jpmorris
Tape Wolf
Well we can probably establish whether the heads are chronically worn.MCI2424 said:
DFGH, do you think you can put up a closeup photo of the heads?
DFGH, do you think you can put up a closeup photo of the heads?
B
Beck
Guest
Fabled stories? Mythical now, is it? 
(me laughing and crying... Hey Dragon! Could we get one emoticon for this please???) 
As I stated three days ago in post #13 above,
So yes it could be symptoms of a worn head, but one must keep a cool head as we patiently and methodically follow industry standard diagnostic steps in the right order, escalating only as the simpler measure fail to remedy the problem/s.
Normal magnetic buildup occurs relatively evenly over time. However, sudden magnetization through a degaussing error is focused due to the small size of the probe. A tape head appears to be physically one piece, but it is not magnetically one piece. It should now be painfully clear (if it wasn’t before) why a demaging probe must be slowly waived over the head to degauss it thoroughly and evenly. If it was magnetically one, you could achieve degaussing by touching the probe to one corner.
It is a simple matter of physics that metal nearest the deqausser when power is lost would have a greater charge. A degausser creates a cyclically reversing magnetic field. If the alternating action stops close to the area being degaussed, that area will be charged with the last half-cycle before interruption. Areas further from the probe receive a weaker charge.
The induced magnetism follows the inverse square law as the device is moved away from the object being degaussed. Doubling the distance of the probe from the area of the head reduces the power to ¼ of what it is right at the tip. And we are talking tiny increments in distance here – millimeters. Magnetically speaking, the distance from one side of a tape head to the other is a long way. So yes, a group of tracks together could become more severely charged than the rest.
Now back to tape path cleaning – it’s the most important regular maintenance item on the list, and it is often neglected. No one on this forum has advocated cleaning as the only course of action, but simply the first course of action, and that it should be thorough. As in the case of sticky-shed a normal cleaning will not suffice. If you’ve never had to remove oxide shed from head relief slots at the edge-tracks with a toothpick and magnifying lens, well you just haven’t lived.
But even normal, uniform oxide buildup reduces tape-to-head contact to an unacceptable degree for serious recording. Narrower tracks and closely spaced tracks are more susceptible. So, an E-16 will present deterioration in audio performance due to oxide buildup sooner compared to a ¼” half-track using the same tape at the same speed. And again – the edge-tracks, the edge-tracks (say it with me) the edge-tracks… remember the edge-tracks – in this case 1 & 16. If bad tape has ever been run through this machine it is very likely the edge-tracks have never been fully cleared. Remember the toothpick… yeah, it gets that ugly and worse.
~Tim
(me laughing and crying... Hey Dragon! Could we get one emoticon for this please???) As I stated three days ago in post #13 above,
So yes it could be symptoms of a worn head, but one must keep a cool head as we patiently and methodically follow industry standard diagnostic steps in the right order, escalating only as the simpler measure fail to remedy the problem/s.
Normal magnetic buildup occurs relatively evenly over time. However, sudden magnetization through a degaussing error is focused due to the small size of the probe. A tape head appears to be physically one piece, but it is not magnetically one piece. It should now be painfully clear (if it wasn’t before) why a demaging probe must be slowly waived over the head to degauss it thoroughly and evenly. If it was magnetically one, you could achieve degaussing by touching the probe to one corner.
It is a simple matter of physics that metal nearest the deqausser when power is lost would have a greater charge. A degausser creates a cyclically reversing magnetic field. If the alternating action stops close to the area being degaussed, that area will be charged with the last half-cycle before interruption. Areas further from the probe receive a weaker charge.
The induced magnetism follows the inverse square law as the device is moved away from the object being degaussed. Doubling the distance of the probe from the area of the head reduces the power to ¼ of what it is right at the tip. And we are talking tiny increments in distance here – millimeters. Magnetically speaking, the distance from one side of a tape head to the other is a long way. So yes, a group of tracks together could become more severely charged than the rest.
Now back to tape path cleaning – it’s the most important regular maintenance item on the list, and it is often neglected. No one on this forum has advocated cleaning as the only course of action, but simply the first course of action, and that it should be thorough. As in the case of sticky-shed a normal cleaning will not suffice. If you’ve never had to remove oxide shed from head relief slots at the edge-tracks with a toothpick and magnifying lens, well you just haven’t lived.
But even normal, uniform oxide buildup reduces tape-to-head contact to an unacceptable degree for serious recording. Narrower tracks and closely spaced tracks are more susceptible. So, an E-16 will present deterioration in audio performance due to oxide buildup sooner compared to a ¼” half-track using the same tape at the same speed. And again – the edge-tracks, the edge-tracks (say it with me) the edge-tracks… remember the edge-tracks – in this case 1 & 16. If bad tape has ever been run through this machine it is very likely the edge-tracks have never been fully cleared. Remember the toothpick… yeah, it gets that ugly and worse.
~Tim
Last edited:
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
It's a process of careful elimination of the most basic / fundemental (but common) possible causes and then proceeding further, as Tim so elequently points out.
D
dfgh11
New member
jpmorris said:
Yeah I'll do that tonight. I'll also put up an audio clip so that you can hear what I hear. Any problems I was getting before hand with tracks were I think probably down to the fact I was using GP9 on a machine calibrated for 456. I've found now that the frequencies seem to be back, if I could only get rid of the 'gargling' sound I can get on with aligning it for GP9. I already have a calibration tape from JRF
M
MCI2424
New member
Beck said:Fabled stories? Mythical now, is it?
As I stated three days ago in post #13 above,
So yes it could be symptoms of a worn head, but one must keep a cool head as we patiently and methodically follow industry standard diagnostic steps in the right order, escalating only as the simpler measure fail to remedy the problem/s.
Normal magnetic buildup occurs relatively evenly over time. However, sudden magnetization through a degaussing error is focused due to the small size of the probe. A tape head appears to be physically one piece, but it is not magnetically one piece. It should now be painfully clear (if it wasn’t before) why a demaging probe must be slowly waived over the head to degauss it thoroughly and evenly. If it was magnetically one, you could achieve degaussing by touching the probe to one corner.
It is a simple matter of physics that metal nearest the deqausser when power is lost would have a greater charge. A degausser creates a cyclically reversing magnetic field. If the alternating action stops close to the area being degaussed, that area will be charged with the last half-cycle before interruption. Areas further from the probe receive a weaker charge.
The induced magnetism follows the inverse square law as the device is moved away from the object being degaussed. Doubling the distance of the probe from the area of the head reduces the power to ¼ of what it is right at the tip. And we are talking tiny increments in distance here – millimeters. Magnetically speaking, the distance from one side of a tape head to the other is a long way. So yes, a group of tracks together could become more severely charged than the rest.
Now back to tape path cleaning – it’s the most important regular maintenance item on the list, and it is often neglected. No one on this forum has advocated cleaning as the only course of action, but simply the first course of action, and that it should be thorough. As in the case of sticky-shed a normal cleaning will not suffice. If you’ve never had to remove oxide shed from head relief slots at the edge-tracks with a toothpick and magnifying lens, well you just haven’t lived.
But even normal, uniform oxide buildup reduces tape-to-head contact to an unacceptable degree for serious recording. Narrower tracks and closely spaced tracks are more susceptible. So, an E-16 will present deterioration in audio performance due to oxide buildup sooner compared to a ¼” half-track using the same tape at the same speed. And again – the edge-tracks, the edge-tracks (say it with me) the edge-tracks… remember the edge-tracks – in this case 1 & 16. If bad tape has ever been run through this machine it is very likely the edge-tracks have never been fully cleared. Remember the toothpick… yeah, it gets that ugly and worse.
~Tim
The first place I always check is the tape path. The mechanical alignment/tape wear pattern of the entire system. That is the #1 most important thing in all of this. The electrical operations are the easiest to debug and repair. If the heads are worn/tape path is out of alignment, then all elsee is a waste of time. Magnatizing a tape head is a rare occurance mainly because the magnatizers that were available did not have the horespower to really do any serious damage except if you were really searching on causing problems. The Handi-Mag is the exception because it was/is designed for 2" recorders and is very powerful. I intentionally tried (using a Radio-Shack and a TEAC demag unit) to destroy some heads to find out for myself. I will be damned if the TASCAM 2 trtack unit is still working perfectly. I tried all night long ago. As I got more brazen, I put the de-mag units right on the head and switched it on/off a half dozen times. No go.
I de-magged and the unit is still working fine.
The Handi-Mag I would not try now. When the unit finally wears out, I will try it to see how I can magnatize a head.
The one thing I would say is that the law of the universe would probably be against you if you tried this like I did on a tape machine you REALLY cared about.
Could happen first shot just to kill you. But, I am quite confident, based on experience, that it is much harder to magnatize heads than the advice I have read would have you believe.
There are other great fables like phantom power destroying ribbon mics instantly, etc.
Caution is the best advice to be sure, but being too overcautious gets paranoia going.
Now, if you wanna talk about blowing IC chips up by plugging boards in wrong............
Funny enough, I have plugged every damn board in most of my tape decks wrong at sometime in their lives and have yet to break a single thing.
Sometimes you just get lucky, or most things are just not that sensitive to being destroyed like some of these magazine writers lead people to believe.
B
Beck
Guest
Ok... but step one is -- clean and demagnetize the tape path even if your objective is to run the calibration tape to check the heads. So everyone starts at the same place.
If you don’t degauss before running your MRL tape, I’m pretty sure (like 100%) you need a new one.
I don't give much credence to degaussing fears except turning the degausser off at the heads, which is the one way you can indeed screw up while degaussing. Any individual experiences to the contrary, yours or mine, are anecdotal and don’t give sufficient cause to overturn industry standard procedures and precautions.
If you don’t degauss before running your MRL tape, I’m pretty sure (like 100%) you need a new one.
I don't give much credence to degaussing fears except turning the degausser off at the heads, which is the one way you can indeed screw up while degaussing. Any individual experiences to the contrary, yours or mine, are anecdotal and don’t give sufficient cause to overturn industry standard procedures and precautions.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
!!!
Damage: No;
Head wear: Yes.
Damage: No;
Head wear: Yes.
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
Ok, the links are working now but thanks Doc for posting the one clear pict.
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
I may need a slight amount of help here. What are we looking at specificaly?
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
btw, seriously...imho, you have to be very careful if/when concluding anything 'for sure' based on viewing a digital photo ... you do not really see the depth, and you do not really see "the axis location", plus a bit of perspective effect kiks in and other illusive artifacts... I guess it is sort of possible from evaluating series of photos made from different angle... still, you know
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
I personally see no obvious head wear but then again .. what the f*ck do I know!
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
The center "green" indicated area in the original photo looks darker and may show a flat spot or may not, depending if this is a lighting related issue or not ... It's def hard to see one way or another .. (at least for me 
)
)
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
Yeah, sort of ... really hard to tell.cjacek said:The center "green" indicated area in the original photo looks darker and may show a flat spot or may not, depending if this is a lighting related issue or not ... It's def hard to see one way or another .. (at least for me
Also, Daniel... sorry for any confusions (if any) with that second picture... I should of make a note or something. I've "painted" the suspicious area and added "vertical" lines to sort of see if it may look like uneven wear (if it is wear.., well, it kind of looks like it is, but hard to tell how bad it is... if it is what it looks like .. arghhhhhhhhhh
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
Dr ZEE said:Yeah, sort of ... really hard to tell.
Also, Daniel... sorry for any confusions (if any) with that second picture... I should of make a note or something. I've "painted" the suspicious area and added "vertical" lines to sort of see if it may look like uneven wear (if it is wear.., well, it kind of looks like it is, but hard to tell how bad it is... if it is what it looks like .. arghhhhhhhhhh
No problem as I was looking at the first one you posted (sans the "retouching"
). I was just pointing to where I was looking at.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
I'll commit:...
I think it's pretty extensive head wear.
I think it's pretty extensive head wear.