Re: question

["Adam Hechler" <adamhe@xxxxxx>]

I make sure I list all pertinent source info either on my list or in 
an info
file I keep on all my CDs. I have a separate text file containing 
setlists,
venue info, sound quality and source info (I've recently started 
listing who
I've received the discs from as well) for each show.

When I have multiple sources of the same show, I'll show the source 
info on
my list otherwise I just print the info file and send it with the 
discs when
I make a trade.

Also... isn't it a shame that we have to list either DAT or CDR 
generations.
Both are digital media and we should be making exact clones when we 
copy
either media.  Like someone listing CDR > CDR > CDR (or 3CDR as in 
your
example below) .. what's the point? We should be able to trust our 
fellow
traders enough to know that once it's in CDR and they're sending us 
CDR then
it doesn't matter how many gens are in the mix... they should all be 
clones.
But alas... we can't trust each other that much. There's too many 
people
just hurriedly churning out CDR burns using Adaptec's CD Copier 
function or
whatever (yuck).

Oops, let me get off the soapbox now.

Adam


=>Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 21:15:18 -0400
=>From: TangerineMan <TangerineMan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
=>Subject: Re: question
=>
=>Good question. Take, for instance, the first North American
=>Strange Sensations
=>show, May 25 at the Orpheum in Boston. I know of one MD-sourced
=>recording and
=>one DAT-sourced recording. Now I'm trying to find out whether the
=>DAT source
=>mentioned here the other day (or was it on the Yahoo list?) is
=>the same as the
=>one I have. The show deserves to be treed, and no doubt will be.
=>At this point
=>it's a matter of deciding who has the best version.
=>
=>On my tradelist, I include as much information as I can about the 
source
=>recording as well as the number of generations between it and my 
copy, if
=>known. The "pedigree" might look like this:
=>
=>Master DAT>DAT>3CDR
=>
=>Which means the master DAT recording was copied to another DAT,
=>then to CDRs,
=>then to CDRs a second time, and finally to CDRs a third time, which 
is the
=>version I received. Sometimes I'll put, say, "3?CDR." The
=>question mark means
=>I'm not sure, but my best guess is my copy is the 3rd CDR copy.
=>
=>Not everybody uses the same "shorthand," but as long as they 
include an
=>explanation of their codes, readers should be happy.
=>
=>The first line of crowd conversation is a good differentiation
=>strategy, yes.
=>Another is the number of tracks and the track lengths. There's no 
way the
=>respective tapers/masterers will have set their cue marks at
=>exactly the same
=>points.
=>
=>idiot88, who really should change his handle :-), writes:
=>
=>> I bet there have been more than one taper at some of the
=>Strange Sensations
=>> shows. [. . .] Does anyone keep track of multiple tapes from
=>the same show?