[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] Tape baking question
I have never had a problem with 175 and I've run hundreds of reels of the stuff.
On the other hand, a reel of *275* (looks identical) that came from ORTF in the
mid 70s jammed up a Studer at CBC Edmonton for a day and a half in about 1983. As
far as I can recall, that's the only defective reel I've known of that stuff as
(Where do I find a fridge that will hold a Teac A3300SX-2T?)
"Richard L. Hess" wrote:
> Hi, David,
> I invented the cold-playing process--put the player in the fridge
> along with the tape...I presented that Sunday at the AES in San
> Tapes that do not respond to baking and still squeal such as Sony
> PR-150 and 3M 175 do respond to being played below their current glass
> transition temperature (Tg). The binder degradation has lowered the Tg
> to below room temperature.
> Cold-desiccation, as I understand Peter's process, is different. I
> don't think he plays the tape cold.
> It seems we're all incoherent. I'm in western Nebraska on my way back
> from SF. Tomorrow I pick up yet another tape recorder in Des Moines.
> Quoting David Lennick <dlennick@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Lists wrote:
> >> David:
> >> I invented the cold-desiccation process and, while it is very helpful in
> >> many circumstances, it is time consuming and not, always, the best
> >> alternative. If you simply have "sticky-shed" (binder hydrolysis), it may
> >> not be necessary. If you have inter-wrap adhesion or binder-base adhesion
> >> problems, then it can be a necessity.
> > This is something I want to know about..it appears that non
> > back-coated Shamrock
> > needs this process, which explains why some tapes I loaned the CBC a
> > few years
> > ago didn't respond to baking.
> > Hey..Shamrock cost $1.29 for an 1800-foot reel in the seventies and we all
> > bought the stuff!
> > dl