Storing DAT tapes: airtight containers?

[Hellenason7]

Is it a good idea or bad idea to store DAT tapes in airtight
containers? I have a few hundred DATs with old mixes and data, and I've been
keeping them in small batches of airtight, tupperwear-like containers for about
ten years.
I've taken out a random few to test every now and then, and so far
all appear to be in good shape. I wonder if the tapes themselves break down a
bit and release anything that might further damage the tapes, given the storage
means?
I live in a fairly humid place (65% rel humidy most of the year),
if that has any bearing. Thanks!

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Is it a good idea or bad idea to store DAT tapes in airtight
> containers? I have a few hundred DATs with old mixes and data, and I've been
> keeping them in small batches of airtight, tupperwear-like containers for about
> ten years.

It certainly can't hurt. You might put a pack of silica gel dessicant
in there too, particularly since you're in a humid area. DAT recorders
don't like moisture, and tape doesn't like mildew.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Is it a good idea or bad idea to store DAT tapes in airtight
> containers? I have a few hundred DATs with old mixes and data, and I've been
> keeping them in small batches of airtight, tupperwear-like containers for about
> ten years.

It certainly can't hurt. You might put a pack of silica gel dessicant
in there too, particularly since you're in a humid area. DAT recorders
don't like moisture, and tape doesn't like mildew.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Hellenason7]

>> Is it a good idea or bad idea to store DAT tapes in airtight
>> containers? I have a few hundred DATs with old mixes and data, and I've
>been
>> keeping them in small batches of airtight, tupperwear-like containers for
>about
>> ten years.
>
>It certainly can't hurt. You might put a pack of silica gel dessicant
>in there too, particularly since you're in a humid area. DAT recorders
>don't like moisture, and tape doesn't like mildew.
>
>--
>I'm really Mike Rivers

Thanks.

[Hellenason7]

>> Is it a good idea or bad idea to store DAT tapes in airtight
>> containers? I have a few hundred DATs with old mixes and data, and I've
>been
>> keeping them in small batches of airtight, tupperwear-like containers for
>about
>> ten years.
>
>It certainly can't hurt. You might put a pack of silica gel dessicant
>in there too, particularly since you're in a humid area. DAT recorders
>don't like moisture, and tape doesn't like mildew.
>
>--
>I'm really Mike Rivers

Thanks.

[Peter Larsen]

Hellenason7 wrote:

> Is it a good idea or bad idea to store DAT tapes in airtight
> containers? I have a few hundred DATs with old mixes and data,
> and I've been keeping them in small batches of airtight,
> tupperwear-like containers for about ten years.

Wise, but not a valid replacement of a sensible backup strategy. The
proper way to store digital data is to keep copying them ..... I can't
remember where I read it, not that many weeks ago, but someoone
explained in some context that one should not consider data "safe"
unless they exist in three copies and on different locations. This is
less than a terabyte, from your wording half a terabyte, so copying two
tapes pr. dvd disk appears to be manageable.

> I've taken out a random few to test every now and then,
> and so far all appear to be in good shape.

DAT tapes (sony brand) from 1993 stored with no special precautions
played well recently. But it may not be like with the back coated
reel-to-reel tapes, they get "issues" when they age, but are
salvageable. DAT tapes probably aren't, and you risk that all have
failed when you detect one "issue" with a spot check.

> I wonder if the tapes themselves break down a bit and release
> anything that might further damage the tapes, given the storage
> means?

I vaguely recall the worst risk to be rust, but it is way many years ago
I read Hugh Ford's articles about it in Studio Sound.

> I live in a fairly humid place (65% rel humidy most of the year),
> if that has any bearing. Thanks!

Dry and cool, say 10 to 15 degrees centigrade, is probably a good idea,
with dryer and less cool (not good for fungi) possibly being a better
choice than cooler and less dry (good for fungi). There seems to be a
fungus for everything, so there is some fungus out there that lives off
of DAT-tapes if it can get at them and if it can get water to go with
them.

Your mileage may vary, but hey ... back it up!

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

[Peter Larsen]

Hellenason7 wrote:

> Is it a good idea or bad idea to store DAT tapes in airtight
> containers? I have a few hundred DATs with old mixes and data,
> and I've been keeping them in small batches of airtight,
> tupperwear-like containers for about ten years.

Wise, but not a valid replacement of a sensible backup strategy. The
proper way to store digital data is to keep copying them ..... I can't
remember where I read it, not that many weeks ago, but someoone
explained in some context that one should not consider data "safe"
unless they exist in three copies and on different locations. This is
less than a terabyte, from your wording half a terabyte, so copying two
tapes pr. dvd disk appears to be manageable.

> I've taken out a random few to test every now and then,
> and so far all appear to be in good shape.

DAT tapes (sony brand) from 1993 stored with no special precautions
played well recently. But it may not be like with the back coated
reel-to-reel tapes, they get "issues" when they age, but are
salvageable. DAT tapes probably aren't, and you risk that all have
failed when you detect one "issue" with a spot check.

> I wonder if the tapes themselves break down a bit and release
> anything that might further damage the tapes, given the storage
> means?

I vaguely recall the worst risk to be rust, but it is way many years ago
I read Hugh Ford's articles about it in Studio Sound.

> I live in a fairly humid place (65% rel humidy most of the year),
> if that has any bearing. Thanks!

Dry and cool, say 10 to 15 degrees centigrade, is probably a good idea,
with dryer and less cool (not good for fungi) possibly being a better
choice than cooler and less dry (good for fungi). There seems to be a
fungus for everything, so there is some fungus out there that lives off
of DAT-tapes if it can get at them and if it can get water to go with
them.

Your mileage may vary, but hey ... back it up!

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Wise, but not a valid replacement of a sensible backup strategy. The
> proper way to store digital data is to keep copying them .....

That's not storage. I'm not sure what you call it, but it's not
storage. The situation is the same with analog tape, too. And some
people think that it should be copied to digital media (where it can
be duplicated faster than real time and the copies stored in places
where they aren't likely to all be lost at once.

But one has to consider just how valuable these recordings are. If it
was something that I thought was pretty neat, I'd copy the DAT to CD
and store both of them. If it was REALLY valuable, chances are it
would be in someone else's hands by now and I'd let them worry about
it.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Wise, but not a valid replacement of a sensible backup strategy. The
> proper way to store digital data is to keep copying them .....

That's not storage. I'm not sure what you call it, but it's not
storage. The situation is the same with analog tape, too. And some
people think that it should be copied to digital media (where it can
be duplicated faster than real time and the copies stored in places
where they aren't likely to all be lost at once.

But one has to consider just how valuable these recordings are. If it
was something that I thought was pretty neat, I'd copy the DAT to CD
and store both of them. If it was REALLY valuable, chances are it
would be in someone else's hands by now and I'd let them worry about
it.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Peter Larsen]

Mike Rivers wrote:

> In article > writes:

>> Wise, but not a valid replacement of a sensible backup strategy.
>> The proper way to store digital data is to keep copying them .....

> That's not storage. I'm not sure what you call it, but it's not
> storage.

It is storage of the DATA, not of the media, but the media are
irrelevant when it is digital from the very onset.

> The situation is the same with analog tape, too.

Not at all, it needs to be physically preserved because and and all copy
is a degraded version, be it analog or digital.

> And some people think that it should be copied to digital media
> (where it can be duplicated faster than real time and the copies
> stored in places where they aren't likely to all be lost at once.

For things like audio stored on Beta Hi-Fi recordings that is an
excellent idea, because players as well as media are rapidly going
extinct.

> But one has to consider just how valuable these recordings are.
> If it was something that I thought was pretty neat, I'd copy the
> DAT to CD and store both of them.

Indeed.

> If it was REALLY valuable, chances are it would be in someone
> else's hands by now and I'd let them worry about
> it.

Hmm ....

> I'm really Mike Rivers )


Kind regards

Peter Larsen


--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

[Peter Larsen]

Mike Rivers wrote:

> In article > writes:

>> Wise, but not a valid replacement of a sensible backup strategy.
>> The proper way to store digital data is to keep copying them .....

> That's not storage. I'm not sure what you call it, but it's not
> storage.

It is storage of the DATA, not of the media, but the media are
irrelevant when it is digital from the very onset.

> The situation is the same with analog tape, too.

Not at all, it needs to be physically preserved because and and all copy
is a degraded version, be it analog or digital.

> And some people think that it should be copied to digital media
> (where it can be duplicated faster than real time and the copies
> stored in places where they aren't likely to all be lost at once.

For things like audio stored on Beta Hi-Fi recordings that is an
excellent idea, because players as well as media are rapidly going
extinct.

> But one has to consider just how valuable these recordings are.
> If it was something that I thought was pretty neat, I'd copy the
> DAT to CD and store both of them.

Indeed.

> If it was REALLY valuable, chances are it would be in someone
> else's hands by now and I'd let them worry about
> it.

Hmm ....

> I'm really Mike Rivers )


Kind regards

Peter Larsen


--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************