Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Bulgaria
Thanks TIMTAPE. I read on here or Tapeheads yesterday about incorrectly zeroed tape paths causing the 'characteristic keystone pattern' of wear on the Ferrograph head, which is certainly what this one has. The thing would certainly benefit from a relap according to those instructions you sent, and from what I can see the base wouldn't get in the way of the process.
|
Yes I guess if the base cant be removed, the head would need to be relapped with the base hanging off the edge of the table, and thinking about it, maybe that's how I did it on my old Ferro 5 head.
Quote:
|
That's interesting what you say about the pressure pads. I was up too late last night reading about the motors providing inconsistent back pressure to keep the contact with the head, hence the pads. I wondered about reducing wear by removing them, in this age of irreplaceable heads, but didn't know this could be done by using newer tape types. When it's up and running I'll have to experiment!...
|
Yes the back tension changes with the diameter of the tape pack, and the larger the disparity between the hub diameter and the max diameter of tape, the greater the change. The special Ferrograph larger reel (8.25"?) must have been the worst possible in this respect.
I compromised with the pressure pads. I removed the record/play head pad but retained the erase head pad for some constant back tension on the record/play head. I also recorded with LP tape which tends to have better head contact than SP tape. This was about 40 years ago.