• Yukabacera over 4 years ago

    Yukabacera edited over 4 years ago
    I bought a handful of budget cover song records at the flea market the other day, and this is one of them: Another Brick In The Wall

    Now, the sleeve is identical to my release. The label is different though - the one in the DB has italics while the letters on mine are upright, so it's a unique release for sure. On mine, however, the pressing rings are also different: they look like the ones on this record: Koncert Vojvodjanskih Horova
    both records were pressed by Diskos for sure, in fact, the second kind of pressing ring (the one on my copy) is more common for their pressings.

    So if there was no difference except for different pressing rings, is that a "variation" or a full-fledged unique release? I ask because I do have one or two records which differ in no way from the copy already in the DB except for noticeably different pressing rings.
  • discosanddragons over 4 years ago

    If they are pressed in different plants, then yes, they would be a unique sub.
    Some plants had different machines that leave different rings, so I believe the ring is not an indicator for a unique sub on discogs.
    I could be wrong though.
    I feel like this was discussed and that was the outcome, but right now I can't find the link and can't take the time as I'm at work.
    Anyone else know for sure?
  • Yukabacera over 4 years ago

    Well, in regards to whether it was a different plant or not, I can't say I know 100% for sure. The second kind of ring is definitely a Diskos one. I haven't seen the first one very many times. I guess it was possible for Diskos to outsource to another plant, but that would be unusual - they had the second or third biggest pressing capacity in Yugoslavia actually. So I can't claim that they were both pressed by Diskos, but I can be around 99 percent sure of it.
  • Yukabacera over 4 years ago

    Spoke too soon: yes, the first pressing ring is a Diskos one as well. Checked on my newly-obtained copy of this: D.I.S.C.O.
    which was pressed by Diskos and has the same kind of ring.
  • n0r over 4 years ago

    I just stumbled upon this with releases from Brain.
    The first releases, with Metronome on label, seem to have been released with and without pressing ring as well. As both variants carry the same runouts, I think best option would be to add a note about 'manufacturing difference' in release notes, add the varying labels to the images.

  • andygrayrecords over 4 years ago

    I've seen in the past some releases which appear identical, but have a different pressing ring entered as separate submissions.

    As I understand it they are different pressings and therefore unique submissions not "manufacturing variations".
  • discosanddragons over 4 years ago

    andygrayrecords
    I've seen in the past some releases which appear identical, but have a different pressing ring entered as separate submissions.

    As I understand it they are different pressings and therefore unique submissions not "manufacturing variations".


    I'm sure there are some on the DB as separate pressings, but can we get a definitive answer?
    I was under the impression that these were not unique submissions.
    Pressed in the same plant, just on different machines.
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 4 years ago

    I don't think variations in the rings stamped into labels are enough to warrant a Unique Release. I think it does just shoe a slightly different machine, maybe a different way of attaching the stamper onto the press. In any pressing plant, I could imagine there could me a few variations in that.
  • disneyfacts over 4 years ago

    As far as I know, different pressing rings indicate separate pressing plants or at least original vs a repress. I've had a few like this, I'll have to see if I can find them.

    WB might know whether a plant would have used machines with two different pressing rings at the same tine
  • Diognes_The_Fox over 4 years ago

    disneyfacts
    As far as I know, different pressing rings indicate separate pressing plants or at least original vs a repress. I've had a few like this, I'll have to see if I can find them.


    They're all different, though I've never seen any definitive guide to which plants having which general shapes/designs. There's also some instances where the shape is due to it being a vinyl or styrene pressing as well.

    Last night I was down to CD's and tapes to add to the DB and hating doing both, I dipped into some of that stack of 45's I sent you some of. I think I can spot a Pitman pressing from 40 paces now, so there's gotta be some consistency between plants/machines.
  • tarantoga over 4 years ago

    disneyfacts
    As far as I know, different pressing rings indicate separate pressing plants or at least original vs a repress.

    This is true for a couple of labels/companies, especially the fact that lables that lack a "deep groove" are later pressings, i.e. represses.
    While I understand nik's decision there are cases where the presence or lack of a 'groove' or pressing ring makes a sometimes huge difference to collectors and sellers.
    One example I'm very familiar with are the classical UK Decca LPs. There are two label variants that can often only be distinguished by the 'groove' and may otherwise be identical. The 'grooveless' versions are later pressings, provided a 'grooved' versions exists.
    One example (just added the 'grooved' version as a separate release a few days ago):
    Grooved original: Sibelius*, Maazel* / Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra* - Symphony No. 3 / Symphony No. 6
    Ungrooved repress: Sibelius*, Maazel* / Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra* - Symphony No. 3 / Symphony No. 6
    For a general overview on the Decca labels see here please (the labels in question are called "ED2" and "ED3"):
    http://fischer.hosting.paran.com/music/Decca-lps/decca-sxl-intro.htm (scroll down to the bottom of the page to see the label versions).
  • mrformic over 4 years ago

    nik
    In any pressing plant, I could imagine there could me a few variations in that.


    I can back-up this theory, as I have been to a few plants.
    Specially today, the newer pressing plants buy used machines wherever they can.
    Different machines make different rings.
  • n0r over 4 years ago

    I brought this up some time ago in Sub History of Neu! - Neu!
    Check the images, there's a pressing ring in side A and no pressing ring side B. (images uploaded by different users)
    I have both variations here, the one with pressing ring seems a little heavier and less 'flexible' (no scale so not sure), they are otherwise identical, including runouts.
  • Yukabacera over 4 years ago

    Going by what n0r and tarantoga said, if these are treated as variations only, it could be confusing.

    Will sellers have to state what kind of pressing ring their label has, in the sales notes?
    Which images should be uploaded to the submission? Of all variations or just one? How should we pick which one?
  • timhorton69 over 4 years ago

    Two separate releases:

    Joy Division - Unknown Pleasures - Australian CBS pressing (wide ring)
    Joy Division - Unknown Pleasures - Australian EMI pressing (narrow ring)

    See also the forum discussion linked in the first release.

    There's a bit of context, both in the discussion and in terms of details on the releases themselves, that may help here.
  • Earjerk over 4 years ago

    Gah! Double post. Apologies!
  • Earjerk over 4 years ago

    tarantoga
    This is true for a couple of labels/companies, especially the fact that lables that lack a "deep groove" are later pressings, i.e. represses.


    This is true of early Columbia records pressings, too.

    http://www.discogs.com/Dominic-Frontiere-And-His-Orchestra-Pagan-Festival-An-Exotic-Love-Ritual-For-Orchestra/release/6500440
    Old school collectors often noted if the label is a "deep groove" pressing or not and as far as I know, these deep groove versions are sought out for their sound quality as well as the fact that they are the earlier presses in many cases. I would say the deep groove definitely SHOULD be considered as separate versions, at least in some cases.
  • truedream over 3 years ago

    truedream edited over 3 years ago
    I've been asked to revive this thread in order to address a merge I selected:
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=586613#latest

    Evidently, statements from nik and DTF here are not enough for some.

    FWIW, my copy appears identical to http://www.discogs.com/release/5119399#images/11089268 except the ring is slightly to the left on side 1, cutting through the "M" in BMI. It has a small saw-cut on the cover and a plain white inner sleeve with a saw-cut in the same exact place.

    The runout says:
    On side 1: RVG 98772 A 10 (looks more like "1D") VAN GELDER then what looks like two backwards "6"s or maybe "dd"
    On side 2: RVG 98772 B - 12 ("12" actually covers over "11") VAN GELDER same backward "6"s

Log In You must be logged in to post.