Back in 1959, RCA introduced their tape cartridge system, an early predecessor to what we now commonly refer to as a “cassette tape.” While the RCA cartridge was significantly larger in size compared to it’s future counterpart by Phillips, the general appearance and function are surprisingly similar. If you have the time, one of my favorite YouTube channels, Techmoan, goes into quite a bit of detail regarding this format.

The RCA tape cartridge did include some innovative features, such as 4-track stereo recording (two channels, left and right, playing in one direction, and two left/right channels playing in the opposite direction, just like later cassettes), and even auto-reverse players – again, in 1959! While the format itself didn’t become a runaway success (perhaps because it was a little too head of its time?), that didn’t stop RCA (and later, Belcanto, who licensed the tech from RCA) from promoting the heck out of it with promotional films and even pre-recorded demo tapes that presented all kinds of value props for the format, including the fact that tape “never wears out” (that’s a direct quote from the demo – see below).

Now, magnetic tape recording technology had been around since the 1930’s, but it didn’t really become a viable format until the late 1940’s (thanks in large part to Bing Crosby). In 1959, the format as a consumer-level product was still relatively new, so making the claim that tape “never wears out” is very much jumping the gun, but the fact that this particular tape was still playable almost 70 years later lends at least SOME validity to their claim. To be fair, the more widely available a product becomes, the more quality control becomes an issue; the fact that this was not a widely-accepted format means that, by default, there wasn’t really much of a quantity-over-quality scenario for the RCA/Belcanto Tape Cartridge.

The subsequent Phillips Compact Cassette (widely referred to as a “cassette,” a “tape,” or a “cassette tape” if you’re being formal), however, DID have a number of issues with quantity over quality. Since Phillips licensed their technology to pretty much anybody who wanted to manufacture them, everything from formulation to tape durability could be potentially impacted by subpar production methods and/or low-budget manufacturers. And despite RCA’s super-confident claim that tape never wears out, a lot of these subpar products proved that, yes, tape absolutely CAN wear out, as well as break, stretch, and even get sticky. Nearly everybody who had a tape deck is familiar with a tape being “eaten” by the player and having to be carefully removed from the machine and re-wound back into the cassette using a number 2 pencil.

“Ok, Kyle,” you may be thinking as you read this, “but what does all (or ANY) of this have to do with gospel music?” I’m glad you (may have) asked!

Southern gospel music has long been a bit of a niche genre, with many artists recording and releasing musical recordings independently (i.e. on their own dime). Cassettes became the go-to format for these artists, as they were significantly cheaper to order than vinyl, as well as more portable. Even “big name” groups would record budget albums specifically to have extra product on their table at concerts. Gold City did this for years, often releasing 2-3 extra tapes per year, and promoting them during intermission as “blue light specials,” a take on K-mart’s promotional discounts.

Aside from those budget releases, there are a great deal of gospel albums (even on major labels) that, so far, have never made it past analog formats. A prime example would be the Cathedrals’ Travelin’ Live album that was released on vinyl and tape (and possibly 8-track, though I can’t confirm that) in 1986 – a time when CD’s WERE becoming available commercially – but to date (as far as I’ve been able to find, anyway), has never had an official CD release (let alone digital/streaming offerings). Even the albums that DID get a CD release (such as the Cats’ Master Builder, which came out around the same time) were often done so using the existing analog masters rather than being properly remastered for the CD format (or, if you bought the “Cathedrals Classics” series from Homeland in the mid-90’s, you were treated to what sounds like a subpar audio source).

if you have any such tapes from the Cathedrals, Gold City, or really any other artist from that era, especially ones that never made it to the CD format (or beyond), then you might want to think about digitizing them sooner rather than later, because there’s a good chance they may not even be playable in the not-too-distant future. This isn’t just speculation on my part, either; it’s a proven statistic – many tapes recorded from that time period are deteriorating to the point of needing extensive repair.

Specifically, tapes manufactured in the 1970’s and 1980’s are now experiencing chemical breakdowns after 40-50 years, the result of manufacturing changes made in the early ’70s that saw a change in the chemical composition of magnet tape. This change in chemical makeup, while saving some money and improving fidelity, has resulted in everything from “sticky shed” (the most common cause of tapes being “eaten” by players, as well as tape drag that introduces speed and pitch fluctuations) to more severe adhesion that causes the tape to bind to itself. While some of these issues can be addressed by simply baking the tape (literally – you put the tape in an oven at low heat to draw out the moisture), the more serious damage can require labor-intensive (and costly) repair and restoration efforts, including specialized chemical treatments that can take weeks or even months.

And this isn’t just those little plastic cassettes having these issues, either. Studio master tapes are falling prey to this decomposition at an alarming rate. Bruce Springsteen, for example, had to have a number of his studio tapes carefully treated and restored before they could even be played, let alone digitized for archiving.

If Bruce Springsteen (and by extension, Columbia Records) has this issue with the deterioration of master studio tapes, then you can bet your tape of Chart Breakers Volume Two probably is going to run into similar issues eventually, so if you want the only studio version of “Moving Up To Gloryland” to show up on an official Gold City album (foreshadowing for a future post…), you might wanna act fast.

This isn’t just a matter of proper storage, either. The Boss’ library I’m sure has been kept in fairly decent condition over the years (one would think, anyway, although that’s not always the case). This is simply a matter of both chemistry and time – specifically how the chemistry of these tapes will last over time. Even in the best of circumstances, these tapes WILL eventually start to experience some sort of chemical breakdown. Just know that, if you have a box of old tapes in your garage or basement, you’re probably not doing them any favors.

Sure, you could just digitize a vinyl copy since (somewhat ironically) vinyl has shown to be a fairly reliable physical medium if cared for properly (although you may want to reconsider the type of protective sleeves that might be on them). In the right circumstances (and with the right equipment), a mint- or near-mint-condition vinyl record can give you probably the highest-quality copy of an album available. But if you’re working with a recording that was ONLY ever available on tape formats (i.e. the Gold City “blue light specials” or indie artists from that time period), then the clock is most likely ticking on how long you have until those tapes might as well be Christmas tree tinsel…