Sticky Shed Help Thread

Is there a clearly defined reason for this shedding, something which is known for sure? I ask, cause theories abound, from worn out tape paths due to ampex / quantegy, to insufficient dry time. Not everyone agrees. Is there a consensus? :confused:

Daniel, I’m not sure that it’s been nailed down to one cause. I have never accepted the tape-width reasoning as the only cause, because RMGI was/is replacing the “defective” tape with new tape of the same width. That would be an exercise in futility if it were only a tape-width issue. Also, I keep hearing reports from users that say they don’t have tape path wear issues. It doesn’t seem to be epidemic, but certainly a pain for the people it strikes.

:)
 
Tim, when dealing with an unused tape, dated '86, just protected by the box (not sealed) and reel wrapped in a plastic bag, will it be sticky shed right out of the box or will it take time and if so, how much time? That this '86 tape has the bad binder is a given but I'm just wondering when exactly it'll fall apart. :eek:

Thanks.:)
 
Tim, when dealing with an unused tape, dated '86, just protected by the box (not sealed) and reel wrapped in a plastic bag, will it be sticky shed right out of the box or will it take time and if so, how much time? That this '86 tape has the bad binder is a given but I'm just wondering when exactly it'll fall apart. :eek:

Thanks.:)

They will have sticky-shed even new-old-stock and sealed in plastic, so you will have to bake unused tape. The binder breakdown is a process of time and environment, so unused tape is no better than "one-pass"

Rather than baking it though, I would toss a blank tape from that era. SSS can't be fixed permanently. :( It’s not a good idea to buy the SSS stuff with a view to recording new material.

The real purpose of baking is to salvage prerecorded material or for using an old calibration tape that is otherwise good.

:)
 
They will have sticky-shed even new-old-stock and sealed in plastic, so you will have to bake unused tape. The binder breakdown is a process of time and environment, so unused tape is no better than "one-pass"

Rather than baking it though, I would toss a blank tape from that era. SSS can't be fixed permanently. :( It’s not a good idea to buy the SSS stuff with a view to recording new material.

The real purpose of baking is to salvage prerecorded material or for using an old calibration tape that is otherwise good.

:)

Thanks Tim. Is it the exposure to the environment (oxygen mainly), which starts the brake-down or does it start even if the tape is sealed? I guess what I mean is, if the tape is not exposed to oxygen, will it "sticky shed" all over the tape path at the first moment when it's taken out of the box / plastic? Thanks again.:)
 
Thanks Tim. Is it the exposure to the environment (oxygen mainly), which starts the brake-down or does it start even if the tape is sealed? I guess what I mean is, if the tape is not exposed to oxygen, will it "sticky shed" all over the tape path at the first moment when it's taken out of the box / plastic? Thanks again.:)

Unfortunately it doesn’t matter whether it is sealed or not. Even the 7” reels that are wrapped on the outside will be sticky right out of the box if from the sticky years.

Humidity is a key part of the process. Even normal humidity in a typical living environment is enough to slowly get absorbed by the binder over a period of years. I think it probably helps if you live in Arizona, but it only gives you more time than tape kept in Louisiana.

In technical terms it’s a hydrolysis of the polyurethane binder. Once you bake the tape it will stay good for a while… a month… maybe two. If you put a plastic bag around the reel with a desiccant pack inside it will help, and you can recondition the desiccant in the food dehydrator at the same time you bake a tape.

:)
 
Unfortunately it doesn’t matter whether it is sealed or not. Even the 7” reels that are wrapped on the outside will be sticky right out of the box if from the sticky years.

Humidity is a key part of the process. Even normal humidity in a typical living environment is enough to slowly get absorbed by the binder over a period of years. I think it probably helps if you live in Arizona, but it only gives you more time than tape kept in Louisiana.

In technical terms it’s a hydrolysis of the polyurethane binder. Once you bake the tape it will stay good for a while… a month… maybe two. If you put a plastic bag around the reel with a desiccant pack inside it will help, and you can recondition the desiccant in the food dehydrator at the same time you bake a tape.

:)

Thanks Tim!:)
 
I've got a Tascam 388, Any particular reason to avoid the old and used Maxell UD-35 90 offa ebay other than supporting the new guys?
 
I've got a Tascam 388, Any particular reason to avoid the old and used Maxell UD-35 90 offa ebay other than supporting the new guys?

Maxell has the good, stable tape formulation and will not go bad or sticky. In fact, it's one of the few tapes that actually has a very long shelf life. I've never heard of Maxell going bad. I have a bunch of new / old stock Maxell, most of which are at least 2 decades old and they still play / record as new. Although it's always best to buy sealed and unused, used Maxells will be fine too, as long as they were reasonably stored and not abused [which is hard to be sure of, if 'used'].

It's fine to support RMGI but there are alternatives and indeed one of them is the Maxell UD 35.

While Maxell 1/4" tapes were not as 'hyped' as todays manufacturing, I sure wish they'd start open reel tape manufacturing again. Judging by the craze of people still buying out new old stock, for record prices, Maxell would have no problems selling the tapes, in good numbers. I'd go as far as saying that Maxell would serve better as an archiving medium than anything else. Those things are pretty much bullet-proof and will probably outlive me. They sound good too.:)

----
 
I don't use tape for recording anymore, but I have buttloads of tapes I recorded bands on throughout the 70's and 80's. I really want to archive all that old stuff and I'm betting it all has sticky shed since it's from those two decades.
So this baking thing looks like my answer to life right now. I just bought a food dehydrator and I'm gonna read up on all these links ya'll have provided and figure out this technique.
thanks!
 
Ok this is from left field and may/may not help, but baking tape just sound sliek a REALLY bad idea to me!

In the liner notes on Boston's Third Stage Lp, Tom Scholtz talks about this same sticky problem on his multi-tracks of 'Cool the Engines'. He used some sort of liquid solution to bath the tape and the let it dry, and obviously it worked because that cut made the album without re-recording it. Might want to go to the band's website and email Tom - I would seriously bet he would help with the name of the solution and how to use it.



AK
 
Ok this is from left field and may/may not help, but baking tape just sound sliek a REALLY bad idea to me!

In the liner notes on Boston's Third Stage Lp, Tom Scholtz talks about this same sticky problem on his multi-tracks of 'Cool the Engines'. He used some sort of liquid solution to bath the tape and the let it dry, and obviously it worked because that cut made the album without re-recording it. Might want to go to the band's website and email Tom - I would seriously bet he would help with the name of the solution and how to use it.



AK
I'd certainly be interested in that but baking tapes with sticky shed is a pretty well established procedure.
 
...baking tape just sound sliek a REALLY bad idea to me!

In the liner notes on Boston's Third Stage Lp, Tom Scholtz talks about this same sticky problem on his multi-tracks of 'Cool the Engines'. He used some sort of liquid solution to bath the tape and the let it dry, and obviously it worked because that cut made the album without re-recording it. Might want to go to the band's website and email Tom - I would seriously bet he would help with the name of the solution and how to use it.

He used a silicone lubricant on 3M/Scotch 226 tape. This was in 1986 before a method to deal with sticky-shed was standardized. People used lubricants, which seemed reasonable enough because the tapes were dragging. Others used alcohol baths (99% Isopropyl). People didn’t start “baking” until the 90’s. Most people sent their tapes to Ampex or 3M, depending on brand of tape, to have the tapes treated in convection ovens using a method patented by Ampex in 1993. This method is what current baking procedures are all based on.

(And by the way, for those of us that were around then in a professional environment, we knew this as “The Tape Crisis.” It had as much to do with people changing over to digital as emerging digital technology did). Imagine… most of the tape people had in vaults [Ampex 406/407, 456/457, 3M/Scotch 226/227, 250, AGFA 469, etc] all going bad. It was a catastrophe of Biblical proportions and literally scared a lot of people into the digital age. The industry fixed the problem, but it was really too late to undo the damage to the reputation of tape).

Anyway, baking is probably a bad term, but it’s the one we ended up with. What we’re doing is dehydrating a tape that has absorbed excessive moisture due to an unstable polyurethane binder. This is done at a relatively low temperature (around 140 degrees F), which can hardly be called baking, but is nonetheless. :D

Baking in a conventional gas or electric kitchen oven is a bad idea, but using the standard procedure outlined in some of the links in the first post in this thread is the only safe way to proceed.

Here is the original Ampex patent for baking tape.

http://www.richardhess.net/restoration_notes/USP5236790.pdf

:)
 
AH, I understand (after reading further). That term 'baking' threw me for loop! Fortunately I have only ONE recorded tape from the bad era, all the rest of my recorded tape are either much older Scotch 207 (no sign of sticky yet!) or the wondrous Maxell UD35. And to think other engineers used to give me crap for using Maxwell instead of their beloved Ampex 456......

AK
 
Last edited:
I'm planning on buying some reels of RMG LPR35 from Splicit, who claim to be a registered RMG dealer. Can I expect the LPR35 to be good quality tape. All I have right now are 5 reels of sticky-shed Ampex 457, and I don't want to end up with more of the same.

Thanks.
 
Ok, has anyone heard of any sticky-shed issues with Scotch 207? I have an opportunity to aquire a bunch of it new in shrink rap for a very good price. I have some older recorded tapes that are 207 and I haven't seen the sticky issue yet, but wanted to ask if anyone else has seen the issue.




AK
 
AK,

I have the 1.5mil variant, the 206. All are fine. The 206 / 207 is not generally known to exhibit sticky shed, as it's a 1969 formulation [correct me on the date if I'm a bit off], which is before the manufacturers, in the USA, 'updated' their formulas, for the worse sadly....

206 / 207 is a safe bet.

BTW, Tim Beck uses and recommends this tape, which, I think, speaks for itself.. :)

---
 
Excellent! this lot of tape is supposedly from 1976-77, I'll be grabbing it all today. Here is a picture of the one box I snagged and brought home already:





AK
 

Attachments

  • S7300556.jpg
    S7300556.jpg
    57.7 KB · Views: 124
  • S7300557.jpg
    S7300557.jpg
    56.8 KB · Views: 123
Back
Top