Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
As I began with my quote request to Sonicraft (thanks Scott Dorsey for the
referral here), I just discovered some tape reels from around 1962-1963 in my mom's home office. They were all recorded on the same Webcor model (maybe a Regent). They've never been in a shed or garage, usually in a dark, lower bookshelf corner and home environment. They are all acetate as it turns out. Ampex / Irish 311 (1) 7" reel & (1) 5" reel Ampex 611 (1) 7" reel Scotch 111 (1) 7" reel I've read some good things about Scotch 111, but don't know how the Ampex compares. I suspect that are some great family memories there that are worth the recovery effort. It was certainly very fascinating to me at the time and fueled my life-long interest in recording, audio, and electronics. For my own edification, what's the generally prescribed handling for acetates? The potential good news is that at least visually, they're in great condition having been relatively undisturbed for about 50years. I'd still not use that as an excuse to just play them. I'd like to know more about that process. If this is largely covered in the FAQ I just need a refersher on the link. Thanks for any info, david |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
david gourley wrote:
As I began with my quote request to Sonicraft (thanks Scott Dorsey for the referral here), I just discovered some tape reels from around 1962-1963 in my mom's home office. They were all recorded on the same Webcor model (maybe a Regent). They've never been in a shed or garage, usually in a dark, lower bookshelf corner and home environment. They are all acetate as it turns out. Ampex / Irish 311 (1) 7" reel & (1) 5" reel Ampex 611 (1) 7" reel Scotch 111 (1) 7" reel I've read some good things about Scotch 111, but don't know how the Ampex compares. I suspect that are some great family memories there that are worth the recovery effort. It was certainly very fascinating to me at the time and fueled my life-long interest in recording, audio, and electronics. For my own edification, what's the generally prescribed handling for acetates? The potential good news is that at least visually, they're in great condition having been relatively undisturbed for about 50years. I'd still not use that as an excuse to just play them. I'd like to know more about that process. If this is largely covered in the FAQ I just need a refersher on the link. Thanks for any info, david Play 'em! I have Scotch 111 tapes from the '50s and '60s. They've been stored on a high shelf next to a fireplace. They are in better shape than the later Ampex 406 reels because they don't have a backing that turns into gum. I always preferred acetate to mylar because it would simply break and could be spliced back together. The mylar tapes would stretch and become unsalvageable. -- ~ Roy "If you notice the sound, it's wrong!" |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
Dave:
Please send me an email. I can't unmunge your email address. mcp On 5/13/2014 11:41 AM, david gourley wrote: As I began with my quote request to Sonicraft (thanks Scott Dorsey for the referral here), I just discovered some tape reels from around 1962-1963 in my mom's home office. They were all recorded on the same Webcor model (maybe a Regent). They've never been in a shed or garage, usually in a dark, lower bookshelf corner and home environment. They are all acetate as it turns out. Ampex / Irish 311 (1) 7" reel & (1) 5" reel Ampex 611 (1) 7" reel Scotch 111 (1) 7" reel I've read some good things about Scotch 111, but don't know how the Ampex compares. I suspect that are some great family memories there that are worth the recovery effort. It was certainly very fascinating to me at the time and fueled my life-long interest in recording, audio, and electronics. For my own edification, what's the generally prescribed handling for acetates? The potential good news is that at least visually, they're in great condition having been relatively undisturbed for about 50years. I'd still not use that as an excuse to just play them. I'd like to know more about that process. If this is largely covered in the FAQ I just need a refersher on the link. Thanks for any info, david |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
Roy W. Rising
: david gourley wrote: As I began with my quote request to Sonicraft (thanks Scott Dorsey for the referral here), I just discovered some tape reels from around 1962-1963 in my mom's home office. They were all recorded on the same Webcor model (maybe a Regent). They've never been in a shed or garage, usually in a dark, lower bookshelf corner and home environment. They are all acetate as it turns out. Ampex / Irish 311 (1) 7" reel & (1) 5" reel Ampex 611 (1) 7" reel Scotch 111 (1) 7" reel I've read some good things about Scotch 111, but don't know how the Ampex compares. I suspect that are some great family memories there that are worth the recovery effort. It was certainly very fascinating to me at the time and fueled my life-long interest in recording, audio, and electronics. For my own edification, what's the generally prescribed handling for acetates? The potential good news is that at least visually, they're in great condition having been relatively undisturbed for about 50years. I'd still not use that as an excuse to just play them. I'd like to know more about that process. If this is largely covered in the FAQ I just need a refersher on the link. Thanks for any info, david Play 'em! I have Scotch 111 tapes from the '50s and '60s. They've been stored on a high shelf next to a fireplace. They are in better shape than the later Ampex 406 reels because they don't have a backing that turns into gum. I always preferred acetate to mylar because it would simply break and could be spliced back together. The mylar tapes would stretch and become unsalvageable. Thanks, I forgot to mention that they're all mono with no splices. There's no vinegar smell, either so I'll retrive them soon on my next visit. david |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
mcp6453 said...news:NuudnS_liIF6X-
: Dave: Please send me an email. I can't unmunge your email address. mcp You've got mail david |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
"david gourley" wrote in message
... As I began with my quote request to Sonicraft (thanks Scott Dorsey for the referral here), I just discovered some tape reels from around 1962-1963 in my mom's home office. They were all recorded on the same Webcor model (maybe a Regent). They've never been in a shed or garage, usually in a dark, lower bookshelf corner and home environment. They are all acetate as it turns out. Scotch 111 (1) 7" reel I've read some good things about Scotch 111, but don't know how the Ampex compares. I suspect that are some great family memories there that are worth the recovery effort. As a youngster, my earliest recordings on the guitar (and ukulele, and even banjo--OK, chortle if one must at this point) happened with a Webcor reel to reel during occasional, impromptu musical sessions with my parents. Years later, before the easy availability of home computers and digital audio, I was able to recover all the music off of both acetate tapes (Scotch) by re-recording them using a Teac reel to reel (by that time, the Webcor had ceased to function, unfortunately), then transferring the results to cassette tape--although, in retrospect I did manage to turn this into a much more complicated dubbing process than was necessary. But the end result pretty much speaks for itself--personally priceless early recordings with my parents preserved for family posterity, particularly after I finally digitally re-mastered the tapes a few years ago. http://inyo.coffeecup.com/site/acous...llthetime.html Links to all of my acoustic 6 and 12-string guitar playing available on the Net. |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
Roy W. Rising wrote:
Play 'em! I have Scotch 111 tapes from the '50s and '60s. They've been stored on a high shelf next to a fireplace. They are in better shape than the later Ampex 406 reels because they don't have a backing that turns into gum. I always preferred acetate to mylar because it would simply break and could be spliced back together. The mylar tapes would stretch and become unsalvageable. And I didn't like the acetate because it broke too easily! To each his own. Anyway, I agree with Roy... take the tapes. If they don't smell like vinegar, if they aren't visibly curled, and if the beginning of the tape unrolls easily by hand without the layers sticking together, then put them on a tape machine and play them. I suggest a machine that is gentle on tape rather than a 440 or something. You may find they are half-track, you may find they are quarter track, you may find they are at crazy low speeds or varying speeds. Give them a listen! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Roy W. Rising wrote: Play 'em! I have Scotch 111 tapes from the '50s and '60s. They've been stored on a high shelf next to a fireplace. They are in better shape than the later Ampex 406 reels because they don't have a backing that turns into gum. I always preferred acetate to mylar because it would simply break and could be spliced back together. The mylar tapes would stretch and become unsalvageable. And I didn't like the acetate because it broke too easily! To each his own. Anyway, I agree with Roy... take the tapes. If they don't smell like vinegar, if they aren't visibly curled, and if the beginning of the tape unrolls easily by hand without the layers sticking together, then put them on a tape machine and play them. I suggest a machine that is gentle on tape rather than a 440 or something. You may find they are half-track, you may find they are quarter track, you may find they are at crazy low speeds or varying speeds. Give them a listen! --scott And digitize on first go. Do not evaluate first and digitize later. Because you do not know how many plays you're gonna get. Don't mess with levels, just align clip levels and go, for instance by aligning so that playing back 320 nW puts you at - 10 dB re. digital zero. Very few tapes will be able to be magnetized beyond that, and that old tapes most certainly not. Keeping digitizing level constant makes you life in post easier, also applies to grammophone records - those should be digitized so that the loudest cracksplutterabang doesn't clip. Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
"Peter Larsen" said...news:53736c7f$0$23218
: Scott Dorsey wrote: Roy W. Rising wrote: Play 'em! I have Scotch 111 tapes from the '50s and '60s. They've been stored on a high shelf next to a fireplace. They are in better shape than the later Ampex 406 reels because they don't have a backing that turns into gum. I always preferred acetate to mylar because it would simply break and could be spliced back together. The mylar tapes would stretch and become unsalvageable. And I didn't like the acetate because it broke too easily! To each his own. Anyway, I agree with Roy... take the tapes. If they don't smell like vinegar, if they aren't visibly curled, and if the beginning of the tape unrolls easily by hand without the layers sticking together, then put them on a tape machine and play them. I suggest a machine that is gentle on tape rather than a 440 or something. You may find they are half-track, you may find they are quarter track, you may find they are at crazy low speeds or varying speeds. Give them a listen! --scott And digitize on first go. Do not evaluate first and digitize later. Because you do not know how many plays you're gonna get. Don't mess with levels, just align clip levels and go, for instance by aligning so that playing back 320 nW puts you at - 10 dB re. digital zero. Very few tapes will be able to be magnetized beyond that, and that old tapes most certainly not. Keeping digitizing level constant makes you life in post easier, also applies to grammophone records - those should be digitized so that the loudest cracksplutterabang doesn't clip. Kind regards Peter Larsen Thanks, all. I did plan on capturing right off without auditioning anything. I agree that there's no telling how much subsequent play I can get from them. They're still in original (exc condition) boxes, look great, and no smell. I was already searching for a machine that would be gentle with the tape, all things considered. I have no idea about the tape speed that was used other than it being a mono (tube) Webcor. It was very new at the time, so it should have been pretty stable. david |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
... You may find they are half-track, you may find they are quarter track, you may find they are at crazy low speeds or varying speeds. The speed of the stereo music I discovered preserved on the Webcor acetates, recovered using a Teac reel to reel (before home-computer digital technology--mentioned in my earlier post in this thread) was definitely of the odd-ball "crazy low speeds" variety--not the standardized speeds compatible with that then "modern" analog Teac. Needless to report, after some home-brewed audio analysis, I managed to formulate a dubbing resolution procedure that brought back to life the original acetate music in normal speed. http://inyo.coffeecup.com/site/acous...llthetime.html Links to all of my acoustic 6 and 12-string guitar playing available on the Net. |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
david gourley wrote:
Thanks, all. I did plan on capturing right off without auditioning anything. I agree that there's no telling how much subsequent play I can get from them. They're still in original (exc condition) boxes, look great, and no smell. I was already searching for a machine that would be gentle with the tape, all things considered. I have no idea about the tape speed that was used other than it being a mono (tube) Webcor. It was very new at the time, so it should have been pretty stable. david The tapes are likely to be half-track mono, 3.75 ips and/or 7.5 ips. Let us know where you are located. Perhaps someone here has a suitable machine you could borrow. -- ~ Roy "If you notice the sound, it's wrong!" |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
Roy W. Rising said...news:20140514195410.854
: david gourley wrote: Thanks, all. I did plan on capturing right off without auditioning anything. I agree that there's no telling how much subsequent play I can get from them. They're still in original (exc condition) boxes, look great, and no smell. I was already searching for a machine that would be gentle with the tape, all things considered. I have no idea about the tape speed that was used other than it being a mono (tube) Webcor. It was very new at the time, so it should have been pretty stable. david The tapes are likely to be half-track mono, 3.75 ips and/or 7.5 ips. Let us know where you are located. Perhaps someone here has a suitable machine you could borrow. Thanks, I'm checking a few places around my area near Raleigh NC. david |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
On 5/14/2014 8:50 PM, david gourley wrote:
Roy W. Rising said...news:20140514195410.854 : The tapes are likely to be half-track mono, 3.75 ips and/or 7.5 ips. Let us know where you are located. Perhaps someone here has a suitable machine you could borrow. Thanks, I'm checking a few places around my area near Raleigh NC. Bluefield Mastering has an ATR-102, among others, but they are expensive. http://www.bluefieldmastering.com/equipment.html |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
mcp6453
said...news:3sednadRrNCJBunOnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@gigan ews.com: On 5/14/2014 8:50 PM, david gourley wrote: Roy W. Rising said...news:20140514195410.854 : The tapes are likely to be half-track mono, 3.75 ips and/or 7.5 ips. Let us know where you are located. Perhaps someone here has a suitable machine you could borrow. Thanks, I'm checking a few places around my area near Raleigh NC. Bluefield Mastering has an ATR-102, among others, but they are expensive. http://www.bluefieldmastering.com/equipment.html Thanks Mike, I knew about Jeff and was going to call him soon. There's also Kitchen Mastering in Chapel Hill, and Brent is good. Having access to an ATR-102 would be worth it. david |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
david gourley wrote:
mcp6453 said...news:3sednadRrNCJBunOnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giga news.com: On 5/14/2014 8:50 PM, david gourley wrote: Roy W. Rising said...news:20140514195410.854 : The tapes are likely to be half-track mono, 3.75 ips and/or 7.5 ips. Let us know where you are located. Perhaps someone here has a suitable machine you could borrow. Thanks, I'm checking a few places around my area near Raleigh NC. Bluefield Mastering has an ATR-102, among others, but they are expensive. http://www.bluefieldmastering.com/equipment.html Thanks Mike, I knew about Jeff and was going to call him soon. There's also Kitchen Mastering in Chapel Hill, and Brent is good. Having access to an ATR-102 would be worth it. ATR-102 is light on tape, and a good choice. BUT, they may need quarter track heads, and they may charge time or a recal fee to go to 3 3/4 ips. You can't do any slower speeds without a VS-20 either. I'm only a couple hours away but I have the same machine (and I don't have stable varispeed either, sadly). I do have a quarter track headstack (and I will rent it out). --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
On Tue, 13 May 2014 15:41:37 +0000 (UTC), david gourley
wrote: As I began with my quote request to Sonicraft (thanks Scott Dorsey for the referral here), I just discovered some tape reels from around 1962-1963 in my mom's home office. They were all recorded on the same Webcor model (maybe a Regent). They've never been in a shed or garage, usually in a dark, lower bookshelf corner and home environment. They are all acetate as it turns out. Ampex / Irish 311 (1) 7" reel & (1) 5" reel Ampex 611 (1) 7" reel Scotch 111 (1) 7" reel --Recently I've managed to transfer a pair of family tames made in mid-sixties, on 12,5 cm reels. I think one was Agfa and the another East-German Orwo. The Orwo tape was brittle so I had to splice it several times. They were quarter-track and recorded at 1 7/8 ips (4.75cm/s). For that, I added enough (ca. 250 mm) of lead-in tape to tape ends and reproduced it on a Revox B77 quarter-track machine, tape reel selector to "small reels". The tape speed was 3 3/4 ips (9,5 cm/s). I recorded it to Sound Forge at 96 ksamples/sec. After the recording has been done, I've set the sampling rate to 44,1 ksamples/sec, without resampling. Thus I've got the right speed instantly. I only checked whether the original line frequency hum was around 50 Hz, it was. Now this method is away of any working points for reproduction at proper recorded speed, but nevertheless the result has been good enough. It was fun to see that family enjoying some details of their life so long ago. All the best, Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
"Edi Zubovic" edi.zubovic[rem wrote in message ... --Recently I've managed to transfer a pair of family tames made in mid-sixties, on 12,5 cm reels. I think one was Agfa and the another East-German Orwo. The Orwo tape was brittle so I had to splice it several times. They were quarter-track and recorded at 1 7/8 ips (4.75cm/s). For that, I added enough (ca. 250 mm) of lead-in tape to tape ends and reproduced it on a Revox B77 quarter-track machine, tape reel selector to "small reels". The tape speed was 3 3/4 ips (9,5 cm/s). I recorded it to Sound Forge at 96 ksamples/sec. After the recording has been done, I've set the sampling rate to 44,1 ksamples/sec, without resampling. Thus I've got the right speed instantly. You do realise 44.1k is *NOT* half of 96k right? Trevor. |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
On Mon, 19 May 2014 15:21:41 +1000, "Trevor" wrote:
"Edi Zubovic" edi.zubovic[rem wrote in message .. . --Recently I've managed to transfer a pair of family tames made in mid-sixties, on 12,5 cm reels. I think one was Agfa and the another East-German Orwo. The Orwo tape was brittle so I had to splice it several times. They were quarter-track and recorded at 1 7/8 ips (4.75cm/s). For that, I added enough (ca. 250 mm) of lead-in tape to tape ends and reproduced it on a Revox B77 quarter-track machine, tape reel selector to "small reels". The tape speed was 3 3/4 ips (9,5 cm/s). I recorded it to Sound Forge at 96 ksamples/sec. After the recording has been done, I've set the sampling rate to 44,1 ksamples/sec, without resampling. Thus I've got the right speed instantly. You do realise 44.1k is *NOT* half of 96k right? Trevor. - Of course it isn't. You have always possibilities to shift pitch/speed uneventfully to a desired degree, though. Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
"Edi Zubovic" edi.zubovic[rem wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 May 2014 15:21:41 +1000, "Trevor" wrote: "Edi Zubovic" edi.zubovic[rem wrote in message . .. --Recently I've managed to transfer a pair of family tames made in mid-sixties, on 12,5 cm reels. I think one was Agfa and the another East-German Orwo. The Orwo tape was brittle so I had to splice it several times. They were quarter-track and recorded at 1 7/8 ips (4.75cm/s). For that, I added enough (ca. 250 mm) of lead-in tape to tape ends and reproduced it on a Revox B77 quarter-track machine, tape reel selector to "small reels". The tape speed was 3 3/4 ips (9,5 cm/s). I recorded it to Sound Forge at 96 ksamples/sec. After the recording has been done, I've set the sampling rate to 44,1 ksamples/sec, without resampling. Thus I've got the right speed instantly. You do realise 44.1k is *NOT* half of 96k right? - Of course it isn't. You have always possibilities to shift pitch/speed uneventfully to a desired degree, though. So why did you say "Thus I've got the right speed instantly"? Trevor. |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Found some old tapes
On Mon, 19 May 2014 16:31:09 +1000, "Trevor" wrote:
"Edi Zubovic" edi.zubovic[rem wrote in message .. . On Mon, 19 May 2014 15:21:41 +1000, "Trevor" wrote: "Edi Zubovic" edi.zubovic[rem wrote in message ... --Recently I've managed to transfer a pair of family tames made in mid-sixties, on 12,5 cm reels. I think one was Agfa and the another East-German Orwo. The Orwo tape was brittle so I had to splice it several times. They were quarter-track and recorded at 1 7/8 ips (4.75cm/s). For that, I added enough (ca. 250 mm) of lead-in tape to tape ends and reproduced it on a Revox B77 quarter-track machine, tape reel selector to "small reels". The tape speed was 3 3/4 ips (9,5 cm/s). I recorded it to Sound Forge at 96 ksamples/sec. After the recording has been done, I've set the sampling rate to 44,1 ksamples/sec, without resampling. Thus I've got the right speed instantly. You do realise 44.1k is *NOT* half of 96k right? - Of course it isn't. You have always possibilities to shift pitch/speed uneventfully to a desired degree, though. So why did you say "Thus I've got the right speed instantly"? Trevor. -Oh, forget it it, please, I tweaked it a little beforehand. Edi Zubovic |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Also can be found in classified | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Found it! | Car Audio | |||
FS: 125 classical music tapes-325 soul-r&b tapes-rock-pop-more | Car Audio | |||
FS: 125 classical music tapes-325 soul-r&b tapes-rock-pop-more | Marketplace | |||
I have found it | Vacuum Tubes |