Curing Sticky Tape Syndrome A Must Read!

[miroslav]

Lance

I don't doubt that the polymer is sealing and polishing the tape....same thing it does to the hood of a car.
So yes, you are putting a coating/seal OVER the SSS.
Now...maybe(?) that's all that is needed to "cure" SSS, but I'm not convinced just by that.
I mean, you could put a polymer coating on a rusty piece of metal, and the rust will not "come out" since it's sealed inside...BUT...is the rust removed/cured...?
NO.

Maybe by sealing it you feel it's cured, but I see the sealant as just a casing over the SSS problem. The real question comes back again to what is happening at the molecular level, and up to this point, you've pretty much pushed those considerations aside and are already convinced just by what you can observe on the surface that you've found the cure.

I don't really feel that's proven science. Maybe it does cure/solve the problem...but I think one needs to take a really, really close look at the particles and other chemicals with a microscope and see what happens to them when the seal is placed over them....and then study them over time.
Is there s-l-o-w chemical interaction that is not visible by the eye?
Not to mention...is there any damage happening to the deck transport, heads, rubber rollers...etc....at a microscopic level as the tape coated with polymer, rides back-n-forth over, and over, and over, and over...well, you get my point.

Heck, my Otari 5050 BIII 2-track deck has non-metallic (not sure if they are plastic or some other material) "rings" at the ends of the metal guides...and other decks might have them too. How will they be affected???
I'm not about to rub a non-approved, untested concoction across those guides and assume over time it won't damage them or my heads. Not to mention, erase heads are very often PLASTIC on many decks...so how will they fair over time???
Not to sound snooty...by just having to replace my head-stack and guides would probably cost more than 2-3 of those TEAC 2300SD decks on eBay.

So unlike some home-rec/tape heads who have throw-away tapes and old, antiquated decks...I'm not about to shit up a practically brand new $6k mixdown deck experimenting with chemicals, and that's the same attitude you will find on pro audio forums where people still use expensive tape decks for recording and/or have tons of old tapes with big-name music on them. Those folks are not going to risk that stuff based on a few forum posts.
You think someone will risk a 24-Channel Studer with chemicals that are not yet recommended by anyone in the industry other than you and another guy on some home-rec/tape head forum....???

Win over those pros, and then maybe you will have something....but I guarantee that won't happen without formal lab testing and real science.

Oh...and I have no need or desire to post on the tapeheads forum. I see you've won over a handful of "I think I'll try it, I have nothing to lose" types over there (though there are skeptics there too), so why would you want me to post there...?...just to get into another drawn out meaningless debate?
I instead again say to you that you should post your comments on the a couple major pro audio engineer forums, and see how that goes.
You have to consider that SSS has been around a LOOOOOOOOOOOONG time, and lots of guys in white lab coats at the major tape manufacturing companies (when they were all still in full swing) have tried to find a real *cure*. I would not be so quick to dismiss their efforts and to think that somehow they simply "missed it"...that they just didn't try the more obvious possibilities. Polymers/sealants are not new...and companies like BASF have been playing with chemicals for a VERY long time.

Don't forget to rinse out your kitchen sink...

 

[Chilljam]

Here is the scientific data:

"The quality that makes NuFinish work is that it contains something (I don't know what nor do I really care) that makes it remove "goo" such as old adhesive, old glue, old bumper stickers, stickers on cookware, etc. It is this property that makes it eat off the gooey sticky shed." Posted by ggoat!!! at tapeheads.net on 08-02-2011

 

[miroslav]

Can you please explain that in layman's terms...???
I can't decipher the lofty techno-babel or make sense of all that hard scientific data that ggoat posted.

 

[Lt. Bob]

***yawnnnn *** .... just got in from a gig. is this still going on?

 

[diggy_dude]

***yawnnnn *** .... just got in from a gig. is this still going on?

What's your opinion of this process, Bob?

The funny thing for me is, I had read an old thread from 2007 where someone scoffed at people paying top dollar for UD 35 when 407 could be had cheaper. So I went searching for 407 and was about to buy some. This thread has scared me away from that idea. The 407 is only a tad cheaper than UD 35 in 2011. Certainly not cheap enough to worry about sticky shed and potential cures.

 

[Lt. Bob]

What's your opinion of this process, Bob?

The funny thing for me is, I had read an old thread from 2007 where someone scoffed at people paying top dollar for UD 35 when 407 could be had cheaper. So I went searching for 407 and was about to buy some. This thread has scared me away from that idea. The 407 is only a tad cheaper than UD 35 in 2011. Certainly not cheap enough to worry about sticky shed and potential cures.

doesn't sound like something I want to do and my reasons are that first, you don't want to remove oxide ..... you need it there, you just want to stabilize it and secondly, I have a food dehydrator which makes baking pretty easy.
From what I've read about sticky shed this isn't a real solution.
Ultimately though, I don't care and I'd be interested in threads where people have used this method and screwed something up 'cause it'd be entertaining.

 

[diggy_dude]

... I'd be interested in threads where people have used this method and screwed something up 'cause it'd be entertaining.

My sentiments exactly. I don't wish any harm to Lance or his followers, of course, but I think it's premature to draw any conclusions about the long-term viability of this solution. So there's some anticipation that he will crash and burn after trumpeting his apparent breakthrough early on. And if that happens, it will be funny in a tragic sort of way.

 

[Lance Lawson]

Lance

I don't doubt that the polymer is sealing and polishing the tape....same thing it does to the hood of a car.
So yes, you are putting a coating/seal OVER the SSS.
Now...maybe(?) that's all that is needed to "cure" SSS, but I'm not convinced just by that.
I mean, you could put a polymer coating on a rusty piece of metal, and the rust will not "come out" since it's sealed inside...BUT...is the rust removed/cured...?
NO.

Maybe by sealing it you feel it's cured, but I see the sealant as just a casing over the SSS problem. The real question comes back again to what is happening at the molecular level, and up to this point, you've pretty much pushed those considerations aside and are already convinced just by what you can observe on the surface that you've found the cure.

I don't really feel that's proven science. Maybe it does cure/solve the problem...but I think one needs to take a really, really close look at the particles and other chemicals with a microscope and see what happens to them when the seal is placed over them....and then study them over time.
Is there s-l-o-w chemical interaction that is not visible by the eye?
Not to mention...is there any damage happening to the deck transport, heads, rubber rollers...etc....at a microscopic level as the tape coated with polymer, rides back-n-forth over, and over, and over, and over...well, you get my point.

Heck, my Otari 5050 BIII 2-track deck has non-metallic (not sure if they are plastic or some other material) "rings" at the ends of the metal guides...and other decks might have them too. How will they be affected???
I'm not about to rub a non-approved, untested concoction across those guides and assume over time it won't damage them or my heads. Not to mention, erase heads are very often PLASTIC on many decks...so how will they fair over time???
Not to sound snooty...by just having to replace my head-stack and guides would probably cost more than 2-3 of those TEAC 2300SD decks on eBay.

So unlike some home-rec/tape heads who have throw-away tapes and old, antiquated decks...I'm not about to shit up a practically brand new $6k mixdown deck experimenting with chemicals, and that's the same attitude you will find on pro audio forums where people still use expensive tape decks for recording and/or have tons of old tapes with big-name music on them. Those folks are not going to risk that stuff based on a few forum posts.
You think someone will risk a 24-Channel Studer with chemicals that are not yet recommended by anyone in the industry other than you and another guy on some home-rec/tape head forum....???

Win over those pros, and then maybe you will have something....but I guarantee that won't happen without formal lab testing and real science.

Oh...and I have no need or desire to post on the tapeheads forum. I see you've won over a handful of "I think I'll try it, I have nothing to lose" types over there (though there are skeptics there too), so why would you want me to post there...?...just to get into another drawn out meaningless debate?
I instead again say to you that you should post your comments on the a couple major pro audio engineer forums, and see how that goes.
You have to consider that SSS has been around a LOOOOOOOOOOOONG time, and lots of guys in white lab coats at the major tape manufacturing companies (when they were all still in full swing) have tried to find a real *cure*. I would not be so quick to dismiss their efforts and to think that somehow they simply "missed it"...that they just didn't try the more obvious possibilities. Polymers/sealants are not new...and companies like BASF have been playing with chemicals for a VERY long time.

Don't forget to rinse out your kitchen sink...

Basement utility sink when home. Chemical sink at shop. Chemicals of a polluting nature stored until disposal at dedicated commercial facility for such chemicals. By education Environmental Engineer. By occupation Luthier (guitar maker)/musician, sometime recording engineer. Posts on all forum I belong to using real name. Noting to hide, lots to share.

Please share with us the nature of your tech degree. Perhaps there is a compelling reason why you feel that only lab coated specialists can make valid discoveries. BTW when still working actively in field research I designed a portable inexpensive water testing system that allowed for on the spot testing for the 16 chemicals we were concerned with. It gained me a promotion to supervisor of field research.

It's a pity you took the stand that you have against this. You seem like a potentially bright individual who rather than heave scorn at this treatment you might have been able to make a real contribution.

Perhaps those plastic rings on the Otari guides are teflon which would make sense although a very uncommon feature. Teflon is a very inert material

 

[sweetbeats]

Lance, I know I'M not debating that the Nu Finish is making a difference now and I think the issue here is that it seems that you are making the assumption that iif it is working now that it will work later and much later and so on. Am I understanding you correctly? If that is the case THAT'S what seems premature and why I don't want to just dive in you know? That's why the questions arise about how do you know what's happening at a molecular level and so on. Hey...BEER was discovered by accident and I think beer is great...so I'm not against accidental discovery of great things, but I can't see how you know what the long term effects will be and it seems that you are promoting that you do; that this is a "cure" for SSS and I think that is premature.

 

[miroslav]

It's an Electronic Technology degree (Audio/Computers), so yeah, I can read specs/data.

I'm not "heaving scorn"....I'm presenting a skeptical view and simply asking for there to be some lab/test data that goes beyond your "I observed the tape, SSS is cured and nothing bad is happening" opinion before you claim you have a "permanent cure". You just don't want to deal with skeptical/opposing views and questions...and that's why you shy away from posting your "cure" on the major pro audio forums.

I didn't say that only lab coated specialists can make valid discoveries. I said a LOT of lab coated guys spent a LOT of time looking for ways to cure SSS...but you seem to have dismissed their efforts as falling short, yet without any solid science or data you are basically claiming that YOUR efforts over the last few days have yielded a "cure".
Sure...it's possible for someone to accidentally/unexpectedly make a "breakthrough" discovery...but before it becomes the "cure"...there needs to be some math behind it, otherwise it just turns into a forum myth.
Choose your own path, though it's easy to promote a myth on the Internet these days!

Look at it this way Lance....if you can't/won't prove it scientifically with proper testing and data, and quell the skeptics...then it's your problem, not theirs. Just asking them to STFU and go away, isn't going to be any proof.
Anyway...you don't need to keep trying to win me over. I told you, when I see the math, then I'll be happy to say I was wrong.

 

[Lance Lawson]

We know the lab guys fell short. SSS wasn't cured. The lab guys gave us baking and baking is not a cure. My efforts of the past few days are built upon tests done over a decade ago. Essentially I've verifying what the tests of 1993 and 2007 produced. Yes I'm refining the application.

Win you over? Why would I want to do that? You haven't produced anything.

 

[diggy_dude]

Has any follow-up been done on those 1997 and 2007 tests to see how the tape is still holding up?

 

[miroslav]

....tests done over a decade ago.

"Tests"...???

That's even funnier than when you referred to the OP's forum posts as "reports".
Why are you trying so hard to paint him as some scientist who proved something???
Is it because you are eager to use his unproven "tests" as some retro-supportive proof of your own unproven "tests"...?

Win you over? Why would I want to do that? You haven't produced anything.

Well....'cuz...

You seem like a potentially bright individual who rather than heave scorn at this treatment you might have been able to make a real contribution.

...that sure sounded like you wanted to win me over.

What I've produced is several questions about your "cure" that you can't/won't answer.

 

[miroslav]

Has any follow-up been done on those 1997 and 2007 tests to see how the tape is still holding up?

Yup...the original Nu Finish "discoverer of the cure" popped back into the forums at one point and said the tapes are all "still good".

 

[diggy_dude]

Yup...the original Nu Finish "discoverer of the cure" popped back into the forums at one point and said the tapes are all "still good".

How long ago was that? Did he answer any pointed questions about that assertion? It seems to me that if he had convinced anyone, it would have become common knowledge on the forums long ago that a cure had been found.

 

[miroslav]

I think it was in 2007.

 

[stevieb]

LONG POST: A Review Of This Thread, From The Perspective Of The Scientific Method

This is obviously an emotional issue for many here. Easy to understand why- analog tape has become quite rare and "dear," and most of us have been disappointed with "cures" that, in the end, did now work. Thus, many of us are either jaded, and apt to reject almost anything we see or hear on the subject, or still optimistic and perhaps a little too willing to accept something that may disappoint us.

But, emotion is antithetical to most, if not all, of the scientific process. In my post here, I will try to sort out some of the different opinions, and bring some order to the tread so we can move forward. At this point, I can not say if I will succeed, but I will do my best. Wish me luck.

First, a brief rundown of the scientific method would be in order. Here is a simplified one, from
Steps of the Scientific Method

Key Info

The scientific method is a way to ask and answer scientific questions by making observations and doing experiments.
The steps of the scientific method are to:
Ask a Question
Do Background Research
Construct a Hypothesis
Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
Communicate Your Results
It is important for your experiment to be a fair test. A "fair test" occurs when you change only one factor (variable) and keep all other conditions the same. l

Ask a Question Although not posed in the form of a question, but I think Mr. Larson did pose a question, at least to himself: Does Nu-Finish "cure" sticky-shead syndrome? Point to Mr. Larson.

Do Background Research It appears Mr. Larson did this, but it is not reported or apparent in his original post. Subsequent posts reference other threads in other forums- the background research was done, but if everyone had known about it, less misunderstanding might have been the result. If Mr. Larson had included a reference to the post at Tapeheads.net in his original post, he would have met this requirement. Too bad- by not doing so, he left a vacuum. Point to the opposition.

Construct a Hypothesis "I decided ...that I’d try the Nu Finish remedy."
Not as eloquently stated as it might be, but good enough, as this is a user forum, NOT a scientific journal. Point to Mr. Larson.

Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment Seems this was done. Mr. Larson followed a procedure, reported it, and then tested the results of his procedure:"Then it was time to test the tape." Point to Mr. Larson.

Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion Done in the last two paragraphs. Point to Mr. Larson.

Communicate Your Results Obviously done- if not, this thread would not exist! Point to Mr. Larson.

It is important for your experiment to be a fair test. A "fair test" occurs when you change only one factor (variable) and keep all other conditions the same. Well, done, to an extent, but no reporting of how well controls were held constant. It appears NO control group or experimentation was done. This might have been a draw, but the lack of a reported control pushes it to Point to the opposition.

But, there is more to the SM. Doing something ONCE might be interesting, but the results have almost no "statistical power." That comes from doing the same thing, again and again, and getting the same, verifiable results. As Mr. Larson reports on only one tape being treated, I can only conclude that his results have little power. Point to the opposition, which I have become a part of, at least for the moment.

A simple score shows Mr. Larson, 5 points; opposition, 3 points., but the SM holds us to high standards, so one must conclude that Mr. Larson's experiment is deeply flawed, but still has merit.

But, some of the concerns expressed by the oposition are not valid. For instance,

According to the Nu-Finish FAQ on their website: "Do not use Nu Finish Car Polish on vinyl, plastic trim..." Tape base material is plastic...

Ah, but the reason poly-based finished are not recommended for use on plastics is they can "stain" the plastic part, esp. if the part is black. Simply put, it can be almost impossible to get the white poly off black plastic parts. Poly-based paint sealants do NOT damage plastics, otherwise. (Mr. Larson points this out, in an earlier post in this thread.)

And,

Lance, you're basically telling people...who haven't tried your "treatment", to f**k off...

What he's saying, from a SM perspective, is "If you have not tried to duplicate my experiment and either got the same or different results, you have no authority to comment on my experiment." A valid statement. Sorry, but some of you folks are standing outside his house, and throwing stones. In common language: "Don't knock it 'till you've tried it."

Criticisms that the “only” way to evaluate the results are chemical analysis, or that not knowing what is happening at a chemical or molecular level, are simply not true. Perfectly valid experimental results can come from observing the RESULTS of an experiment and drawing conclusions, without knowing HOW or WHY it worked.

This thread has become highly emotionalized, and that has made understanding difficult, maybe impossible. The personal attacks on Mr. Larson (“This is a freaking side show…,” “and so good luck to him and all those ...who are hungry for a cure and are lining up for their bottle,” “ are damaging to the discussion here. I would implore everyone to focus your comments on the PROCESS, not on PERSONALITIES.

Thank you, all.

 

[miroslav]

The "experiment to test the hypothesis " step was rather crude and totally *unmeasured*....that's a point for the opposition.
I also think the "analyze data" step is another point to the opposition...since there was no real *data*, just casual observation (see experiment step above).
Some tests can be simply "observed"...but we are dealing with chemicals and changes on a molecular level (as has been pointed out about 20 times already)....so just "observing" that the concoction is a "cure" doesn't cut mustard.

So that IMO makes it 5-3 to the opposition.

Also, I've not attacked Lance's personality...just his lack of hard data and hard science while IMO, preemptively claiming to have the "cure" and then taking a rather negative view of anyone still skeptical that he has found a "cure".

 

[diggy_dude]

In common language: "Don't knock it 'till you've tried it."

So if Mr. Larson drove his car over a cliff and lived to tell the tale, then advised others to do the same, we shouldn't chastise him for dispensing that advise without providing statistical evidence that they would probably live through it as well?

I don't think I'm throwing stones, as you put it. I haven't drawn any conclusions for or against. I haven't said Mr. Larson's findings are baseless or without merit. What miroslav and I are saying, quite simply, is that it's too early to tell.

 

[moresound]

Sunshine can do wonders on sticky tape.