings has inadvertently harmed professional musicians’ ability to make a substantial profit from album sales. Fogel believes that many of the woes of the record industry can be attributed to the overall increase in available inventory; if a single piece of music is represented on twenty different recordings, each recording will not sell as well as if there were only two available recordings. And though some may disagree on the physical durability of a compact disc, Fogel pointed out that when consumers began replacing long-playing records—which are easily scratched and warped—with their more sturdy digital counterparts, fewer albums were sold. Within technological advances lies a silver lining for lesser-known ensembles, he argued, for local groups now have a greater chance of making quality recordings. “There’s no question,” said Fogel, “that the Mannheim Symphony would sell more than the Sioux Falls Symphony because they’ve had a chance to record, even though the Sioux Falls Symphony may be better.”

Digital media consultant and nueMeta LLC President Nicolas Sincaglia suggested attendees consider the demise of a once-popular medium from an historical perspective, noting that change has been one of the few consistencies. Sound recording formats have been evolving since Thomas Edison’s 1877 captures on phonographic cylinders (the outstanding medium for only thirty years as opposed to the eighty-year reign of the long-playing record) and eventually recorded sound appeared in a variety of tape and disc mediums. The compact disc—durable, reliable, and portable—was a “huge technological breakthrough” in 1982, though it did not become popular until the early 1990’s. It was, however, just another new technology created to overcome a deficiency or to provide a new benefit that was lacking in the previously ubiquitous format. “When we talk about the demise of the CD, we should take a look at the flaws of that format and look at the benefits of new formats,” said Sincaglia, ticking off drawbacks such as the fact that a compact disc is not self-describing (only minimal data is present without liner notes), it is not network aware (relatively difficult to share and transmit data), it is static, bulky, and provides minimal storage space. From a technologist’s perspective, Sincaglia believes the current shift away from physical formats is helping us to enter “a new era of connectiveness” in which information can be transferred and shared more easily.

James Ginsburg, founder of Cedille Records and the Chicago Classical Recording Foundation, shared his guidelines that prove one’s age is a powerful determinant: 1. anything that is in the world when you are born is natural and ordinary; 2. anything that is invented between the ages of fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting; and 3. anything invented after age thirty-five is completely unnatural. Because teenagers are driving the market, Ginsburg said, “it’s a mathematical certainty that the compact disc will cease to become a viable format [within five to ten years] and downloading will be the primary means of delivery.” He speculated that, currently, classical downloads are not necessarily a replacement for the compact disc; rather, downloadable audio is a way to reach a new listener base. Ginsberg noted, however, that until Internet bandwidth is capable of delivering downloadable audio at CD quality or higher, labels’ production practices likely won’t change very much. “It is important for library collections to have the highest quality music possible,” he said.

D.J. Hoek, Head of the Music Library at Northwestern University, shared his personal concerns regarding the intersection of downloadable music, libraries, and licensing restrictions that prohibit libraries from disseminating that music to their users. He described music librarians as having an “interest in building, preserving, and providing access to music collections” and that he has been seeing more and more examples of desirable recordings that are only available as a downloadable file. “This is a great challenge to our profession,” said Hoek, recalling a specific Grammy-nominated recording of the Los Angeles Symphony Orchestra, released by Deutsche Grammophon, that was not made available on compact disc. Hoek drove home the point that, because current licensing practices prevent libraries from stewarding this change in format, “this recording is in none of our libraries.” Though libraries have always been in the business (until now, perhaps) of managing format changes and distributing items to users, Hoek reminded attendees that another key role of libraries is to preserve cultural heritage. “Preservation is a costly undertaking,” he said, “and we are more committed to this investment than the companies that produce these recordings.” Hoek also concluded that audio subscription databases are not libraries’ ideal solution to this dilemma, primarily because they do not reflect the careful selection processes merited by the uniqueness of each institution. He encouraged MLA to act quickly in addressing this glaring problem in collection development, and to raise awareness alongside other professional organizations that might hold similar interests.

Top
 

Renew Your Membership Now!

 
The MLA membership year runs July 1 through June 30.  That means that it is time to renew your membership!!  Do not let your membership lapse, renew your membership at the online membership directory: https://www1.areditions.com/mla/directory/default.asp. An overview of the site is available elsewhere in this issue of the MLA Newsletter.
 
When you renew, please review your profile information, and make any needed updates.

Please note: Membership renewals must go through the new online directory. You may pay by Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or by printing out your updated entry and renewal form RECEIPT and mailing it to the Business Office.

However you choose to renew, please remember to print or save your renewal receipt for your records!

MLA Members Explore Hot Topics in Chicago

Chris Mehrens
Arizona State University

The “Hot Topics” session sponsored by the MLA Education Committee and co-moderated by Ruthann McTyre (University of Iowa) and Tom Caw (University of Wisconsin–Madison), was attended by 195 members. As in years past, the session offered lively discussion on a variety of issues that have come to the fore in music librarianship over the past year, interspersed with moments of great levity. Contributing to the jovial mood was Tom Caw, who will take over as moderator next year for McTyre, who will be fully involved with her activities as association president.

The session started off with Nancy Nuzzo (University at Buffalo) with a “brief word” on JSTOR. She announced that twenty music titles would be added to the collection. She concluded by telling those present that if they would like to be involved with the process of selecting titles to be added, to contact her via e-mail (nuzzo@buffalo.edu).

The next topic was submitted by first-time attendee Beth Fleming (Kent State University). McTyre related Fleming’s question: as a library and information science student with “a definite bent toward music librarianship,” currently at an institution that offers “only one semester of music librarian-specific coursework,” she would like to see “more practical manuals …written so that students could learn more about music-specific library procedures.” In response, McTyre observed that all librarians have an initial panic upon entering any new job but that, in her opinion, “when you really learn your job” as a music librarian “is when you get your first job.” She likened the first job to a sort of finishing school. She also noted that many library practices are unique to each individual institution.

When the floor was opened for comment, a number of people, including Jana Atkins (University of Central Oklahoma), indicated that they were in agreement with McTyre. John Wagstaff (University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign) related a “useful discussion” he had with Michael Rogan (Tufts University) and Rebecca J. Littman (University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee) about their respective music librarianship courses and how they have endeavored to tailor their course content to the core competencies established by the Music Library Association. Stephen Luttmann (University of Northern Colorado) encouraged posting questions to the MLA-L, noting that experienced music librarians would “not let them fall” and that we are a “pretty nice bunch of folks.” Both Michelle Hahn (Southern Methodist University) and Marty Jenkins (Wright State University) emphasized the importance of student internships and practicums as a means of acquiring certain skill sets. McTyre also suggested looking at the MLA Basic Manual Series and made a call for proposals for new publications in the series.

The next topic was contributed by Bob Follet (Peabody Institute)—specifically creative ways to cope with budgetary concerns at the present time. Margaret Ericson (Colby College) suggested that efforts be made to foster regional contacts and networks so as to purchase electronic resources through consortia and to engage in cooperative collection development. Rebecca Littman related that the Milwaukee School of the Arts has a differential tuition program to meet the special needs of their students and encouraged librarians to seek out sources of non-library funds. Kirstin Dougan (University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign) said that, at her institution, they are being encouraged to be creative and to start thinking about doing things in new ways. She is gathering data in order to assess staffing models and ways of delivering service. Steve Gerber (George Mason University) related how their student life division has a lot of money and will use it to fund the staffing of their libraries on a 24/7 basis. McTyre suggested that perhaps we should start lobbying student organizations.

Submitted by Wendy Sistrunk (University of Missouri–Kansas City), the next topic grew out of a “challenging” meeting of a technical services unit where pronouncements were made as to how scholars and musicians use a music collection. Sistrunk noted that at her institution that they are entertaining the idea of putting items into storage, including the entire score collection. Another concern that grew out of the meeting was the questioning of the necessity of music cataloging, especially with the availability of vendor records. Sistrunk then pointed out the fallacies of these pronouncements, especially with respect to self-published scores. The question, therefore, posed for discussion was why is music special and why do libraries need music catalogers? Jenn Riley (Indiana University) emphasized the need to collect data to prove the importance of music collections and how they are used. Holly Gardinier (Claremont Colleges) suggested using her dissertation on information seeking behavior as a resource. Jill Shires (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) commented negatively on vendor records and recounted a conversation with a vendor who did not know what RDA was. Leslie Bennett (University of Oregon) noted that music librarians have a good understanding of how our collections are used and that we need to educate others (on the administrative level) in this regard.

The next topic was proposed by Mark Blair (Texas State University) and centered on electronic audio reserves. He wrote, “…what in the world is the practical utility of e-reserves and what benefit is it to the instructor if they have to track down permissions after one semester, or post completely new examples from one semester to the next?” Diane Norton (Wabash College) reported that they use e-reserves and maintain a controlled reserve system. David Gilbert (UCLA) said that this is largely a matter of risk management and that you need to follow the advice of your legal counsel. Blair had a follow-up question about whether the items mounted electronically were also physically placed on reserve, and the group collectively responded in the affirmative.

Zoe Rath (Berklee College of Music) contributed the next topic, which was centered on how many libraries were using Wiki’s and LibGuides. By a show of hands, it was demonstrated that quite of few institutions were using both.

The next topic was suggested by Nancy Zavac (University of Miami). She asked, “are there music libraries using WorldCat Local for their catalog and what are your experiences (advantages/disadvantages)?” Bonna Boettcher (Cornell University) responded with a clear “thumbs down.” Kathleen DeLaurenti (University of Washington Bothell and Cascadia Community College) said that they are using WorldCat Local and that there are a lot of issues with editions and authority control. Stephen Luttmann (University of Northern Colorado) in his capacity as MOUG Vice Chair/Chair Elect indicated that MOUG was working on a series of recommendations to give to OCLC with respect to problems encountered when using WorldCat Local. He also invited people to join MOUG and to send any questions/concerns his way.

McTyre then asked for a show of hands of those who attended the morning’s plenary session on the viability of the compact disc and invited Daniel Boomhower (Kent State University) to comment on what OhioLINK had done with respect to “purchasing content.” In his comments, Boomhower detailed the partnership between OhioLINK and Naxos which enabled a local load of the “entire existing Naxos label’s catalog” as well as updates under a perpetual license for streaming access for all OhioLINK institutions. The goal: to create a model for developing, preserving and making accessible digital audio collections. McTyre mentioned her consortium’s discussions with the Center for Institutional Cooperation and the use of entrepreneurial funds for similar initiatives. She suggested that MLA needs to look at this as an organization and continue this conversation on MLA-L.

The next hot topic addressed alternatives to the annual conference, especially in light of travel funding issues. McTyre started off the round by reading a comment submitted by Sue Weiland (Ball State University), where she observed “my ability of shoot off my mouth at MLA has served me very well over my career! But sooner or later we may have no choice. Going to an every-other-year live conference, with the off year in some other medium, might be something to shoot for.” In response, Stephen Luttmann warned against bi-annual meetings because institutions do not budget for bi-annual meetings. Both Alec McLane (Wesleyan University) and Jenny Colvin (Furman University) recommended the use of virtual technology as a means to cut down on expenses. Lisa Lazar (University of Akron) observed that she finds face-to-face meetings essential and suggested that such cost-saving measures as holding committee meetings in hotel rooms could be an alternative. Bruce Evans (Baylor University) said that he had attended the ALA midwinter meeting in Denver and suggested that we could move to an all-committee meeting format (in a big room or few big rooms) to reduce our conference footprint. Joe Boonin likened MLA meetings to family reunions and said that he would personally do whatever he could to support the continuation of annual meetings. He also encouraged people to support the Freeman Travel Grant.

The final topic was centered on the future of Music Librarianship as a profession. McTyre started the discussion by reading the following message submitted by Ned Quist (Brown University): “This might be as much a product of my age as any real hard reason to believe that this is the case, but does our profession have a future? In my bleaker moods reading the likes of Kevin Kelly and even the recent article by Virginia Heffernan in the Sunday’s New York Times Magazine has made me wonder how much longer we have … and this probably applies to librarianship in general as much as to music librarianship. With Atlantic Records now showing larger income from digital sales than from CD sales, will it be long before the last physical medium for recorded music is gone—and all we’re left with are the undocumented downloads that are not licensed for library use. Paper journals are fading from our shelves and books may not be far behind. About the only thing left to make our existence justifiable is that electronic music stands have not yet caught on. Oh, I forgot, there’s always the library as café. So maybe this question could be asked: Does our profession have a future?”

In response, Jane Gottlieb (Juilliard) responded with a personal anecdote about the Presidential Inauguration of Barack Obama and how she was contacted because Juilliard had the only copy of Margaret Bonds’ arrangement of the spiritual This little light of mine. She recounted how she facilitated getting the arrangement to the singer (including permissions) and concluded that this reaffirmed why we do what we do as music librarians. Thomas Bell noted that in his own work he has been encouraging faculty to demand more of their students when it comes to research, as it is so much easier to find articles in the electronic environment. The music librarian needs to become more engaged with faculty.

Pamela Pagels (SLIS student at Indiana University), who was attending her first meeting, said the future of the profession rests in the intrinsic value of what we do and that, in a lot of what we do, we are truly educators and that we need to pass along our values to our students, faculty, and coworkers. Matt Snyder (New York Public Library) said that, from the perspective of a public research library, the core concept that has come down from on high is it is important to develop  unique collections, and unique collections justify why we do what we do. Stuart Simon (University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee) observed that somewhere in what we do there has to be a human element. So the profession will not go away. And with that final comment, another wonderful Hot Topics session drew to a close.

Bibliographic Control Committee

The report of the Bibliographic Control Committee (BCC) and the Authorities Subcommittee can be found in the March–April issue of the newsletter.  Reports from other BCC subcommittee reports follow.  

The Subcommittee for Descriptive Cataloging held its business meeting for 2009 on Saturday, February 23 from 12:00-1:30 p.m. Over 20 visitors complemented the six subcommittee members present. Discussion of Resource Description and Access (RDA) was the main business item—in particular, prioritizing areas where the Music Library Association had issues with proposals from the Library of Congress for revisions to the full draft of RDA Chapter 6, especially those instructions for naming musical works. Mark Scharff, SDC chair and MLA liaison to ALA’s Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access (CC:DA) and Kathy Glennan, BCC chair and voting member of CC:DA, had been invited to attend a session of the Joint Steering Committee for the Development of RDA (JSC) during its March meeting in Chicago, as advisors to the ALA representative during the discussion of the proposal. The outcomes of that session would dictate the text of the first publication of RDA. The areas of contention between MLA (and by extension, ALA) and LC were many, and Scharff and Glennan asked for some input on identifying the most important items.

A robust and wide-ranging discussion ensued. Among the areas where consensus seemed to form: 1) MLA wishes to continue translating non-distinctive titles for musical works into the language of the cataloging agency (English for most of us) when the title is cognate with an English term. The closed list in the LC proposal was too small, and there were issues with the underlying philosophy that there was insufficient value in using consistent terms across composers’ oeuvres. 2) When not fully analyzing incomplete compilations of works of a single composer in a particular form, genre, or type, adding “Selections” to the preferred title should not be optional when creating an access point. That is, “Symphonies” should not be the title portion of a preferred access point for a resource containing Beethoven’s odd-numbered symphonies. 3) Music catalogers wish to retain the current practice of treating the title of a part of a work as distinctive in the preferred access point for that part, regardless of whether or not the part title itself is non-distinctive. In simpler terms, a movement from a Haydn symphony titled “Menuet” will use that title in the preferred access point for that movement, not “Minuets, orchestra, [key].” The LC proposal for how to name parts of works sent such titles through the translation/singular-plural process before being recorded. 4) A proposed instruction that would allow the designation of a particular keyboard instrument in preferred access points when doing so produces a more rational filing arrangement (e.g. Mozart or Haydn keyboard sonatas) must not be generalized to all time periods. Such an instruction produces ludicrous results when applied to 20th-century composers.

Other issues elicited less agreement, or a wait-and-see approach. Principal among these: 1) Using “found terms” to name large ensembles (e.g. “variety orchestra,” “wind ensemble”) in lieu of the three terms currently employed (“orchestra,” “string orchestra,” “band”). There is interest in more specificity, but issues around numbering, language forms, ambiguities, etc. that bear closer consideration. 2) Naming musical works with new text and title. For dramatic works, this currently takes the form of the preferred access point for the original, with the new title in parentheses. Extending this practice to non-dramatic works (e.g. “God save the King (America)” was an MLA proposal. Sentiment seemed to be to hold off. 3) Naming adaptations of folk/ethnic music. The immediate issue had to do with problems in the wording of the instruction, but a larger question was whether such adaptations should continue to be named by title alone, which seemed to imply that there was a recognizable “Ur-form” of the work to which an adapter’s contributions could be compared to determine whether those contributions had produced a new work. Most agreed that this was a far larger issue than could be addressed at this time.

The subcommittee also noted an IFLA proposal for a new Area 0 in ISBD, to contain information about content and carrier that is currently found in the General Material Designation. There seemed to be little issue with the proposal. The subcommittee also brainstormed future directions. One possibility would be a plenary session on RDA for the 2010 meeting, and/or a preconference for 2011, when implementation decisions are expected to have been made. Other suggestions: a report from the U. of Rochester on the Extensible Catalog; an orientation session on FRBR; and an instructive session on FRAD (Functional Requirements for Authority Data).

The chair recognized outgoing members Lois Schultz (Duke University) and Steve Henry (University of Maryland–College Park) for their years of service.

The business meeting began with an announcement that Spiro Shetuni and Joe Hafner would be rotating off of the committee, with thanks for their service.

Jay Weitz reported on activities at OCLC highlighting the Expert Community Experiment; OCLC MARC Update 2009, no. 8 and no. 9; work on the Duplicate Detection and Resolution (DDR); and completion of the first phase of the Controlled Headings project. In response to questions regarding parallel records and the DDR, Jay stated that parallel records would not be considered duplicate records, however, duplicate records in the same cataloging language (i.e. German) would be potentially detected and resolved.

Steve Yusko reported on activities at the Library of Congress, stating that he has attended several meetings regarding RDA discussions and proposals. Steve mentioned that MARC proposal no. 2009-01/2, New content designation for RDA elements: Content Type, Media Type, Carrier Type, was passed by MARBI at ALA Midwinter, but with concern about visibility in MARC records and with some questions regarding terms of extent of music. He also noted that RDA Appendix J and Appendix K are problematic so we should stay tuned for more information on these appendices.

Kathy Glennan reported on the new RDA-MARC Working Group. The group prepared discussion papers and proposals relating to implementing RDA in MARC for the ALA Midwinter meeting in Denver. She has been serving as a music expert on this group since mid-December, specifically helping address issues in RDA Appendix J.

Jim Alberts led a brief review of the subcommittee’s charge. He began by reading the charge and asked if we are living up to some of its provisions. He mentioned that he is trying to move faster to get MARBI proposals and discussion papers to subcommittee members so that MLA can develop responses to documents that may not be explicitly music-related but could have an impact on the music community. It was noted that the timeline between the release of MARBI proposals and discussion papers (generally less than a month before MARBI meets) leaves the chair and the subcommittee very little time to review these materials before ALA. He also hopes that his successor as chair will continue to pursue this. More discussion on this will take place via e-mail following this meeting including a discussion on how to deal with the metadata issue with regards to our subcommittee.

The subcommittee discussed MARC proposal 2009-01/1, New data elements in the MARC 21 Authority Format. Much of what is in this proposal aligns current practice with FRAD requirements. It was asked whether we will start using these codes once we implement RDA, to which Jim responded that we probably won’t be using them until at least 2011; Kathy pointed out that the current target implementation of RDA is not until Fall 2010. Additionally, we will have to wait until changes are both published and implemented in the MARC format to make use of these codes.

Jim began a discussion of MARC proposal 2009-01/2 with a summary of the proposal, which creates new fields for content, carrier and medium information, replacing some of what is currently coded in the 245 General Material Designation and field 300. He then turned the discussion over to guests Damian Iseminger and Kathy Glennan. Damian described how to use the fields and noted that these create redundancy in the record. The specific problems arising with changes to the extent of notated music codes (Bibliographic Format, Music 008/20) may warrant official proposals to be put forth by MLA.

Daniel Paradis brought up MARC field 518, Date of Issuance vs. Date of Recording, noting that place of capture and date of capture are in two different subelements of RDA, which does not work with existing coding. While the capacity to link fields in MARC exists, there would need to be an additional subfield in the 518 to break date of recording out separately. A poll of the subcommittee indicated that this issue is worth pursuing. Jim will contact Rebecca Guenther to determine whether this should be put forward as a proposal or if the RDA-MARC Working Group would be interested in taking it on.

Jim noted that he had been asked about MARC Proposal 98-16 and 98-16R, which allows for the use of control characters (ISO 6630 hex'88' and hex'89', or “curly brackets”) around non-filing characters. Matthew Wise and others noted that this dated to format integration and implementation of MARC field 246 and other fields in which non-filing indicators could not be used. The proposal was approved by MARBI but has never been implemented except in some UNIMARC systems in other countries. Since this has already been approved for use in MARC21, it was recommended that individual institutions should lobby themselves if they want to make use of this.

Kathy Glennan repeated Steve’s concerns about RDA Appendix J and Appendix K. She noted that both are in a state of flux and that the JSC representatives at CC:DA encouraged Diane Hillmann not to work on developing the RDA vocabulary registries on these appendices until after the March 2009 JSC meeting.

On this note, the chair closed the meeting with thanks to all subcommittee members and visitors.

(Based on minutes recorded by Catherine Gick)

A report on the business meeting of the Subject Access Subcommittee held at the MLA annual meeting in Chicago follows.

Recognition of Service
A special thank you goes to outgoing members Lynne Jaffe and Jenn Riley for their valuable contributions and time serving on this committee.

ALA report (Beth Flood)
In the LC report on the moving image project, the Policy Office recommended that each of the five new projects (music, law, cartography, literature, and religion) contribute to a centralized genre/form thesaurus. The report also recommended that LC “explore new models for a community based thesaurus of genre/form terms in collaboration with professional organizations and other institutions” (http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/movimgenre.pdf).

In other news, LC will be continuing the project to make a subset of LCSH available in SKOS format. They are developing a site within the loc.gov domain for this project, after which SKOS should go live again.

The ALA/ALCTS/SAC Genre/Form Implementation Subcommittee discussed RDA carrier terms in relation to the developing genre/form thesaurus, and suggested that a list of carrier types/format terms could be made and those terms established as 155 genre/form headings. The group also made plans to create a list of form subdivisions (MARC authority tag 185). This list will be used by specific projects to identify subject-specific form subdivision terms, and it will also be used by the subcommittee in developing a list of terms used across disciplines.

A new Library of Congress report on the pros and cons of pre/post-coordination of subject headings has been made available at: http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/pre_vs_post.html.

Library of Congress Report (Gerry Ostrove)
LC has created about 35,000 validation records to date. However, the program being used in generating these records developed a problem, resulting in duplicate records. The project is on hold until this problem is resolved.

Discussion of the Genre/Form Project
The group, including visitors, discussed at length LC’s proposal for beginning the music genre/form project. Issues that arose included the following.

• Can $8 linking fields be used to support pre-coordination of strings in a post-coordinated environment?

• Determining how post-coordination will work with existing systems can come after the project is begun. The terms and structure generated in this project need to be portable beyond MARC. The vocabulary should support a post-coordinated indexing system, but development of such a system is not in the scope of this project. The project should perhaps encourage ILS groups and OCLC to develop the structure necessary to support a post-indexing system.

• Instrumentation is a single category which can then be subdivided into instrument terms and ensemble terms. Pattern headings will now be different. In the new system, will there be a way to address numbers of instruments versus number of players (doubling, alternate instruments, etc.?)

• Named ensembles could pose a problem in terms of specificity, because instrument terms are implied but not stated in the ensemble names. For example, a (standard) string quartet includes a viola, but the term “viola” is not in the ensemble name.

• What about the 048 field? The coding can currently be more specific than subject headings, but is it easy to transform to linguistic terms? On the issue of codes versus terms, the important thing is consistency—either use consistent terms or consistent codes. In any case, the current 048 codes need to be replaced, probably by the IAML code list, to increase the vocabulary. This would be a good opportunity for MLA to work with IAML.

• A problem is caused by the inherent Boolean logic in many ILS systems. Such systems allow users to search for records which include specified terms but do not allow limiting to only those terms. Systems also are not usually capable of limiting searching to an individual MARC field (i.e., one 048 field in a record that includes several 048 fields.) However, this in an indexing problem, rather than a problem that the genre/form project can solve.

• Separating medium of performance from genre/form headings, without some provision for the medium portion of the headings, could result in an automated authority control problem. There is not a one-to-one correlation between current music heading strings and future form/genre terms. There is a threat that automated authority control vendors could flip music heading strings from 650 to the form/genre 655 terms and lose the medium of performance portion of the heading in the process. This threat needs to be communicated to vendors along with a recommendation that vendors do not process music genre/form headings until the project is close to completion.

• Genre/form terms and medium of performance terms need to be related in the public interface. A user might start with the form term “Sonatas”, but they then need to be directed to instrumentation.

An update on activities and projects sponsored by the Career Development and Services Committee (CDS) follows.
 
Placement Service:
Placement Officer, Susannah Cleveland reports that five (5) institutions interviewed for six (6) jobs at the Chicago Meeting. Thirteen (13) currently open positions were advertised at the Placement Desk. This number is down considerably from the approximately twenty-four positions that were advertised in Newport at last year’s meeting. In recent months, many ads have been removed as a result of hiring freezes. Susannah observed also that “positions requiring experience have been facing particular challenges, suggesting perhaps that people with jobs are very reluctant to make major career changes right now.”

Résumé Review Service Update:
Thirty-two (32) job-seeking MLAers took advantage of the CDS Committee’s Résumé and Cover Letter Review Service in Chicago. This is the highest number of participants at any meeting since the program’s inception. Nine MLA veterans acted as official “reviewers.” They were Jeannette Casey, Beth Christensen, Susannah Cleveland, Michael Duffy, Paula Elliot, Ned Quist, Darwin Scott, Sheridan Stormes, and Lisa Woznicki. Alan Ringwood coordinated the program this year with the assistance of Lisa Woznicki, who will be the RCLRS coordinator for the coming year. Michael Duffy will be her assistant.

In addition, the RCLRS has enjoyed an active presence on the MLA Web site since late August. Those seeking to improve their job applications now may take advantage of the service year-round. Instructions for submission of materials for review are included on the Web site page.

Career Advisory Service:
The Board has approved the proposal drafted by a task force led by Lisa Shiota for a Career Advisory Service. Lisa has been working with MLA Web Editor, Amy Pawlowski and Assistant Web Editor, Jon Haupt to develop an online forum for this service. In their deliberations, the members of the Task Force determined that a forum with a special section for “F.A.Q.’s” and moderators to handle various specialized questions would be a more appropriate tool than a blog. Once the forum is set up, the Task Force will put out a call for mentors. Task Force members are: Beth Christensen, Joe Clark, Michael Duffy, and Lisa Shiota.

Study of Minority Participation in Music/Fine Arts Librarianship:
After soliciting input for revising the MLA Survey of Personnel Characteristics (the original version of which was created by Renée McBride and David Lesniaski), Mark Puente and Susannah Cleveland sent the survey to various listservs. They have already received 347 responses and hope to receive more before the survey deadline of March 15, 2009. Mark and Susannah plan to extract basic demographic data and compare it with general population statistics and projections and make a presentation of their findings at the San Diego meeting.

Other Proposed Projects
The Career Services and Development Committee discussed plans for the proposal of a program at the 2010 meeting on the “Dos and Don’ts of a Successful Job Interview.”

Most recently, the CDS Committee has been approached about revisiting and revising the “Qualifications of a Music Librarian, A Statement prepared by the members of the Committee on Professional Education of the Music Library Association,” Fontes artis musicae 21 (1974):139-43. This project is currently under consideration.

New Charge:
Finally, outgoing MLA President Phil Vandermeer asked the Career Development and Services Committee to revise its charge statement. The committee did so at its annual meeting in Chicago and has proposed the following charge to President Ruthann McTyre:

“The Career Development and Services Committee exists to provide ongoing programs that assist music librarians to secure suitable and relevant employment and to establish and maintain viable and meaningful career paths. The membership of the Committee seeks to provide experienced and unbiased mentoring and counsel on matters pertaining to career development and workplace dynamics.

In addition, the Committee monitors developments in personnel-related areas and seeks to provide guidance through individualized counseling and, as deemed beneficial, sponsor or provide relevant Conference programming.”

Top
 

Sarah Dorsey
University of North Carolina at Greensboro

The Women in Music Roundtable joined forces with the American Music Roundtable to present, “American Women: Composing, Conducting … and Singing the Blues,” a varied, Chicago-themed session combining the tales of three very different and inspiring American women musicians. Starting off was Linda Mack, Music Librarian at Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, who presented her research on composer, pianist and pedagogue, Blythe Owen (1898-2000). Composer of over 150 pieces in a variety of genres, Owen was composing and teaching well into her 90s. The fact that Linda knew Owen and studied piano with her enhanced the engaging and informative presentation of a fascinating woman. We look forward to reading the book Linda is writing on Owen.

The next featured Chicagoan was Margaret Hillis (1921-1998), founder and first director of the Chicago Symphony Chorus, whose career with the CSO spanned almost four decades. Frank Villella, archivist of the CSO, provided a biography of Hillis and background on the founding of the Chicago Symphony Chorus. He was followed by Dr. Cheryl Frazes Hill, Head of Music Education and Director of Choral Activities at Roosevelt University, and an associate conductor of the Chicago Symphony Chorus and a protégé of Hillis. She vividly recounted stories of Hillis’s rehearsal methods with illustrations of the intricately marked scores from Hillis’s library.

Our third presenter, Chicago native Laura Moody is Music Librarian at San Francisco State University (and Co-Chair of the American Music Roundtable). She told the story of blues singer Victoria Spivey (1906-1976), which featured vintage audio examples. A colorful character, Spivey recorded with King Oliver, Louis Armstrong and Bob Dylan.

Cassaro Appointed Development Officer

James Cassaro, Music Librarian at the University of Pittsburgh, has been appointed the Music Library Association’s new Development Officer. He succeeds Paula Matthews, who will be stepping down after serving as the association’s first Development Officer.

Jim Cassaro has previously served MLA as President as well as Treasurer, and is currently the editor of Notes. The Development Officer position comes as his term as editor draws to an end. Join us in welcoming Jim to this new position!

 
1 July 2009
MLA Membership
Renewals Due

5-10 July 2009
IAML Annual Conference
Netherlands, Amsterdam

9-15 July 2009
ALA Annual Conference
Chicago, IL

21 August 2009
MLA Newsletter no. 158
Submissions Due

Time to Apply for 2010 Awards and Grants

The Music Library Association is now accepting applications for the following 2010 awards and grants. Awards will be presented at the MLA annual meeting in San Diego, California, which will be held March 20–24, 2010.
 

 
At its 2003 annual meeting, the Music Library Association announced the establishment of the Carol June Bradley Award for Historical Research in Music Librarianship. Ms. Bradley is Librarian Emeritus at the State University of New York at Buffalo, and has been the foremost historian of music librarianship. This annual award, in the amount of $1,000, will be granted to support studies that involve the history of music libraries or special collections; biographies of music librarians; studies of specific aspects of music librarianship; and studies of music library patrons' activities.

The grant will be awarded to support costs associated with the research process. These may include travel, lodging, meals, supplies, and digital, photocopy or microfilm reproduction of source material. There are no restrictions as to applicant's age, nationality, profession, or institutional affiliation. All proposals will be reviewed entirely on the basis of merit.

Applicants should submit the following documents:

1. A summary of the project, including planned results
2. A preliminary budget with justification for expenses
3. A current vita
4. The names of three references

Within one year of receiving the award, the recipient is required to submit a report on how the funds were spent, and on the progress of the work supported. Any publication of the recipient's work must state that this award helped to support the research process.

The deadline for receipt of applications is June 15, 2009. Applications received after that date will be considered for funding in 2010. Recipients will be notified by October 15, 2009. For more information, please contact the Bradley Award Committee chair via e-mail: tdickma@siue.edu

Applications should be submitted to:

Therese Dickman
Lovejoy Library
30 Hairpin Drive
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Edwardsville, IL 62026-1063

 
The Dena Epstein Award for Archival and Library Research in American Music was created in 1995 through a generous gift from Morton and Dena Epstein to the Music Library Association. Requests are currently being accepted for one or more grants to be awarded for the year 2010. The amount to be awarded is $2100.

A grant may be awarded to support research in archives or libraries (both nationally and internationally) on any aspect of American music. There are no restrictions as to applicant's age, nationality, profession, or institutional affiliation. All proposals will be reviewed entirely based on merit. Awards may be presented to an individual applicant or divided among multiple applicants. At its discretion, the committee may choose not to award a grant during any particular year. An applicant who has not received an Epstein Award for the first year of application may resubmit a proposal in the two following years for any one project. An applicant may receive only one award for any one project.

Applicants must submit the following documents:

1.  A brief research proposal (under 10 pages) that includes:
a)  a description of the project
b)  a detailed budget for the project, indicating:
1)  the amount of funding requested (capital purchases such as computer equipment and furniture are ineligible)
2)  justification for the funding
3)  additional sources of funding
c)  a demonstration of how the applicant's research will contribute to the study and understanding of American music

2.  A curriculum vitae of the applicant.

3.  Three letters of support from librarians and/or scholars knowledgeable about American music.

The committee will accept both electronic and print submissions. If submitting by mail, please include four copies of all documents. If submitting electronically, proposals must be in Microsoft Word or PDF and be sent as e-mail attachments.

If submitting electronically, please send required documentation to Cheryl Taranto, chair of the Dena Epstein Award Committee, at cheryl.taranto@unlv.edu.

If mailing print submissions, please send the required documentation to the chair of the Dena Epstein Award Committee at the following address:

Cheryl Taranto, Ph.D.
Music Librarian
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
4505 Maryland Pkwy.
Box 7002
Las Vegas, Nevada 89154-7002.

The deadline for receipt of proposals and letters of support is July 1, 2009.
 

The Music Library Association, in memory of its Past President and Honorary Member Walter Gerboth, established the Gerboth Award. It is made to members of MLA who are in the first five years of their professional library careers, to assist research-in-progress in music or music librarianship. Eligible members are invited to apply by June 15, 2009 for next year's award. Please send the following information via e-mail, to the chair of the committee, Laura Dankner:

1. A description of the project and a statement about its significance.
2. A detailed total budget, specifying the amount of funding requested from MLA (to a maximum of $1,000) and its purpose (capital purchases are not eligible). Indicate any other sources of funding you may have already secured.
3. Two letters of recommendation—one for the project and one for yourself.
4. A curriculum vitae that also names additional references.

If you have any questions about the award, particularly about whether you are qualified to apply for it, please contact the chair: Laura Dankner (dankner@earthlink.net)

Top
 

MLA’s New Online Directory

James L. Zychowicz
MLA Business Office, A-R Editions

Launched in late 2008 to coincide with registration for the 2009 annual meeting, MLA’s new online directory is designed to provide easy access to information about current members of the organization. Members can use the site to search for members not only by name, but also by other fields, such as city, state, membership type, or other parameters. In addition, the site offers members control of their own information, so that contact information is always current for mailing addresses, e-mail addresses, and phone numbers. Members can also create and update their own passwords to facilitate logging into the site. Moreover, the entire site is linked to e-commerce to make it safe and easy to join MLA, renew memberships, contribute to MLA, and register for conferences online through a secure server.

Bookmark the Online Directory
The easiest way to find the new online directory is through MLA’s organization site: http://www.musiclibraryassoc.org. Follow the links under the heading “For Members and Subscribers” to reach the online directory.

When you get to the site, you may want to bookmark or make it one of your favorites to make it easier to return to the site regularly.

Log into the Online Directory
Once at the site, be sure to login so that you can take full advantage of all the features. Log into the site with your e-mail address and use the password you chose. If you forgot your password, click on the link labeled “Forgot password” to have the site send you the password on file. This service is available day and night, so that members can have access to the site whenever they need it. (If you have problems with the login and password, please contact the MLA Business Office for assistance: mla@areditions.com or 608-836-5825. Members who did not renew for the 2008-2009 membership year may need to click the “Join” link to enter their information in the online directory.)

Once they login successfully, members have full access to all the directory’s features, which are listed on the sidebars found on the left-hand side of the screen.

Those visiting the site for the first time may want to review their own information; it is possible to do so through the link “Update Profile.” With a single click, members can find their personal information displayed in front of them. It is possible to revise any field, so that the rest of the organization has the latest contact information. You can also use the site to revise your password for future logins. After making any changes, though, you must click “Save” for them to take effect.

Searching the Directory

To search the directory, click on the link labeled “Membership Directory” to find the basic search screen. The display should appear as follows:

Use a name or part of a name to find someone. The results will include both last names and first names. With common names or stems like “John,” you can sort the results by clicking on the headers on the results page. Clicking on the header “Name,” for example, organizes the results alphabetically by last name, and it is possible to organize the results by clicking on each of the headings.

It is also possible to use multiple fields for advanced searches when looking for specific information. Use the drop-down menus for the first two fields to establish the parameters you want. For example, it is possible to search by state and membership type, and thus find student members in the state of New York. This kind of work lends itself well to the dynamic environment of the online directory. As you become familiar with the site, you are welcome to try different combinations depending on your needs.

Once you have your results, you can contact individuals listed on the results pages by clicking on their name. The listings resemble those found in the traditional print directory, and should not pose any problems. Yet in this online environment, some individuals may have opted not to show their home addresses. More importantly, some of the information displayed may differ from the last printed directory, since it reflects the latest input from the members. (This environment encourages us to work together in keeping the information current.)

My Profile
Members have individual pages containing their personal information, and logged-in members can update it at any time. Use the navigation item “Update Profile” to get to your page:

When you review your information, please check that your “Institution” information is correct. You need not repeat the institution name in Address 1 and, instead, use the field for the rest of the mailing information. Please feel free to make changes as needed, including updating your password, if you like. Remember to click “Save” (at the bottom of the page) to put the changes into effect.

E-Commerce
Another feature of the new online directory is its integration with e-commerce, so that members can renew, donate, subscribe to an MLA publication, or register for a conference. Payment by credit card is possible via VISA, MasterCard, and American Express. Members may also pay by check, since the site can generate a formatted receipt to return to the Business Office with payment.

When you are logged into the site as a current member, your personal information appears right away, so that you do not have to fill out a form. In fact, your personal information appears in the preview, and if you would like to change it, you can go back to revise any personal data, then complete the transaction.

If the information is correct, you can click the button to “Proceed with payment” and then use the e-commerce at the site to pay by credit card. Again, if you want to print out a form to send payment by mail to the Business Office, click on the option to pay by check, and the site will generate the paperwork you need. It should be clear and easy to use.

You can pay by credit card (VISA, MasterCard, or American Express) or print a mail-in form to send to the Business Office with your check. If you use a credit card, make certain that the site knows the billing address for it—the member’s profile has space for a home address, a work address, and a credit-card billing address. The latter is useful for payments with institutional credit cards and other, related situations.

When you pay by credit card, you should receive two receipts:

• An itemized receipt generated by the site with all the details in a formatted presentation (this comes from noreply@areditions.com)

By the way, it is also possible for individuals to join MLA or register for the conferences prior to joining MLA. More importantly, anyone can return to the site to make further purchases. If you decide later to purchase a concert ticket or an additional banquet ticket, it is possible to return to the site to take care these and other transactions. The 2009-2010 Membership Renewal will take place soon, and it should be easy for members to handle this at the site.

Contact Us
The site also offers various ways to contact the Business Office, starting with the navigation panel on the front page:

The “Contact Us” navigation item is linked to a structured response, which contain some drop-down menus to refine your message:

This is one way to reach us – if it’s easier to send e-mail or to call us, please do so. The site has not replaced human contact with technology, but allowed technology to make regular communication more effective.

Some Tips
Please use the site. In fact, if you have not already done so, please log into the online directory and familiarize yourself with it. Try the navigation buttons, use the drop-down menus, and get a feel for the site.

If you haven’t yet bookmarked the site, remember to do so.

Please review your profile periodically and keep it current.  

As you use the site, feel free to contact the Business Office with any questions or suggestions (608-836-5825 or mla@areditions.com). We look forward to hearing from you!