Assessing the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's score collection.

Gillie, Esther ; Teper, Thomas H.

Seeking to develop a better understanding of the collections they managed, and beginning a process of long-term planning, music librarians at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) enlisted the assistance of the library's preservation administrator in assessing their collection's condition. This assessment gathered information about the collection's history and publication formats, circulation patterns, and preservation needs with the intent of generating a more complete picture of the collection's health. The data collected indicated directions the library should take to enhance the collection's management, and refuted long-held assumptions about the collection's preservation needs and the institution's ability to purchase replacement copies of damaged materials. The following article describes the project's planning and organization, reports on the assessment's findings, and proposes a series of recommendations to improve the cooperative preservation of our printed music collections.

COLLECTION HISTORY

The University of Illinois at Urbana--Champaign's printed music collections began as an integral part of the library's main collection. Housed in the Main Library's stacks until 1944, the library administration moved the 15,000-piece collection of scores and books to the second floor of the Smith Music Hall. Within twenty years, Smith Music Hall's inadequacy as a proper library became clear. The collection not only filled all of the available space in Smith Hall by the mid-1960s, but it resided within locked, wire-caged shelving that lined the building's non-air-conditioned hallways. In 1969, the library administration relocated the Music Library's listening services and circulating collections, excepting the scores, to the newly constructed Undergraduate Library. Nevertheless, this solution also proved unsatisfactory; the scores remained in an increasingly cramped Smith Hall, separated from the listening and general circulating collections. In August 1974, the university dedicated a new music building, consolidating the library's collections and the public services operations into a new, purpose-built library within the new building. At this time, the library administration relocated many of the valuable, older materials to secure, climate-controlled conditions in the Rare Books and Special Collections Library (RBSC). Those items not meeting RBSC's collection policies moved to a closed stack area within the new Music Library. Although this move did not represent a concerted effort to collocate all printed music materials published before a specific date, the identification and transfer of these items served to create a circulating collection consisting almost entirely of materials published after the early 1900s.

The musical scores received substantial support in terms of physical treatment when compared to other collections within the library. This resulted, in large measure, from the forward thinking of personnel within the Music Library itself. Nearly every score is either commercially bound or pamphlet bound, and personnel in the Music Library received training on basic collection maintenance treatments such as tipping in loose pages and mending torn leaves long before most individuals within the University Libraries were so trained.

Although the Music Library's staff actively participated in caring for the collection, there was no assessment of the collection's condition. The recently completed assessment project occurred, in part, because of the deteriorating condition of the older Dewey-classed materials. The most significant reason for doing so, however, was the appointment of the University Library's first full-time preservation administrator.

Although the University Library supported the continuous operation of a small mending unit from its inception as part of the Roosevelt administration's Federal Emergency Relief Administration, the centralized preservation program is relatively young when compared to those of similar institutions. Consolidated in 2001, the library's preservation program made great progress in its first three years of existence. Not only did it expand services throughout the University Library, but it supported the Music Library's long-standing interest in preservation through continued pamphlet binding; increased preventative binding of paperbacks, spiral-bound items, and other weak binding structures; and the implementation and rationalization of reactive treatments such as centralized repair services and brittle book reformatting. Despite this support, the first step in planning for the comprehensive care of any collection remains completing an assessment.

PLANNING AND CONDUCTING THE ASSESSMENT

Shortly after arriving at UIUC, the preservation administrator completed a successful assessment of the general library book stacks. (1) Working with the preservation administrator, the Music Library's staff sought to apply the same model to their collections. While the head of Preservation identified some resources for the treatment of materials within the Music Library, the absence of documentation about the collection's overall condition prevented systematic planning for its preservation. In addition to providing needed documentation for planning the expenditure of internal funds, the assessment would provide the library with data valuable for planning grants necessary to support the collection's ongoing treatment.

After several conversations about the music collection as a whole, the preservation administrator and the music librarians agreed on limiting the planned assessment to the library's circulating scores. Although the circulating scores received heavy use through the years, no comprehensive data existed about the collection's condition, use, and preservation needs, and little literature existed on this aspect of preservation planning within a music library. For this reason, the scores seemed the logical and appropriate place to begin assessing our collections. However, several other reasons influenced the decision.

The School of Music's faculty and students typically used the circulating scores as a performance collection; consequently, they received heavy circulation and much use-related wear and tear. Second, the recently completed assessment of the Main Library's stacks provided the institution with some guidance about the overall condition of the institution's monograph collections. Third, the Music Library recently reclassified its remaining Dewey-classed reference materials to ensure arrangement according to the Library of Congress's classification. This project addressed many pressing preservation issues with the reference materials, and reduced that collection's need for immediate care. Finally, an assessment of the Music Library's special collections required a much more intense, and costly, item-by-item evaluation, whereas a statistical sampling of the scores would suffice as an introductory planning exercise.

While a portion of the Main Library's stacks assessment gathered information about housekeeping in the area where the materials resided, the authors of the music assessment deemed this level of detail excessive. Since the Music Library resides in a relatively new building with acceptable environmental controls, and preliminary investigations revealed no significant cleanliness issues, environmental damage, or evidence of insect infestation, the authors centered their efforts on developing an assessment focused on the condition of the physical scores rather than the environmental conditions in which they resided. (2)

In preparation for the assessment project at the UIUC, the Music Library's user services librarian queried MLA-L, the Music Library Association's e-mail distribution list, to ascertain if other institutions had completed assessments for their scores. Responses were minimal and contained information that, in some cases, remains unverifiable (e.g., "I believe that so-and-so completed an assessment at X University in the 90s."). Additionally, a literature search sought to identify any "how to" articles, and music librarians engaged in deacidification projects were contacted to see whether assessments identified materials at risk. Generally, most music librarians reported that they identified materials for deacidification treatment through routine preservation work such as repair or through post-circulation evaluation. With the exception of information reported in Janet Gertz and Susan Blaine's "Preservation of Printed Music: The Columbia University Libraries Scores Condition Survey," and Mark Roosa and Jane Gottlieb's edited conference proceedings entitled Knowing the Score, no identifiable assessment model specific to music materials was located. (3)

Statistical Methodology

Statistical sampling employing a standardized sampling methodology provides a reasonably accurate estimate of any population within an acceptable margin of error. Working from the model used in the stacks assessment at UIUC, the authors determined that, based on the size of the collection, sampling 385 pieces would provide a confidence of 95 percent, and a tolerance of [+ or -] 5 percent. (4) Consequently, if the assessment found that 12 percent of the items evaluated required binding, the authors could remain confident that the results would fall within [+ or -] 5 percent of the original answer 95 percent of the time.

While a higher confidence and a lower tolerance increase precision, the number of samples required increases exponentially. For example, increasing the confidence from 95 percent to 99 percent requires a 72 percent increase in the number of items sampled. Likewise, lowering the tolerance from 5 percent to 4 percent would increase the number of sampled items by 56 percent. Moreover, the authors determined that conducting relatively uniform assessments between circulating collections provides accurate cross-collection data throughout the library system.

Developing an Assessment Tool

By reviewing other assessments, the authors identified several categories needing investigation (see fig. 1). Five Music Library staff tested the draft form by examining five sample scores each. After testing, the preservation librarian revised the forms, including categories of information not apparent in the original discussions and further clarifying vocabulary. Project managers created an instruction and clarification page to ensure a uniform understanding of terms in the evaluation process (for example, "light damage" did not mean a small amount of damage, but damage caused by exposure to visible and ultraviolet light). Upon completion of the revisions, the preservation administrator revised the initial form to accommodate additional categories and permit a more organized and logical investigation of each piece (see appendix). Personnel then retested the form.

Organization and Workflow

While the new form permitted assessors to gather the desired information, it did not provide assessors with a means of locating the sampled items. To complete this task, the authors employed a modified fractional sampling method. In samples drawn from card catalogs, this method requires that one randomly select a card from within a set interval. (5) Employing this method in sampling a collection from the shelf required the development of way-finders within the collection. To fulfill this need, music librarians consecutively numbered the 1,255 shelves holding the scores. This permitted trained assessors to identify sample items using a combination of the shelf number and the item's position on the shelf. For example, the sample number 105:17 indicated that the evaluator should select the seventeenth score on shelf number 105. In order to determine which items were to be sampled, library personnel used Microsoft Excel's random number generator to produce the sample numbers based upon the range of shelving (1-1,255) and the average number of scores per shelf.

Unfortunately, the varying thickness of scores complicated the process of determining the average number of scores per shelf. While an odd shelf entirely composed of pamphlet-sized materials in a typical library collection may be uncommon, a score collection contains shelves of book-sized scores (such as hymnals or volumes of collected works), shelves of thin pamphlet-bound scores (choral octavos or vocal repertoire), and shelves with a mixture of sizes. To develop an accurate estimate for the number of scores per shelf, library personnel counted and averaged the number of scores on ten shelves of each size category and then generated sample sets using the largest number of scores encountered on a shelf. Unfortunately, this did result in a high number of rejected samples. To counter this foreseeable possibility, the authors generated extra random numbers for each assessor, providing them the ability to eliminate random number sets in which no item matched the numbers assigned.

After finalizing the assessment tool and generating the random numbers, the authors assigned 120 samples to the three individuals working in the project. Library staff previously completed twenty-five samples in testing the final forms. To train the assessors how to identify types of damage, the preservation librarian provided a training session including samples and a list of definitions of types of damage. Copies of a Power-Point presentation given to the assessment team showing typical damage provided assessors with a means of ready reference, and any questionable items could be put aside for further review. Once the assessors completed the data collection, the authors entered the data into a Microsoft Access database and calculated statistics.

THE ASSESSMENT'S RESULTS

Collection Information

To develop a well-rounded picture of the collection, the assessment gathered bibliographic information about each sampled item. This included data about an item's place and date of publication, publication format, and physical size.

Date of Publication

As rare scores remained isolated within a noncirculating collection, the authors expected a bias toward twentieth-century publication dates. As expected, nearly every score in the circulating collection had been published after 1900. Indeed, of the 385 items sampled, only seven items carried a publication date before 1900. From that date forward, the collection experienced almost unchecked growth--the major exceptions being the 1940s and 1970s, periods marking dislocation in the publishing industry, an unavailability of international literature caused by World War II, and economic stagnation (see fig. 2). Perhaps the most difficult aspect of determining the publication date of a score from a physical assessment is the common practice among publishers of including a copyright date in lieu of a publication date. Because the copyright date often does not correspond to the publication date, the age of 11.23 percent of the collection cannot be accurately gauged. Additionally, 9.35 percent of the collection possesses neither a marked date of publication nor copyright.

Place of Publication

As expected from a collection supporting a school focused on Western musical traditions, responses for the place of publication reflect the library's focus on collecting printed scores in those traditions. Publishers produced 95.32 percent of the scores in North America and Europe. Only 4.68 percent of the scores either originated in other parts of the globe, or carried no identified place of publication.

Size

Surprisingly, 83.38 percent of the sampled items fell within the category of being a standard size (between 27 cm and 42 cm in height). Miniature scores (those under 27 cm tall) amounted to 12.21 percent of the collection, and oversized (over 42 cm tall) or oblong (over 35 cm wide) accounted for only 4.42 percent of the total collection. By comparison, in the Main Library stacks assessment, 2.82 percent of sampled items were undersized (under 15 cm) and 17.95 percent were oversized (over 27 cm).

Format

Unlike typical monographs, music scores vary widely in format, and their formats play a significant role in determining the function and use of an individual piece in study and performance. The Music Library's assessment evaluated the scores to determine what percentage of the collection fell into particular formats--individual scores, scores with parts, scores with recordings, loose parts, and others. Individual scores constitute the largest part of the collection (75.84 percent). Yet, other formats represent a significant portion of the collection-19.48 percent of the collection is composed of scores issued with loose parts, and another 3.90 percent consists solely of sets of loose parts. Since the Music Library consciously removed and separated recordings issued as material accompanying a published score, this portion of the collection represents only 0.52 percent.

Circulation Information

Security Measures

The score collection's incomplete security stripping long required that personnel at the circulation desk check bags and backpacks for library materials in an effort to prevent theft. The assessment showed that only 36.10 percent of the score collection possesses security strips, quantifying the need for additional preventative security measures.

Usage

Only 31.40 percent of the sample population had no due-date labels, indicating that they never circulated. About 54.10 percent circulated up to ten times, and 14.50 percent circulated ten or more times. Despite the Music Library's practice of discarding full date-due slips, and the inability of such circulation information to account for in-library consultation, photocopying, and casual use that did not involve a formal circulation, these figures still show the collection's heavy use. For those items checked out in excess of ten times, it was common to find due dates spanning four or more decades.

Clarity of Labeling

Bar codes and accurate, legible labels were present on 98.40 percent of the scores sampled. Clearly, the need to relabel significant portions of the collection is not an issue.

Binding Condition

As the assessors completed their examination of each item's bibliographic and circulation information, they began an inspection of each item's exterior.

Binding Style

The assessment determined which of eleven categories most closely represented the binding style for the sampled items. As expected, pamphlet binding, used for 73.77 percent of the collection, was the dominant binding style. Commercial library binding protected about 17.92 percent of the collection. Combined, this indicates that 91.69 percent of the collection received preventative treatment, reflecting this unit's longstanding interest in preservation. This is particularly true in light of the University Library's tardiness in establishing a significant centralized preservation program (see fig. 3).

External Damage--Hinges and Mechanical Construction

The assessment also examined the materials for structural damage. Despite the different use and construction of music scores when compared to monographs, the collection exhibited roughly the same percentage of items suffering from external damage as found in a 2002 assessment of the Main Library's stacks. There, 24.88 percent of the collection exhibited damage including detached boards, torn covers, loose hinges, or missing boards and covers. (6) Despite heavy use, only about 23.12 percent of the score collection suffered from these types of damage, indicating the wisdom of preventative binding for such heavily used, fragile materials.

External Damage--Other Damage

Typically, hinge damage represents a small portion of the external damage. This held true for both the Main Library's stacks and the library's musical scores. However, the scores suffered from greater overall external damage. While only 56.41 percent of the main stacks materials exhibited signs of visible cover damage (such as water damage, warped and misshapen boards, light bleaching, staining, and insect damage), (7) the Music Library's scores exhibited visible damage on 81.04 percent of the collection. Scratched and dog-eared covers represented the greatest amount of damage with 29.49 percent and 24.62 percent damaged, respectively. There were also signs of staining on the covers of 15.90 percent of the materials.

Extraneous Materials

Assessors found extraneous materials, such as tape affixed to the external cover, on a very small proportion of the items. Only 7.79 percent of the collection had any tape or other material affixed to the exterior.

Internal Page Condition

Paper Damage

The overwhelming types of damage found on the internal pages resulted from poor care and handling. Of the items sampled, only 1.74 percent suffered from water damage, 0.35 percent from mold damage, and none from visible insect or pest damage. Only 3.15 percent of the items exhibited age-related damage, such as foxing.

The greatest cause of damage remains patron use. In contrast to slight damage caused by environmental circumstances, 33.57 percent of the collection suffered from marking by patrons, and 12.24 percent of the items evaluated contained dog-eared pages. Clearly, the collection's heavy performance-related use accounts for much of this damage, as marking scores during rehearsals is commonplace among musicians. Additionally, 6.99 percent of the collection suffered from mechanical damage, which included missing pages, loose pages, and scores detached from the pamphlet binders that held them.

For a library score collection at an institution that also supports a separate performance collection within its School of Music, one would presume a much lower incidence of marking. Nevertheless, as noted previously, the Music Library's score collection does circulate. This circulation is reflected in the high incidence of marking. This indicates that the collection's use is not solely for research. Indeed, the results strongly support a more appropriate classification of the collection as a performance collection that supplements the School of Music's performance collection.

Extraneous Material

Relatively few scores had extraneous material affixed to pages. Tape repairs appeared on only 3.12 percent of the items examined. Only 0.52 percent of the items contained paper clips, adhesive notes, or other foreign materials.

Paper Acidity

Personnel determined the paper acidity of each item with an Abbey pH pen. Not surprisingly, 83.12 percent of the collection was printed on acidic paper. While the pen measures surface pH and not acidity at the paper's core, it provides a good indication of the collection's potential for embrittlement. In comparison to the assessment recently conducted in the Main Library's stacks, the number of acidic items relative to the total collection size was nearly 9 percent less in the Music Library's collection of scores. As mentioned earlier, the score collection generally excludes any music published before 1891 and is largely of Western origin. In comparison, the main stacks collection includes items published as early as the 1800. Consequently, it is likely that the percentage of items printed on acidic paper is higher in the corpus of printed music than is indicated in this assessment.

Paper Acidity as Related to Brittleness

Although it is valuable to know the proportion of a collection printed on acid-free paper compared to those printed on acidic paper, preservation planning requires a more refined understanding of the collection's condition. In particular, this requires an understanding of the relation between the acidity of the paper present in the collection to its level of brittleness (see fig. 4). In the case of the materials assessed as part of this project, 83.12 percent are printed on acidic paper, but only a small portion of those materials were brittle. Those items printed on pliable papers remain candidates for less costly preventative preservation treatments such as mass deacidification. Of the items sampled, only fifty-seven pieces (14.81 percent) were both acidic and brittle. Consequently, while 83.12 percent of the collection tested as acidic, fully 68.31 percent of the collection would benefit from a preventative treatment such as mass deacidification.

Acidity and Embrittlement to Decade of Publication

Through discussions with other music librarians, the authors determined that many music deacidification programs at other libraries selected materials for treatment based upon decade of publication. The results of the UIUC music assessment indicate that making blanket assumptions about the acidity of materials published within certain date ranges significantly oversimplifies decision-making, excluding acidic materials that do not fall within the decades commonly associated with acidic paper. Of particular interest in this study was the fact that after the 1980s, Western music publishers continued producing a large percentage of scores on acidic papers. Indeed, for items sampled carrying known production dates in the 1990s, 21.74 percent of the sampled scores contained acidic paper. With over 95 percent of the collection at UIUC published in North America and Europe, one would assume a lower rate of acidity, especially as these regions placed significant emphasis on the use of permanent papers. Nonetheless, with 21.74 percent of the items published in the 1990s containing acidic paper, materials overlooked in previous mass deacidification projects should receive renewed consideration (see fig. 5). Similarly, while brittleness was present in every decade before 1990, there were also items published in every decade that were not brittle. For example, in the first decade of the twentieth century, 62 percent of the sampled scores were not yet brittle, even though 91.67 percent were acidic. Consequently, preventative measures would still be effective in preserving a significant portion of the library's score collection--even those materials published in earlier decades.

Ease of Replacement

Mindful of the cost of reformatting, personnel in the Music Library investigated a subset of the sample population for current availability, considering each score's place within the standard repertoire as identified in A Basic Music Library, (8) the extent of holdings as represented in OCLC's WorldCat, and its availability for purchase. The authors evaluated every tenth sample, creating a subset of forty items. Only five of this subset appeared as standard repertoire, and those five were widely held in WorldCat and still available from some publishing houses. Thirty-five different publishers were represented among the subset, including several defunct companies and many companies subsequently absorbed by larger corporations.

In terms of actually purchasing replacement copies, the evaluation found only seven items from the original subset of forty listed in current music publishers' catalogs. Oftentimes, the edition was not the same. Clearly, the acquisition of replacement copies is not always an easy process. While this quick investigation is not statistically valid, it does indicate a need to both rethink long-held assumptions about the ease of replacing deteriorating printed music collections through purchase. Moreover, assuming that future availability will remain dependent upon the loan of a diminishing pool of deteriorating copies at other music libraries, music librarians must carefully consider the future availability of printed music through purchase or loan when making withdrawal decisions.

Findings and Recommended Treatments

The Value of Assessments

As noted above, preparation for this assessment entailed queries to MLA-L and direct contact with institutions engaged in the deacidification of music collections. While it did provide some useful information in terms of planning the assessment, it provided insight into the planning and decision-making process at many other institutions. In general, MLA-L respondents indicated a reluctance to initiate assessment projects due to a lack of labor and funding. Based on anecdotal evidence, many librarians felt comfortable focusing deacidification activities exclusively on materials falling within certain dates, feeling that anything older than the 1960s would be brittle and anything produced after the 1990s was printed on permanent paper or would not have deteriorated enough to justify the expense. Another sentiment often voiced was the ability to replace scores as needed. Why preserve materials when it is more cost effective simply to replace them? Since the UIUC library identified no empirical data about brittleness and ease of replacement from those queried, the authors decided to proceed with an assessment and test the assumptions voiced by other music librarians in the process. Clearly, assumptions about the ease of replacements and paper acidity were flawed, and individuals planning for the long-term care of their collections would benefit from reevaluating their collection's needs.

The Value of Preventative Care

As discussed in Kathleen Haefliger and L. Suzanne Kellerman's "Preserving Music Materials: Past and Future," the use of microfilm and digital imaging as a means of preserving printed music impedes the performer from using the items as intended. (9) Short of perfect environmental conditions and an end to acidic paper, binding and mass deacidification should remain the primary long-term preservation options for printed music collections.

Despite very heavy use, UIUC's printed music collection remains in remarkably good condition. With approximately 95 percent of the collection issued in soft covers, the library's extensive use of pamphlet binding protected this collection admirably. While slightly more than 23 percent of the collection suffered from damaged covers, only 0.23 percent of the collection was missing any pages, and only 5.10 percent of the collection had any torn pages. For a heavily used collection primarily issued in paper covers, this is a remarkable testament to the protection afforded by pamphlet and library binding.

While the bindings physically protect the materials, their chemical deterioration continues. Despite the availability of acid-free paper since the mid-eighties, a significant percentage of publishers continue producing music on acidic paper. Clearly, the sole use of publication date to determine acidity is flawed, in that acidic materials are still being produced. Consequently, any successful deacidification project must account for both current and retrospective production.

The final need in terms of preventative preservation remains the need for proper security against theft. The assessment discovered that nearly two-thirds of the collection lacks basic security strips. In order to alleviate this need, the library embarked on a project to insert security strips into every volume of this highly desirable material.

Preservation or Replacement?

MLA-L respondents to the authors' inquiries frequently indicated an assumption about the ease of replacement for musical scores. In particular, this assumption focused on the fact that replacement was as simple as purchasing a new copy through normal acquisition channels. While more research is required, the assessment provided preliminary evidence that it is wrong for music librarians to assume damaged scores can be replaced by purchasing new copies; a large percentage of the sampled scores are no longer available from any publisher. With only 17.5 percent of sampled items available for purchase, very few items are easily replaceable, implying that preserving printed music collections cannot rely solely upon preventative care and replacement. Institutions must engage in reformatting to maintain access to their collections.

Preventative Education

The other major need demonstrated by the assessment is for the music librarians to begin addressing issues around how their collections are used. Although the UIUC Music Library's long-standing service-centered ethic encourages patrons to use its materials, it appears as though many faculty and students rely upon the library to provide copies of standard repertory for use in their teaching studios, resulting in significant use-based damage to the library's collections and a disincentive for students to build their own libraries. With printed music scores composing a significant part of the Music Library's circulating collection, it makes sense that the collection would be used for performance and study. Nevertheless, the quantity of materials suffering from use-related marking and mutilation indicates a need for education and training of both students and teaching faculty.

Education about the use and role of the library's collection takes much the same tone whether it is a music collection or a general library collection. The possibility of preventing further damage by encouraging teaching faculty to require students to purchase personal copies of music for rehearsal, practice sessions, tutorials, and course work emerged high on the list of potential solutions. While changing portions of the collection's status to noncirculating would solve the problem, the library's emphasis on access means that such a decision would require significant changes to the cultural and organizational values of the Music Library. In any case, there is a need for the library to engage in educational activities focused on the proper handling and treatment of library collections.

CONCLUSIONS

By evaluating and developing a better understanding of their collections through the process of assessment, music librarians at UIUC sought to outline a plan of action that would assist them in maintaining access to the resources they had painstakingly assembled. The assessment provided the authors with information about the collection's publication history, circulation patterns, and preservation needs. The data collected also indicate further directions the library should take to enhance the collection's management.

By developing a more comprehensive portrait of the collection, those within the Music Library gained insight into the collection's use, the impact of this use on the collection's condition, and strategies to preserve the materials. While many of these findings clearly illustrated local needs such as training and outreach in care and handling and user education, some findings illuminated needs for music librarianship at large.

In particular, the need for a cooperative preservation program remains significant. While the preservation of printed music collections on a local level is well-established among music librarians, the literature contains little reference to successful cooperative preservation programs for printed music. According to the results of the assessment, 68.83 percent of the UIUC collection is acidic, but not brittle. With over 58,000 scores in the collection and costs of over fourteen dollars per score to deacidify single items, it rapidly becomes clear that no single institution can bear the costs necessary to preserve the corpus of music literature. This begs the question of whether institutions should begin adopting cooperative models of preservation to ensure the long-term availability of printed music collections. Through the creation of collaborative repositories for core music literature, and the preservation of that literature both locally and through such a cooperative, the profession can adopt a leadership role in the preservation of its literature that few other disciplines have attempted. General Category Specific Data Publication information * Country * Date of publication * Size Collection management information * Format * Presence of security strip * Number of known circulations * Duration of circulating life * Clarity of labeling * Condition of stacks (cleanliness, order, crowding, etc.) Preservation information * Binding condition * Internal damage * External damage * Extraneous material * Acidity * Embrittlement Fig. 1. Categories identified as requiring investigation Category Number Percent of Total Pre-1800 0 0.00% 1801-1810 0 0.00% 1811-1820 0 0.00% 1821-1830 0 0.00% 1831-1840 0 0.00% 1841-1850 1 0.26% 1851-1860 0 0.00% 1861-1870 0 0.00% 1871-1880 0 0.00% 1881-1890 0 0.00% 1891-1900 6 1.56% 1901-1910 10 2.60% 1911-1920 10 2.60% 1921-1930 20 5.19% 1931-1940 22 5.71% 1941-1950 18 4.68% 1951-1960 40 10.39% 1961-1970 67 17.40% 1971-1980 45 11.69% 1981-1990 45 11.69% 1991-2000 23 5.97% 2001- 0 0.00% No date 28 7.27% Unknown 8 2.08% [c] w/o pub. date 42 10.91% Total 385 100.00% Fig. 2. Date of publication Category Number Percent of Total Pub. cloth 15 3.90% Pub. board 1 0.26% Lib. binding 69 17.92% Softcover 1 0.26% Velobind/Comb 4 1.04% Spiral 0 0.00% Pamphlet binder 284 73.77% Other binding 1 0.26% Vellum binding 0 0.00% Unbound 0 0.00% No response 10 2.60% Total 385 100.00% Fig. 3. Binding styles of musical scores Category/Breakability Number Percent of Total Acidic/One fold 10 2.60% Acidic/Two folds 18 4.68% Acidic/Three folds 11 2.86% Acidic/Four folds 18 4.68% Acidic/Not brittle 265 68.83% Nonacidic/One fold 0 0.00% Nonacidic/Two fold 0 0.00% Nonacidic/Three folds 1 0.26% Nonacidic/Four folds 0 0.00% Nonacidic/Not brittle 62 16.10% Total 385 100.00% Fig. 4. Acidity of paper to breakability on double-fold test Decade % Acidic Pre-1800 0.00% 1801-1810 0.00% 1811-1820 0.00% 1821-1830 0.00% 1831-1840 0.00% 1841-1850 100.00% 1851-1860 0.00% 1861-1870 0.00% 1871-1880 0.00% 1881-1890 0.00% 1891-1900 85.71% 1901-1910 91.67% 1911-1920 100.00% 1921-1930 88.89% 1931-1940 75.00% 1941-1950 100.00% 1951-1960 100.00% 1961-1970 94.37% 1971-1980 74.47% 1981-1990 71.11% 1991-2000 21.74% 2001- 0.00% Unknown 87.88% Fig. 5. Percent of sampled items acidic per decade

1. Thomas H. Teper and Stephanie S. Atkins, "Building Preservation: The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Stacks Assessment," College & Research Libraries 64 (May 2003): 211-27.

2. These are important aspects of assessment that should be considered, especially if the environment is questionable or if one suspects insect or water damage.

3. Janet Gertz and Susan Blaine, "Preservation of Printed Music: The Columbia University Libraries Scores Condition Survey," Fontes Artis Musicae 41 (April-June 1994): 261-69: Knowing the Score: Preserving Collections of Music, ed. by Mark Roosa and Jane Gottlieb, MLA Technical Reports, 23 (Canton, MA: Music Library Association; Chicago: Association for Library Collections & Technical Services, 1994).

4. Teper and Atkins, 215. Calculations of sample sizes were obtained from Michael T. Martin, Research Advisory Services, Inc., AZ Plan Site (1998), http://www.azplansite.com/samplesize.htm (accessed 23 February 2005). Sample-size information can also be obtained from Creative Research Systems' Sample Size Calculator, http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm (accessed 23 February 2005).

5. John Dean, "Managing Collection Information for Preservation Planning," Advances in Preservation and Access 2 (1995): 201.

6. Teper and Atkins, 219.

7. Ibid., 219.

8. A Basic Music Library: Essential Scores and Sound Recordings, 3d ed., compiled by the Music Library Association (Chicago: American Library Association, 1997).

9. Kathleen Haefliger and L. Suzanne Kellerman, "Preserving Music Materials: Past and Future," Advances in Preservation and Access 2 (1995): 322.

Esther Gillie is user services coordinator in the Music Library, and Thomas H. Teper is head of Preservation at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.