24 Jun
2005
24 Jun
'05
9:28 a.m.
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Scott Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:38:28 +0100 (BST)
ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell) wrote:
I think you've misunderstood the message. I think Sellam was refering
to 'fancy technology' inside the tape player -- things like noise
reduction circuits. You want a player without anything like that.
I understood that. Using a 'cheap' mono cassette recorder with
automatic level control and brute plain electronics is well known enough
that I'm suprised that anybody wouldn't know it. I just didn't think it
was a 'cureall' comment to say 'just use a cheap tape recorder.'
There's a lot more you can do, and Sellam's comment seemed dismissive.
It wasn't meant to be dismissive, but a step in the right direction. I
didn't know what you were using, and just wanted to be sure of that.
Perhaps I shot from the hip. It isn't the first time.
Many people never used cassettes for program storage, so it might not be
too obvious that a modern day player with Dolby noise reduction or what
not might actually be hampering a tape load.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
> A somewhat 'crude' but simple thing you
can try is to listen to
> the audiotape sound of the tape you created which you say was
> successful. Then listen audibly to the tapes you're trying to
> recover. If the pitch seems to match for the most part it isn't
> a speed problem. If you have an oscilloscope, look at the
> amplitude of the signal out of the cassette drive of the new
> 'working' tape and compare to the one you're trying to recover.
As others have suggested, use the simplest tape player you can
find. Noise reduction circuits and other fancy technology will
only cause problems.
The 'fancy technology' I suggested was an oscilloscope. I don't see
how