|
Wow, I've spent the last few days reading through this whole thread, and there's a lot of amazing stuff in here. While I did enjoy the train derail, I find obsolete media particularly interesting. I figured I could post some film specific stuff, as I worked at a huge film archive last year and did an analogue restoration of a small collection of nitrate film from the 20s. Film is an unwieldy medium as it takes a whole lot of space and is heavy as gently caress. I've moved a ton of it around on shelves and I wish the digital age a warm welcome. I'm not sure how much the layman knows about film and its deterioration over time, but stored under correct conditions it is actually fairly resilient. In a long term perspective analogue film is actually still considered more reliable and cheaper even than digital storage. However, stored under the wrong conditions it deteriorates fast and in awful ways. The colours degrade, it becomes brittle, it shrinks, it smells, it becomes sticky, infested with various molds and fungi, the film grains crystalize and fall of the celluloid or create weird spots and warps the image, or the whole reel could turn into a solid celluloid brick etc. The acidic smell of deteriorating film shot on acetate stock (vinegar syndrome), is pretty loving bad for example. However, nitrate film is a whole other story. Some of you might know that this poo poo is highly flammable, can self-ignite and is sort of explosive in powder form. While at the archive I was set to assess the quality of the titles that had been deemed in truly bad quality a few years back, and see whether it was in any condition to be saved still. It was about a 100 reels of nitrate and I set to work without a mask the first day. Bad idea. You see badly deteriorated nitrate looks like this:   (These reels are far from the worst ones I dealt with. The worst ones would be filled with dust and blackish fungi all the way up to the rim of the can. You couldn't even see the actual film reel before you dug around in the dust. I didn't snap photos of those as I was trying to vacuum all the dust of asap though. That is not to say that this reel right here is not in abysmally bad shape) As I mentioned, this stuff is highly flammable, but I'm fairly certain it's not healthy to breathe it in either. Combine a dust-filled reel like that with having to use force to open a rusted shut metal can, and the result is a cloud of poisonous/explosive dust. Did I mention that deteriorated nitrate film smells too? It does, and it smells magnitudes worse than the acidic smell acetate gives off. It's this sort of sweet and rotten smell - something like honey and rotting meat. The stuff I worked with had been stored basically outdoors (in a boathouse) for almost 80 years when it arrived at the archive, so we didn't really expect there to be anything but blank celluloid and dust left. Luckily, the rusted shut cans had actually helped shield the film from the surroundings and a lot of footage could still be salvaged. I'm not going to bore you with details of the restoration work, like days of fixing lovely splices and sprocket holes, but I will post some obsolete equipment!  This beast is the Colormaster I used for colour grading the footage (not entirely sure what the English term for this done on the light levels on b/w footage is). Some of it was too badly deteriorated (brittle) to be ran through the machine. Luckily the brittle reels were very short, and we could do general colour/light values for the entirety of the reels, using single frames. This thing uses floppy discs to store the colour/lighting values throughout the film. During printing you insert the floppy into the printer (on the topic of printers: the chemical smell/fumes of wetgate fluid is loving intense too. I was dizzy after a couple of reels), which then adjusts the strength of the different lights as the film is run through. It is all very nifty. The fact that this thing still used floppies amazed me. There are newer color graders with usb and poo poo, but apparently they are pricy as gently caress and floppies still do the job just fine. I guess they won't be or really need to be replaced anytime soon, but it had still been a lot of years since I used (or even held) a floppy disc. One of the really interesting aspects of working in a film archive, is that basically every piece of equipment and stuff you deal with are obsolete. There are bizarre formats you have no idea how to play back for example (weird glass plates, strange colour types, esoteric framerates, etc.). This gets complicated when you take the archival mission into account - we want to restore it (not improve it) to its original form. When stuff breaks down, you are in deep poo poo if you are not able to fix it yourself. Expertise had to be flown in from afar whenever this happened. Furthermore the price of film is rising and it is getting harder and harder to get hold of good stock. The price of kodak duplication positive stock per reel is just mad. I hope this post is not too ranty and incoherent, but it is getting sort of late over here. Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 03:25 on Jan 8, 2014 |
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:32 |
|
|
Ron Burgundy posted:I've got a couple of nitrate reels I run at home occasionally (Newsreels). The danger is often over-hyped, In an advanced state of decomposition sure it's unstable. But a reel in good nick will run fine, not to mention that nitrate is stunning and I've yet to see black and white look as good on safety film. Huh, I assume you are in the US. Over here you are legally obliged to turn in nitrate film to the national film archive for safe storage. This is in part due to the volatility of the nitrate itself, but perhaps more importantly due to the fact that most nitrate film found over here are historically interesting and should be properly preserved for posterity. Both acetate and nitrate can do fine in lovely conditions for long periods of time, but once the deterioration process begins there is no way to stop it and the information on the reels will be lost relatively fast. (There are ways of deep freezing film, that can sort of halt or pause the process. Deep freezing is generally not very good for the material and a sort of last resort that requires a bunch of equipment). You could argue that the whole flame hazard thing is overstated when it comes to nitrate, and, to be honest, it is not very likely to happen. However, if people have reels of this poo poo just lying in the attic not knowing what it is, stuff could go seriously wrong. The thing about nitrate fires is that they are violent fires that literally can't be extinguished. The whole thing will go up in a total blaze very fast. Almost explosive self-ignition can even happen if the can is completely sealed and gasses are allowed to build up inside. To limit possible damages in a worst case scenario, nitrate film is usually not stored in huge vaults like acetate, but rather in smaller cells. If a can were to ignite, however unlikely, it is probable that you'll lose most of the stuff stored around it or the entire cell. I assume you know all of this, but do you know whether the newsreels in question have been preserved at an archive? Newsreels are actually particularly difficult stuff to deal with from an archival point of view, as the footage is very rarely complete. Seeing as the footage often was of a general nature, sections would be cut from the negative and reused in different films. Newsreel negatives were basically used as stock footage, and as a result are a total mess to work with. It's a shame, but the cultural heritage stored on nitrate is rotting away rapidly. The chances of discovering lost stuff on nitrate (outside of archives) are tiny and in a few years it will all be gone... If you have unique stuff (both on acetate and nitrate), I would donate it to an archive for proper storage. Film needs proper climate controlled environments. Nitrate film looks very good indeed, it is actually superior tech in many ways. The blacks are great and the contrasts are amazing. On image quality on film in general, I would like to add that pristine 35mm prints look absolutely mindblowingly good. I sat through a lot of quality control screenings with the senior lab technicians and archivists, and I was truly amazed by the amount of detail and "resolution" of really old footage. Mind you, this was "0-day" prints made from our own preservation duplicating positives. To be honest the move to digital amazes me somewhat, as the current standard in cinemas over here is 2k. 2k looks fairly well on a television screen, but it has nothing on a 35mm print. 4k looks comparable though. Here's a small 480p snippet from one of the reels I worked on (handheld unedited footage): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmQ9ffD2j0 Consider that the reels looked like this when we started working with them (post-vacuuming)... The lid had to be cut open on this one. The outer layers of the reels were washed blank, but the inner parts of the reel were salvageable.  DNova posted:Why did you leave this job? Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 19:15 on Jan 8, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Ron Burgundy posted:Nitrate fires can be extinguished with carbon tetrachloride, but that's another can of worms entirely Cool post! My guess for explaining the different audio formats would be that the material comes from different sources, but who knows. Even though newsreels are patchwork stuff, mixed formats like that are not at all that common in my experience. On the topic of funky optic sound: I've ran into to some reels with triple bilateral soundtracks a few times. Couldn't tell a difference in sound quality at all, but I suppose it was supposed to give a more accurate readout or something. As all of these things basically work by adjusting the intensity of light going through the film, the differences between them are usually marginal. Some film stock seems to produce better results with variable density and vice versa (it comes down to devlopment really). Here's another cool little video with the most common types: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ekWozMjFW0 I've never even heard of this carbon tetrachloride stuff before. Reading up on it however, I guess there are perfectly good reasons for never having heard of it.  EDIT: DNova posted:Are you doing something related now? Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 12:13 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2014 12:09
|
|
|
WebDog posted:Thirding Ignition! as a fascinating horrific read. Hey, the nazis even used some of this stuff for manned aircraft! The Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet, was a rocket-plane using some rather nasty corrosive fuel. The refueling procedure is explained somewhat at 30:13 here, followed by pilots and engineers chatting about how the stuff ignited once it came in contact with skin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-cFNjWZUiw Panaflex posted:One can argue that film used as an exhibition medium is now pretty much obsolete. Here in the US nearly all currently operating cinemas have converted to digital projection. The studios have begun to cease offering some titles on 35mm and even so, there are only small quantities of prints being struck for the last hold outs. As a production or archival medium I think it still has some life left, but production of some of the ancillary items used to handle film have begun to disappear which is creating a whole other problem in itself. I would argue that film has one foot and four toes in the grave already. Over here there are no analogue cinemas left, as we did a (premature imho) nationwide transition into digital a few years back. For analogue film you have to go to one of the few cinematheques or film clubs. I was under the impression that most new movies were shot digitally, but this might not be the case. I've never been on the production side of things. What is true though, is that production of film stock is being scaled down and that film labs are closing/going bankrupt all over. The death of film is probably closer than most people think. Film is superduper obsolete. As an archival medium, film is actually pretty well suited. As long as you have the facilities to store it properly, it can be stored safely for decades (probably much longer). Sadly, the combination of new public management ("we want you to preserve, but can you preserve more?" = an emphasis on keeping production numbers up/and doing routine preservations) seeping into the archival sector and the coming of digital distribution are impacting of the field. If your goal is to preserve and give the public access to your collection, digital might seem like a gift from the heavens. You can both preserve and screen the digital copies without the fear of wear and tear! This has lead to a lot of huge public digitization efforts so that stuff can be made available to the public. However, this has also lead to archival analogue departments all over Europe falling from grace (either in the form of cuts or not being allowed to invest in needed equipment) and put a new emphasis on digitization. To be honest, This is problematic due to the fact that digital standards and technology have been advancing rapidly and there is still a distinct lack of standardization. Stuff done just a few years ago, are not looking very good today. A lot of stuff was digitally preserved in 2k for example, and this is quite simply not good enough for a preservation copy. Long term digital storage is also still more costly than analogue, and the problem of digital standards and software becoming obsolete is very real. You basically have to transfer the digital copies to newer and newer technologies as you go along, and this poo poo costs a lot. LTO tapes (I believe it was LTO at least) are just supported a couple of generations backwards. While this assures you support for, lets say 20 years, this is not really good enough for the hundreds/thousand year perspectives archives deal with. The technological development of analogue basically stopped years ago, and for archives this is basically a good thing. A film shot in 1919 can still be played back with modern equipment, while you might struggle to get digital software from just a few decades back to work at all. Furthermore, even if all the archives wanted to keep doing analogue preservations, the production of film stock only pays as long as commercial actors use it (ie. film is shot on film). Archives are mostly non-commercial and I doubt that the film companies will be able to keep the production of film stock running solely for archival needs. It is a lovely situation basically. --- But enough archival talk, here are some more obsolete content! Before the coming of sound film, bright colours were almost the norm on film. There was a huge range of competing technologies for making colour on film, but there are three primary techniques especially worth mentioning: Tinting, toning and stencilling. You have probably seen tinted film at some point. The basic idea is to dye the actual film stock. The result is that the transparent parts will be coloured. This was done both scene by scene (more costly/time consuming) and for longer sections (ie. the entire film). The various film companies used to offer catalogues with their entire range of available tints and you could even buy pre-tinted film stock. Tints degrade at various speeds and in different ways, for example finding blue, if I remember correctly, tints today are fairly rare due to it degrading more rapidly than a lot of other tints. The recipes and procedures for making these tints today are often lost and restoring the colour of tinted film properly is quite difficult. One way of doing it is with the "Desmet method", developed by Noël Desmet of the Cinematheque Belgique. Digital restorations if tints are becoming more widespread and is much easier. Tinted film looks gorgeous:      Toning, or metallic toning, is a tad more complicated, but produce equally amazing results. As I mentioned, tinting affects the transparent areas of the film, toning is in many ways the opposite, as it affects the dark areas. Toning works by immersing the film in chemicals (metal compounds) that reacts with the silver crystals (black areas) of the film and changes their colour. The colour range is much more limited but results are very fancy. The transparents remain mostly transparent (white) as there are no crystals there. Perhaps the most well known of the tones are sepia - today an instants signifier of "old film" and often found in filter form in video and photo editing software! There are also mordant toning, which works by "replacing" the silver crystals with other chemicals (basically bleaching the silvers using silver salts). Combinations of tinting and toning can produce stunning results. Toning looks great too:      Tinting and toning are the most common of the three types, but this does not mean that stencilling is uncool or anything. Stencilling is perhaps the most funky of the three. Stencilling works exactly as you think it does, and Pathé (among others) used to have a huge department with tons of workers doing it. Stencilling is done by hand frame by frame with a machine (film was also hand coloured without machines at one point). Very time consuming, but the results speak for themselves:      If you find this stuff interesting a great timeline with image galleries and stuff to read can be found here (where I picked my images from): http://zauberklang.ch/filmcolors/ Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 16:51 on Jan 10, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 14:20
|
|
|
Geoj posted:A CCD captures a color negative frame four times; one each in red, green and blue light and then a fourth capture is made with infrared, which the processing software uses to generate a mask and removes any scratches or dust present on the negative.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:Thanks for the informative post, but I can assure you that data, which video and audio is, can always be parsed and read, even 1000 years from now, given that it's not corrupted of course. In this age of information spreading across the world like wildfire and being stored on thousands of servers, it's extremely unlikely that all knowledge about a video and audio encoding format will be lost forever, rendering the data unusable. Even if it did, people can work hard to code a program that can decipher an encoding format. Of course we should be able to reverse engineer all this stuff, but it is not really an optimal position to put yourself in. Archives are supposed to guarantee the survival of their collections - archival standards are high. Some rather new video formats are particularly fleeting in nature and are already starting to degrade/disappear. Archives are working against the clock here and will have to find safe (and hopefully proven) preservation standards to utilize. It's really quite complicated, but digital obsolescence is indeed a very real problem for archives. It all comes down to money, or, more often than not, the lack thereof. Preservation is non-commercial and non-profit in 99% of the time, while at the same time being both time consuming and costly. I'm sorry for being a bit general here, but the issue of the transition from analogue to digital is basically a whole field of its own in archiving. A relatively recent paper discussing some of the key issues in an introductory manner. The bit about data migration covers some interesting stuff. Archiving is basically a field dedicated to preserving originals, and we need to ask ourselves what is lost whenever we migrate data to new formats. (I only skimmed this one, but it was the first one I could find. I could probably dig up some better ones tomorrow if it's of any interest  )http://www.amiatechreview.org/V12-05/papers/tadic.pdf An example of digital obsolescence and the work needed to save the material: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Domesday_Project An older (and probably somewhat dated) paper, touching on a lot of the same issues as Tadic (only skimmed this one as well): http://besser.tsoa.nyu.edu/howard/Papers/amia-longevity.html Finally, here's a "manifesto" by FIAF, highlighting some of the issues. While I personally find FIAF to be a bunch of backwards, film snob/elitist dinosaurs, they did touch on some key issues here.: http://www.fiafnet.org/uk/members/Manifestofulltext.html EDIT: added some stuff. EDIT2: added some more stuff. Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 03:09 on Jan 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:The Japanese MSX computers of the mid- to late '80s are probably the most cyberpunk-looking things that I can think of: Those msx computers look super cool.  EDIT: quoted the wrong post.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:Also, I remember when this awesome stick came out: I saved up money for what felt like an age and bought that, only to realize that I had very few joystick games. For some reason it came bundled with mdk and interstate 76. While both games are cool, it makes no sense to play either with a joystick. All I ever played with it was ms flight sim 98, and now computers don't come with the necessary port to plug it in :/
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 12:43
|
|
|
why not just shoot it digital, and tweak it in after effects or something afterwards?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 12:30
|
|
|
You can actually still see cinerama's precursor - polyvision - in action from time to time, in special screenings of Abel Gance's Napoleon. Basically, the last part of the film was filmed simultanously on three 35mm cameras, and is screened with three projectors to create stunning 3x1:34 aspect ratio vistas. At the very end the reels are tinted to form the french flag. It is indeed quite spectacular.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Oxidization isn't nearly as important in film conservation as temperature and humidity. It's been a while but I also think film will readily decay by itself, much like old books do because the paper or ink itself is acidic but faster. Yeah, basically. Temperature and humidity control is key here. Changes back and forth speeds up decomposition. Film really craves stability. Storage in low-oxygen environments are sought after too, but that is more of a general safety measure in regards to fires. The last couple of years freezing film is becoming an increasingly interesting option for film. It almost slows decomposition to a complete standstill. Needless to say, being able to almost stop decomposition would be amazing. Freezing, and any other clever storage trick, however is not thought of as permanent solutions, but rather a way of buying time to save the material by either digital or analogue means. Once the processes of decomposition start, they can't be stopped. Source: I'm writing this from a nitrate film bunker. also, a small contribution to the thread: BAVC's video artifact atlas. it's still quite small, but a nice resource: http://avaa.bavc.org/artifactatlas/index.php/A/V_Artifact_Atlas Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 08:56 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
Here's some film archive horror pics i snapped a while back with my outdated phone, when I examined the condition of nitrate marked as badly decomposed. You know how film reels are supposed to be shiny and smooth and stuff? well:  That poo poo is nitrate dust. the emulsion has basically crystallized and fallen off the base. Super flamable. Added bonus: it smells absolutely vile. Acetate cellulose film smells intensely of vinegar when it begins deteriorating (vinegar syndrome), but nitrate smells pungent and grossly sweet for some reason. bonus picture of the weird effects created by deterioration:  for more funky decay, check out the film "Decasia": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeEzb-0vf7A Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 12:54 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 12:50
|
|
|
A bunch of these came up at work. Fairly obsolete: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_follower During the production of the film in question the sound was recorded using a Nagra 4S recorder on 1/4" reels. These audio reels would then edited onto 16mm film with magnetic coating, that is supposed to be synced up to a final 16mm film print with the image and a mute audio track (you can sync them by locking sprocket holes!). This way you dont have to bother making an optical audio track on the film reel. The nagra 4s is a gorgeous piece of equipment by the way: 
Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 12:53 on Jun 29, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2015 12:51
|
|
|
How about porn on nitrate 35mm reels? There's going to be a symposium or what have you on old porn somewhere in England iirc this autumn. Had a look at our contribution a little while a go. Linda Williams of "Hard Core" fame (a groundbreaking book on porn narrative) will speak. 20-30s porn is just as graphic as today's porn. It surprised me somewhat, even though I should know better...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
Betacam SP masters were very common in the 80s and early 90s, for TV stuff/docus etc. A ton of them keep showing up at the archive where I work. They look quite alright if we consider the contemporary U-matic HB masters (and the state they usually are in these days)... or the preceding 1" C tape reels  Screened a DCP made from a Betacam source at a small cinema not so long ago (out of lack of a better copy), and I can assure you it looks like poo poo on a big screen. e: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8CbG30G1Zg Actually the main problem with 1" C, 2" quad, etc. these days is not always the reels themselves but lack of functioning equipment to do anything with it. I have a small stack of Type C reels on my desk, that I can't do anything with yet. Tape heads have been out of production for a long while. The combined lifespan of allthe remaining tape heads for these formats are probably shorter than the time it would take to digitize all the undigitized tapes left in the world  Here's some cool guides/cheat sheets for assessment of the most common formats: http://www.arts.texas.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/video.pdf https://psap.library.illinois.edu/format-id-guide/videotape Truck Stop Daddy has a new favorite as of 10:31 on Nov 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 10:12
|
|
|
Here's something cool. Old film industry trade journals! Tons of advertising and reviews of old film technology + reviews/summaries of coming attractions. The issues of Moving Picture World are really cool. You can track the rapid changes of the burgenoning industry through from 1907 to 1919. http://mediahistoryproject.org/collections/ Been going through the February issues of 1911 for information about what I think is a french film. Mobile cameras are getting better     
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 12:25
|
|
|
Poohat666 posted:V-CD was big in Asia, not sure if it was in North America. They still are big in parts of asia. I used to buy VCD's of 60-80s thai-flicks up until the guy I ordered from just took all my money and never sent anything*. I guess I can't blame him, there was absolutely no risk involved for him, with me being on the other side of the globe and stuff. There is a certain kind of material that is only available on obsolete formats, which is part of why I'm interested. The stuff that is not interesting enough to be migrated to the next generation of media, will eventually be lost. The original source material deteriorates while the amount of people who know that the material even exists decreases the longer the last format it was released on has been obsolete. I fear for the films that was out on VHS, but never made it to DVD. Interestingly, for Thai cinema there actually seems to be have been a bunch of stuff that never made it to VHS, but DID make it to VCD. I don't care because the films could be "lost gems" or have any filmic qualities worth mentioning, but because they'll be gone forever once they're lost. *Aaand while I'm on the subject of Thai flicks, please contact me if anyone knows where I can get a copy of รับจ้างตาย ตอน แลกตาย (1989) AKA Cannibal Mercenary 2 AKA Employ for die 2. I know it exists on VCD and there's supposedly a VHS in existence too... It was my holy grail for some time, before I gave up trying to track it down...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 10:27
|
|
|
I'm currently in a bidding war for a LD player in tyool 2016. I feel this is relevant to this thread. I had almost forgotten how difficult it is to figure out which of the players are any good, if we ignore the top 5 mostly high-end players (that I've never seen for sale here). It's an arcane art...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Gave up. It tripled in price... Got a Panasonic LX 1000u already, but it's fairly ancient and has began to have significant crosstalk issues :/ This DVL-919 would've been a sweet upgrade. Ah well
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
LD is vastly superior compared to VHS in every way possible (apart from discs having to be turned), and that is what mattered. I guess it could be argued that some of the LDs it had better audio than the very earliest DVD's but that's about it (not that I would hear the difference anyways). I essentially download everything I watch these days, but I'm still a collector/hoarder at heart. LDs soothes that itch much better than DVDs, with their huge covers and inherent strangeness. Essentially, they look cooler on my shelves
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2016 12:06
|
|
|
Here's a oddball format: Laserfilm. It's really hard to find any info about it whatsoever, but the tech sounds funky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laserfilm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVHUZ8YJp-U
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:I mean, who even comes up with a contraption like that? And how? That eidophor video was super-interesting! I'd never even thought about early video projection before...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
Came across a bunch of tapes at work in a format I knew very little about : Philips VCR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TElmbdDWtI Nice, writeup here (but with weird site navigation): http://www.totalrewind.org/philips.htm Now I just need to track down functional playback equipment, to see if we can salvage any of the stuff on these 40 year old tapes...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2016 10:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:32 |
|
|
Those old B&O TVs are gorgeous. In particular when you put it directly on the floor ising its tilted foot. Same goes for redline speakers! Still using a MX6000 myself, as I still haven't bothered to make the transition to flatscreens 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 19:34
|
|