LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


[email protected]


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  October 2022

ARSCLIST October 2022

Subject:

Re: [EXTERNAL] [ARSCLIST] Scotch 175 verses 176

From:

"Richard L. Hess" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 28 Oct 2022 13:25:32 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (268 lines)

Hi, Andreas,

I have written about 3M 175 in several articles. In chronological order:
https://richardhess.com/notes/2006/07/12/the-beginning-of-3m-175-squeal/

Mentioned tangentially and another approach:
https://richardhess.com/notes/2007/11/08/success-with-squealing-shamrock-031-tape/

A further bit of analysis and comparison:
https://richardhess.com/notes/formats/magnetic-media/magnetic-tapes/analog-audio/degrading-tapes/
(search for "175" (without the quotes) and it's the second hit from the top.

Discussion of 176 follows immediately after.

Cold playback has proven to be helpful, and that generally indicates 
that there has been binder degradation in the sense that the binder has 
become more rubber-like than glass-like due to the glass transition 
temperature being lowered as the tape degrades. Cold playback just 
lowers the playback temperature below the current glass transition 
temperature (Tg) of the tape. Ric Bradshaw tested some 3M 175 for 
me--and here the Tg had dropped to about 8 °C. 4 °C is a common 
cold-playback temperature.

A fairly lengthy discussion of this appears starting a little more than 
half way down on p. 250 of my 2008 ARSC Journal article, found here:
https://www.richardhess.com/tape/history/HESS_Tape_Degradation_ARSC_Journal_39-2.pdf

The bottom of page 252 is Bradshaw's comment on the 175 sample he tested 
for me. There are many interesting points raised in this quote. I think 
that Bradshaw's "greasy" and your "oily" might be both describing a 
similar byproduct.

> My experience with gamma iron oxide filled, BF Goodrich Estane 
> polyester-polyurethane
> based formulations from the late 60’s and 70’s is that they ALL had 
> Tg’s at time zero of
> barely 26–30°C, and as they aged and hydrolyzed it dropped to less 
> than 12-15°C. I really
> believe this is why [cold playback of] many of these tapes improves 
> their runability. For
> hydrolyzed tapes, an increasing amount of the binder is cleaved and 
> produces greasy, low
> melting degradation fragments which prefer to migrate to the surface 
> and for back coated
> media move into the backcoat causing it to be “sticky” at room 
> temperature. Baking tapes
> with this kind of degradation can force even more migration and 
> ultimately “glue” the
> two coatings together unless the bake is done with very low wrap 
> tension (interlayer pressure).
> I think that wiping with a Q-tip or any wipe for that matter is 
> removing some of
> the degradation fragments (I imagine the wipes get very brown from 
> coating removal as
> well) and thus improving the unwind and play. The problem with doing 
> this for the
> length of a tape is that you are also removing what is left of the 
> lubricants and the
> degraded coatings have lost much of their rubbery (resilient) 
> toughness. It would be better
> to do a two part wipe, using a damp isopropyl alcohol wipe followed by 
> a butyl stearate
> (lubricant) (about 5% by volume in hexane) wipe to not delube the 
> magcoat. You have to
> build a rewind station with two wipe heads in series to do this 
> satisfactorily. We used to
> have one to handle 3420 reel to reel digital tapes.

So, there is a bunch of information here, but I do not think we have a 
definitive procedure for all 3M175, since different reels appear to 
behave differently. This seems to be a problem with many 
manufacturers...not to mention the often-found problem of Tape Type ABC 
in Tape Box XYZ.

Cheers,

Richard




On 2022-10-27 4:23 p.m., Andreas Meyer wrote:
> Thank you Dennis,
>
> I always welcome your experience and expertise.  Curious we had no problems
> so far with the 176 stock (again same full track mono at 7.5ips).  I
> decided to try a *light* baking of the 175 stock, but this did not reduce
> the oily deposit on the head for playback.  I would like to get these under
> a scope as this is not back coating causing the typical sticky shed
> syndrome.  There is no backing on the 175 stock.  But I do want to see if
> the oil leaving the tape is causing damage before I go further. I will read
> up on the AES paper that was linked earlier in the thread and see if this
> can shed some light on the situation (pun intended).
> Thank you all,
> Andreas
>
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 1:30 PM Dennis Rooney<[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>> My experience with 176 and 177, from their introduction in the seventies,
>> is that both shed quite a bit after fewer than one or two years, but I
>> never encountered any oily deposits. As a utility formulation, they worked
>> well in our newsroom operations, and were occasionally used for field
>> recordings of concerts, although they were never a first choice for that
>> purpose.
>>
>> DDR
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:26 AM Andreas Meyer<[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Tim,
>>>
>>> No, nothing was applied to these reels, they are coming from a library
>> that
>>> I trust.  The format is full track mono and it ran at 7.5ips.  The
>>> interesting thing is my initial test didn't show any shedding, no
>> deposits
>>> and then played fine for half the program.  I could hear edits between
>> two
>>> machines as they overlapped for live concert - and the machines had
>>> different azimuth settings (I had to adjust every time they switched
>>> machine source). But about an hour into the program, I realized there was
>>> more going on than just an azimuth adjustment.  Sure enough, there was an
>>> oil residue on the heads.  The stock from both machines looks the same,
>> and
>>> the boxes are the original Scotch 175 boxes, so I have no reason to
>> believe
>>> they were running different stock.  I am treating the tape now so I will
>>> update with my progress.
>>> Best,
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 7:07 AM Tim Gillett <[log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello  Andreas,
>>>>
>>>> Not open reel but this week I had in a cassette (Ampex Plus Two). It
>>>> was sticking or slowing  for the owner.   The owner's  other
>>>> cassettes had transferred perfectly for him. I seem to recall this
>>>> Ampex type has  squealed or stuck for me in the past.
>>>>
>>>> The owner applied a lot of spray silicon lubricant to the entire tape
>>>> inside the cassette. It didnt solve the problem and probably made it
>>>> worse by making the tape too slippery for the capstan and pinch roller
>>>> to grip it.    Using Isopropanol as a solvent I thoroughly cleaned
>>>> the oil from the tape, both sides. The tape then played all the way
>>>> through without a problem.
>>>>
>>>> Is it possible some sort of oil had similarly been applied by someone
>>>> to the 3M 175 in an attempt to stop it squealing?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> Tim Gillett
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List"
>>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> To:<[log in to unmask]>
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Sent:Wed, 26 Oct 2022 19:38:04 -0400
>>>> Subject:Re: [ARSCLIST] [EXTERNAL] [ARSCLIST] Scotch 175 verses 176
>>>>
>>>>   Hello.
>>>>   Well i don't have squeal with the 175, but i have oil deposit. Enough
>>>> to
>>>>   give me a high
>>>>   Frequency reduction. The 176 is playing off fine.
>>>>   Thanks.
>>>>   Andreas
>>>>
>>>>   On Wed, Oct 26, 2022, 17:58 Shai Drori<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   > The 175 and 176 are totally different tapes. The 176 was a general
>>>> purpose
>>>>   > tapes used extensively in radio ( and in Israel also for some music
>>>>   > production). It is extremely reliable and stable, and still
>>>> performs well.
>>>>   > The 175 is showing signs of loss of lubrication. Richard Hess’s
>>>> paper is
>>>>   > right on the mark. In my experience the 175!is usually a major
>>>> squealer,
>>>>   > like the PR150.
>>>>   >
>>>>   > On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:15 Gary A. Galo <
>>>>   >[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>   >
>>>>   > > Hi Andreas,
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > Are you saying that the 175 you have has back-coating? 176 and
>>>> its 1 mil
>>>>   > > counterpart, 177, were not back coated, and I didn’t think 175
>>>> was
>>>>   > either.
>>>>   > > Richard Hess has a post on loss of lubrication in 175:
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > >
>>>>
>> https://richardhess.com/notes/2006/07/12/the-beginning-of-3m-175-squeal/
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > Best,
>>>>   > > Gary
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > -----Original Message-----
>>>>   > > From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <
>>>>   > >[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Andreas Meyer
>>>>   > > Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 12:05 PM
>>>>   > > To:[log in to unmask]
>>>>   > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [ARSCLIST] Scotch 175 verses 176
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > This message did not originate from SUNY Potsdam or one of its
>>>> trusted
>>>>   > > senders. Do not open attachments, click on links, or provide your
>>>>   > > credentials if the source is suspicious.
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > Greetings,
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > Curious if someone has details on the difference of Scotch 175
>>>> stock
>>>>   > > versus 176. I am noticing slight shedding on the 175 whereas the
>>>> 176
>>>>   > seems
>>>>   > > stable (vintage 1973). The shedding is more oily rather than
>>>> actual back
>>>>   > > coating.
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > Thanks in advance.
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > Andreas
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > > --
>>>>   > > *Meyer Media LLC / Swan Studios NYC
>>>> <https://meyer-media.com/index.html >  >*
>>>>   > > 77 East 110 Street
>>>>   > > New York City, NY 10029
>>>>   > > 917-639-3312
>>>>   > >
>>>>   > --
>>>>   >
>>>>   > Cheers
>>>>   > Shai Drori
>>>>   > Expert digitization services for Audio Video
>>>>   > 3K scanning for film 8mm-35mm
>>>>   > Timeless Recordings Music Label
>>>>   >www.audiovideofilm.com
>>>>   >[log in to unmask]
>>>>   >
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------
>>>> Email sent using Optus Webmail
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> 1006 Langer Way
>> Delray Beach, FL 33483
>> 561.265.2976
>>
-- 
Richard L. Hess                   email:[log in to unmask]
Aurora, Ontario, Canada                             647 479 2800
http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm  
Track Format - Speed - Equalization - Azimuth - Noise Reduction
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.

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

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
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