First of all, i mean not to steal Richard H's thunder, as he knows quite a bit more about this subject than me.
That said, it strikes me that the solution proposed here only accounts for splices *so* sticky as to be identifiable by touch alone. Thus allowing selections exhibiting less ridiculously obvious stages of hyrolysis to miss the boat.
Brandon Burke
Quoting Tom Fine <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Guys, this is not all correct. Wait for Richard Hess to chime in.
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Lennick" <dlennick@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 10:38 PM Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Tape baking question
> That was sort of what I expected the answer to be. > > dl > > "joe@xxxxxxxxxxx" wrote: > >> If memory serves, baking is known to be detrimental to some types of >> tape, so I'd suggest separating them out as best you can, bake, >> reassemble and Xfer. >> >> Joe Salerno >> Industrial Video Services >> PO Box 273405 >> Houston Texas 77277-3405 >> >> David Lennick wrote: >> > Here's one for the team. Let's say you have a reel made up of several short >> > pieces of tape, either a compilation or a master or just something where it was >> > convenient to group similar pieces of material together. Let's say SOME of the >> > selections are recorded on 176, some on 456, some on god knows what....and of >> > course, now you have a tape that has sticky shed on only some of the tracks. Do >> > you bake the whole thing or try and remove only the portions that need >> > treatment and bake them? >> > >> > --Stuck >> >
--
Brandon Burke
Archivist for Audio Collections
Hoover Institution Archives
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-6010
vox: 650.724.9711
fax: 650.725.3445
email: burke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx