Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Neumade "Tape Holder Roller" -- $26.80?!

This is topic Neumade "Tape Holder Roller" -- $26.80?! in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=006335

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-07-2004, 03:47 AM:

Well, it just so happens that while assembling our print of King Arthur today, I lost what I assume to be the "Tape Holder Roller" to one of our Neumade splicers. I looked all over for it and I can't find it anywhere. Now I'm assuming that this "Tape Holder Roller" is what I'm looking for -- the little drum thing that goes inside of the roll of tape -- but their website advertises it for a whopping $26.80. That seems like way too much for what amounts to a small metal cylinder with a notch on each end. Does anyone know how I could obtain one for less, or if perhaps I am reading about the wrong part? If I don't get this resolved, my boss is going to kill me. [uhoh]

Posted by Peter Mork (Member # 1336) on 07-07-2004, 03:59 AM:

$26.80? - Fiddlesticks!

I made my own, out of epoxy plumber's putty (buy it at your local hardware store). Mix up a glob of it and stick it in the middle of a tape roll. When it hardens, slide it out and drill a hole through the middle (or you can poke one in with the spindle when it's still soft). Voila! A cheap substitute that fits perfectly.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-07-2004, 06:10 AM:

Your boss will kill you over $26.80? That seems a little excessive. Besides, it doesn't just disappear. It probably rolled under a lamphouse. You'll find it.

Posted by Josh Kirkhart (Member # 1046) on 07-07-2004, 08:06 AM:

I bet the 26.80 that Somebody tossed it accidentally when getting rid of the tape roll. Many times immediatly realizing what I was doing have I had to jump back in after tossing it. Funny stuff.

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-07-2004, 08:42 AM:

No, I lost it because the push-pin that holds the roll in is broken and if you pick up the splicer without giving care to keep it from falling out, it will fall right on the floor. There's good chance it will show up someday, but our booths are way overcrowded and there are just too many places it could have fallen into. I might give the epoxy plumber's putty a try and see what my boss says about it.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 07-07-2004, 12:34 PM:

you could also try taking one from another splicer to a machine shop and see how much it would cost to get one fabricated.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-07-2004, 01:25 PM:

$26.80 is not unreasonable since it is a replacement part that has to be stocked and sit on a self till sold and in inventory

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-07-2004, 01:47 PM:

Yeah, the thing probably costs a dollar to build.

Neumade buys it from the factory for $3

Neumade sells it to a distributor for $8

The distributor sells it to your dealer for $16

The dealer sells it to you for $26.80 and tacks on a shipping charge of $10 (of which about $2 is the actual cost of the shipping).

If the roller was a fast moving part that is sold every day, the cost progression would be a lot less per step.

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 07-07-2004, 02:00 PM:

Try a small wood spool, we have an old CES splicer that usues such a thing. To me, $26.80 seems pretty cheap for a hunk of cinema metal. [Smile]

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 07-07-2004, 02:51 PM:

quote: Robert L. Fischer
There's good chance it will show up someday, but our booths are way overcrowded and there are just too many places it could have fallen into.

just like our booth. we even have holes in the floor so you never know if that nut/whatever you just dropped may be in the building void. you can still find old carbons and whatnot down in there.

carl

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-07-2004, 03:03 PM:

$26.80 was the price on Neumade's website, but I guess it might be a third-party distributor.

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 07-07-2004, 03:12 PM:

The price on the web-site is list and is there for convenience. a dealer should quote it at less if you have a good relationship or minimum to handle the transaction...remember that part swam in from Japan [Wink]

Posted by Christopher Seo (Member # 7) on 07-07-2004, 04:40 PM:

quote: Robert L. Fischer
I lost it because the push-pin that holds the roll in is broken

I guess management couldn't afford to replace that, either? [Roll Eyes]

It seems that problems, if left uncorrected, beget other problems. Perhaps that's why they're problems. [Big Grin]

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 07-07-2004, 06:50 PM:

The "push pin" is defined by Neumade as the Tape Roller Retainer Assembly and lists for $18.50 on my price guide (October 8, 1996). All together, Robert's manager will spend $45.30 in parts and roughly $8.00 S&H. All totaled about $54.00. Using the numbers here at our theater, that means the concession stand must sell sixteen large drinks to cover all costs. Maybe this expense will cut into your manager's concession bonus, and thus the reason as to why he/she will be pissed.
Take Chris' advice and find a local machinist to help you out. It NEVER hurts to have extra splicer parts on hand no matter how simple they are. Greg Muller might be of some help, but I'm not sure if he still posts since the closure of the political forums.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 07-07-2004, 09:39 PM:

all of our Neumade "Tape Roller Retainer Assemblies" have been replaced with a same-sized $0.15 screw from Home Depot.

You can find all kinds of booth parts at Home Depot. I wouldn't be surprised if they started stocking exciter bulbs. [Cool]

=TMP=

Posted by Mike Perju (Member # 1482) on 07-07-2004, 11:36 PM:

It could be worse: a locking screw for a ARRI filter stage goes for over $80USD.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-07-2004, 11:52 PM:

Mike, if you think thats bad a replacement outer eyepiece element was 290.00 way back in 1979 for my Arri S. Today you're lucky to be able tog et any parts out of Arri USA for the older stuff. You'll actually have better luck going directly to Arri Germany where they still proidly support just about all the equipment they've ever made.

We can all thank God and Larry Shaw that Arri USA no longer distributes Kinoton!!

Mark

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-08-2004, 03:06 AM:

Thomas, do you happen to know the specific size of that screw? I would just bring the splicer with me to the hardware store to find out, but I don't think I'd be allowed to take it out of the theater.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-08-2004, 09:03 AM:

quote: Thomas Procyk
I wouldn't be surprised if they started stocking exciter bulbs.

Weren't exciter bulbs originally "borrowed" from the automobile industry, which needed heavy filament lamps designed to run on low voltage DC?

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 07-08-2004, 07:18 PM:

I wouldn't be surprised if they started stocking exciter bulbs.

You mean LED arrays? [Razz]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-08-2004, 08:14 PM:

AFAIK, the technology that led to very high efficiency red LED arrays was also first developed for the automobile and signalling industries.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 07-08-2004, 08:21 PM:

We've got LED brake, signal, and marker lights on our tractors and trailers. They're pretty doggone bright!

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-10-2004, 10:43 AM:

Are we still going to call them exciters? White exciter lamps and Red exciter arrays? And how come they are reverse scanners? Wouldn't that make the old configuration Forward Scanners? So what exactly is the reader part of the system and what is the scanner part? Is the solar cell the reader and/or the scanner? So how come the old system wasn't called a white reader and/or scanner?

And what have we decided to call the old redeveloped track? If we are calling the new non-redeveloped track a "cyan" track, shouldn't we call the old redeveloped track a "white" track or a "silver" track?

The nomenclature around this soundhead business is murky at best.

And as you can see, I don't have much to do while I am waiting for the coffee to brew.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-10-2004, 11:34 AM:

In addition to Frank's questions, I'm curious about the difference between a "soundhead" and "sound reproducer." Everyone seems to refer to the item in question as a "soundhead," yet many manuals (Century, at least) refer to it as a "sound reproducer." Why? Which is correct?

Also, the old SMPTE projectionist book makes a point of using the term "photographic sound record" to refer to what everyone else calls the "optical soundtrack." What's the difference?

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 07-10-2004, 11:09 PM:

I usually call them reproducers, unless I'm in mixed company. Just the old-school term.

Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 07-11-2004, 08:00 AM:

I am pretty sure you would not call conventional soundhead scanning foward scan. It probably should not even be called Reverse scan, a better name is projected track and normal systems should be called projected slit. Everyone talk as if that reverse scan is something new, its an Australian invention that dates back to the 1930s and were made under the Raycophone brand and most cinemas in Australia were fitted with them, and there are some still running. [thumbsup]

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-11-2004, 08:58 AM:

I beleive one of the original Klangfilm soundhead s was "reverse scan" from day one

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-11-2004, 09:34 AM:

I prefer sound reproducer to sound head. A sound head might in reality be the magnetic "head" mounted on a sound reproducer. Phillips also used the projected reverse scan system since the 1930's. I would be more willing to bet that the reverse scan method, projected or not, is very much a European invention. The first true U.S. built reverse scan sound head was made by Western Electric in the later 1930's, the TA7400. It was a very unique sound head and used a 3450 rpm drive motor, it also had a fully field adjustable slit in both the horizontal and vertical directions. Many are in use today for archival work of old optical sound tracks.

Mark

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-13-2004, 10:18 PM:

Well, good news: my boss didn't kill me. He didn't even seem to care too much. We haven't decided yet how to replace the part, but I don't think it's on the top of anyone's priority list seeing as how we have 2 other splicers and only 5 screens.

Posted by Tony Hall (Member # 2490) on 07-21-2004, 04:24 PM:

Tape Roller

The tape Holder roller out of a Scotch tape dispenser
That is what i have used in tight spots before when that piece has gotten lost. And when it dissapears no one really cares to much [Wink]

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-21-2004, 09:54 PM:

So I'm guessing that splicing tape also has a one-inch core? Ingenious! Thank you.