Re: Question regarding Tape Generations

[bite me <davebarbee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike Hopkins wrote:
> 
> FBO:
> 
> I have often wondered how others assign generations to analog cassettes.
> 
> For example, let's assume someone has a DAT MASTER of a show and then
> makes me an ANALOG copy of that DAT.  Does that mean I now have a 2nd
> generation cassette?  Or would my cassette be considered 1st generation?
> 
> Likewise, let's say I have Power & Glory on CD and make someone a
> cassette copy of the set.  Would they now have a 2nd generation copy or
> would you say it's a 1st generation?  I'm leaning towards saying it would
> be the 1st generation since it's just 1 dub from the original.  Same goes
> for my DAT example above.
> 
DAT clones are a perfect clone with no generation (at least that's what
they tell me), so cassette copy would be 1st gen assuming that the DAT
can directly off the master. A copy of a CD would be 1st generation of
the (insert title here). Since most CDs are not from the master tape
(with some exceptions of course), it's hard to give the exact number of
generation. Many people make the mistake of calling direct copies 1st
gen but in my experience most CDs are not direct from the master tapes.
If a CD was indeed made from the master, you would have a 2nd gen unless
the source was a DAT and there would be no generation loss. It sounds
confusing but if you use common sense it's not too hard to figure out.
Just remember that direct DAT to DAT (or CD to CD) cause no generation
loss but analog does. Mini-Disc is another can of worms but that's not
what you inquired about.
Happy trading,
Dave.