LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  March 2006

ARSCLIST March 2006

Subject:

Re: And on the plus side ...

From:

Scott Phillips <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 19 Mar 2006 23:34:24 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (110 lines)

I was working at a major studio in Florida at the time, we often went
through 100 rolls of 2" a WEEK. True, the humidity is high there ,
although the studio climate was well controlled. On quite a number of
famous artists using 468, we had to transfer the master 2" tracks just
to get through tracking, let alone mixing. 1/4" and 1/2" were the same.
I really, really liked the sound of the tape, and dimensionally it was
very well slit and stable in the recorders. The sticky shed was the
issue. 469 was also used a good deal, and it didn't seem at the time to
do the shedding, but no one seemed to like the sound as much, and it was
thinner.... 

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Lennick
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 11:19 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] And on the plus side ...

Whatever BASF and AGFA tape was being used for EBU programs in the late
80s and early 90s, it's all held up beautifully for my purposes. Never
had a bad roll of the stuff. On the other hand, whatever Deutsche Welle
was sending out (1-mil back-coated brown oxide with a very smooth oxide
surface) was sticky almost immediately. This totally unscientific and
biased survey is based solely on what I was hauling out of CBC's Tape
Reclaim and the CJRT discard bin between about 1986 and 1996.

dl

Scott Phillips wrote:

> Agfa 468 in the '80's I had many, terrible problems with, in all width

> formats including 2". Sticky shed was the presentation, looking back 
> at it. It was as if after a certain number of passes it just fell 
> apart. A pity, as it was VERY good sounding tape with a nice 'type' of

> noise floor.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marie Azile O'Connell
> Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:33 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] And on the plus side ...
>
> I agree whole-heartedly.  Virtually every tape I have encountered from

> the 50's and 60's presents with almost no problems, and the sound 
> quality is very good, if not excellent.  This has been with 3inch, 5 
> inch and 7 inch reels, and most
> 10.5 inch reels.  Strangely, the only brands I have had HUGE problems 
> with in the 10.5 inch reels are AFGA 469 (I think) and PYRAL, or ones 
> that have been spliced together with different brands of tape, having 
> been recorded, in the field, on a Uher, and later spliced together and

> put onto a 10.5 inch reel.
> Once we hit the 70's, all hell broke loose, and they changed the 
> formulas!  In hindsight, they didn't do us a favour at all!  Infact, 
> they gave/give us endless problems - just because it it new, doesn't 
> mean to say it is good, or the best!
>
> My sixpence worth!
>
> Marie
>
> Quoting [log in to unmask]:
>
> > In a message dated 3/19/2006 6:40:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> > [log in to unmask] writes:
> > Wow, the tape fairies are in the air! I had the same experience with

> > an early
> >
> > 60's reel of AudioTape
> > mylar-backed on Friday evening.
> > *****************
> >
> > I've yet to have a problem playing a tape made between 1950 and
1965.
>
> > Most of this was the cheapest tape I could buy so I'm not talking 
> > about high quality, just that it is now just as good (bad) as it was
> when new.
> >
> > Unfortunately around 1980 I spent a considerable amount of time 
> > transferring
> >
> > and editing material from that era to new, professional grade tape. 
> > I am having trouble playing some of those transfers.
> >
> > Now should I go back to the originals and spend the time again, 
> > though
>
> > less with the help of digital editing, to make new copies on a 
> > possibly even less
> >
> > durable medium?  I'm too old to maintain the copies myself for 
> > another
>
> > 25 years, and who else will?
> >
> > Mike Csontos
> >
>
> Marie O'Connell
> Sound Archivist/Sound Engineer/Sound Consultant Center for Oral 
> History & Cultural Heritage University of Southern Mississippi
> Phone: 601-266-6514
> Mobile: 601-329-6911

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager