This is a FWIW posting regarding the SSS problem and I'm sure
many of you already know this.
The owner of the only US tape manufacturing facility passed this
on to me a year or so ago and I hope I'm forwarding the correct
Whale oil was always used in the binder of tape until the ban on
whale harvesting went into effect. We observed the ban while the
Japanese didn't. We switched to a polyurethane base while the
Japanese continued to use whale oil until they stopped making tape. I
believe today's technology, regarding polyurethanes, has solved
the problem but only time will tell.
Merry Christmas all, Ken
On Dec 22, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Shai Drori wrote:
> It's a good argument, but has it been tested. Has anyone tried to
> store a back coated tape without it's back coating to see the
> difference? If I remember correctly (where is Rich Hess when you
> need him) the SSS was first discovered in ampex 400 series, but it
> was the new binder they used. I don't see how that is affected by
> the back coating, and why doesn't it affect all back coated tapes.
> I have many different tapes with back coating, some of them almost
> 30 years old by now that play like the day I bought them. Maxell
> XLI, BASF pem468, BASF dpr26, emtec 911 (not 30 years old). To put
> the blame on the back coating just because if is from the same era.
> It should have sown up in all back coated tapes. What am I missing?
> On 12/22/2010 8:47 PM, Michael Biel wrote:
>> On 12/22/2010 2:27 AM, Shai Drori wrote:
>>> I have many tape that are back coated that show no SSS. In my
>>> experience there is no connection whatsoever.
>> But how often have you found non-backcoated tapes with SSS?
>> Mike Biel [log in to unmask]
>>> On 12/22/2010 8:46 AM, Michael Biel wrote:
>>>> The one saving grace of 8mm is that I don't think I have come
>>>> across a backcoated tape in this format. So if there is any
>>>> truth to SSS being a reaction to backcoating, that reduces that
>>>> Mike Biel [log in to unmask]