Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape

To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape
From: Lou Judson <inaudio@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 22:27:35 -0700
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@loc.gov>
In-reply-to: <6.2.3.4.2.20050924105649.01e88cf8@127.0.0.1>
Message-id: <5c26f796d4c5e1688fc3515735a448b4@pacbell.net>
References: <6.2.3.4.2.20050923165744.04c62cd8@127.0.0.1> <yam10128.1396.158182680@smtp.ntlworld.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20050924105649.01e88cf8@127.0.0.1>
Reply-to: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx>

The backwards transfer I first saw when I worked in a duplication house. When tape is moving 16 or more times normal spped, electronics can respond to the transients better in reverse - at normal spaaeds the difference is truly negligible.

Lou
On Sep 24, 2005, at 8:00 AM, Richard L. Hess wrote:

When I transfer two track mono tapes or four-track mono/stereo tapes and they don't have any noise reduction, I transfer all tracks at once and reverse the necessary ones in the computer. In fact, some people suggested copying analog to analog backwards as being a hair better, but given the choice, I prefer to monitor the ingest process.

References:
- Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape
  - From: Richard L. Hess
- Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape
  - From: Don Cox
- Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape
  - From: Richard L. Hess

Prev by Date: [ARSCLIST] "tails-out" issues? (was re: reel-to-reel tape)
Next by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape
Previous by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape
Next by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Table of Contents]

Re: [ARSCLIST] reel-to-reel tape

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]