Spectroscopy identifies deterioration degree in old tapes

[Jason[_15_]]

http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/web/2015/09/Testing-Old-Tapes-
Playability.html

[Scott Dorsey]

Jason > wrote:
>http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/web/2015/09/Testing-Old-Tapes-
>Playability.html

Interesting!

The good things about this:

1. It identifies some compounds (if only by absorption spectrum) that
indicate binder breakdown which can be more carefully analyzed in the
future.

2. It indicates problems with the tape binder itself rather than just the
backcoating, providing additional validation to the theory that it is
the binder itself breaking down.

The bad things about it:

1. The test itself is not practical for spot-checking tape libraries. The
reel has to be pulled and unreeled for the surface to be analyzed. What
is needed is a swab that can be wiped on the outer edge of the tape wind
and then analyzed either in a machine or by eye.

2. The overlap between tests of playable and unplayable tape is great, so
this test will either produce a lot of false positives or false negatives
depending on how it's calibrated.

I'm not saying this isn't useful research, I'm just saying that as a
production test this is of limited use.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ron C[_2_]]

On 9/9/2015 2:06 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Jason > wrote:
>> http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/web/2015/09/Testing-Old-Tapes-
>> Playability.html
>
> Interesting!
>
> The good things about this:
>
> 1. It identifies some compounds (if only by absorption spectrum) that
> indicate binder breakdown which can be more carefully analyzed in the
> future.
>
> 2. It indicates problems with the tape binder itself rather than just the
> backcoating, providing additional validation to the theory that it is
> the binder itself breaking down.
>
> The bad things about it:
>
> 1. The test itself is not practical for spot-checking tape libraries. The
> reel has to be pulled and unreeled for the surface to be analyzed. What
> is needed is a swab that can be wiped on the outer edge of the tape wind
> and then analyzed either in a machine or by eye.
>
> 2. The overlap between tests of playable and unplayable tape is great, so
> this test will either produce a lot of false positives or false negatives
> depending on how it's calibrated.
>
> I'm not saying this isn't useful research, I'm just saying that as a
> production test this is of limited use.
> --scott
>
I got the impression this was more of an archivist's curation tool than
a production test. Um, what kind of production did you have in mind?
==
Later...
Ron Capik
--

[Jason[_15_]]

In article >,
says...
> I got the impression this was more of an archivist's curation tool than
> a production test. Um, what kind of production did you have in mind?
>

That's what I thought, too, hence the interest by the Smithsonian.

[Scott Dorsey]

Jason > wrote:
>In article >,
says...
>> I got the impression this was more of an archivist's curation tool than
>> a production test. Um, what kind of production did you have in mind?
>
>That's what I thought, too, hence the interest by the Smithsonian.

By production I mean a continuous assembly-line operation, of the "here
are 10,000 tapes, tell us which ones are bad in two weeks" type, as opposed
to a development project.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ron C[_2_]]

On 9/9/2015 9:15 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Jason > wrote:
>> In article >,
>> says...
>>> I got the impression this was more of an archivist's curation tool than
>>> a production test. Um, what kind of production did you have in mind?
>>
>> That's what I thought, too, hence the interest by the Smithsonian.
>
> By production I mean a continuous assembly-line operation, of the "here
> are 10,000 tapes, tell us which ones are bad in two weeks" type, as opposed
> to a development project.
> --scott
>
Hmm, who might be looking to do such a thing?

==
Later...
Ron Capik
--

[John Williamson]

On 10/09/2015 04:11, Ron C wrote:
> On 9/9/2015 9:15 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> Jason > wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> says...
>>>> I got the impression this was more of an archivist's curation tool than
>>>> a production test. Um, what kind of production did you have in mind?
>>>
>>> That's what I thought, too, hence the interest by the Smithsonian.
>>
>> By production I mean a continuous assembly-line operation, of the "here
>> are 10,000 tapes, tell us which ones are bad in two weeks" type, as
>> opposed
>> to a development project.
>> --scott
>>
> Hmm, who might be looking to do such a thing?
>
Any large tape library, such as the Smithsonian or British Library or
even a record company with a warehouse full of master tapes they don't
have time to check by playing.

It would be very handy if it could tell you which tapes have problems
before they get too bad to play back, so you could back them up in time,
especially in the case of some early digital recordings, as some have
been lost due to the digital cliff effect of perfect playback one day,
and total failure of the error correction to cope when they were played
the following month.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Jason[_15_]]

In article >,
says...
> or
> even a record company with a warehouse full of master tapes they don't
> have time to check by playing
>

Five miles from where I live, there is an Iron Mountain underground
storage site. It contains all the masters that Sony Entertainment has
produced - audio and video. I know someone who works there - I'll ask if
they're using this kind of technology.

(During the Cold War, they had H-bomb-proof(?) apartments for rent in
that facility. I recall seeing an advertizing brochure. I was told that
Nelson Rockefeller had one reserved.)

[Ty Ford]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 9:12:29 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote:
> http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/web/2015/09/Testing-Old-Tapes-
> Playability.html

There's a chemical engineer down in Annapolis who has a process for removing sticky shed back coating that's supposedly much better than baking tape, if that's any help.

James Richardson: (410) 757-3733

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Scott Dorsey]

Jason > wrote:
>In article >,
says...
>> or
>> even a record company with a warehouse full of master tapes they don't
>> have time to check by playing
>
>Five miles from where I live, there is an Iron Mountain underground
>storage site. It contains all the masters that Sony Entertainment has
>produced - audio and video. I know someone who works there - I'll ask if
>they're using this kind of technology.

I don't think anyone is. People who are doing general assessment might
be pulling reels out to spot check on a machine or with their thumb, but
I don't think anyone is doing full archives surveys anywhere yet. As I
said, it needs to be made faster and more convenient before people will
use it.
--scott

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

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 9/11/2015 10:04 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> I don't think anyone is. People who are doing general assessment might
> be pulling reels out to spot check on a machine or with their thumb, but
> I don't think anyone is doing full archives surveys anywhere yet.

Well, the Library of Congress is one of the participants in this
project, and the have a lot of tape. I expect that they would be a
likely candidate if it proved to be an efficient and reliable process.
Otherwise, an educated thumb would likely work pretty well.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then