reel to reel tape storage

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

I have a collection of 60 reels and I am looking for some type of
storage for them.Any Ideas?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On 26 May 2005 17:11:54 -0700, "granddad" <granddad90fm@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I have a collection of 60 reels and I am looking for some type of
>storage for them.Any Ideas?

The cardboard boxes they came in, standing upright on a shelf is the
traditional method.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Laurence Payne" <lp@laurenceNOSPAMpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:e6qd915nfnad1iqm8pqi1bqqlfbvqqkp3s@4ax.com...
> On 26 May 2005 17:11:54 -0700, "granddad" <granddad90fm@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I have a collection of 60 reels and I am looking for some type of
> >storage for them.Any Ideas?
>
> The cardboard boxes they came in, standing upright on a shelf is the
> traditional method.

And kept in a temperature and humidity controlled environment.

MrT.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Mr.T wrote:
> "Laurence Payne" <lp@laurenceNOSPAMpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
> message news:e6qd915nfnad1iqm8pqi1bqqlfbvqqkp3s@4ax.com...
>> On 26 May 2005 17:11:54 -0700, "granddad" <granddad90fm@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have a collection of 60 reels and I am looking for some type of
>>> storage for them.Any Ideas?
>>
>> The cardboard boxes they came in, standing upright on a shelf is the
>> traditional method.
>
> And kept in a temperature and humidity controlled environment.
>
> MrT.

Following is some advice from my brother who was an applications engineer
with the old Ampex magnetic tape division:

"Tape needs to breath, the solvents in the binders on old tapes still
evaporate, and if trapped in a closed container, can affect the surface
oxides...That's the prevailing theory anyway....Cool, but not
cold...Recomended temps are 60-65 degrees F."


Mark Z.

 

[bill]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

You might also want to transfer them to an empty reel and than back again.
As I recall once a year??

"Mark D. Zacharias" wrote:

> Mr.T wrote:
> > "Laurence Payne" <lp@laurenceNOSPAMpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
> > message news:e6qd915nfnad1iqm8pqi1bqqlfbvqqkp3s@4ax.com...
> >> On 26 May 2005 17:11:54 -0700, "granddad" <granddad90fm@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I have a collection of 60 reels and I am looking for some type of
> >>> storage for them.Any Ideas?
> >>
> >> The cardboard boxes they came in, standing upright on a shelf is the
> >> traditional method.
> >
> > And kept in a temperature and humidity controlled environment.
> >
> > MrT.
>
> Following is some advice from my brother who was an applications engineer
> with the old Ampex magnetic tape division:
>
> "Tape needs to breath, the solvents in the binders on old tapes still
> evaporate, and if trapped in a closed container, can affect the surface
> oxides...That's the prevailing theory anyway....Cool, but not
> cold...Recomended temps are 60-65 degrees F."
>
> Mark Z.

--
Hope this helps

Bill Mayhew
Mayhew & Company, Rental, Sales, Service
<http/www.mayhewco.com>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In <1117152713.965317.95590@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, on 05/26/05
at 05:11 PM, "granddad" <granddad90fm@hotmail.com> said:

>I have a collection of 60 reels and I am looking for some type of
>storage for them.Any Ideas?

A constant temperature near or slightly below room temperature and
moderate humidity (about 50%) would be ideal.

Part of good storage is proper packing of the tape. By "packing" I mean
don't rewind the tapes after play. (This is also known as storing tapes
"tails out".) If you look carefully at the tape pack after play, you'll
notice that it is nearly perfect. After rewind, the pack is uneven. As
the tape pack expands and contracts during storage, any unsupported
edges that stick out of the pack will stretch and are easily damaged if
the reel flanges are pinched.

Another consideration is occasional spooling of the tapes. For home
stored tapes this means playing the tapes. High speed tape cleaning
machines are available that can spool at high speeds while cleaning
debris off the tape surface. I've seen suggestions that tapes be
spooled annually.

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam: uce@ftc.gov
wordgame:123(abc):<14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13> (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Yes but I have had some flood damage and the boxes are damaged. I am
looking for new storage boxes

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Fri, 27 May 2005 22:27:47 -0400, zzzz@zzzz.zzz (Barry Mann) wrote:

>In <1117152713.965317.95590@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, on 05/26/05
> at 05:11 PM, "granddad" <granddad90fm@hotmail.com> said:
>
>>I have a collection of 60 reels and I am looking for some type of
>>storage for them.Any Ideas?
>
>A constant temperature near or slightly below room temperature and
>moderate humidity (about 50%) would be ideal.
>
>Part of good storage is proper packing of the tape. By "packing" I mean
>don't rewind the tapes after play. (This is also known as storing tapes
>"tails out".) If you look carefully at the tape pack after play, you'll
>notice that it is nearly perfect. After rewind, the pack is uneven. As
>the tape pack expands and contracts during storage, any unsupported
>edges that stick out of the pack will stretch and are easily damaged if
>the reel flanges are pinched.
>
>Another consideration is occasional spooling of the tapes. For home
>stored tapes this means playing the tapes. High speed tape cleaning
>machines are available that can spool at high speeds while cleaning
>debris off the tape surface. I've seen suggestions that tapes be
>spooled annually.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>spam: uce@ftc.gov
>wordgame:123(abc):<14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
>13> (Barry Mann)
>[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
>-----------------------------------------------------------

I was taught to store tape "Tails out" and rewind before use.
Is this still considered a good practice?


, _
, | \ MKA: Steve Urbach
, | )erek No JUNK in my email please
, ____|_/ragonsclaw dragonsclawJUNK@JUNKmindspring.com
, / / / Running United Devices "Cure For Cancer" Project 24/7 Have you helped? http/www.grid.org

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On 28 May 2005 12:31:22 -0700, "granddad" <granddad90fm@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Yes but I have had some flood damage and the boxes are damaged. I am
>looking for new storage boxes

Oh, you didn't say that. Then you might want to check out the tapes
as well.
For new boxes, try tapewarehouse.com (or any other place that sells
R2R tape) - don't know if they'll have them, but they have just about
everything else.

-----
http/mindspring.com/~benbradley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In <cl4h911e2buerceub8c8lu6q08v52lcon9@4ax.com>, on 05/28/05
at 03:52 PM, Steve Urbach <dragonsclaw@NOTmindspring.com> said:



[ ... ]

>I was taught to store tape "Tails out" and rewind before use. Is this
>still considered a good practice?

Yes. Some of the very expensive Pro decks can form a good tape pack in
fast wind, but the rest of us should leave the tapes played.

Tails out will also change the print through pattern a bit. The ghosts
will be spaced closer at the beginning of the tape.

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam: uce@ftc.gov
wordgame:123(abc):<14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13> (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On 28 May 2005 12:31:22 -0700, "granddad" <granddad90fm@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Yes but I have had some flood damage and the boxes are damaged. I am
>looking for new storage boxes

NOW you tell us

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In <4299889d$0$5180$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>, on 05/29/05
at 07:17 PM, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> said:


>"Steve Urbach" <dragonsclaw@NOTmindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:cl4h911e2buerceub8c8lu6q08v52lcon9@4ax.com... > I was taught to
>store tape "Tails out" and rewind before use. > Is this still
>considered a good practice?

>Only if the tape is uni directional, and you actually believe the
>pre-echo Vs post echo theory.

Pre-echo and post-echo exist, you must decide which is worse and, in
the case of 4-track stereo, which end you want the more closely spaced
echos. Since the pack will never be exactly the same from playing to
playing, occasionally spooling the tapes will tend to diffuse the echos
a bit.

>I have seen people with little understanding, doing it with 4 track
>stereo tapes. (recorded both directions)
>How they determine which is the "tail" is beyond me.

The term "tail" predates 4-track stereo and has never been re-invented.
Also, for the most part, 4-track stereo tapes are a home audio format
and are not used in professional work. (It is very difficult to cut and
paste a 4-track stereo tape.) Since home audio fans don't often think
in archival terms, they are not aware of the benefits of tails out
storage. Lots of tapes have been living in the attic for decades.

Perhaps "tail" should be redefined as the "most recently played end".
[update the literature now].

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam: uce@ftc.gov
wordgame:123(abc):<14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13> (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Steve Urbach" <dragonsclaw@NOTmindspring.com> wrote in message
news:cl4h911e2buerceub8c8lu6q08v52lcon9@4ax.com...
> I was taught to store tape "Tails out" and rewind before use.
> Is this still considered a good practice?

Only if the tape is uni directional, and you actually believe the pre-echo
Vs post echo theory.

I have seen people with little understanding, doing it with 4 track stereo
tapes. (recorded both directions)
How they determine which is the "tail" is beyond me.

MrT.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Mr.T" wrote ...
> I have seen people with little understanding, doing it with
> 4 track stereo tapes. (recorded both directions)
> How they determine which is the "tail" is beyond me.

The tail is the end of the tape where you turn it over to
play the second side.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Sun, 29 May 2005 19:17:08 +1000, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:

>
>"Steve Urbach" <dragonsclaw@NOTmindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:cl4h911e2buerceub8c8lu6q08v52lcon9@4ax.com...
>> I was taught to store tape "Tails out" and rewind before use.
>> Is this still considered a good practice?
>
>Only if the tape is uni directional, and you actually believe the pre-echo
>Vs post echo theory.
Yes, I have uni directional 4 channel tapes (remember Quad?) in my
collection.

>
>I have seen people with little understanding, doing it with 4 track stereo
>tapes. (recorded both directions)
>How they determine which is the "tail" is beyond me.
>
>MrT.
>

, _
, | \ MKA: Steve Urbach
, | )erek No JUNK in my email please
, ____|_/ragonsclaw dragonsclawJUNK@JUNKmindspring.com
, / / / Running United Devices "Cure For Cancer" Project 24/7 Have you helped? http/www.grid.org

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In <429ae451$0$15535$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>, on 05/30/05
at 08:00 PM, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> said:

>"Barry Mann" <zzzz@zzzz.zzz> wrote in message
>news:4299fdf0$2$avgroveq$mr2ice@wcnews.cyberonic.com...
>> >Only if the tape is uni directional, and you actually believe the
>> >pre-echo Vs post echo theory.
>>
>> Pre-echo and post-echo exist, you must decide which is worse and, in
>> the case of 4-track stereo, which end you want the more closely spaced
>> echos. Since the pack will never be exactly the same from playing to
>> playing, occasionally spooling the tapes will tend to diffuse the echos
>> a bit.

>Yes, proper spooling is not in question.
>The difference in echo between an adjacent outer layer and an adjacent
>inner layer is too small to matter IMO.
>(Of course I'll accept proof to the contrary.)

In terms echo magnitude, there is no difference, print through is print
through, but due to the difference in pack diameter, the time skew of
the echos is different. Of course, the exact timing depends on the
tape's linear speed. If a loud layer prints through to a quiet passage
and the loud sound is fairly coherent, it will be more annoying than
print through of diffuse ambient noise. As far as pre or post echo is
concerned, the annoyance will depend on the situation. Generally, I
prefer post echo, but any distinct echo is an annoyance.

[ ... ]

>>Since home audio fans don't often think
>> in archival terms, they are not aware of the benefits of tails out
>> storage.

>Which is OK since it doesn't matter for cassettes or 4 track stereo
>tapes as I was pointing out.

I've never observed a significant print through problem with cassettes.
(But I've never been a big fan of cassettes and I don't hold them to
the same standards as reel-to-reel. I do marvel at the improvements
over the years, but I relegate cassettes to "convenience" and try to
ignore their faults. During that "ignore" process, for me, print
through disappears.)

>>Lots of tapes have been living in the attic for decades.

>Deterioration due to heat and possibly humidity will be more of a
>worry.

Yes, print through is the least of their problems. Proper spooling
could have prevented edge damage, but binder bleed is always a problem.
Mould can also be an issue. Old tape splices are a major problem
because the splicing strip adhesive migration is more aggressive than
the binder. I've seen too much clear office tape used to splice
magnetic tape. One creative type spliced his magnetic tape with a wrap
of painter's masking tape.

>> Perhaps "tail" should be redefined as the "most recently played end".
>> [update the literature now].

>NO. The tail is the END of a UNI directional tape.

>There is NO valid tail for Bi-directional tapes. Each end is the head
>of one side, and the tail of the other.

OK

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam: uce@ftc.gov
wordgame:123(abc):<14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13> (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Mr.T wrote:
> Only if the tape is uni directional, and you actually believe the pre-echo
> Vs post echo theory.

I think the more important factor is "loosely wound" -- which most folks
find easier to achieve if your general practice is rewind-before-using,
play-to-end.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote in message
news:119jgj356il3vb4@corp.supernews.com...
> "Mr.T" wrote ...
> > I have seen people with little understanding, doing it with
> > 4 track stereo tapes. (recorded both directions)
> > How they determine which is the "tail" is beyond me.
>
> The tail is the end of the tape where you turn it over to
> play the second side.

What if the second side is better than the first?

MrT.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Barry Mann" <zzzz@zzzz.zzz> wrote in message
news:4299fdf0$2$avgroveq$mr2ice@wcnews.cyberonic.com...
> >Only if the tape is uni directional, and you actually believe the
> >pre-echo Vs post echo theory.
>
> Pre-echo and post-echo exist, you must decide which is worse and, in
> the case of 4-track stereo, which end you want the more closely spaced
> echos. Since the pack will never be exactly the same from playing to
> playing, occasionally spooling the tapes will tend to diffuse the echos
> a bit.

Yes, proper spooling is not in question.
The difference in echo between an adjacent outer layer and an adjacent inner
layer is too small to matter IMO.
(Of course I'll accept proof to the contrary.)

> The term "tail" predates 4-track stereo and has never been re-invented.
> Also, for the most part, 4-track stereo tapes are a home audio format
> and are not used in professional work. (It is very difficult to cut and
> paste a 4-track stereo tape.)

Agreed. I was only making a point.

>Since home audio fans don't often think
> in archival terms, they are not aware of the benefits of tails out
> storage.

Which is OK since it doesn't matter for cassettes or 4 track stereo tapes as
I was pointing out.

>Lots of tapes have been living in the attic for decades.

Deterioration due to heat and possibly humidity will be more of a worry.

> Perhaps "tail" should be redefined as the "most recently played end".
> [update the literature now].

NO. The tail is the END of a UNI directional tape.

There is NO valid tail for Bi-directional tapes. Each end is the head of one
side, and the tail of the other.

MrT.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Barry Mann" <zzzz@zzzz.zzz> wrote in message
news:429b37bd$3$avgroveq$mr2ice@wcnews.cyberonic.com...
> >Yes, proper spooling is not in question.
> >The difference in echo between an adjacent outer layer and an adjacent
> >inner layer is too small to matter IMO.
> >(Of course I'll accept proof to the contrary.)
>
> In terms echo magnitude, there is no difference, print through is print
> through, but due to the difference in pack diameter, the time skew of
> the echos is different. Of course, the exact timing depends on the
> tape's linear speed. If a loud layer prints through to a quiet passage
> and the loud sound is fairly coherent, it will be more annoying than
> print through of diffuse ambient noise. As far as pre or post echo is
> concerned, the annoyance will depend on the situation. Generally, I
> prefer post echo, but any distinct echo is an annoyance.

All fairly true, however I still fail to see how much difference there would
be in "pack diameter" between 3 adjacent tape layers. Would the "time skew"
*really* make an audible difference?
I have never studied the problem, because a significant difference seems
improbable to me.

Of course reel size will have a much more significant impact on print
through echo delay. To keep delays short, you could respool from 10" reels
to 7" or even 5" If you were really keen.
(assuming appropriate places to cut the tape. Most pop music with 3 or 4
minute songs would be no trouble.)

> I've never observed a significant print through problem with cassettes.

I have. However hub sizes are very small, even though the low tape speed
counteracts this benefit.

> (But I've never been a big fan of cassettes and I don't hold them to
> the same standards as reel-to-reel.

Me either.

> Yes, print through is the least of their problems. Proper spooling
> could have prevented edge damage, but binder bleed is always a problem.
> Mould can also be an issue. Old tape splices are a major problem
> because the splicing strip adhesive migration is more aggressive than
> the binder. I've seen too much clear office tape used to splice
> magnetic tape. One creative type spliced his magnetic tape with a wrap
> of painter's masking tape.

Yes, however most consumers never even attempt to splice tapes, so it's not
too big a problem.
Hopefully professionals know better.

MrT.