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 2015

ARSCLIST March 2015

Subject:

Re: Distressing data point for upcoming ARSC tape playback workshop

From:

John Schroth <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Sun, 1 Mar 2015 17:30:23 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (124 lines)

There's quite a delay between posting and having the email appear on the 
list-serve so some of Richards comments overlap mine.

One point to add. Kodak videotape was also problematic. Signal decay 
"seems" to be much more noticeable on Kodak videotape, mold is much more 
common and oxide shed seems higher than other brands of tape. I love 
Kodak, my dad worked there through his whole adult career. I have many 
friends who are retired engineers from Kodak who helped paved the 
landscape for everything from imaging technology for top secret military 
spy satellites to the CCD imaging devices in your high-end cell phone. 
No-one ever came close to many film products they offered but they never 
made decent audio OR videotape. And consumer products that came out 
after the days of film (8mm videotapes to lost cost ink/printers) were 
always behind the 8-ball when finally released. They always seemed to be 
behind the times, not ahead of it.

John Schroth

On 3/1/2015 4:52 PM, Tom Fine wrote:
> Hi Stewart:
>
> You are asking all good questions! Unfortunately, back in the era of 
> the mono "1812" master tapes, Audio Devices put batch numbers only on 
> crates containing the individual tape reels. In fact, in that era, 
> they often didn't have any Audiotape branding on the brown-cardboard 
> packaging for bulk sales to studios and other professional/industrial 
> buyers. The pretty boxes were mainly for 7" reels for sale to consumers.
>
> It's entirely possible that the "1812"/"Capriccio" tapes were from 
> different batches. Why? The "Capriccio" is a first-generation edited 
> master made at the original recording session in Minneapolis in 1954. 
> The "1812" and the narration were produced at Fine Sound Studios 
> because the "1812" is a mixed production -- original music score, 
> cannon and bells. All of this is explained in Deems Taylor's excellent 
> narration. In any case, the master tape was recorded at a different 
> time and different location from the component "session" tapes, and 
> would thus most likely be from a different batch. What I was getting 
> at with John Schroth is that it's strange how the occasional batch of 
> Audiotape (only 1/4", in my experience) goes bad like this, while most 
> don't.
>
> Regarding Richard's comment about iron, I would guess that 3M/Scotch, 
> Kodak and Audio Devices all had different suppliers of iron oxide for 
> their tape formulations. Their plants were located in different 
> places, and back in that time there were many iron mines and many 
> producers of iron products in the US. Plus, I assume everyone had 
> different oxide formulations. You can listen to each kind of tape and 
> the hiss is different. So, if iron has something to do with vinegar 
> syndrome, each oxide would have a different net effect on whether it 
> happens and how fast it happens.
>
> Finally -- Kodak tape. Every reel I've seen has been edge-warped and 
> shrunken. I've only had to play a few for transfer jobs. In all cases, 
> they're required my gauze in the head can brute-force approach on an 
> Ampex AG-440. The gauze pushes the warped tape against the play head 
> (not good for the head at all). An AG-440 drive is brute-forceful 
> enough to overcome the added friction. None of these tapes were 
> high-fidelity music masters but all were valuable to the client. Kodak 
> had really pretty packaging. It's too bad their tape formulation was 
> doomed from the start.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart Gooderman" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 4:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Distressing data point for upcoming ARSC tape 
> playback workshop
>
>
>> What I say here are words of a layperson with respect to restoration, 
>> but I am somewhat familiar with organic polymerization being an 
>> contact lens practitioner.
>>
>> Tom, do you know whether the two recordings were done on the same 
>> batch of tape? Because if they were different, they a) could have 
>> been polymerized differently, and/or b) could have been handled 
>> differently prior to Mercury receiving and using them to record on. 
>> In the short run that might not make a difference, but in the long 
>> run that could have a profound effect.
>>
>> Rigid contact lenses are made from buttons that are cut from long 
>> rods of plastic. It is well known that the quality of the 
>> polymerization at one end of the rod can be different that at the 
>> other end and this can lead to differences in quality when the 
>> contact lens is finished.
>>
>> Cellulose can consist of hundreds to thousands of D-glucose units, 
>> and so cellulose is not cellulose. It’s makeup can vary, the quality 
>> of the polymerization can vary, and it’s subsequent breakdown from 
>> heat and moisture can vary.
>>
>> I’ve even seen things like this with spectacles, when a lens is cut 
>> very slightly off. It fits into the plastic frame well enough when 
>> new, but in 2+ years you can see the lens buckling inside the eyewire.
>>
>> Again, I’m not an expert here, nor am I a chemical engineer. Just 
>> food for thought.
>>
>> DrG
>>
>>> On Mar 1, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Interesting case in point  -- the 1956 1/4" master tapes for the 
>>> mono Mercury "1812 Overture." Side 1, the overture and the spoken 
>>> narration by Deems Taylor, the master tape is a mess. It's badly 
>>> edge-warped and smells of vinegar. Side 2, the Capriccio Italien, 
>>> the master tape is in perfect condition. Both Audiotape, both made 
>>> at the same time. Both tapes have been treated and stored the same 
>>> because they are of one single album. Why has one fallen apart and 
>>> the other not? Very strange! Have you seen any such things with 
>>> acetate media in the Hollywood vaults?
>>>
>>> -- Tom Fine
>>
>>
>


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

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

December 2020
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