Tim Gillett wrote:It couldnt have been too fiddly otherwise it wouldnt have been done as on the 1/4" examples I have here.
Is this the 5-minute pointless argument, or the full 30 minutes? :?
I didnt say it was impossible, just that it sounds too fiddly for me -- with the background context of a broadcasting environment.
I can do lots of fiddly things... But where there is a quicker and easier solution I generally choose it unless there's a very good reason not to. I'm sure I could write quicker and more easily -- not to mention more legibly -- on a label than on leader tape.
It allowed people to identify what was on the tape without a machine to play it.
Sure.... And I'd do that by looking at the box and/or the label on the reel -- and I could still use those methods to tell me what the tape is even when it's laced up... :think:
Tapes could become separated from their original reel and perhaps original box. The programme ID remained with the tape, independent of the reel or the box.
True, but its still not foolproof. The leader tape can get damaged, break or fall off when the splicing tape dries out. All things that can happen just as easily as the tape getting removed from its original reel.
Given good operational practices, though, a tape shouldnt get separated from its reel or box, of course. And if the tape isn't being used with good practices, all bets are off anyway!
So each to their own, and all that, and I'm not suggesting writing on the leader is a bad
idea... Just that I'm not personally persuaded to adopt or recommend leader-scribblng as a better technique over the other, arguably more conventional, methods mentioned.
Unlabelled recordings are a curse.
I'd certainly agree with that!