Re: [ARSCLIST] wire recordings - archival storage

[Tracy Popp <tpopp2@xxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the thoughtful responses. They're extremely helpful.

Best,
Tracy

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Steven Smolian <smolians@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Actually, the Webster-Chicago wire is stainless steel and won't oxidize.
>
> I've done hundreds of wires and have yet to see mold, though I expect it's
> possible.
>
> The Websters have to be heads out as the take-up reel is much larger and
> part of the playback device.
>
> Since wind is the fatal flaw- I won't do mare's nests- and the balance of
> tensions within the device and the free movement of the bobbin are what
> usually go out of whack to cause the tangle issue, I'd leave it alone until
> transfer time.  Winding for storage rather than related to transfer is
> asking for trouble.
>
> Kinks in the wire often develop in storage and will jerk the wire during
> playback, sometimes breaking it.  For music especially, I usually make two
> passes, recording both but inevitably using the second as it then unwinds
> more smoothly.
>
> The Peirce-GE machine uses the same style feed and take-up reel.  It may be
> feasible to wind these tails out.  You could do the same on the Websters if
> you wanted, dubbing them with the signal backwards and reversing tit
> digitally.  I don't know of any studies which investigate when print-thru
> occurs on wire, though there may be a document covering this topic
> somewhere
> in Marvin Camras' papers, possibly at IIT.
>
> And though the wire supplied with the Peirce was also stainless steel, I've
> worked on some where someone would his own and which rusted through in
> clumps.
>
> Steve Smolian
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Scott D. Smith
> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 8:51 PM
> To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] wire recordings - archival storage
>
> Tracy,
>
> This is an area where not a lot of research has been done (at least that
> I've ever seen). However, based on my experience, I would at least
> recommend the following:
>
> 1. Do not store them in the original cardboard containers, as it invites
> issues with mold and moisture.
>
> 2. As much as possible, make sure there there is a _consistent_ wind on
> the pack, with no loose strands. (This is probably _the_ most important
> part for long-term storage).
>
> 3. A threaded leader should be attached, if there is none present. The
> end should be taped to the top of the spool with an archival, non-bleed
> tape (the 3M "zebra" tape is perfect for this).
>
> 4. As oxidation of the wire is always an issue, (especially with lower
> grade wire stock), it would be best to keep the spools in an airtight
> plastic container (a small 16mm plastic film canister might be an
> option). A desiccant pack would probably be a good idea as well, but
> would have to be changed periodically.
>
> I don't really have an opinion one way or the other regarding tails out
> or heads out for storage. More than anything else, I think it is
> important to have a well functioning machine which can properly wind the
> spools at a constant tension.
>
> Scott D. Smith
> Chicago Audio Works, Inc.
>
>
> Tracy Popp wrote:
> > Dear ARSC list members:
> >
> > I have been doing research on archiving wire recordings for a project we
> are
> > working on here at Univ. of Illinois. I have yet to find any  information
> > about preferred archival storage of these types of recordings - storage
> > orientation, preferred archival containers, etc. I have seen
> recommendations
> > regarding storage environment temperature but nothing definitive on
> > container or orientation.
> >
> >  I'd like to hear about how you and your institution approach archival
> > storage of wire recordings and if you have any particular resource you've
> > used to guide your decisions. Thank you in advance and I look forward to
> > your responses!
> >
> > Best,
> > Tracy Popp
> > Graduate Student
> > Univ. of Illinois
> >
> >
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.10/2088 - Release Date: 04/30/09
> 17:53:00
>