[ggoat!!!]

Hi everyone...

I haven't posted on this site for forever now...since 2007. I've been
recording since around 1975, and have used and/or owned just about
every deck out there and have used and/or tried just about every tape
that was reasonably available. My favorite since around 1993 has been
3m 996. Up until this week I thought it pretty much indestructible.
I've sadly found out that it's not, and I've stockpiled hundreds of
them NOS.

About four years ago, I posted on the Internet regarding how ziplock
bag/silica gel storage ruined some of my tapes. To make a long story
short, I had hundreds of reels stored with silica gel in ziplock bags
in a south Louisiana non-climate-controlled storage where 90-100%
humidity is the norm. These tapes were stored for 6 YEARS basically
outside. Some survived, some didn't (the worst were Basf/Emtec
900/911/486 which grew some of the worst and strangest mold I've ever
seen and were not salvageable). In 2007, two brands that survived
virtually unscathed were all types of Maxells and 3m 996. 3m 966
suffered some strange "warping" to the tape pack that was never
eradicated. But, 996 astounded me, as every single tape was completely
undamaged by mold, humidity, temperature, and the worst storage
situation imaginable...for 6 years. Here is a link to a thread I
started about the situation in 2007:

http://www.audiobanter.com/showthrea...t=88926&page=1

Fast forward to 2011. After I "rescued" all these tapes from this
storage-scenario-hell, I meticulously restored them, eradicating all
mold from boxes, tape, and reels from the ones that required such. I
painstakingly basically hand polished each tape itself with miles of
pellon cloth until every affected tape played with no shed, no
sticking, no problems. I threw away all the old ziplock bags, silica
gel, and inner plastic bags. I purchased new 4 mil bags from
bagsunlimited (unsealed) for the reels and boxes (I wasn't doing the
ziplock sealed thing again), new packets of silica gel (with packs
placed in the inner plastic bag next to the reels themselves, in the
boxes themselves, and in the outer bags the boxes were placed in), and
stored the tapes properly, climate-controlled, in my home. Sounds
good, right?

Well, nearly all the tapes are FINE. Even some 1994 Ampex 456 reels
that HAD gone sticky in 2007 from being outside that I "fixed" using
my controversial "Nu-Finish" method STILL play with NO shed and NO
signs of stickiness...even Sony ULH that I "Nu-Finish'd" show no signs
of sticky shed. But, that's not the point. The point is...

3m 996 HAS GONE STICKY.

I honestly don't understand it. The tapes were OUTSIDE for 6 years,
and were FINE. Not a SIGN of stickiness. I bring them into the PROPER
storage conditions, and four years later of being treated to not the
least BIT of humidity, they go STICKY??!?? How?!?!?! I even wrote in
2007 regarding 996 after the storage debacle:

"BTW...this has been the absolute BEST test for binder/sticky shed
problems with later 3m 996/966 tape...this stuff is STABLE to the max
(the binder at least)! BTW...I'm literally in the swamps of south
Louisiana. 100+ degrees and 99% humidity for years. The tapes have
been in an outside non-climate controlled storage unit, and have been
through several hurricanes (don't ask why). Most notably Rita and
Katrina. However...gotta hand it to Maxell. That tape is absolutely
undamaged and perfect. Sitting unwrapped/unprotected and wet. No
binder issues, no mold, no packing issues, no uneven tape, no
NOTHING. I've always heard great reliability cudos regarding Basf/
Emtec, but they are by far the worst "survivors" of this. I'll post
info on other tapes as I open them and experience problems.

3m 996 has no sticky shed problems whatsoever. Even after 10 or
so passes through a cleaning cloth with moderate pressure, there is
next to NO oxide binder, or backcoating shedding of ANY kind, not even
the "normal" amount you would expect. Out of dozens of reels, only
one has a bad spot to where the growth is being stubborn to remove."


I just don't understand it. I DO understand and expect horrible
storage conditions for 6 years in constant heat and humidity to cause
stickiness, mold, and general destruction for audio tapes. But, these
996 tapes (and others, most notably Maxell) survived being outside
with absolutely NO ILL EFFECTS upon discovery. Now, 4 years later, in
absolute PERFECT storage conditions, the 996 tapes become sticky? NONE
of the other tapes, even the ones KNOWN for sticky shed, have gone
sticky after being stored in the EXACT same conditions (both good and
bad since 2001) as the 996. Why has the 996 gone sticky NOW?

I need to state that the stickiness isn't as damning as typical sticky
shed in the following way. Most sticky shed R/T Ampex 456, Scotch
Classic, Sony ULH, etc exhibits SO much "goo" that trying to pass the
tape fast winding through pellon cloth basically ruins the tape; i.e.,
you do more damage than good. You can't "wipe" the sticky goo off.
However, the state that the 996 is in right NOW, you CAN use pellon to
wipe the stickiness off, with NO chemicals needed. I simply fast wind
the tape back and forth (with NO guides in play, as the 996 exhibits
enough sticky shed to gum up the machine and stop the tape) holding
the pellon cloth only on the back-coated side for about an hour or so,
until there is absolutely NO residue on the pellon cloth. Since this
is on the back-coated side, any undamaged backcoating that comes off
as a result of removing the goo doesn't matter . This is where MOST of
the residue is. Then, I do the same to the oxide side of the tape, but
for about half the time. I continue until there is a minimal or
"normal" amount of oxide shed on the pellon (similar to what you'd get
with a new tape), then I do a few runs using the "pinch both sides"
method using hardly any pressure. This method, with the state the 996
is in right now, makes the tapes playable as if nothing ever happened.
With normal or classic sticky shed, the goo is too great to correct in
this way...which gives me a bit of hope. The 996 is shedding, and it's
shedding "stick-illy," but not to an extreme point just yet. Will it
get as bad as 456/Classic/ULH? Possibly, possibly not. There is no way
of knowing. What I DO know is that for some unknown reason, the tape
survived 6 years of basically being outside in the swamp with no signs
of sticky shed. Subsequently, stored properly and untouched for 4
years inside a climate controlled home (basically the complete
opposite conditions of the previous 4 years), and 996 has gone
sticky.

Phruck.

[[email protected]]

Is there some reason that the tapes can't be baked?

ggoat!!! wrote:
: Hi everyone...

: I haven't posted on this site for forever now...since 2007. I've been
: recording since around 1975, and have used and/or owned just about
: every deck out there and have used and/or tried just about every tape
: that was reasonably available. My favorite since around 1993 has been
: 3m 996. Up until this week I thought it pretty much indestructible.
: I've sadly found out that it's not, and I've stockpiled hundreds of
: them NOS.

: About four years ago, I posted on the Internet regarding how ziplock
: bag/silica gel storage ruined some of my tapes. To make a long story
: short, I had hundreds of reels stored with silica gel in ziplock bags
: in a south Louisiana non-climate-controlled storage where 90-100%
: humidity is the norm. These tapes were stored for 6 YEARS basically
: outside. Some survived, some didn't (the worst were Basf/Emtec
: 900/911/486 which grew some of the worst and strangest mold I've ever
: seen and were not salvageable). In 2007, two brands that survived
: virtually unscathed were all types of Maxells and 3m 996. 3m 966
: suffered some strange "warping" to the tape pack that was never
: eradicated. But, 996 astounded me, as every single tape was completely
: undamaged by mold, humidity, temperature, and the worst storage
: situation imaginable...for 6 years. Here is a link to a thread I
: started about the situation in 2007:

: http://www.audiobanter.com/showthrea...t=88926&page=1

: Fast forward to 2011. After I "rescued" all these tapes from this
: storage-scenario-hell, I meticulously restored them, eradicating all
: mold from boxes, tape, and reels from the ones that required such. I
: painstakingly basically hand polished each tape itself with miles of
: pellon cloth until every affected tape played with no shed, no
: sticking, no problems. I threw away all the old ziplock bags, silica
: gel, and inner plastic bags. I purchased new 4 mil bags from
: bagsunlimited (unsealed) for the reels and boxes (I wasn't doing the
: ziplock sealed thing again), new packets of silica gel (with packs
: placed in the inner plastic bag next to the reels themselves, in the
: boxes themselves, and in the outer bags the boxes were placed in), and
: stored the tapes properly, climate-controlled, in my home. Sounds
: good, right?

: Well, nearly all the tapes are FINE. Even some 1994 Ampex 456 reels
: that HAD gone sticky in 2007 from being outside that I "fixed" using
: my controversial "Nu-Finish" method STILL play with NO shed and NO
: signs of stickiness...even Sony ULH that I "Nu-Finish'd" show no signs
: of sticky shed. But, that's not the point. The point is...

: 3m 996 HAS GONE STICKY.

: I honestly don't understand it. The tapes were OUTSIDE for 6 years,
: and were FINE. Not a SIGN of stickiness. I bring them into the PROPER
: storage conditions, and four years later of being treated to not the
: least BIT of humidity, they go STICKY??!?? How?!?!?! I even wrote in
: 2007 regarding 996 after the storage debacle:

: "BTW...this has been the absolute BEST test for binder/sticky shed
: problems with later 3m 996/966 tape...this stuff is STABLE to the max
: (the binder at least)! BTW...I'm literally in the swamps of south
: Louisiana. 100+ degrees and 99% humidity for years. The tapes have
: been in an outside non-climate controlled storage unit, and have been
: through several hurricanes (don't ask why). Most notably Rita and
: Katrina. However...gotta hand it to Maxell. That tape is absolutely
: undamaged and perfect. Sitting unwrapped/unprotected and wet. No
: binder issues, no mold, no packing issues, no uneven tape, no
: NOTHING. I've always heard great reliability cudos regarding Basf/
: Emtec, but they are by far the worst "survivors" of this. I'll post
: info on other tapes as I open them and experience problems.

: 3m 996 has no sticky shed problems whatsoever. Even after 10 or
: so passes through a cleaning cloth with moderate pressure, there is
: next to NO oxide binder, or backcoating shedding of ANY kind, not even
: the "normal" amount you would expect. Out of dozens of reels, only
: one has a bad spot to where the growth is being stubborn to remove."


: I just don't understand it. I DO understand and expect horrible
: storage conditions for 6 years in constant heat and humidity to cause
: stickiness, mold, and general destruction for audio tapes. But, these
: 996 tapes (and others, most notably Maxell) survived being outside
: with absolutely NO ILL EFFECTS upon discovery. Now, 4 years later, in
: absolute PERFECT storage conditions, the 996 tapes become sticky? NONE
: of the other tapes, even the ones KNOWN for sticky shed, have gone
: sticky after being stored in the EXACT same conditions (both good and
: bad since 2001) as the 996. Why has the 996 gone sticky NOW?

: I need to state that the stickiness isn't as damning as typical sticky
: shed in the following way. Most sticky shed R/T Ampex 456, Scotch
: Classic, Sony ULH, etc exhibits SO much "goo" that trying to pass the
: tape fast winding through pellon cloth basically ruins the tape; i.e.,
: you do more damage than good. You can't "wipe" the sticky goo off.
: However, the state that the 996 is in right NOW, you CAN use pellon to
: wipe the stickiness off, with NO chemicals needed. I simply fast wind
: the tape back and forth (with NO guides in play, as the 996 exhibits
: enough sticky shed to gum up the machine and stop the tape) holding
: the pellon cloth only on the back-coated side for about an hour or so,
: until there is absolutely NO residue on the pellon cloth. Since this
: is on the back-coated side, any undamaged backcoating that comes off
: as a result of removing the goo doesn't matter . This is where MOST of
: the residue is. Then, I do the same to the oxide side of the tape, but
: for about half the time. I continue until there is a minimal or
: "normal" amount of oxide shed on the pellon (similar to what you'd get
: with a new tape), then I do a few runs using the "pinch both sides"
: method using hardly any pressure. This method, with the state the 996
: is in right now, makes the tapes playable as if nothing ever happened.
: With normal or classic sticky shed, the goo is too great to correct in
: this way...which gives me a bit of hope. The 996 is shedding, and it's
: shedding "stick-illy," but not to an extreme point just yet. Will it
: get as bad as 456/Classic/ULH? Possibly, possibly not. There is no way
: of knowing. What I DO know is that for some unknown reason, the tape
: survived 6 years of basically being outside in the swamp with no signs
: of sticky shed. Subsequently, stored properly and untouched for 4
: years inside a climate controlled home (basically the complete
: opposite conditions of the previous 4 years), and 996 has gone
: sticky.

: Phruck.

[ggoat!!!]

On Jun 23, 6:37*pm, wrote:
Is there some reason that the tapes can't be baked?

ggoat!!! wrote:

: Hi everyone...

: I haven't posted on this site for forever now...since 2007. *I've been
: recording since around 1975, and have used and/or owned just about
: every deck out there and have used and/or tried just about every tape
: that was reasonably available. My favorite since around 1993 has been
: 3m 996. Up until this week I thought it pretty much indestructible.
: I've sadly found out that it's not, and I've stockpiled hundreds of
: them NOS.

: About four years ago, I posted on the Internet regarding how ziplock
: bag/silica gel storage ruined some of my tapes. To make a long story
: short, I had hundreds of reels stored with silica gel in ziplock bags
: in a south Louisiana non-climate-controlled storage where 90-100%
: humidity is the norm. These tapes were stored for 6 YEARS basically
: outside. Some survived, some didn't (the worst were Basf/Emtec
: 900/911/486 which grew some of the worst and strangest mold I've ever
: seen and were not salvageable). In 2007, two brands that survived
: virtually unscathed were all types of Maxells and 3m 996. 3m 966
: suffered some strange "warping" to the tape pack that was never
: eradicated. But, 996 astounded me, as every single tape was completely
: undamaged by mold, humidity, temperature, and the worst storage
: situation imaginable...for 6 years. Here is a link to a thread I
: started about the situation in 2007:

:http://www.audiobanter.com/showthrea...t=88926&page=1

: Fast forward to 2011. After I "rescued" all these tapes from this
: storage-scenario-hell, I meticulously restored them, eradicating all
: mold from boxes, tape, and reels from the ones that required such. I
: painstakingly basically hand polished each tape itself with miles of
: pellon cloth until every affected tape played with no shed, no
: sticking, no problems. I threw away all the old ziplock bags, silica
: gel, and inner plastic bags. I purchased new 4 mil bags from
: bagsunlimited (unsealed) for the reels and boxes (I wasn't doing the
: ziplock sealed thing again), new packets of silica gel (with packs
: placed in the inner plastic bag next to the reels themselves, in the
: boxes themselves, and in the outer bags the boxes were placed in), and
: stored the tapes properly, climate-controlled, in my home. Sounds
: good, right?

: Well, nearly all the tapes are FINE. Even some 1994 Ampex 456 reels
: that HAD gone sticky in 2007 from being outside that I "fixed" using
: my controversial "Nu-Finish" method STILL play with NO shed and NO
: signs of stickiness...even Sony ULH that I "Nu-Finish'd" show no signs
: of sticky shed. But, that's not the point. The point is...

: 3m 996 HAS GONE STICKY.

: I honestly don't understand it. The tapes were OUTSIDE for 6 years,
: and were FINE. Not a SIGN of stickiness. I bring them into the PROPER
: storage conditions, and four years later of being treated to not the
: least BIT of humidity, they go STICKY??!?? How?!?!?! I even wrote in
: 2007 regarding 996 after the storage debacle:

: "BTW...this has been the absolute BEST test for binder/sticky shed
: problems with later 3m 996/966 tape...this stuff is STABLE to the max
: (the binder at least)! BTW...I'm literally in the swamps of south
: Louisiana. 100+ degrees and 99% humidity for years. The tapes have
: been in an outside non-climate controlled storage unit, and have been
: through several hurricanes (don't ask why). Most notably Rita and
: Katrina. However...gotta hand it to Maxell. That tape is absolutely
: undamaged and perfect. Sitting unwrapped/unprotected and wet. No
: binder issues, no mold, no packing issues, no uneven tape, no
: NOTHING. I've always heard great reliability cudos regarding Basf/
: Emtec, but they are by far the worst "survivors" of this. I'll post
: info on other tapes as I open them and experience problems.

: 3m 996 has no sticky shed problems whatsoever. Even after 10 or
: so passes through a cleaning cloth with moderate pressure, there is
: next to NO oxide binder, or backcoating shedding of ANY kind, not even
: the "normal" amount you would expect. Out of dozens of reels, only
: one has a bad spot to where the growth is being stubborn to remove."

: I just don't understand it. I DO understand and expect horrible
: storage conditions for 6 years in constant heat and humidity to cause
: stickiness, mold, and general destruction for audio tapes. But, these
: 996 tapes (and others, most notably Maxell) survived being outside
: with absolutely NO ILL EFFECTS upon discovery. Now, 4 years later, in
: absolute PERFECT storage conditions, the 996 tapes become sticky? NONE
: of the other tapes, even the ones KNOWN for sticky shed, have gone
: sticky after being stored in the EXACT same conditions (both good and
: bad since 2001) as the 996. Why has the 996 gone sticky NOW?

: I need to state that the stickiness isn't as damning as typical sticky
: shed in the following way. Most sticky shed R/T Ampex 456, Scotch
: Classic, Sony ULH, etc exhibits SO much "goo" that trying to pass the
: tape fast winding through pellon cloth basically ruins the tape; i.e.,
: you do more damage than good. You can't "wipe" the sticky goo off.
: However, the state that the 996 is in right NOW, you CAN use pellon to
: wipe the stickiness off, with NO chemicals needed. I simply fast wind
: the tape back and forth (with NO guides in play, as the 996 exhibits
: enough sticky shed to gum up the machine and stop the tape) holding
: the pellon cloth only on the back-coated side for about an hour or so,
: until there is absolutely NO residue on the pellon cloth. Since this
: is on the back-coated side, any undamaged backcoating that comes off
: as a result of removing the goo doesn't matter . This is where MOST of
: the residue is. Then, I do the same to the oxide side of the tape, but
: for about half the time. I continue until there is a minimal or
: "normal" amount of oxide shed on the pellon (similar to what you'd get
: with a new tape), then I do a few runs using the "pinch both sides"
: method using hardly any pressure. This method, with the state the 996
: is in right now, makes the tapes playable as if nothing ever happened.
: With normal or classic sticky shed, the goo is too great to correct in
: this way...which gives me a bit of hope. The 996 is shedding, and it's
: shedding "stick-illy," but not to an extreme point just yet. Will it
: get as bad as 456/Classic/ULH? Possibly, possibly not. There is no way
: of knowing. What I DO know is that for some unknown reason, the tape
: survived 6 years of basically being outside in the swamp with no signs
: of sticky shed. Subsequently, stored properly and untouched for 4
: years inside a climate controlled home (basically the complete
: opposite conditions of the previous 4 years), and 996 has gone
: sticky.

: Phruck.

I've baked tapes, but the reason that I did NOT bake the 996 is due to
the fact that the 996 has one great quality that also seems to be a
downfall for baking. You see, most of my 996 was recorded on both
sides of the tape, and this tape can take an AMAZING amount of signal.
And, most of my recordings were recorded slamming the tape HARD for a
certain desired auditory result. But, with recording this high on 996,
and using both sides of tape, print through especially of the high
frequencies can be a problem. I've found that when baking this tape
the crosstalk from the other side of the tape in the high frequency
region is just horrible; I've found no other ill effects of baking,
but with 4-track bi-directional recordings, the crosstalk from the
other side of the tape is multiplied greatly when baked, and in my
particular instance, that's not usable. I haven't noticed this on
lower-output tapes or tapes recorded at a lower level, but with 996
recorded near it's max, baking leads to a crosstalk exaggeration which
can be a problem when there is completely different audio information
recorded on the offending tracks.

[[email protected]]

Thanks, that's useful information

ggoat!!! wrote:
: On Jun 23, 6:37?pm, wrote:
: Is there some reason that the tapes can't be baked?
:
: but with 4-track bi-directional recordings, the crosstalk from the
: other side of the tape is multiplied greatly when baked, and in my
: particular instance, that's not usable. I haven't noticed this on
: lower-output tapes or tapes recorded at a lower level, but with 996
: recorded near it's max, baking leads to a crosstalk exaggeration which
: can be a problem when there is completely different audio information
: recorded on the offending tracks.

[Scott Dorsey]

: but with 4-track bi-directional recordings, the crosstalk from the
: other side of the tape is multiplied greatly when baked, and in my
: particular instance, that's not usable. I haven't noticed this on
: lower-output tapes or tapes recorded at a lower level, but with 996
: recorded near it's max, baking leads to a crosstalk exaggeration which
: can be a problem when there is completely different audio information
: recorded on the offending tracks.

Are you trying to play them back with a 4-track head or with the proper
quarter-track head? If you try and play them back with a 4-track head,
you will get more crosstalk.

If there is some bleed, adjusting the head height can sometimes get it
down.

Quarter track was really a horrible, horrible format. Not as bad as
cassettes, but close.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[ggoat!!!]

On Jun 23, 8:33*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
: but with 4-track bi-directional recordings, the crosstalk from the
: other side of the tape is multiplied greatly when baked, and in my
: particular instance, that's not usable. I haven't noticed this on
: lower-output tapes or tapes recorded at a lower level, but with 996
: recorded near it's max, baking leads to a crosstalk exaggeration which
: can be a problem when there is completely different audio information
: recorded on the offending tracks.

Are you trying to play them back with a 4-track head or with the proper
quarter-track head? *If you try and play them back with a 4-track head,
you will get more crosstalk.

If there is some bleed, adjusting the head height can sometimes get it
down.

Quarter track was really a horrible, horrible format. *Not as bad as
cassettes, but close.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Hi there...I'm playing them back on the same machines they were
created on...Teac X-1000Rs, X-2000Rs, Pioneer RT-707s and 909s, and an
Akai 4000db. I basically baked one 996 tape, which got rid of the
stickiness, but I still had to use Nu-Finish to polish off the "speed
bumps" of goo that were on the reels from first trying to fast-wind
that tape and stopping. After hearing the resulting high frequency
crosstalk from tracks 2 and 4 on tracks 1 and 3 that I was playing, I
knew that baking such a high output tape with different audio
information on the opposing tracks was not an option. BTW, the Akai
4000db must have more narrow track widths, as the low frequency
crosstalk (that is common on 7.5ips and up reel to reel) is nearly
completely inaudible on that machine. It has other shortcomings, but
if you have some quiet musical passages and you're getting bleed-thru
from the other side in the bass region, it is doubtful that you will
hear it on an Akai 4000db. It makes that machine a hidden gem. But
sadly, it doesn't help with the high frequency crosstalk that results
from baking two-direction 4 track 996 recorded near it's max operating
level.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...

Quarter track was really a horrible, horrible format.

I used to have a half-track tape of Sinatra's "Where Are You?". The sound
was superb. The tape -- which did not include all the songs from the
album -- cost $12 55 years ago. Think about that.

Since the point of open-reel tape was not just stereo, but superior sound,
one wonders why quarter-track was developed in the first place. (Once stereo
LPs were introduced, the format should probably been allowed to die.)
Perhaps its most-irritating characteristic was the way side A would be
reasonably quiet, side B noisy.

[Mark]

On Jun 23, 9:48*pm, "ggoat!!!" wrote:
On Jun 23, 8:33*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:



: but with 4-track bi-directional recordings, the crosstalk from the
: other side of the tape is multiplied greatly when baked, and in my
: particular instance, that's not usable. I haven't noticed this on
: lower-output tapes or tapes recorded at a lower level, but with 996
: recorded near it's max, baking leads to a crosstalk exaggeration which
: can be a problem when there is completely different audio information
: recorded on the offending tracks.

Are you trying to play them back with a 4-track head or with the proper
quarter-track head? *If you try and play them back with a 4-track head,
you will get more crosstalk.

If there is some bleed, adjusting the head height can sometimes get it
down.

Quarter track was really a horrible, horrible format. *Not as bad as
cassettes, but close.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Hi there...I'm playing them back on the same machines they were
created on...Teac X-1000Rs, X-2000Rs, Pioneer RT-707s and 909s, and an
Akai 4000db. *I basically baked one 996 tape, which got rid of the
stickiness, but I still had to use Nu-Finish to polish off the "speed
bumps" of goo that were on the reels from first trying to fast-wind
that tape and stopping. *After hearing the resulting high frequency
crosstalk from tracks 2 and 4 on tracks 1 and 3 that I was playing, I
knew that baking such a high output tape with different audio
information on the opposing tracks was not an option. *BTW, the Akai
4000db must have more narrow track widths, as the low frequency
crosstalk (that is common on 7.5ips and up reel to reel) is nearly
completely inaudible on that machine. *It has other shortcomings, but
if you have some quiet musical passages and you're getting bleed-thru
from the other side in the bass region, it is doubtful that you will
hear it on an Akai 4000db. *It makes that machine a hidden gem. *But
sadly, it doesn't help with the high frequency crosstalk that results
from baking two-direction 4 track 996 recorded near it's max operating
level.

sounds like a problem that could be solved with the right DSP app.

if you can play back the tape on a 4 track machine so that you get the
two desired tracks simultaneously with the 2 undesired tracks, then
feed the 4 tracks into the right DSP app, the DSP could create a
matrix to cancel out the undesired crosstalk..

anybody want to develop this app?

Mark

[Frank]

On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:50:29 -0700, in 'rec.audio.pro',
in article 3m 996 has gone STICKY!!! ,
"William Sommerwerck" wrote:

Since the point of open-reel tape was not just stereo, but superior sound,
one wonders why quarter-track was developed in the first place.

I think that quarter-track decks were developed with the
cost-conscious (read cheap), convenience-oriented (read lazy) consumer
in mind.

By being able to record in both directions, tape costs were cut in
half. As to the convenience factor, playback on auto-reverse machines
meant that the listener didn't have to get up out of their easy chair
as often to change tapes.

With regard to potential crosstalk and print through problems, I
believe that dbx Type II noise reduction helped somewhat to address
this issue.

--
Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
[Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/
[also covers AVCHD (including AVCCAM & NXCAM) and XDCAM EX].

[Scott Dorsey]

ggoat!!! wrote:

Well, nearly all the tapes are FINE. Even some 1994 Ampex 456 reels
that HAD gone sticky in 2007 from being outside that I "fixed" using
my controversial "Nu-Finish" method STILL play with NO shed and NO
signs of stickiness...even Sony ULH that I "Nu-Finish'd" show no signs
of sticky shed. But, that's not the point. The point is...

3m 996 HAS GONE STICKY.

I honestly don't understand it. The tapes were OUTSIDE for 6 years,
and were FINE. Not a SIGN of stickiness. I bring them into the PROPER
storage conditions, and four years later of being treated to not the
least BIT of humidity, they go STICKY??!?? How?!?!?! I even wrote in
2007 regarding 996 after the storage debacle:

What you are seeing is cumulative damage. The urethanes were broken down
while the tape was outside for six years. Now it's becoming a problem,
after the fact.

996 is very stable tape, but it's not intended to sit outside for six
years.

I just don't understand it. I DO understand and expect horrible
storage conditions for 6 years in constant heat and humidity to cause
stickiness, mold, and general destruction for audio tapes. But, these
996 tapes (and others, most notably Maxell) survived being outside
with absolutely NO ILL EFFECTS upon discovery. Now, 4 years later, in
absolute PERFECT storage conditions, the 996 tapes become sticky? NONE
of the other tapes, even the ones KNOWN for sticky shed, have gone
sticky after being stored in the EXACT same conditions (both good and
bad since 2001) as the 996. Why has the 996 gone sticky NOW?

For the same reason that the first 500 miles of driving will affect how
much oil your car uses 100,000 miles later. It's a matter of cumulative
and progressive damage that will take some time to show up sometimes.

Bake the tape. Use Pelon if you don't want to bake it. But realize that
the condition of the tape is the sum of everything that has happened to it
over its lifetime.

Phruck.

Get good transcriptions off of them as soon as possible. And next time,
rent vault space.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

ggoat!!! wrote:

Hi there...I'm playing them back on the same machines they were
created on...Teac X-1000Rs, X-2000Rs, Pioneer RT-707s and 909s, and an
Akai 4000db.

These are... not exactly good tape machines, and they all tend to have a
lot of non-moving stuff in contact with the tape.

If you try something like one of the Technics iso-loop decks, you should
have much better luck because there's less stuff in contact. They will
play sticky tapes much better.

I basically baked one 996 tape, which got rid of the
stickiness, but I still had to use Nu-Finish to polish off the "speed
bumps" of goo that were on the reels from first trying to fast-wind
that tape and stopping.

Use Pelon for that.

After hearing the resulting high frequency
crosstalk from tracks 2 and 4 on tracks 1 and 3 that I was playing, I
knew that baking such a high output tape with different audio
information on the opposing tracks was not an option.

And did you then adjust the head height? Try it.

4000db must have more narrow track widths, as the low frequency
crosstalk (that is common on 7.5ips and up reel to reel) is nearly
completely inaudible on that machine. It has other shortcomings, but
if you have some quiet musical passages and you're getting bleed-thru
from the other side in the bass region, it is doubtful that you will
hear it on an Akai 4000db. It makes that machine a hidden gem. But
sadly, it doesn't help with the high frequency crosstalk that results
from baking two-direction 4 track 996 recorded near it's max operating
level.

You're playing tapes that were made on misaligned machines back on other
misaligned machines. You need to be adjusting the head height to match
the original misalignment.

If the tape shrinks or expands due to humidity issues, the misalignment
will change too.

I don't think your crosstalk is the result of baking, I think it's just
the normal crappy interchange issues that were common with quarter track.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Richard R]

On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:48:28 -0700, ggoat!!! wrote:

On Jun 23, 8:33Â*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
: but with 4-track bi-directional recordings, the crosstalk from the :
other side of the tape is multiplied greatly when baked, and in my :
particular instance, that's not usable. I haven't noticed this on :
lower-output tapes or tapes recorded at a lower level, but with 996 :
recorded near it's max, baking leads to a crosstalk exaggeration which
: can be a problem when there is completely different audio
information : recorded on the offending tracks.

Are you trying to play them back with a 4-track head or with the proper
quarter-track head? Â*If you try and play them back with a 4-track head,
you will get more crosstalk.

If there is some bleed, adjusting the head height can sometimes get it
down.

Quarter track was really a horrible, horrible format. Â*Not as bad as
cassettes, but close.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Hi there...I'm playing them back on the same machines they were created
on...Teac X-1000Rs, X-2000Rs, Pioneer RT-707s and 909s, and an Akai
4000db. I basically baked one 996 tape, which got rid of the
stickiness, but I still had to use Nu-Finish to polish off the "speed
bumps" of goo that were on the reels from first trying to fast-wind that
tape and stopping. After hearing the resulting high frequency crosstalk
from tracks 2 and 4 on tracks 1 and 3 that I was playing, I knew that
baking such a high output tape with different audio information on the
opposing tracks was not an option. BTW, the Akai 4000db must have more
narrow track widths, as the low frequency crosstalk (that is common on
7.5ips and up reel to reel) is nearly completely inaudible on that
machine. It has other shortcomings, but if you have some quiet musical
passages and you're getting bleed-thru from the other side in the bass
region, it is doubtful that you will hear it on an Akai 4000db. It
makes that machine a hidden gem. But sadly, it doesn't help with the
high frequency crosstalk that results from baking two-direction 4 track
996 recorded near it's max operating level.

Those X1000/2000 machines were excellent machines when they were new, but
in my experience they easily go out of alignment. The problem I have
found is the quarter track heads as fitted wear unevenly because there
are no dummy heads fitted where the reverse direction tracks would be.
Take a look at the heads and you will likely see the head is wearing in
such a way that there is a deeper groove being cut at the bottom of the
head where there's no head and less apparent wear to the top of the head
where there is a head. (I hope I'm being clear on this).

I have an X2000M which is the 2 track 7.5/15ips version. This machine
also comes fitted with a quarter track playback only head to allow
playback of quarter track recordings, but I have had to remove that head
due to uneven wear because it was causing the tape to ride up the
headstack causing poor alignment across the half track heads which are
still in excellent condition with even head wear. As soon as I removed
that quarter track head and placed a dummy guide in it's place, the
alignment returned to it's proper position. This may explain your
crosstalk problem, I have a feeling your recordings are out of alignment.

Rich..