Re: arsclist Transfer of multiple copies, was: Full 3-D mapping of groove?

["George Brock-Nannestad" <pattac@xxxxxxxx>]

From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad

>  Steven Smolian wrote:
> >If you are working from a full track mono and are willing to give up
> >a bit of signal to noise, you could use a two-track stereo head. 
> >This assumes the gap is wide enough to allow independent reading of
> >the separated sections with sufficient data to effect the appropriate
> >adjustment..
> >
> >Steve Smolian,

----- and Richard Hess responded (cut):
> 
> I think this conversation has morphed...but I'd like to suggest that
> for whatever reasons--not yet fully understood by me--the full-track
> reproduction of high-speed full-track tapes provides a richer, warmer,
> cleaner transfer that is not strictly attributable to the S/N
> degradation caused by the head...at least it sounds more and different
> from what one would expect. 

----- however, there is no advantage to use the CEDAR azimuth 
corrector on two separate parts of a full-track tape - the loss in high 
frequencies created by the azimuth error will not be counteracted, 
just because you obtain the correct synchronism between the two 
parts of the tape. The only remedy is the micrometer attachment to 
a tonehead bridge. The CEDAR does not correct azimuth as such, 
only the timing error between channels created in a stacked head 
where the gaps are not disposed perfectly vertical above each 
other. In a 24-track recording this can be a real problem if your 
replacement head is not made to same standards as the original 
record head.

Kind regards and the best wishes for 2003,


George
-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.