[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Thin tape decay



I was always taught: 1.5 mil reel to reel for anything that really mattered. 1 mil reel to reel was OK for the rest. Cassettes were for portables (but that changed with time as the tape and technology improved) and use C-90 or less (although, again, technology improved and end-of-era C-100's brought out to accomodate CD length sides never failed me but I only used Maxell or TDK). Things like 0.5mil reel tape and C-120's just weren't in the lexicon in my house. Same goes for T-160 VHS tapes. My father always taught me, use a pro-grade tape and don't use a junky slow speed to record it. Tape is cheap compared to the time wasted making a bad recording. Judging by what comes through my studio, this was not the conventional wisdom among consumers!

I've successfully transfered numerous client C-120's with no problems. Also have done a few super-thin reels (which, incidently, were not warped, to my surprise) with no problems. Which makes me wonder -- would 1.5 mil reel tape warp "worse" (ie more severely) than 1 mil? My thinking is, it's thicker so there's more to warp and hold the warped shape.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- From: "David Lennick" <dlennick@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Thin tape decay



The thought of using anything that thin fills me with great dread. But I used
C120s for years to aircheck my late night shows and play them back in the car
(!)..I used Scotch 120s and never had one pack up on me. Used them over and
over, too..about 10 airchecks was the limit before I began to hear dropouts and
since they were free, I just tossed 'em (except when I hit a show I wanted to
keep, which was usually when the tape was in its worst condition).

Triple-thin reel to reel tape? Oy. Was any of that ever manufactured with back
coating? I'm not aware of any.

dl

Lou Judson wrote:

I used to use a umber of 180 cassettes to record 3 hour long radio
programs - they always returned level at about -15 to -20 from normal
record level - they just don't have enough particles to give full
level. Unless you have used them and know from experience, the low
level is not the recordist's fault, but the extra thin tape and
coating...

<L>

Lou Judson . Intuitive Audio
415-883-2689

On Aug 2, 2006, at 7:52 AM, Robert Hodge wrote:

> The audio levels on the 180's wasn't what I'd expected- low overall .
> But that may have been attributable to the recordist or machine used.


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]