Disctronics per country

Disctronics

"The company has replication plants in the UK, , Italy and Texas, plus sales offices in Paris and Los Angeles."

As suggested on this thread: http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/help/forums/topic/338398?page=2 , starting a thread on ways to add the company for the different countries. There has been some discussion there already, but not sure if I added it correctly:
Disctronics, UK

The release shows: Made in UK by DISCTRONICS in the matrix mould

Disctronics S = ?
Disctronics = UK
Disctronics Limited = australian
Disctronics B = australian
Disctronics USA = till 2003
DiscUSA = after 2003

Made by, Manufactured By etc
i've seen Disctronics S on a few releases, maybe there's another plant that uses S perhaps ?

Keep the main one as the one for UK you mean instead of adding , UK?

The profile for it shows it to be for all the different plants, would it not be better to keep that as catch-all for those that have no country or reference to one in the matrix, plain Distronics?

i don't know mate, i just tripped over another Disctronics S one here: Yattering - Murder's Concept
i just used Disctronics and put a link to this thread in the submission notes.

sorry i didn't respond sooner i had alerts disabled, uggh.

About time to have them separated...
What about EDC, BTW?

Coincidence_vs_Fate
About time to have them separated...

Hear hear!! I've been struggling with this issue for ages!

dreeat
Disctronics Limited = australian

Problem with this dreeat, is that this version of the company seems to have only had a very short life-span before becoming something else. It would forcing many Australian CDs that were not made by this company at all, under this version of Disctronics, were it to become the 'catch-all' for Australian CDs that just say 'Disctronics' and not 'Disctronics B'. Perhaps really we'd be better off to just have a "Disctronics (2)" for the plain, old "Disctronics" Australian ones?

Here's another 'much-associated to this issue', old Topic: http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/help/forums/topic/234879 (Title: "MADE BY DISCTRONICS B = Australian?"
Then there are also the heap of references I have tried to furnish, scattered amongst the comments histories & threads.

Here are the links to all that I know of (& referenced so far ^^) for easier reference:
Disctronics Limited

I imagine some of these links will disappear if changes are made to some of them, eradicating some of them eventually. And more may exist too. Please post anymore that can be located.

It'd be great to sort this finally.

Does anyone know if Disctronics have a way to see the year of pressing in the matrix? if so, does that differ per pressing plant?

Trying to figure out if the Disctronics or Sonopress version is re-issue for releases:Total Touch - This Way

is there any reason why there isn't a list of mastering and mould sid codes on label pages/pressing plants etc?

something like this: http://www.musik-sammler.de/wiki/index.php?title=IFPI-Codes

Could be handy, though sometimes it is almost impossible to read the IFPI code, need something like a microscope for some!

do you not have a magnifying glass? they're fairly cheap.
i inherited my granddad’s map reading one, it's about 50mm diameter, i'm not sure what the magnification is though.
i can read the Bertelsmann text under the Arvato logo just ha ha
actually i was sitting here thinking 'i should get a magnifying glass for reading matrix info' and about a week later mum gave me this, i took it as a good omen or something.
this is really old too, mum re granddad having it when she was just a teenager so it's 50+ years old and it's made in england, i like old stuff especially if it's made in england.

heh 8)

I have my granddad's philatelist loop = magnifying glass with light.

It's when you hold hold the disc just so in the half-light at an obtuse angle for a split second you can just about make it out sometimes. And the matrix area is often very scratched when I get them second hand, makes it even harder.

As for the the disctronics, IFPI's etc: the stickies and posts are what we have to refer to now, and have to wade through posts, search engine misses most of the relevant posts, a more ' friendly' version of run-out's and related bits like pressing plants, the how to's of finding what you need in the matrix would be a lot more logical.

Guess for the Disctronics question, have to be patient and as more people edit and add matrix info, can get a better overview. I have done the only entry for UK one, am sure there will be more to follow. I added some to the Distronics S, but does not really make sense now I looked at the ifpi codes, as for those they indicate UK plant.

1skinnylad
Here are the links to all that I know of (& referenced so far ^^) for easier reference:
Disctronics
Disctronics B
Disctronics S
Disctronics USA
Disctronics, UK
Disctronics Limited

I imagine some of these links will disappear if changes are made to some of them, eradicating some of them eventually. And more may exist too. Please post anymore that can be located.

It'd be great to sort this finally.

Howz about Disctronics Italy? (IFPI LM11 & Mould 6?xx)
Which this (Infernal Poetry - Not Light But Rather Visible Darkness) may have writ upon its hub, if it were entered.

or Disctronics (IFPI L205 & mould HUxx), etc
Possibly: Grog (2) - Odes To The Carnivorous

Did the Australian have a mould-code N5xx?

the S is probably for Southwater plant of Disctronics
B for Blackburn

i have these Demented Ted - Promises Impure

but were they pressed in Australia? As is not such a big market, wouldn't be cheaper to press with the rest in UK and ship to Australia? As quite a few of the singles I have that are Australian releases also have things like GEMA/BIEM on them, same artwork etc except for the Australia info, would make sense?

i'm not sure where they are pressed, none of them have ifpi codes, they are all quite old too 8(

Amsreddevil
I added some to the Distronics S, but does not really make sense now I looked at the ifpi codes, as for those they indicate UK plant.

Disctronics S is the UK plant. That's what I thought I'd worked out ages ago.

dreeat
i have these Disctronics B releases, they are all Australian releases

i have 6 Disctronics B releases as well - all are strictly Australian releases, definitely printed in Australia, but no proof if they are pressed there (of course only if to assume the location of Disctronics B is unknown)

Amsreddevil
but were they pressed in Australia? As is not such a big market, wouldn't be cheaper to press with the rest in UK and ship to Australia?

Why the UK versions are not pressed by Disctronics B as well then ? So far, i did not see a non-Australian Disctronics B release...

Amsreddevil
quite a few of the singles I have that are Australian releases also have things like GEMA/BIEM on them, same artwork etc except for the Australia info, would make sense?

no :) rights societies is not a good criteria. local single versions in any country usully have the same or similar artwork with some local fine print added.

cvalda44
rights societies is not a good criteria. local single versions in any country usully have the same or similar artwork with some local fine print added

Correct

1skinnylad
Disctronics S is the UK plant. That's what I thought I'd worked out ages ago.

The profile for that one can be updated then.

Can't find the Australian plant name. It was called BGL International Limited before Disctronics took over? Can't find what BGL is short for, maybe location name?

BGL = ? Group Limited perhaps?

so we're doing quite well!
Disctronics S = UK
Disctronics B = Australia

the problem we have is when people see the matrix info they may not realise the letter after Disctronics is part of the label name [understandable really] so we'll just get heaps of Disctronics entries.

dreeat
the problem we have is when people see the matrix info they may not realise the letter after Disctronics is part of the label name [understandable really] so we'll just get heaps of Disctronics entries.

I noticed that at some point in time (early 00's?) they dropped the 'S' from the matrix string. So I imagine we'll have two different entries referring to the same company.

dreeat
the problem we have is when people see the matrix info they may not realise the letter after Disctronics is part of the label name [understandable really] so we'll just get heaps of Disctronics entries.

The profile of Disctronics can be edited how to read the matrix, that you read everything Disctronics first, then the string of numbers and letters.

handmedownurluv
I noticed that at some point in time (early 00's?) they dropped the 'S' from the matrix string. So I imagine we'll have two different entries referring to the same company.

Is it still at the same plant then? The Blackburn plant is also mentioned for the UK, guess some were pressed there at some point?

dreeat
the problem we have is when people see the matrix info they may not realise the letter after Disctronics is part of the label name [understandable really] so we'll just get heaps of Disctronics entries

So, fundamentally, this is why I'd originally argued for the basic 'Disctronics' webpage to be the one that permits capturing ALL the variant Disctronics, because there are also many that simply don't have a letter, like the 'S' or the 'B' in their matrix at all, for both UK and Australian ones respectively.So where do these go?

Do we create different Disctonics-es, ie. Disctronics (2) & Disctronics (3) per country, leaving the UK basic one (for those without an actual S in the matrix) to still remain just as the 'Disctronics that its profile says it is now? Would this sort of work-around solution simply be easier to accommodate the different countries basic mention of Disctronics, where the country is known, but which Disctronics it is is entirely differenmt?

Btw, Re:

Amsreddevil
As is not such a big market, wouldn't be cheaper to press with the rest in UK and ship to Australia?

Australia was also one of the countries at the forefront of CD production and often took contracts from overseas to manufacture them discs here for sale OS. (Pity our manufacturing base is shot through nowadays as we have become a mining & services economy almost only - supposed to be advanced capitalism I guess!).

This is so complicated, I'm happy to bow out now and just go along with what everyone else decides to do about it.

handmedownurluv
I imagine we'll have two different entries referring to the same company.

I'm inclined to think so too on this point, possibly relevant for the Australian one too, but I vaguely recall that one plant was now in Blackburn (I am very local to Blackburn, once had a student job in a book-printers (long-gone) that made Mills & Boon books down in Blackburn, and my suspicion is it would've possibly been on Whitehorse Road, alongside other runs of giant former factories/warehouse...there used to be the big AGFA (film stock manufacture) factory down that way too, so it would make sense it was there, but I don't know), and I seem to also recall other mention being made of another industrialized suburb, like Moorabbin, or somewhere near it, also hosting the site of a Disctronics from the research I did a year or so ago, for which links are contained somewhere in one of the threads of one of the Disctronics or in some topic.

So you mean Blackburn in Australia? I thought it was referring to the UK Blackburn as it is referred to being UK (Großbritannien) here:
http://www.musik-sammler.de/wiki/index.php?title=IFPI-Codes#SID-Codes_Presswerk_01.2A.2A_-_09.2A.2A

IFPI 87** EDC (Blackburn) Großbritannien

Ah, superb post! Well, this changes things a lot then! So maybe Disctronics B CDs weren't made in Australia after all. But then why do so many have Made in Australia by Disctronics B in their matrix? I don't know what to think now.

Disctronics as is does not exist any more though?

In profile: In 2003 Disctronics was sold to Deluxe (7), a t venture by The Rank Group and optical disc manufacturer Ritek Corp.

I see quite a few entries on the page after 2003 though.

that's because they say, on the release itself, Made By Disctronics (and usually also in conjunction with wording such as exactly Made in Australia..

I have CDs, bought in UK, that have cases with inserts bearing "Made & Printed in USA"
However, the CD hub data reveals it was made/pressed in UK.
Indeed, as it was shrink-wrapped, the content has a 'return card' that bears a UK address. A UK address is also printed on the inlay that bears the aforesaid "Made & Printed in USA" quote.
I would suggest your package was 'Made/printed' in Australia (the 'presenters' of the package). The disc imported.

(If there's a hole in the middle then it's where the holes come from - according to The Beatles - Blackburn, Lancashire).

Coming back to this again, no need for Disctronics for the UK and for other locations with location or letter added?

Amsreddevil
Can't find the Australian plant name. It was called BGL International Limited before Disctronics took over?

From the ASX "THE 1998 ASX DELISTED COMPANIES BOOK":
New name: DISCTRONICS LIMITED
Old name: N.C. from BGL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
Date: Sep. 22, 1988
Taken over by "Hedron Investments Pty Ltd" in Feb. 04, 2004 (Receivership ??)

Amsreddevil
IFPI 87** EDC (Blackburn) Großbritannien

2006 - 2009 EDC Blackburn Ltd
2003 - 2006 Deluxe (7)
1987 - 2003 Disctronics (Disctronics (UK) Ltd. or Disctronics Manufacturing (UK) Ltd.) - Southwater
2002 - 2003 Universal M & L, UK)
Blackburn itself can be traced back to PDO, UK (1986 - 1996), Philips Electronics UK Ltd. (pre 1986)

sebfact
Taken over by "Hedron Investments Pty Ltd" in Feb. 04, 2004 (Receivership ??)

So for Australian releases that don't specify Disctronics.

One of my releases says Disctronics W. Any idea which Disctronics that is? Should I create a new company or just enter Disctronics?

is the W on it's own or part of the rest of the matrix?

swagski
I would suggest your package was 'Made/printed' in Australia (the 'presenters' of the package). The disc imported.

But not when the actual matrix states in its etching "MADE IN AUSTRALIA BY DISCTRONICS B" (it's always capitalized and actually forms part of the matrix). This is not Made in Australia stuff printed on the sleeve or inserts. Just wanting to clarify that we're still referring both to the actual matrix, yes?
It has to have been the local Australian CD press/presses (?) of Disctronics then, surely?

1skinnylad
So for Australian releases that don't specify Disctronics B, nor are Disctronics Limited, then what do we enter these under?

And what do we take for releases where the disc reads Made by Disctronics Limited and the matrix Made By Disctronics B? See here http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/image/R-2131808-1265746305.jpeg

sebfact
And what do we take for releases where the disc reads Made by Disctronics Limited and the matrix Made By Disctronics B

lol
Both?!

Amsreddevil
is the W on it's own or part of the rest of the matrix?

I need to find that one again. However, here are two examples of DISCTRONICS (H) all by it's lonesome. Any clue which Disctronics this is?
Danny Carnahan & Robin Petrie And The Missing Pieces - No Regrets

Also, there are a bunch of releases made by Disctronics which are entered as Discotronics. If someone feels like doing a bunch of editing...

timetogo
which are entered as Discotronics.

Left comments for those.

noticing that people are not adding full matrix info, just the numbers. Shouldn't things like Made By Disctronics be added as well, it is part of the matrix after all, and also important to see which possible variants of the company it could be.

Amsreddevil

noticing that people are not adding full matrix info, just the numbers. Shouldn't things like Made By Disctronics be added as well, it is part of the matrix after all, and also important to see which possible variants of the company it could be.

I agree. Half a matrix isn't terribly helpful, is it?

timetogo
I agree. Half a matrix isn't terribly helpful, is it?

No - sure isn't.
A bit like entering title as "Sgt. Pepp" by "Bea".

I've always been intrigued by the 'Matrix' term used in RSG. It does make the assumption that the reader knows the matrix from their elbow.
If it were "Add the entire data string provided on the hub" it might prevent folks 'guessing' what was a matrix / Cat/ SID or whatever.

On a vinyl I've never called it that, to me it's just 'run-out data'. So why not refer to it as 'Hub data'?

swagski
Add the entire data string provided on the hub

5.3. Matrix / Run-Out information is often stamped in the run out grooves of records, or in the inner ring of CDs. Vinyl run out etchings can also contain mastering engineer / mastering studio / pressing plant information (often as initials), and extra text. This information can all be added to one 'Matrix number' field.

This information can all be added, leaves it up in the air if you should or not. This information should all be added...

Also noticed the splitting up of the info in the matrix given on one line around the matrix, so where you have 3495898 9*2.1 1:1:0 (moulded) Made in the UK by M & L, this ends up
Matrix/Runout 3495898
Other 9*2.1 1:1:0 (Inner ring)
Other Made in the UK by M & L (Inner Ring Mould)
which I would add as either:
Matrix/Runout 3495898 9*2.1 1:1:0 Made in the UK by M & L
or
Matrix/Runout 3495898 9*2.1 1:1:0 (Printed)
Matrix/Runout Made in the UK by M & L (Mould)
but all under matrix info.

Then you also have IFPI codes, these could strictly speaking also be added under Matrix / Runout instead of Other, part of all the info in matrix area.

http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/history?release=256494#latest

Disctronics, UK without the , is suggested. I had added the company by what was said in other thread,
http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/help/forums/topic/338398?page=2
add location by: Company, Location

Haven't been paying too much attention to this thread until one of my own older subs triggered me.
Question: So would http://s.dsimg.com/image/R-654984-1343340613-1448.jpeg have been pressed by Disctronics S (with the "S" way on the other side and precedes what is also the cat#)? I can't comment on IFPI codes, I haven't got this CD anymore.

hmvh
have been pressed by Disctronics S

yes, this is one of them

1skinnylad
So for Australian releases that don't specify Disctronics B, nor are Disctronics Limited, then what do we enter these under? Because there's an enormous amount currently filed under just Disctronics.

I think Universal M & L.
If most of UK pressings say "MADE IN THE UK BY DISCTRONICS" the UK branch can be separated as per rule 4.3.4.

cvalda44
can be separated as per rule 4.3.4.

So Disctronics, UK would be correct?

hmvh
So would http://s.dsimg.com/image/R-654984-1343340613-1448.jpeg have been pressed by Disctronics S (with the "S" way on the other side and precedes what is also the cat#)?

I'm starting to wonder about this too. The difference between the placement of the one-'spaced' letter after the word Disctronics appears minimal when just reading it as a matrix/run-out string in the BaOI; just from the written BaOI display of a release.

I vaguely suspect this is also what prompted Disctronics but there's so many there now, it'd be near impossible to find I think, to work out the reasoning behind its creation.

What's there now; they do almost all have had close-up pics of matrix kindly ed by Amsreddevil, and they consistently do have the 'S" placed over on the opposite side of the matrix. This is quite different to the Disctronics B case, where this is exactly as written when etched in the matrix/runout: "MADE BY DISCTRONICS B" (altogether, the "B" separated only by one character's spacing of nothing between the word Disctronics and the "B" if you know what I mean?).

So now, I too wonder if we should even be using the Disctronics S? Any thoughts? Maybe they should all just go under the plain old Disctronics? But there does seem to be that consistent pattern. Does this mean they're all duplicated/pressed in the same plant? I'd think they would be, but wouldn't know.

Amsreddevil
swagski
Add the entire data string provided on the hub

5.3. Matrix / Run-Out information is often stamped in the run out grooves of records, or in the inner ring of CDs. Vinyl run out etchings can also contain mastering engineer / mastering studio / pressing plant information (often as initials), and extra text. This information can all be added to one 'Matrix number' field.

This information can all be added, leaves it up in the air if you should or not. This information should all be added...

Well, apart from the fact (I say it again) that 'groove' has nothing to do with it. It's a run-out - a flat bit on which data is conveyed. The data is not in a groove. We would not be able to read it, whilst it would also fubar the needle...
Anyway, a 'Matrix' leads us into the choppy waters of semantics again.
Per audio , a Matrix is the unique code given a recording - usually quite short and oft printed on the label... like for example 34,022 for an A-side & 34,023 for a B-side. This can find its way to the run outs as 34022-A1 & 34023-B1 and may even relate to a cat# - say Cat# 3402
(Note the use of caps for Matrix) None of the rest is a Matrix - it's just data.
Meanwhile... A 'matrix' is simply a die used in pressing. So, the matrix data would be the entire data imparted by the matrix referred to as the subject.
(Note the use of lower-case)
On another point, "etchings" [as per 5.3] are usually achieved in artistic endeavor with a scribe - hence a sneaky engineer credit often found.
Mentioning "Stamped" or "Hand-written" can, therefore, be real useful. (And may need the data divided up to achieve said usefulness).
Sorry to digress a bit ;)

Amsreddevil
So Disctronics, UK would be correct?

Well, yes. As I understand the comma is not required if we use exact text from release (for example Disctronics USA). But when we "construct" entity name, adding location from somewhere, the general practise is to use comma.
I see the point why "Disctronics UK" is suggested, but it would be great if it would be ed but at least some minority of releases which would read "Disctronics UK". Unfortunately all releases I have say "MADE IN THE UK BY DISCTRONICS".

swagski
Mentioning "Stamped" or "Hand-written" can, therefore, be real useful.

Hand-written is misleading, like you take a pen and write on that area. It is hand-etched, etched would suffice for that, and stamped for the other bit for vinyls and printed and moulded for matrix of CD's & DVD's?

cvalda44
all releases I have say "MADE IN THE UK BY DISCTRONICS"

Same here, and I have quite a few that I have not updated or added yet. I don't think it was ever shown as Disctronics UK as is.

1skinnylad
So now, I too wonder if we should even be using the Disctronics S

You were the one that started the profile ;-)

How to find out history though, it doesn't exist any more.

Amsreddevil
Hand-written is misleading, like you take a pen and write on that area. It is hand-etched, etched would suffice for that, and stamped for the other bit

That is what I meant, I was clarifying that 'etched' was hand-work.
Etched, scratched, scribed, engraved, intaglio, etc., as opposed to stamped or pressed. No need for descript on CD data.

Amsreddevil
It is hand-etched, etched would suffice for that

Well, I like 'hand-etched' more than what I've been using ('handwritten') but I just developed that habit of using handwritten merely from having come across so many in the vein of what I was subbing, so copied & stuck with that for the last year or so. Will change to the better hand-etched in future I reckon, if I can to break a now long habit.

But back to Disctronics, cvalda44 has added some worthwhile comments I think to the comments history on that webpage (July 2012). Worth considering in light of this topic, I think -> http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/history?label=Disctronics#latest

But now given the precision that that webpage now has up on it for a Profile and an accompanying picture, shall we agree to simply shift all the Australian-made Disctronics to a Disctronics (2)? This is what I'd suggest at this point.

...barring, of course, the actual Made in Australia by Disctronics B ones, which wholly justify their own separate webpage I would say!

Disctronics S

For those it is clear they are UK releases. So they would fall under Disctronics now? Pretty sure the S in matrix refers to Southwater pressing plant, there was at least one other plant in the UK too.

Amsreddevil
So they would fall under Disctronics now?

Why ? All we need is to update the profile then...
as far as I see no one is against it including the person who wrote the profile. He just says his info should not be removed but moved.

Regarding 'Distronics S':

Is there anything that acutally shows this a being an actual name? All I see here is a photo of a partial matrix which shows a matrix number beginning with 'S' and a separate 'Distronics':
http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/image/L-329811-1342022183-1330.jpeg
http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/image/R-374829-1304770682.jpeg

^if that's the case, the page for this plant should be 'Distronics, (location)' and the 'S' should be considered only a 'unique identifier' not part of the name.

Is there anything that actually s using 'Distronics S' as a name?

(edit:typo)

The Disctronics page is a mess now though, this really needs to be sorted.

Have been through about 20% on the page, quite a few don't have the full matrix info filled in, don't know why, Disctronics is mentioned on the same line as the rest of the info in a matrix, but generally a mish-mash of all the Disctronics co.'s.

Also noticed for quite a few US releases there is often an (H) in the matrix, another pressing plant?

djindio
^if that's the case, the page for this plant should be 'Distronics, (location)' and the 'S' should be considered only a 'unique identifier' not part of the name.

You have a point, but cannot confirm the actual pressing plant name. We are still trying to figure out what is what here, I have been trying for over 3 months, not making much progress though....

djindio
Is there anything that actually s using 'Distronics S' as a name?

Distronics S on a number of releases. Although I have to it the space between Disctronics and S is confusing :)
As was said "S" may indicate Southwater plant, if this is true this page can stay likely. If to select between "Disctronics, Southwater" and "Disctronics S", imo surely the 2nd is preferred because it reflects what is printed on releases. Then, I'd say it looks like a common Disctronics practise of use one-letter suffix to indicate plants.

I think Disctronics S may stay until we have more info. Nik once said it is much easier to merge entities rather than split them then.

Btw, I have just found Disctronics A :)
http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/viewimages?release=6627

cvalda44
I have just found Disctronics A

the A is in brackets like with the H on some US releases. A for Austin, Texas, H for Houston, Texas?

djindio
^if that's the case, the page for this plant should be 'Distronics, (location)' and the 'S' should be considered only a 'unique identifier' not part of the name

What about Disctronics B then?

Amsreddevil
the A is in brackets like with the H on some US releases. A for Austin, Texas, H for Houston, Texas?

Two Disctronics plants on the US ? Surely both pages can be created, if so.
But i wonder if Disctronics USA profile is correct - it pretends like there's only 1 plant in the US. Then it would be great to know if Disctronics USA was used by both US plants or just by one of them.

Amsreddevil
What about Disctronics B then?

There's nothing wrong about it.

I was just guessing with the letters A and H, could be for any name, but as the US branch was located in Texas, at least one of the plants would be there.

On the profile page, the ones up to now I checked:

Disctronics S

Tomski - 14 Hours To Save The Earth

USA release
Junior Kimbrough - Meet Me In The City

USA with (H)
The Primitives - Pure

Made in Australia by Disctronics on disc
Various - Summer '88

With Disctronics B in the matrix
Snap! - World Power

release
Floh De Cologne - Lucky Streik

Made in by Disctronics
Jacques Lejeune - Messe Aux Oiseaux - Ave Maria

Italy release
David Liebman / Gunnar Mossblad Ensemble - The Seasons Reflected 2004

as label:
Bad Karma - Death On Call

Need at least Disctronics, as well

Amsreddevil
Manuel Göttsching - Dream & Desire but Disctronics S ?

pressed in the UK for . nothing uncommon. and maybe the sleeve is printed in Belgium :)

Amsreddevil
Need at least Disctronics, as well

yes!

The main profile of Disctronics says it was taken over in 2003 by Deluxe, yet there are examples of releases pressed in 2004 by Disctronics, UK. Time line somewhat incorrect?

Amsreddevil
The main profile of Disctronics says it was taken over in 2003 by Deluxe, yet there are examples of releases pressed in 2004 by Disctronics, UK. Time line somewhat incorrect?

No, often the plant name in the matrix is not updated immediately after owner change. As per examples I have the "transition period" may take from several months to 2 years! I have 2001 PMDC releases and so on.

Then, maybe a CD was really pressed in 2003, but released only in 2004.

Btw, check this: Agnetha Fältskog - If I Thought You'd Ever Change Your Mind
The matrix mentions Deluxe already, so it was glass mastered by Deluxe but there's still MADE BY DISCTRONICS moulded. I wonder if someone knows on which stage of production process the mould data is added. But as this example probably suggests I'd say the mould data is added on a very early stage, when these CD plastic protectors are produced. So if Disctronics have produced too many of these protectors, Deluxe just uses the old stock while making their CDs.

for Deluxe (7) mentioned,
http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/image/R-1688578-1335639932.jpeg
the other Deluxe (7) and in mould MADE IN UK BY DISCTRONICS,
http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/image/R-1688578-1343764695-6253.jpeg
can't get it scanned so it shows up, but it is there in the grey area. Also has different ifpi, one has mastering code as IFPI L502, other IFPI L136

Two different entries? One would be under Deluxe (7)?

Amsreddevil
Two different entries? One would be under Disctronics, UK, the other Deluxe (7)?

I don't know. They are both pressed by Deluxe in fact because Disctronics simply did not exist already if the info on its page is correct. I assume, just this plastic detail of some CDs was made by Disctronics back in 2003. Maybe "MADE IN UK BY DISCTRONICS" should be just listed as mould data variation and not linked at all. But it seems your Deluxe-only version is later press, also different matrix code, so likely better if listed separately.
I have similar, but not completely the same proiblem here:
http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/help/forums/topic/343720
Obviously there's a need to learn the CD manufacturing process better before going into these discussions, i feel like i have probably said some complete nonsense in the last posts :) If there's an expert here please help :)

Amsreddevil
What about Disctronics B then?

^Don't know, I have no idea how the matrix ring looks on those...

Amsreddevil
is the W on it's own or part of the rest of the matrix?

It's on it's own, but it's actually DISCTRONICS (W). Here is the release I have: http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/David-Van-Tieghem-Strange-Cargo/release/1587206

As I noted before I also have a few with DISCTRONICS (H). All the (H) and (W) items seem to be for the U.S. market, but as we all know that doesn't necessarily mean they were manufactured in the U.S.

Hi olddingo - welcome to the funhouse.
If you have any info on Astor relating to Beefheart I'd be interested.
Captain Beefheart And His Magic Band* - Safe As Milk
also "Golden Groove" series circa '67/'68, with the metallic over-stickers to sleeves for mono/stereo.
Were black decals with gold = mono & gold decals with black = stereo?
Pressing plant IDs on the runouts, etc. PM me if you fancy.
Sorry to deviate the thread...

Back to Blackburn, Oz & holes in Blackburn Lancashire

cvalda44
so likely better if listed separately.

I have added it as variant matrix for now. Not sure if it does warrant a separate submission. The matrix with both companies would have been pressed first I guess. Maybe I should add it as another sub. Strange thing is I bought it new right after it came out, factory sealed, and no sticker on the front of the jewel case, which the one with only deluxe on it did have, bought that second hand because of the sticker, only realized the different matrix because of updating it here on discogs.

Amsreddevil
Does anyone know if Disctronics have a way to see the year of pressing in the matrix? if so, does that differ per pressing plant?
Trying to figure out if the Disctronics or Sonopress version is re-issue for releases:Total Touch - This Way, Total Touch - This Way

This is an interesting example.

I'm sure Disctronics pressing was made for the UK market, while SonoPress made it for the European. None of those releases seem to be Dutch in spite of the artist's location.
About the 'S' in matrix... I have only guesses.

timetogo
It's on it's own, but it's actually DISCTRONICS (W). Here is the release I have: http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/David-Van-Tieghem-Strange-Cargo/release/1587206

You made incorrect update to BOI or at least your update is not corresponding with the ed images. I left a comment there.
That release does not even mention Disctronics in any way.

Amsreddevil
the S is probably for Southwater plant of Disctronics
B for Blackburn

Good thinking, but we are still guessing.

I have spent about 4-5 hours altogether, when I updated the Disctronics pages.
I have read ALL accesable web.archived pages, even Deluxe's web.archive pages to dig up all the valuable informations.
I added everything I could.

What is 1000% sure, the company is UK based, all the other plants "came" little later.
http://web.archive.org/web/200012051914/http://www.disctronics.co.uk/

edit:
I couldn't find the note/srouce regarding Deluxe built the plant in 1986, only the source for it built in 1986:
http://web.archive.org/web/20030412235912/http://www.disctronics.co.uk/disctron/where/where_uk.htm

edit2:
"The Deluxe Global Media Services Ltd plant was built in 1986 and acquired by Disctronics in 1987, then by Deluxe in 2003."
http://web.archive.org/web/20040204111300/http://www.disctronics.co.uk/disctron/where/where_uk.htm

Disctronics
http://web.archive.org/web/20000919222544/http://www.disctronics.co.uk/disctron/where/where_fr.htm#Disctronics%20

Disctronics Italy
http://web.archive.org/web/20000919222539/http://www.disctronics.co.uk/disctron/where/where-it.htm

Disctonics Texas
http://web.archive.org/web/20030413000612/http://www.disctronics.co.uk/disctron/where/where_usa.htm

Disctronics Blackburn
http://web.archive.org/web/20030617135345/http://www.disctronics.co.uk/disctron/where/where_blackburn.htm

Wow, thanks for that. I spent hours trolling through pages of google, looked in the wrong places I guess.

Hopefully the requests I left for people to add full details of what is in the matrix on those subs where nothing has been filled in other than company, have not fallen on deaf ears. Then some more profiles can be made.

So far confirmed:
Disctronics B, whatever the B stands for

I guess
Disctronics, UK is also a safe bet.

as for the Disctronics S, nothing more found about that. Keep it separate or merge with the UK company, as they are UK made, or is it 'unique' enough to keep?

By the way, the B stands for Braeside.

Some information. Disctronics B / Disctronics Limited are the Australian arm - nothing to do with Blackburn.

The Braeside Disctronics plant cha nged hands to Pacific Mirror Image, then Southern Star Duplitek, and subsequently Technicolor.

http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/help/forums/topic/234879#2997734
http://pinkfloydarchives.com/DAuCDPF.htm
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/archive/index.php/t-202865.html

I'd use both Disctronics B and Disctronics Ltd. as the company has chosen to identify it's plants in these ways.

Disctronics S was the Southwater plant (UK). I think _TheBeatles worked there for a period. As far as I am aware Sony now own the plant and is now known as (one of the) Sony DADC plants.
http://www.sonydadc.com/en/locations/

I would use "Disctronics S" for these releases.

As for country designation, for those which state the location (made in blah by Disctronics etc) then these should be given their own pages. For those which just say "Disctronics" or "Made By Disctronics" I'd keep the "Disctronics" page as a catch all for those releases which don't say B or S or mention the country and keep a good table with links on each profile as done on the PDO profile.

We can add a Disctronics, too as there are releases that specifically say made in by Disctronics.

Of course, for those which display the location in the matrix or on the release that's in order.

that last sentence of mine in the post above was incomplete, I've edited it properly now.

I was really surprised that finally it's not only few of us, who care about digging info and trying to improve the company details!
I would wait few more days for more comments, then we could do some updates :))

Eviltoastman
I'd use both Disctronics B and Disctronics Ltd. as the company has chosen to identify it's plants in these ways.

I would keep only Disctronics B, as it stands in the matrixes. I see no sense in creating 2 pages for the same entity.

Amsreddevil
Disctronics, UK is also a safe bet.

I only asked to change it to "Disctronics UK" to correspond with "Disctronics USA" which uses no comma and used exactly in the same way in CD matrixes.

Eviltoastman
I would use "Disctronics S" for these releases.

Ok, I seconded it.

hwanin
I only asked to change it to "Disctronics UK" to correspond with "Disctronics USA"

Is is written as Disctronics USA in the matrix, but Made in UK by Disctronics.

cvalda44
the UK branch can be separated as per rule 4.3.4.

Like the French one would be Disctronics, when page is made.

hwanin
I would keep only Disctronics B, as it stands in the matrixes. I see no sense in creating 2 pages for the same entity.

This is counter to the advice provided by Nik. These are two different credits, you do not know why they had the two different names or if they actually refer to the same Australian plant. We have to be concerned with the chosen branding on the CD. The two plants should be credited separately with Disctronics B using Disctronics Ltd. as the parent. Also note that Disctronics Ltd. (Australia) was only linked briefly to the UK/US Disctronics firm and was subject to litigation meaning the UK and US branches should not be linked to the Australian branches. The ownership was convoluted and unimportant to our business here of cataloguing the releases and the entities displayed on the release.

hwanin
I only asked to change it to "Disctronics UK" to correspond with "Disctronics USA" which uses no comma and used exactly in the same way in CD matrixes.

Uniformity is not a good idea for the sake of it. US Disctronics releases show "Disctronics USA" so USA is part of the name/branding used. UK and French are not branded this way, they say "Made In UK by Disctronics" so the location must follow the name "Distronics" which as per 4.3.2 and 4.3.4 must be separated by a comma. The location is not a part of the name but is consistently stated.

hwanin
I was really surprised that finally it's not only few of us, who care about digging info and trying to improve the company details!I would wait few more days for more comments, then we could do some updates :))

Most of the information I relayed above is already known and has been discussed to death in the early LCCN period before December last year. http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/help/forums/topic/2348791Skinnylad[/url] put in a lot of effort trying to get this sorted and I also did quite a bit of digging. I was not able to help sort the matter because of my lack of understanding of the LCCN rules and naming conventions and a general lack of guidance in the discussion.

As such I think we've waited long enough and the recommendations I've made are now par for the course with Nik's as on release policy which is due to become rule shortly, see 4.2.1 below:
http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/help/forums/topic/342942

I'm lost now and don't really care anymore which we use, just long as we tend to be able to sensibly compile CDs made in differing countries fairly reasonably - not stuffed into one webpage altogether (ie. not UK manufactures bunched in with Australia/US/Wherever-else manufactures, etc - clearly these would be made in different plants if the country of manufacture can be clearly ascertained).

Some CDs, manufactured by variously different Disctronics, may also disclose other discreet bits of info that may help identify a certain sort of manufacture or some other identification similarity (perhaps the ways etchings are sequenced, run-out sequences perhaps, patterns in the etched matrix, etc). This might be worth compiling but I personally don't really mind anymore where we go with Disctronics. Too confusing!

I think it's far clearer now though.

1skinnylad
I'm lost now

I am not yet :)

Eviltoastman
UK and French are not branded this way, they say "Made In UK by Disctronics"
....
The location is not a part of the name but is consistently stated.

I completely get the point now and it's OK for me. I'm not a "bad" person, but unless I don't see other people's point of view, I think it's right what I think and do :)) Thank you for your inputs!

So we agreed to keep
Disctronics, UK
and create
Disctronics, [where it consistently says on the release that it was made in by Disctronics]
and additionally creating
Disctronics, Italy [for the same reason, as for the French subsidiary]

we also agreed to keep the main Disctronics page for releases that cannot be listed under the country-specific entries due to no extra informations or missing images, etc.

but
Furthermore yet didn't agree about
Disctonics B -- or -- Disctonics Limited

Logically, Disctronics B is the indicator of the plant (as nicely revealed the meaning of B by Eviltoastman) and Disctonics Limited is the company that operates the plant.
But it's stupid to keep both, because you link them both on 1 release??
The fine print will read 'made by Disctronics Limited' while the matrix reads 'Disctronics B'.
So you will add both?? Why? We are arguing here, so please don't refer to anyone's opinion, but yours.
If the majority of you (and/or other s) will say that we should use both, I'll not fight over this matter, but accept.

After we 'close' this topic, I'll revise the current main page of Disctonics to match with our agreements.

Eviltoastman
Most of the information I relayed above is already known and has been discussed to death in the early LCCN period before December last year.

I was referring to the database as whole. I see so few s updating company pages properly.
s usually blindly creating new entries every day, but they shit about making follow-up updates.

When I ed this site, I was asked and told (by former s and/or editors) to consistently make follow-up updates and providing extra info about new entries, when I create a submission or make an update.
I'm still doing it this way. 99% of the current s don't provide information about new entries and don't make follow-ups.

Are we all in agreement that Disctronics page?

Yes.