Steve:

I don't know if David ever made the paper available online. He sent me a 
paper copy years ago. I believe it was the basis for his book "/Sound 
Recording: The Life Story of A Technology" /(which I have not had the 
opportunity to read)./

/Here is a link to his Recording History site, which lists the 
publications he has done. Fascinating site-he has done some great research.

http://www.recording-history.org/HTML/pubs.php

--Scott Smith


Steven Smolian wrote:
> I wasn't aware of the dissertaion.  Can you supply a more complete 
> reference?
>
> Steve Smolian
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott D. Smith" 
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 6:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] wire recordings - archival storage
>
>
>> Angie:
>>
>> The discussion of various wire piqued my curiosity, so I did a little 
>> digging. I didn't find the exact reference I was looking for, but 
>> found a couple of similar citations. I think most of this research 
>> was done by Brush Magnetics and Marvin Camras at Armour Research, 
>> with similar research done by the Geramns.
>>
>> The best reference I found was from "The Recording and Reproduction 
>> of Sound" (Oliver Read-Author; Howard Sams-Publisher; ©1952). In the 
>> section on wire recording, there is a reference to the use of medium 
>> carbon steel wire, which was produced from medium carbon steel rod. I 
>> think this was probably what some of the early Pierce wire stock was. 
>> There is also reference from a Fidelitone source which outlines 
>> differences between /"Regular Stainless Steel Wire"/ and /"Stainless 
>> Steel Recording Wire"/. It essentially outlines the fact that the 
>> Stainless Steel Recording Wire undergoes some specific QC and other 
>> treatments during manufacture. There was quite a bit of research that 
>> went into this at the time, and I haven't had a chance to look up all 
>> the references. I do recall that there tended to be a high rejection 
>> rate of the stainless steel rod used to produce the wire, and that it 
>> had to fall within specific limits on the B & H curve.
>>
>> In the excellent book titled "Elements of Sound Recording" by John 
>> Frayne and Halley Wolfe (John Wiley & Sons, ©1949), there are 
>> references in a response chart from Brush Development to /"Carbon 
>> Steel Wire", "420 Stainless Steel Wire", "Brush Wire Type BK-913",/ 
>> and /"Coated Paper Tape"/. (If you're curious, the paper tape beats 
>> them all!).
>>
>> As I recall, the reference that I had previously seen wire stock 
>> referred to as "Type 1" and "Type 2" wire. Wish I could find the damn 
>> thing...
>>
>> I think the part of oxidation problem is as a result of the pot metal 
>> that was used for making the wire spools, which in the case of 
>> Webster-Chicago, I believe are anodized aluminum, although I have 
>> frankly never researched it. I have seen problems in the past with 
>> various anodizing, where either the metal was contaminated, or the 
>> anodizing was not done quite properly, resulting a sort of white 
>> powder substance. I'm not a chemist, so I will leave it to someone 
>> else to speculate on exactly what the nature of this might be.
>>
>> Your comments on print-through are interesting. It certainly would 
>> seem that wire would be prone to this-strange that it doesn't appear 
>> more often (on the other hand, the 40 db S/N ratio might have 
>> something to do with this!)
>>
>> One of these days, in my spare time (yeah, right), I'm going to go 
>> down to the IIT archives and take a look at the Armour papers 
>> relating to the research on wire recording, although David Morton has 
>> already covered much of this in his dissertation on Webster-Chicago.
>>
>> (BTW-the Webster-Chicago plant still stands at 5610 W. Bloomingdale 
>> in Chicago. I took some exterior photos a few years ago, and hope to 
>> make a tour of it sometime).
>>
>> Scott D. Smith
>> Chicago Audio Works, Inc.
>>
>>
>> Angie Dickinson Mickle wrote:
>>> Scott D. Smith wrote:
>>>> I always thought all the wire made by W-C was stainless as well, 
>>>> but apparently there were at least couple of different grades 
>>>> (which I've seen reference to in some literature from the 1940s. 
>>>> Would have to dig for the source).
>>>
>>> I would be very interested in your reference to this when you get a 
>>> chance.
>>>
>>>> I have seen some wire which has exhibited a crystalline type of 
>>>> oxidation (usually easily cleaned).
>>>
>>> I've seen this also.  To me oxidation is rust, but this is 
>>> definitely some environmental reaction.  It does not seem to effect 
>>> the recording or the integrity of the wire in the least.  And I find 
>>> it more often on the metal spool itself than the actual wire.
>>>
>>>> I've never really experienced any issues with print-through on wires.
>>>
>>> I hadn't either until very recently.  A very loud volume passage on 
>>> a wire definitely could be heard seconds later.  It could be argued 
>>> that that low level garbling that is frequently heard on wire could 
>>> be print-through.  On the other hand, it could be incomplete erasure 
>>> of previous recordings.  I could never tell.  Weighing tails out 
>>> storage to future playback equipment compatibility, I'd continue 
>>> storing heads out with a proper, even wind.  Because, here's my 
>>> question.  After being stored heads out for 50 or 60 years, how much 
>>> worse can any print-through get?
>>>
>>> Angie Dickinson Mickle
>>> Avocado Productions
>>> Broomfield, CO
>>> www.avocadoproductions.com
>>> 800-246-3811
>>>
>>
>