Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started. LISTSERV 16.0 - ARSCLIST Archives

Print

Print


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