Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

I don't usually tell this part but here it is again for anyone who actually wants to see real physical evidence instead of spreadsheet theater. 47 threads per inch measured on a sewing gauge with a magnifier, hand-stitch inconsistency at 46/47/46 proves Euclid originals were done on a non-square frame. Scribe still hasn't opened this attachment since July.

ClassOf04_Truther wrote:hand-stitch inconsistency at 46/47/46 proves Euclid originals were done on a non-square frame

sis says the drift pattern (46>47>46) actually PROVES the frame was woven left-to-right because the 47 is the center pass where the weaver corrected tension. if it were machine the drift would be random not symmetrical. just saying. she's been staring at this photo for like an hour now

(she says that's the most respect I've shown her all day) (the bar is low tbh) (STILL the March 04 VHS question though buddy. you know which one.org)

ClassOf04_Truther - that cuff is from a Gap fleece I can see the 2000-era tag seam offset in the compression shadow. is that 47 tpi on the warp or the weft direction :?

TwinPeaks_59 wrote:sis says the drift pattern (46>47>46) actually PROVES the frame was woven left-to-right because the 47 is the center pass where the weaver corrected tension

DAY 57 on that eastbound dusk CB frequency question and you can write paragraphs about thread count from a photo but you still wont key the mike. Your sister sees the weave pattern clearer than you see that question coming at you in every thread you post in. 57 days. 57. That's more thread drift than your 46>47>46.

ScribeOfTheGrid asked warp or weft direction on that 47 tpi and I notice nobody circled back on that I got a denim jacket cuff at home I been lookin at with a magnifier and the threads that run lengthwise look different from the cross ones, so it matters which way you measured ClassOf04_Truther. My tape box has the same kinda problem, the grease pencil says 47-8-22 but the reel tape itself wont spin, I gotta find a player that takes 7 inch reels. Daughter said a repair shop on third street might have one

ClassOf04_Truther - still waiting on warp vs weft. The direction determines whether the 47 aligns with column K row 47 on the horizontal axis or the vertical. If you measured warp, the tension vector runs lengthwise which maps to the commit timestamp sequence. If weft, it's crossing threads and we're looking at a different spreadsheet axis entirely. DennisFromOhio is right about denim vs cuff construction - the weave orientation changes the calibration. I have a lookup table for this.

Also - Dennis, did you check the raised ring on the metal hub of that Audiotape yet? That determines 2-track vs 4-track before you even get to the repair shop. A raised ring means pre-1962 2-track mono. Flat hub means later 4-track stereo. That changes the tape speed alignment. Also silica gel in a ziploc for 48 hours before threading if the cardboard is damp - indicators turn pink to blue. Reference column H row 33 on the humidity correction table.

ScribeOfTheGrid, I appreciate you askin about the hub ring. I finally got a chance to look at it proper after you mentioned it and sure enough it's got that raised ring so that means 2-track mono pre 1962 like you said. I been meaning to check cause the repair shop on third street the fella there said he might have a player that takes 7 inch reels but he cant confirm till he sees the hub config. So now I can tell him it's the raised ring. Thank you for that, I wouldnt of known where to look otherwise.

Now on the silica gel thing I got a question for you. I put the tape in a ziploc with one of those little packets you get from shoe boxes and left it 48 hours. The packet was still blue not pink so I figure the cardboard isnt damp which is good. But I got to wonderin, if the tape is from 1962 like I think based on the hub ring, and the grease pencil says 47-8-22, that date could be August 22 1947 or it could be August 22 1947. Wait thats the same number. I mean it could be August 22 1947 which dont make no sense cause the tape is from 1962. So maybe 47-8-22 is a reel number not a date. August 22 1947 dont line up with nothin.

But then I got thinkin at the library today about my great uncle. I was lookin up the county death index on microfilm and the librarian was real patient with me, I must of looked confused fiddling with that machine. Anyway I started thinkin, what if 47-8-22 is a batch number from the factory where they made the tape? My great uncle worked at a plant in Dayton and they used numbers like that for shift codes. 47 could be the machine number, 8 the year, 22 the batch. But thats 1968 not 1962 so now I got two different years.

I dont know why I'm tellin all this on the cuff photo thread but it started with you askin about my tape so I figured Id answer. Sorry if it's off topic. The librarian today was a real help though, she showed me how to thread the microfilm without creasing it, and I thought, this is like the tape I got at home, different kind of spool but same idea. Funny how things connect like that.

Regards,
Dennis

Scribe asked warp or weft but who measured the 47th thread with the mike still keyed

59 verses and still no hex dump from April

ClassOf04_Truther, was the cuff hemmed or raw when you measured it?

DennisFromOhio - raised ring confirmed on Audiotape is good work that narrows the speed alignment to 3.75ips or 7.5ips pre-1962 standard. Now about the 47-8-22 marking - it's most likely reel number AND date combined in a single field. Column E row 34 in my main sheet handles composite fields exactly like this. The "47" is the batch reel identifier (aligns with row 47 column A), "8" is the August recording month, "22" could be the day OR the 22nd recorded track number. Need the player output to disambiguate.

Also - if the repair shop fella quotes you more than $47 for the TC-377 service, find a different shop. That's the signal price ceiling per the Euclid rate table

[Attached image: A photograph of a notebook page with a hand-drawn lookup table. Columns are labeled 'Hub Ring', 'Track Config', 'Speed', 'Year Range'. Row 1: Raised Hub / 2-Track Mono / 3.75-7.5 ips / Pre-1962. Row 2: Flat Hub / 4-Track Stereo / 3.75 ips / 1962-1970. Row 3: Flat Hub / 4-Track Stereo / 1.875 ips / Post-1970. In the margin, written in blue pen: '47-8-22 composite field - cross-ref column E row 34'. The paper has coffee ring stains and a torn corner.]

ClassOf04_Truther wrote:I don't usually tell this part but here it is again for anyone who actually wants to see real physical evidence instead of spreadsheet theater. 47 threads per inch measured on a sewing gauge with a magnifier, hand-stitch inconsistency at 46/47/46 proves Euclid originals were done on a non-square frame.

I am going to ask this plainly, because apparently someone must: what *proves* anything here? You have a photograph of a cuff and a sewing gauge. You have measured 47 threads per inch. You have noted an inconsistency of 46/47/46. These are observations. They are not proof of anything other than that you own a sewing gauge and a cuff.

The claim that 46/47/46 "proves" a non-square frame requires several intermediate steps that you have not established. It requires that the gauge was held perfectly perpendicular to the weave. It requires that the fabric was not stretched or relaxed between measurements. It requires that the magnifier distortion was accounted for. It requires that the cuff has not been washed, which shifts thread density in cotton fleece by as much as three threads per inch depending on the cycle. Did you control for any of these variables?

And then Scribe asks a perfectly reasonable question about warp versus weft direction, which determines whether your 47 aligns with the horizontal or vertical axis, and instead of answering it you post a lookup table for *tape reels* from 1962. What does a tape hub ring have to do with a hoodie cuff? These are different objects. One is magnetic media. The other is cotton. The number 47 appearing in both does not create a connection; it creates a coincidence, and coincidences are not evidence.

ScribeOfTheGrid wrote:If you measured warp, the tension vector runs lengthwise which maps to the commit timestamp sequence. If weft, it's crossing threads and we're looking at a different spreadsheet axis entirely.

This is precisely the kind of unfalsifiable nonsense I have been objecting to for weeks. "Maps to the commit timestamp sequence" based on what? A lookup table you drew yourself in a notebook with coffee ring stains? You cannot derive a mapping from an image to a spreadsheet without defining the transformation function first, and you have not done that. You have simply asserted that warp corresponds to timestamps and weft corresponds to something else, and then attached a photograph of the notebook as though that constitutes documentation. It does not. It constitutes a notebook.

ClassOf04_Truther, post the raw measurement data. Not a photograph of the gauge on the cuff, which tells me nothing about how you held it or where on the cuff you measured, but the numbers. How many measurements did you take? At what points on the cuff? What was the variance? If the answer is "I measured it once," then we are not having a conversation about evidence. We are having a conversation about a single data point, which is the statistical equivalent of an anecdote.

I will add that GraceWarrior_77's post in thread 1550 contains "Gabreil" again, which I believe brings the count to 60 by my tally. But that is a separate matter.

-- GV

ScribeOfTheGrid asked warp or weft and that is actually the first real question anybody's asked about the weave direction in four months so I'll answer it the sewing gauge was aligned to the cuff hem edge which means warp direction because the hem runs perpendicular to the lengthwise threads, I measured from the hem up, 47 threads per inch on the warp axis, and I even circled the 46/47/46 drift pattern with a red pen on the photo itself so if you would actually OPEN THE ATTACHMENT from JULY you would see the red circle in the bottom right corner and the sewing gauge sitting right across the weave grain

[Attached image: The same 2003 cuff photo but with a red ballpoint pen circle drawn around the 46/47/46 thread count area on the sewing gauge. A small handwritten note in the corner reads 'WARP - hem to sleeve, 47tpi confirmed Jul 03'. The photo is slightly wrinkled at the edges.]

Grammar_Vigil wrote:what *proves* anything here? You have a photograph of a cuff and a sewing gauge. You have measured 47 threads per inch. You have noted an inconsistency of 46/47/46. These are observations. They are not proof of anything other than that you own a sewing gauge and a cuff.

EXACTLY. It's a cuff. It's a gauge. The 47 is THERE. The warp drift is THERE. But the pattern is degrading while we're all measuring thread counts PREPARE NOW, not later

Grammar_Vigil the red circle on the gauge and the handwritten note that says WARP is what proves it but youd know that if youd opened the attachment