This paper examines dilemmas for Australian music academics in terms of quantifying their research equivalence in the recent Federal government ERA preparations. To do so, short written statements and limited digital assets were offered in a trial evaluation framework somewhat disconnected from the original musical contexts and their meanings, yet this assessment model will increasingly impact upon career progression, esteem, and research funding in future ERA rounds. Consequently, this paper reviews the salient features of recent web 1.0 and web 2.0 activity to argue the case for a scholarly digital resource peer-review system as 'authority 3.0'.