CAML Review / Revue de l'ACBM (Canadian Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres / Association canadienne des bibliothèques, archives et centres de documentation musicaux)

McArthur, Michael

Still Rollin’ - Mike Murley Septet (CD Review)

Zylstra, Robert

 
------------------------------------ 
© 2011 The author and the Canadian Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres / 
L’auteur et l’Association canadienne des bibliothèques, archives et centres de documentation musicaux 
 
26 
 
MLA 2011: FIRST-TIMER IMPRESSIONS  
FROM A NEW MUSIC LIBRARIAN 
 
BY ROBERT ZYLSTRA 
GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY 
 
 
This past February I had the privilege of attending the 80th Annual Meeting of the Music 
Library Association in Philadelphia, PA. As I am new to music librarianship, this event 
was an opportunity for me to ask questions and discuss the challenges of the field with 
experienced colleagues. What follows is a short account of my experiences at the 
conference in this beautiful and historically rich city.  
 
Upon my arrival in Philadelphia I settled into my room at the Loews Hotel and headed to 
the opening reception. The number of attendees immediately surprised me: just under 
480 people had registered for the conference. Prior to the conference, I had not put 
much thought into just how many music librarians were employed across North 
America, but it soon became clear that I was far from alone in this field! During the 
reception, the ‘first-timer’ ribbon on my nametag caught the eye of some enthusiastic 
and seasoned music librarians who welcomed me and then took opportunities 
throughout the conference to introduce me to others, which I appreciated greatly.  
 
The next morning I arrived early for the plenary, which was preceded by a welcoming 
performance by a group of the Philadelphia Mummers. The opening panel presentation, 
entitled Thinking Beyond the Disc: Disseminating Recordings in the Digital Era, was an 
excellent precursor to the concurrent sessions that followed. First, Stephen Millen from 
the Philadelphia Orchestra explained how recordings that were originally a source of 
revenue for the organization have evolved into a marketing tool requiring investment. 
These recordings have become a method of brand recognition that ensures the 
Orchestra is known outside of the Philadelphia area. David Ludwig from the Curtis 
Institute of Music then spoke about how the Institute is using the InstantEncore platform 
to engage faculty, students and the public with concerts, videos and archival material. 
At the Curtis Institute, new technologies have been utilized to reduce a previously 
cumbersome recording process in order to deliver content in a time frame that meets 
current expectations. George Blood from Safe Sound Archives then closed the session 
with a thought-provoking presentation about the history of the recording industry and its 
continued importance. 
 
My remaining time at the conference was packed with interesting concurrent sessions, 
impressive vendor showcases, and informal discussions with my new colleagues about 
current issues. In one notable presentation, Paul Engle, Director of Library Services at 
 
27 
 
Berklee College of Music in Boston, highlighted recent developments in the College’s 
online course reserves system. I was impressed by this initiative, which is part of a 
larger resource management system that the College designed and built using open-
source software. In addition to perusing the extensive vendor displays, I also managed 
to arrange meetings with some of the vendors that I have been working with for the past 
few months. This was time well spent as I had come prepared with several key 
questions related to building MacEwan’s new music collection. 
 
It would be a shame not to mention the unscheduled aspects of the conference milieu. 
Local attractions such as Independence Hall, noon-hour organ concerts at Macy’s 
Department Store, and City Hall tours were just a few of the ways to take in the great 
city of Philadelphia. My favorite attraction was listening to the Wannamaker Organ at 
Macy’s. After hearing the organ and meeting the organist, I couldn’t help but give up a 
second noon hour to do it all over again. Unscheduled time was also spent in the hotel 
lobby where the only free wireless access could be found. This was at first somewhat 
frustrating, but joining other conference attendees in the lobby who were also seeking a 
connection to the outside world proved to be interesting and even entertaining at times. 
A number of informative discussions and connections developed as a result, including 
the first of several introductions to my Canadian colleagues. The Local Arrangements 
Committee Reception at Solmssen Court, University of the Arts, on Friday evening (a 
scheduled event with an unscheduled feel) was another excellent opportunity to share 
experiences and meet new people. I particularly enjoyed the search for a pub and the 
good conversation that followed this event. All of these activities helped make the 
conference memorable and were in many ways as useful as the program itself. 
 
As a new music librarian eager to meet colleagues and discuss the issues, I felt that the 
MLA conference could not come soon enough. Attending after having had only six 
months on the job, I was introduced to new ideas, received confirmation of others and 
was forced to rethink my approach to some issues. Now that the conference is over I 
find myself looking forward to the next MLA annual meeting in Dallas, as well as 
Canadian and international conferences in Sackville (CAML 2011) and Montreal (IAML 
2012). At this early stage in my career, opportunities that facilitate learning, discovery 
and discussion -- such as those I experienced at MLA 2011-- are invaluable. And on a 
final note, should you find yourself in Philadelphia, the noon-hour organ concerts at 
Macy’s Department Store are not to be missed! 


MLA 2011: First-Timer Impressions from a New Music Librarian

s.n., s.n.

Minutes of the CAML/ACBM Annual General Meeting, 2010

 
CAML REVIEW 39, NO. 3 (NOVEMBER 2011)   PAGE 10 
HELMUT KALLMANN AWARD / LE PRIX HELMUT KALLMANN 
 
This is an open invitation for 
nominations for the sixth Helmut 
Kallmann Award for distinguished 
service relating to music libraries and 
archives in Canada.  The award is 
presented by the Canadian Association 
of Music Libraries, Archives and 
Documentation Centres.  Both 
nominators and nominees may or may 
not be members of CAML.  Other 
details and previous recipients of the 
Award may be viewed at  
http://www.yorku.ca/caml/drupal/?q=en
/kallmannaward. 
 
The Award is named in honour of Dr. 
Helmut Kallmann, the pioneering 
Canadian musicologist, who was Chief 
of the National Library of Canada’s 
Music Division from its inception in 
1970 to 1987, as well as, a co-founder 
of the Canadian Music Library 
Association (the predecessor of 
CAML). 
 
Criteria  
The award is open to librarians, 
archivists, academics, and others who, 
over the course of their career, have 
made outstanding contributions in one 
or more of the following areas relating 
to music in Canada: 
  
 music librarianship or the archivist 
profession  
 development, preservation, and 
advancement of music libraries and 
archives  
 bibliography, cataloguing, and 
indexing activities improving access 
to Canadian resources  
 Canadian musicology research and 
documentation, including 
outstanding publications, promotion 
and dissemination activities.  
 
 Voici une invitation à soumettre des 
candidatures à la sixième édition du prix 
Helmut Kallmann. Présentée par l’Association 
canadienne des bibliothèques, archives et 
centres de documentation musicaux (ACBM), 
cette distinction souligne et reconnaît les 
services exceptionnels rendus par une 
personne dans le domaine des bibliothèques et 
archives musicales au Canada. Il n’est pas 
nécessaire que le candidat ni celui qui propose 
sa mise en candidature soient membres de 
l’ACBM. Vous pouvez retrouver d'autres détails 
ainsi que les précédents récipiendaires du prix, 
à l'adresse :  
http://www.yorku.ca/caml/drupal/?q=fr/kallmann.  
  
Le prix a été créé en l'honneur du Dr. Helmut 
Kallmann, chef de la division de la musique à 
la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada, depuis 
les débuts de cette division en 1970, jusqu'en 
1987. Le Dr. Kallmann est reconnu, de plus, 
comme un pionnier de la musicologie 
canadienne et co-fondateur de l'Association 
canadienne des bibliothèques de musique 
(devenue ACBM). 
 
Critères de sélection  
Le prix s’adresse aux bibliothécaires, 
archivistes, professeurs et autres qui, au cours 
de leur carrière, ont contribué d’une façon 
exceptionnelle à l’un des domaines connexes à 
la musique au Canada :  
 
 bibliothéconomie ou archivistique musicales 
 développement, préservation et 
avancement des bibliothèques et archives 
musicales 
 bibliographie, catalogage et activités 
d’indexation facilitant l’accès aux 
ressources musicales canadiennes 
 recherche et documentation en musicologie 
canadienne, incluant des publications 
exceptionnelles, ainsi que la promotion et 
les activités de diffusion.  
 
 
 
CAML REVIEW 39, NO. 3 (NOVEMBER 2011)   PAGE 11 
Candidates will be assessed on their 
achievements at the local, or regional, 
or national levels.  
 
Nominations, normally considered 
every two years, will be reviewed by an 
independent jury of three CAML 
members appointed by the CAML 
Board.  The jury will select a single 
recipient, or none if it considers none 
deserving for that year.  
 
Nominations 
 
Nominations should consist of:  
 
 a signed statement by the 
nominator, outlining the 
achievements of the nominee as 
they relate to the above criteria  
 other supporting documentation, 
including the curriculum vitae of the 
nominee. Letters of reference may 
also be appended.  
 full address and contact information 
for both the nominator and 
nominee. 
 
Nominations should be submitted by 
either sending an email to: Peter 
Higham, Mount Allison University at 
phigham@mta.ca, or, by mailing a 
paper copy to: The Helmut Kallmann 
Award Committee, c/o Peter Higham, 
Alfred Whitehead Music Library, Mount 
Allison University, Sackville, NB  E4L 
1A6. 
 
The nomination deadline is 30 
January 2012. 
 
The Helmut Kallmann Award 
Committee expects to present the 
Award at a CAML event during the July 
2012 Conference of the International 
Association of Music Libraries (IAML) 
in Montreal. 
Les candidats seront évalués selon leurs 
réalisations, soit au niveau local, régional ou 
national.  
 
Les candidatures, normalement proposées à 
tous les deux ans, seront étudiées par un jury 
indépendant composé de trois membres de 
l’ACBM et nommé par le conseil 
d’administration de l’association. Le jury ne 
choisira qu'un seul récipiendaire ou se réserve 
la possibilité de n’en choisir aucun, si aucune 
candidature n’est méritoire cette année-là. 
 
Mises en candidatures  
 
Les mises en candidature doivent inclure : 
 
 un exposé rédigé et signé par la personne 
qui présente un candidat, soulignant ses 
réalisations et ses liens avec les critères de 
sélection 
 toute autre documentation pertinente, 
incluant le Curriculum Vitae du candidat, 
lettres de référence, etc. 
 adresses et coordonnées du candidat et de 
la personne qui le propose 
 
Les candidatures peuvent être soumises de 
l'une ou l'autre façon : 
 
 par courriel à : Peter Higham, Mount Allison 
University <phigham@mta.ca>  
 par la poste : Comité du prix Helmut 
Kallmann, a/s , Peter Higham, Alfred 
Whitehead Music Library, Mount Allison 
University. Sackville, NB E4L 1A6.  
 
Date d’échéance des mises en candidature : 
30 janvier 2012. 
 
Le Comité du Prix Helmut Kallmann devrait 
dévoilé le(la) gagnant(e) et présenté cette 
distinction au cours du congrès de 
l'Association internationale des bibliothèques 
de musique (AIBM) qui se tiendra à Montréal, 
en juillet 2012.  
 


English

Helmut Kallmann Award / Le Prix Helmut Kallmann

a, n

49 
 
BOOKS AND RECORDINGS RECEIVED 
 
Alban Berg and His World. Edited by Christopher Hailey. Princeton, NJ: Princeton 
University Press, 2010. xvi, 361 pp. ISBN-13: 9780691148554. Paper. $29.95 
USD. 
Glass Houses Revisited: Music of Ann Southam. Toronto, ON: Centrediscs, 2011. 1 
compact disc (58:10). Christina Petrowska Quilico, piano. Contents: Selection of 
nine pieces from Southam’s Glass Houses, revised and edited by Quilico. 
CMCCD 16511. $13.98.  
Letters from Helen: A Canadian Student in Germany on the Eve of the Great War. By 
Helen VanWart. Sackville, NB:  Sybertooth, 2010. 187 pp. ISBN-13: 978-
0981024493. $20.00.  
Sound, Society and the Geography of Popular Music. Edited by Ola Johansson and 
Thomas L. Bell. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate, 2009. xiv, 305 pp. ISBN-13: 
9780754675778. $99.95 USD. 
 


Books and Recordings Received

Kirk, Ryan

raW: Chamber Music by James Rolfe (CD Review)

AIBM/IAML 2012 Montreal

Nowlan, Gillian

 
CAML REVIEW 39, NO. 2 (AUGUST 2011)   PAGE 17 
HOT TOPICS FOR MUSIC LIBRARIANS:  
SESSION HIGHLIGHTS FROM CAML 2011 
 
SACKVILLE, NEW BRUNSWICK 
 JUNE 2–5, 2011 
 
BY GILLIAN NOWLAN 
UNIVERSITY OF REGINA 
 
 
 
The Canadian Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres 2011 
conference in Sackville, New Brunswick, covered a variety of topics in the areas of music 
librarianship. Issues ranged from music cataloguing, collection development policies, 19th-
century Canadian sheet music, and information literacy to “hot topics” for music librarians. 
 
The session “Hot Topics for Music Librarians” was chaired by Brian McMillan, who compiled a 
set of questions that were sent to him via email by other music librarians. Open discussion of 
these topics and questions allowed for all attendees to participate and to contribute to the 
conversation. 
 
The following are highlights and observations from the “Hot Topics for Music Librarians” 
session.   
 
 
Question #1 
 
I have a question I would like some feedback on … Not working with the students/researchers 
that you would see in an academic library, I am curious as to how these users look for classical 
material. Specifically, do they ever use the name-titles that are provided on the cataloguing 
record? It seems to me that keyword searching would be used almost exclusively now when 
searching the databases, but I really don't know.  
 
The first issue that was brought forward was the use of name fields and whether or not they 
provide a simplified way to find music materials. It was acknowledged that names present 
certain problems when there are multiple spellings used for a particular composer. It was 
generally agreed that the best approach is to teach library patrons to search with keywords and 
then adopt the use of the name field once more specific information is pulled from a keyword 
search. That is, once the standardized forms of an author’s name and a title are found through a 
simple keyword search the patron can move to more advanced searching, which includes using 
the name field. 
 
The use of uniform titles in online catalogue records and the question of how to teach music 
library patrons to use them was also addressed in the same fashion as using the name field 
when searching. It was agreed that it is best to identify uniform titles through keyword searching 
if the exact title is not know or if a title search under uniform title retrieves no results. 
 
 
CAML REVIEW 39, NO. 2 (AUGUST 2011)   PAGE 18 
There was further discussion about creating a more advanced system that could utilize cross 
references in a more transparent way, making searching easier and more accessible for library 
patrons. Name fields and uniform titles are still extremely useful, but it might be best to show 
patrons how to use these fields through a basic keyword search and to teach them how these 
fields function in the OPAC. 
 
 
Question #2 
 
Unionization: I would like to ask whether or not being in a union makes anyone feel safer, given 
the storm created by the statements (and actions) of the Chief Librarian at McMaster, Jeff 
Trzeciak. 
 
A topic prevalent not only in music libraries, but across all academic libraries, is unionization 
versus faculty associations. The conversation was fueled by concern over the statements and 
actions of Jeff Trzeciak at McMaster University. This brought about the question of whether 
librarians feel safer with a union rather than a faculty association. Some librarians in 
nonunionized environments said they feel safe and still have the same opportunities as those in 
unionized libraries. There was some disagreement, though, as some librarians in unionized 
environments felt that they had more opportunity to do research and be better represented 
within the university. It was difficult to compare unionized libraries to libraries with faculty 
associations, since faculty associations can vary so much from institution to institution. 
 
There was some agreement that unionization is preferable when it comes to tough times within 
a library or academic institution. In this case unionization provides job protection and stronger 
support. Overall, it was stressed that librarians have to promote themselves and show that they 
are a vital part of running a functional library. 
 
 
Question #3 
 
There is a very hot topic that has been sitting on my back burner for a while now, namely, the 
acquisition of mp3s for the library collection. Increasingly I'm finding that the purchases I'd like to 
make are limited by the fact that we have no technical infrastructure or legal framework to 
support developing a collection with mp3s. We have access to pretty well all of the online 
streaming packages (Naxos, Alexander Street Press, etc) and I'm sure that eventually the “big 
three” will have some sort of deal for libraries (or will they?), but there are a host of independent 
labels now selling mp3s exclusively. And we have no means to collect their material. 
 
The acquisition of mp3s in libraries poses a large problem due to the multitude of various 
individual licenses, many of which allow only for private use. Many vendors are only releasing 
and selling music as a download and not providing a physical format anymore. This creates 
some major issues for libraries because most companies will not allow music to be copied onto 
a CD or iPod for library patrons to listen to. Companies don’t seem to realize that they are 
creating this problem for libraries, so there is uncertainty if this problem will be solved by the 
vendors themselves. Librarians need to start negotiating for better licensing and more flexible 
copyright. There is especially a need to address the accessibility of Canadian content and to 
make sure that this is available to library patrons. Even though better licensing and copyright 
laws would assist with this issue, there is still the problem of tracking down individual artists or 
copyright owners to ask for permission. 
 
 
CAML REVIEW 39, NO. 2 (AUGUST 2011)   PAGE 19 
Another issue is how libraries store and archive these materials. Currently, libraries are ill-
equipped to store and archive music in mp3 format.  
 
 
Question #4 
 
How are music libraries dealing with print-on-demand scores? Any issues? 
 
Scores are increasingly being made available digitally, to be sent to libraries in electronic format 
or to be printed for a specific library. A number of sources for digital scores were mentioned, 
including vendors (e.g. Schirmer’s Print-on-Demand service, American Composers Alliance pdf 
download service) and free sites (e.g. IMSLP, Sibley Music Library Digital Scores Collection). 
Sibley was also mentioned as a source for out-of-print Carl Fischer publications. The 
subscription database Schubertline was cited as a valuable source of public domain scores that 
can be freely printed – even in transposed versions – as the need arises. 
 
As with audio formats, licensing issues related to scores can also pose challenges for library 
collections, as some self-published works are now being licensed for specific uses only. 
 
 
Question #5 
 
We are in the midst of a new building program for the Faculty of Music (and the music library). 
One "hot topic" that keeps coming back to me is … what is the future of listening stations in 
music libraries? We are looking 3-4 years down the road and it's hard to know what to plan for, 
other than FLEXIBILITY.  
 
It is difficult to predict the future of listening stations, considering the ongoing changes to music 
formats and to the ways that we listen to music. Most music library listening stations currently 
have a mix of upper-end CD players and a few turntables. The use of listening rooms has gone 
down considerably since the introduction of music recording databases, portable media players, 
and laptops. Many students seem to prefer to listen on their laptops or iPods, in part because 
there is the opportunity to listen to music in a group and discuss what they are hearing. 
 
It was recommended that listening stations maintain Blu-ray players, since many laptops do not 
have this feature, as well as turntables. There was also discussion on providing more portable 
playback devices, such as iPods and iPads. Another idea was to have a soundproof study 
space that could be used for group listening or for conductors wanting to practice without the 
wires of headphones. Planning for the development of a new listening area should include a 
survey asking what students want in terms of a listening room or station. Ensuring that there are 
plenty of outlets for electronic devices and providing stations with multiple headphone outlets for 
group listening is essential.  
 
 
 
 


Hot Topics for Music Librarians: Session Highlights from CAML 2011

Chellew, Megan

16 
 
RDA: A Real-Life Look 
Megan Chellew 
McGill University 
 
 
For the last few years, every time someone said “RDA” to me, it conjured up a vision of a very 
complicated chart of FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) relationships, 
swirling around with new rules and weird-looking bibliographic records. I love rules, and the 
chart of FRBR relationships is a really exciting way to look at things. But I need concrete 
examples to really understand something new; for me, the burning question was: “What is this 
really going to look like?”  
On October 1, 2010, the United States testing period began for RDA (Resource Description and 
Access), the new cataloguing standard. Since then, RDA records have been appearing in OCLC, 
available for export and for the world to see. For the first time, we can look at the reality of 
RDA, from both the public view and the cataloguer’s view. I’ve chosen to highlight the changes 
that will affect virtually each and every record; there are additional changes that will either not 
be seen frequently, or will be implemented at the cataloguer’s discretion. It’s also important to 
keep in mind that the public view is something that will be customized by each individual 
library. Some institutions may choose not to display some of the new RDA features. The 
examples I’ve chosen are from institutions that are choosing to display these features. 
Looking at a record from the Library of Congress catalogue (fig. 1), one feature immediately 
jumps out and gets right to the heart of the changes RDA has brought to cataloguing. At the 
bottom of the record are three new fields, labeled as Content Type, Media Type and Carrier 
Type. These fields use controlled vocabularies to indicate what the resource really is. It is a 
score, so the content type is notated music. No extra media is needed to access the resource, so 
the media type is unmediated. And the carrier type, the actual physical reality of the resource, is 
a volume. (All the RDA controlled vocabularies can be found at: 
http://metadataregistry.org/rdabrowse.htm.) With the exception of these three new fields, this 
bibliographic record looks very similar to the AACR2 records we’re used to seeing. From the 
public service point of view, the changes RDA has brought are very straightforward and 
accessible.  
 
 
------------------------------------ 
© 2010 The author and the Canadian Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres / L’auteur et 
l’Association canadienne des bibliothèques, archives et centres de documentation musicaux 
17 
 
 
Fig. 1 
 
Looking at the MARC view of the same record (fig. 2), cataloguers will want to know what will 
tell them that this is an RDA record. First of all, in the 040 field, subfield e, “rda” is given as the 
Convention of Description. The second clue is in the Leader (the 000 field in this record). The 
Descriptive Cataloging Form (position 18), which we are used to seeing coded as “a” for 
AACR2 records, in RDA is given as “i” because it is non-AARC2.  Further down the record, 
cataloguers will find the three new fields mentioned above: 336 (Content Type), 337 (Media 
Type) and 338 (Carrier Type). Each of these fields has a subfield 2, indicating which controlled 
vocabulary is used to fill in the terms in the subfield a. The subfield 2 (rdacontent, rdamedia, 
rdacarrier) is a further clue that this is an RDA record. 
There are a few other differences that RDA brings to this record, none of which diverge wildly 
from what we’re used to seeing. The 260 field (Production, Distribution, etc.), subfield c, has 
two identical dates recorded—[2009], ©2009—which does look unusual. The RDA rule is to 
record both the copyright date and the date of publication, even if they are the same year. How 
these dates are transferred to the corresponding positions of the 008 field is subject to 
interpretation. In this record, they are recorded as “t” (publication date and copyright date) with 
2009 entered in both date positions. Other institutions are recording this as “s” (single date) when 
the publication and copyright dates are identical, and only entering 2009 in the first date position. 
18 
 
Another small difference is in the 300 field (Physical Description). This piece of music is for 
solo piano, and according to AACR2 rules, would have been designated as “pages of music” and 
not a “score” (score being reserved for music for more than one instrument or voice). Under 
RDA, however, this terminology has been normalized, and all notated music is referred to as a 
score.  
 
 
Fig. 2 
 
In several places, you will see words that would have been abbreviated in the past written out in 
full. RDA has abolished the use of the abbreviations (unless an abbreviated form is what appears 
on the resource in hand). So, instead of “p.”, we have “pages”, and instead of “approx.” (in the 
500 field indicating the duration of the piece), we see “approximately”. The exception to this rule 
is that the physical dimensions of the score are still recorded in “cm”, not centimetres. In RDA, 
“cm” is considered a symbol, not an abbreviation. 
 
One last difference in this record, which probably would not be noticed by anyone who was 
unaccustomed to controlled vocabularies and authorized forms of name, is the form of name in 
the 100 field. The authorized form of Corigliano’s name is actually Corigliano, John, 1938-. 
19 
 
Library of Congress’ policy, however, is to always include the full form of name, which is why 
what we see in the 100 field here is Corigliano, John (John Paul), 1938-. (This RDA form is 
added to the existing authority record for Corigliano in a 700 field.)   
RDA has a slightly higher impact on bibliographic records for sound recordings. In the sound 
recording record in figure 3, again, we see the three new RDA fields. In the first example, we 
saw that Library of Congress has chosen to label them “Content Type”, “Media Type”, “Carrier 
Type”. Here, the University of Chicago has labeled theirs “Content type”, “Medium”, “Format”. 
In this case, the content is performed music. The resource requires Audio media to access it, 
which is recorded in the Medium field. And finally, the Format, the thing the music is recorded 
on, is an audio disc. 
 
 
Fig. 3 
 
Also, experienced users might notice that the Title field looks a little bare; the [sound recording] 
(also known as the GMD, or general material description), which would normally appear after 
the first part of the title, will no longer be used in RDA. That GMD is really what the three new 
fields replace. Those fields parse the information out more specifically, so it is more computer 
friendly. 
 
Looking at the MARC view (fig. 4), a cataloguer will immediately notice that the 245 is missing 
its subfield h [sound recording] GMD. That change, along with the new 336, 337, 338 fields, is 
the major change in cataloguing rules for sound recordings. Again, there are minor changes, such 
as the subfield c in the 260 field, where the date of publication and copyright date are both 
recorded. Looking at the 008 field, this record is an example of an institution that has decided to 
code the date as a single date, since the date of publication and copyright are identical. Another 
minor change is in the 300 field, subfield b, where stereo no longer has a period at the end. It is 
no longer considered an abbreviation for stereophonic, but a word in its own right (mono gets the 
same treatment in that it is no longer considered an abbreviation for monaural). Also in the 300 
20 
 
field, this time in subfield c, the dimensions of the disc are recorded in centimetres instead of 
inches. Because RDA is meant to be a truly international standard, physical dimensions will be 
recorded using the metric system, since most countries use the metric, and not the imperial, 
system. 
 
 
Fig. 4 
 
One great strength of RDA is that it really highlights the relationships between the resource and 
the person, or people, involved in producing it. So, in the example shown in figure 5, in the 
Personal Author field, Satie is designated as the composer (using a subfield e and a relator term 
in the 100 field). In the second Added author field, Debussy’s relationship is spelled out; he is 
the “arranger of music”. By making the relationships clear, the user can easily see what each 
person’s involvement was, without having to refer to different fields, and possibly put the puzzle 
pieces together themselves. In this example, it is easy to understand Debussy’s role; it is clearly 
outlined in the Title (or 245) field. But there are certainly times where a user would have to look 
in a notes field to find out what Debussy’s involvement was. It also means that resources on 
which Satie was the composer will index separately from resources on which he was, for 
example, the performer. This makes retrieval easier for both the computer and the searcher. 
Simply as a point of interest, it is worth noting in this record, that the uniform title is not, in fact, 
constructed according to any RDA rules. It is, however, a very interesting idea to include the 
instrumentation the piece was arranged for, and the arranger.    
21 
 
 
Fig. 5 
 
Anyone wanting to look at further examples of RDA records can pull a set from OCLC (either 
the browser or the client) by doing a command search by entering the following: dx:rda, and then 
adding another term (for example, su:music or au:Debussy) to refine the search and retrieve a 
manageable set of records. 
None of the changes that I’ve shown in the above records is really a great departure from the 
AACR2 rules we have come to know and love. Cataloguers are still recording the same kinds of 
information that we always have. With RDA we’ll be recording some information a little 
differently, or in a new location. But, fundamentally, these changes are all very manageable and 
understandable. This is, of course, a transition period. There will be further changes as RDA is 
implemented more fully. But the whole point of having a transition is to try to make the move 
from the AACR2 world to the new RDA world as smooth as possible.  


Not a member yet