KOCH / kdg matrix numbers in LCCN

It has already been practice to enter NNN.NNN matrix numbers in LCCN for Koch Digitaldisc). Older matrix numbers are in the format NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N, which was shortened to NNN.NNN around 1999 based on my own examination of kdg releases in the database.

Note: KOCH was active as a record label and company as well as in manufacturing, and there are therefore relases where the NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N / NNN.NNN number is based on the release cat#. This makes sense to be as the same internal cat# was assigned by the KOCH structure and used by its record labels and manufacturing plant. This is unlike cases where the release cat# may be accidentally extracted from the matrix and associated with a pressing plant that did not assign the cat#.

Points:

1) I think the NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N matrix number should be okay'ed for entry as LCCN catalogue# for KOCH.

1.1) there are probably many releases on the Koch is being credited as label/company and whether that is problematic, since the current profile suggests that that profile exists only for KOCH's pressing plant.

2) There are many 1998-99 kdg submissions that show a NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N style matrix, but only the first NNN.NNN is entered in LCCN. I think the entire NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N string should be entered in LCCN, not just the first NNN.NNN. Sneakily, I made an update of the kdg profile last night and already added that advice - but retroactively I seek approval.

ping list:
baldorr

On the profile are you saying that in this example you would add

[manufactured by kdg logo x2] 820.418.000.020.0 #1

So are you saying add 820.418.000.020.0 #1
or
add 820.418.000.020.0

Edited KDG to Kdg

One more example if we do include the #N
[manufactured by kdg logo] 834.695 TIP-888836 #3

Obviously the TIP-888836 is the cat number for the release but would you still add the #N to the LCCN Cat#
so

Manufactured By Kdg - 834.695 #3

..and one more question. Re the profile text:

If 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix & both Mastering & Mould SID are present dowe add
all, so:
Maufactured By, Glass Mastered At & Pressed By and which part would get the NNN.NNN or NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N

Preferred & Otherwise probably needs clearer caveats

Preferred LCCN role(s):
· Manufactured By - when the 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix

Otherwise:
· Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17* or LP57
· Pressed By - with any mastering SID code and mould SID code IFPI 30**
· Glass Mastered At and Pressed By - with mastering SID code IFPI L17*/LP57 and mould SID code 30**

Other than the above +1 for the change re the NNN.NNN or NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N schemes

Led Zeppelin - Mothership
On this one I'm, assuming the DVD was pre Lynic and was Kdg, but only the SID codes and the #N to go on?

Cl0ver
So are you saying add 820.418.000.020.0 #1
or
add 820.418.000.020.0

Only 820.418.000.020.0 would go in LCCN. Maybe I should change #N to #X to make that more clear?

Cl0ver
If 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix & both Mastering & Mould SID are present dowe add
all, so:

The idea there is:
- when 'manufactured by kdg' is in the matrix, use Manufactured By
- when there is no mention of kdg in the matrix, use Glass Mastered and/or Pressed depending on SID codes.

Maybe I could edit it this way?:

Preferred LCCN role(s):
· Manufactured By - when the 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix

Otherwise (when kdg is not named in the matrix):
· Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17* or LP57
· Pressed By - with any mastering SID code and mould SID code IFPI 30**
· Glass Mastered At and Pressed By - with mastering SID code IFPI L17*/LP57 and mould SID code 30**

Cl0ver
Led Zeppelin - Mothership
On this one I'm, assuming the DVD was pre Lynic and was Kdg, but only the SID codes and the #N to go on?

Lynic closed in early 2007, so based on the release date of that release, kdg would be more likely anyway, and the presence of #N would agree with that. In general, Lynic glass masters with LP57 always (almost always?) have a Lynic matrix number. kdg glass masters often leave off the XXX.XXX matrix number depending on the releasing label. It does get a bit complex when SID codes were ed around like this...

Myriad
Only 820.418.000.020.0 would go in LCCN. Maybe I should change #N to #X to make that more clear?

Maybe better, it is just that sometimes these things can be read as examples. Trying to think like someonen ewer to the database.

Myriad
Maybe I could edit it this way?:

Preferred LCCN role(s):
· Manufactured By - when the 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix

Otherwise (when kdg is not named in the matrix):
· Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17* or LP57
· Pressed By - with any mastering SID code and mould SID code IFPI 30**
· Glass Mastered At and Pressed By - with mastering SID code IFPI L17*/LP57 and mould SID code

Clearer, but I do wonder why not having the name in the matrix = elevated profile standing based on SID codes only when they are likely to be present on the branded matrix releases as well.

Myriad
Lynic closed in early 2007, so based on the release date of that release, kdg would be more likely anyway, and the presence of #N would agree with that. In general, Lynic glass masters with LP57 always (almost always?) have a Lynic matrix number. kdg glass masters often leave off the XXX.XXX matrix number depending on the releasing label. It does get a bit complex when SID codes were ed around like this...

Thanks. Understood.

Myriad
Points:

1) I think the NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N matrix number should be okay'ed for entry as LCCN catalogue# for KOCH.

Myriad
2) There are many 1998-99 kdg submissions that show a NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N style matrix, but only the first NNN.NNN is entered in LCCN. I think the entire NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N string should be entered in LCCN, not just the first NNN.NNN. Sneakily, I made an update of the kdg profile last night and already added that advice - but retroactively I seek approval.

Myriad
Only 820.418.000.020.0 would go in LCCN. Maybe I should change #N to #X to make that more clear?

Myriad
Preferred LCCN role(s):
· Manufactured By - when the 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix

Otherwise (when kdg is not named in the matrix):
· Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17* or LP57
· Pressed By - with any mastering SID code and mould SID code IFPI 30**
· Glass Mastered At and Pressed By - with mastering SID code IFPI L17*/LP57 and mould SID code 30**

+1 for these.

Myriad
1.1) there are probably many releases on the Koch Digitaldisc and Koch Digitaldisc GmbH pages that would be better moved to Koch according to "as on label" rules and current profile instructions. I'm also unsure whether Koch is being credited as label/company and whether that is problematic, since the current profile suggests that that profile exists only for KOCH's pressing plant.

If it doesn't say either "Koch Digitaldisc" or "Koch Digitaldisc GmbH" in the matrix information, then crediting Koch seems ideal.

I'm in agreement with what WolfXCIX has said above. Another +1 from me for those suggestions/amendments.

Cl0ver
but I do wonder why not having the name in the matrix = elevated profile standing

Sorry, not really sure what you mean by elevated profile standing.

Cl0ver
Clearer, but I do wonder why not having the name in the matrix = elevated profile standing based on SID codes only when they are likely to be present on the branded matrix releases as well.

I think what you're asking is why not also credit GM and Pressed By when the name is in the matrix? The answer to that is that we generally follow the 'as on release' rule and prefer to mirror whatever role the company chooses to give itself on the release. Obviously it wouldnt be wrong to add GM and Pressed By in addition to Mfd By but from my perspective I guess it just feels less necessary once kdg is credited already

Myriad
I think what you're asking is why not also credit GM and Pressed By when the name is in the matrix?

Yes that was what I was thinking as I'm sure others may wonder.
GM & Pressed By generally suggests a definite task rather than a general manufactured by role, but I do understand the as on the release argument though.

WolfXCIX
Myriad
1.1) there are probably many releases on the Koch Digitaldisc and Koch Digitaldisc GmbH pages that would be better moved to Koch according to "as on label" rules and current profile instructions. I'm also unsure whether Koch is being credited as label/company and whether that is problematic, since the current profile suggests that that profile exists only for KOCH's pressing plant.

If it doesn't say either "Koch Digitaldisc" or "Koch Digitaldisc GmbH" in the matrix information, then crediting Koch seems ideal.

Yes, but also as on the release you can have:
Made By KOCH Digitaldisc on the artwork
&
Made by KOCH in the matrix

so as on the release you have to credit both.

When there are 2 discs in set with same xxx.xxx pressing number but one disc has got '.A' and second '.B' - as for example Acylum - The Enemy - we add both cat. numbers in LCCN section as
- 681.398.A
- 681.398.B

or only one main pressing cat. 681.398?

Cl0ver
WolfXCIXMyriad
1.1) there are probably many releases on the Koch Digitaldisc and Koch Digitaldisc GmbH pages that would be better moved to Koch according to "as on label" rules and current profile instructions. I'm also unsure whether Koch is being credited as label/company and whether that is problematic, since the current profile suggests that that profile exists only for KOCH's pressing plant.

If it doesn't say either "Koch Digitaldisc" or "Koch Digitaldisc GmbH" in the matrix information, then crediting Koch seems ideal.

Yes, but also as on the release you can have:
Made By KOCH Digitaldisc on the artwork
&
Made by KOCH in the matrix

so as on the release you have to credit both.

That makes sense.

Cl0ver
Yes, but also as on the release you can have:
Made By KOCH Digitaldisc on the artwork
&
Made by KOCH in the matrix

+1

Miki242
When there are 2 discs in set

That's a good question. The way that 2-disc releases were catalogued differs between the two matrix schemes:

1) for the older scheme (NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N), the final N was replaced by A or B:

NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.A
NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.B

So in leaving .A/.B from the LCCN cat#, we are leaving the matrix number with one less digit

2) The NNN.NNN number simply had .A and .B suffixed on, so it is easier to enter without the suffix.

My thinking is that entering NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N in LCCN without the .A/.B would be too complicated and cause messiness on the label pages because of different digits lengths. For the NNN.NNN I could probably be persuaded either way

Next question:

Clan Of Xymox - Subsequent Pleasures (and others) - full set of digits and dots should be presented as cat. number, not only first six digits?

I've noticed that some releases with these long set of digits were already updated with adding them as pressing cat.: Various - Off Road Tracks Vol. 33 and others.

Miki242
Next question:

Clan Of Xymox - Live, Clan Of Xymox - Subsequent Pleasures (and others) - full set of digits and dots should be presented as cat. number, not only first six digits?

That's exactly the question I have asked in my first post and which I am asking s to discuss in this thread. You're asking the same question I already have

Myriad
Miki242Next question:

Clan Of Xymox - Live, Clan Of Xymox - Subsequent Pleasures (and others) - full set of digits and dots should be presented as cat. number, not only first six digits?
That's exactly the question I have asked in my first post and which I am asking s to discuss in this thread. You're asking the same question I already have

Ok, I understand.
So, as kdg profile has been updated with:
"Early releases have a longer-form number NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N, which should be entered in its entirety as kdg's catalogue#."

I understand that it's correct to add full set NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N

Myriad
I think what you're asking is why not also credit GM and Pressed By when the name is in the matrix? The answer to that is that we generally follow the 'as on release' rule and prefer to mirror whatever role the company chooses to give itself on the release. Obviously it wouldnt be wrong to add GM and Pressed By in addition to Mfd By but from my perspective I guess it just feels less necessary once kdg is credited already

it appears Koch outsourced some of their earlier glass mastering to CDM or Dipress between 1986 and 1989.

Myriad
Just to be clear.

So before I make any changes i.e. on Acoustic Mania - Talking Hands to change, Manufactured By – Kdg – 820.418 to Manufactured By – Kdg –820.418.000.020.0
Are we going with this or is this still under discussion?

Cl0ver
Are we going with this or is this still under discussion?

I'd like there to be more discussion but there hasn't been much input so far... but I suppose in the absence of any opposition I will eventually go ahead with it

Myriad
I'd like there to be more discussion but there hasn't been much input so far..

Thanks. I've not too many with the longer codes so will sit on the fence fot now but am happy for you to proceed with the change.

handmedownurluv
Myriad: what to do when there are two numbers? It Was Easy

That phenomenon seems to be limited to releases brokered through Flight 13 and honestly I have no idea what to do. It's possible that one of the numbers is assocated with FLight 13 instead of kdg. I can't imagine why the plant would have assigned 2 different cat#s to the same release. Needs further investigation for sure

Taking Title Tracks - It Was Easy as an example.

- 619.xxx numbers on the kdg profile sort to 2004-06
- 701.xxx sorts to 2010-12

So my immediate thinking is that 701.136 is kdg's sequential number for that release.

Vinyl manufactured by Flight 13 has a matrix number in the form 2xx.xxx (examples below), so its possible that 6xx.xxx was their CD equivalent of that number, and that it's just bad luck for us that the kdg and FLight 13 numbers are so similar as to cause this confusion

Finisterre (2) - Finisterre

Myriad
So my immediate thinking is that 701.136 is kdg's sequential number for that release.

I found a couple of examples of Flight 13-manufactured CDs that were not handled by Kdg that only use the 6xx.xxx-style numbers:

For Daily Use

One can never be 100% sure, but it would be reasonable to think as you do that in these cases the 7xx.xxx numbers go to Kdg while the 6xx.xxx numbers to Flight 13. Or is the numbering still too close?

handmedownurluv
I found a couple of examples of Flight 13-manufactured CDs that were not handled by Kdg that only use the 6xx.xxx-style numbers:

Great finds! I think they confirm the assumption that:

handmedownurluv
7xx.xxx numbers go to Kdg while the 6xx.xxx numbers to Flight 13

So we can add that info to the kdg and Flight 13 profiles

Myriad
Do we know if the start date of 1998 is accurate for Kdg as still a few pre this date releases on the profile.

Cl0ver
Do we know if the start date of 1998 is accurate for Kdg as still a few pre this date releases on the profile.

The source for start date for 1998 is given in the Kdg profile history page. It's this document: https://web.archive.org/web/20050505054513/http://www.gemeinsamlernen.at/siteVerwaltung/mBeitrage/Arbeitsmappe/Geschichte%20und%20Berufsbilder.pdf

In fact, my suspicion is that the KOCH branding remained in the disc matrix until probably 1999, based on releases I've seen in the database.

Myriad
1) I think the NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N matrix number should be okay'ed for entry as LCCN catalogue# for KOCH.

Myriad
2) There are many 1998-99 kdg submissions that show a NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N style matrix, but only the first NNN.NNN is entered in LCCN. I think the entire NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N string should be entered in LCCN, not just the first NNN.NNN. Sneakily, I made an update of the kdg profile last night and already added that advice - but retroactively I seek approval.

UPDATE

I have to change my position; only the first NNN.NNN should be entered for KOCH/kdg I think. It appears that the first NNN.NNN is the pressing plant's internal matrix number, which continued under Kdg as the 8nn.nnn, 6nn.nnn, 7nn.nnn, and now 1nn.nnn schemes. The following digits, however, are adapted from the release catalogue#. Some examples:

1997: Dan Wall - Off The Wall
Cat#: ENJ-9310 2
Matrix / Runout: [Mastered by Koch logo] 814.479.009.310.2

1997: Hugo (29) - Hugo
Cat#: 199622
Matrix / Runout: 815.605.199.622.0 #1 [mastered by KOCH logo]

2000: Martyr (10) - Murder X : The End Of The Game
Cat#: IR-C-147
Matrix / Runout: 835.002.000.147.0 #1

2001: Goca Tržan - Želim Da Se Promenim
Cat#: CD 000 127
Matrix / Runout: 848.768.000.127.0 #2

antmassam55

Myriad
I have to change my position; only the first NNN.NNN should be entered for KOCH/kdg I think. It appears that the first NNN.NNN is the pressing plant's internal matrix number, which continued under Kdg as the 8nn.nnn, 6nn.nnn, 7nn.nnn, and now 1nn.nnn schemes. The following digits, however, are adapted from the release catalogue#.

Oh, good catch. The examples you provided appear prove your claim. I pulled another random one and it has the same formatting:

1999: Melissa Walker - Moment Of Truth
Cat#: ENJ-9365 2
Matrix / Runout: 828.302-009.365.2 #1

+1 for using just the first "NNN.NNN".

agreeing with WolfXCIX from the releases i have sampled as well
+1 for using just the first NNN.NNN

Myriad
only the first NNN.NNN should be entered for KOCH/kdg

+1

Agressiva 69 - 2·47
Cat #: 33977-2
Matrix: 000.000.339.772.0 > 000.000 as pressing cat number?

Agressiva 69 - 2·47
Cat #: 33950-2
Matrix: 000.000.339.502.0 > 000.000 as pressing cat number?

Agressiva 69 - Point Of View
Cat #: 33977-6
Matrix: 000.000.339.776.0 > 000.000 as pressing cat number?

Agressiva 69 - Pure
Cat #: 33955-2 + Cat #: 33955-6
Matrix: 000.000.339.556.0
000.000.339.552.B

So, 4 different releases and each has '000.000'.

These all are for Koch releases, so I think that we can't add first NNN.NNN for Koch releases.

Myriad
only the first NNN.NNN should be entered for KOCH/kdg

+1

Do you think the internal job\matrix number needs to be applied to both Pressed By\Glass Mastered At when both present.

Myriad
ressing plant's internal matrix number, which continued under Kdg as the 8nn.nnn, 6nn.nnn, 7nn.nnn, and now 1nn.nnn schemes

I may have missed it, but are there any time lines for when the respective first N number (8, 6, 7 & 1) number was used?

Miki242
So, 4 different releases and each has '000.000'.

These all are for Koch releases, so I think that we can't add first NNN.NNN for Koch releases.

I've only sampled a few but it seems when Made By Koch is in the matrix the matix number starts with '000.000'.
When Mastered ny [Koch logo] is in the matrix the '000.000' numbers appear at the end, Antonio Forcione & Sabina Sciubba - Meet Me In London

Miki242
So, 4 different releases and each has '000.000'.

These all are for Koch releases, so I think that we can't add first NNN.NNN for Koch releases.

Good point. Those are all released on Koch-related labels. In these cases, the Koch pressing plant did not create its own cat# but simply placed the release cat# into the NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N format. So it would probably make sense not to enter anything in cat# field for Koch's manufacturing roles for such releases.

Cl0ver
Do you think the internal job\matrix number needs to be applied to both Pressed By\Glass Mastered At when both present.

I like to do that due to the current "display issue" of the release cat# showing up on the manufacturer's label page if the matrix number is not entered in the Pressed By field. It makes sense that the matrix number assigned by Koch or kdg (or any other disc manufacturer) is equally valid for Pressed By as it is for Glass Mastered when the same manufacturer performed both roles.

Cl0ver
I may have missed it, but are there any time lines for when the respective first N number (8, 6, 7 & 1) number was used?

Very broadly:

8nn.nnn - mid-1990s to early/mid-2000s
6nn.nnn - mid-200s to ~2010
7nn.nnn - ~2010 to ~2020
1nn.nnn - ~2020 to present

you can look at the kdg profile to get a more accurate timeline if you're interested

Edited to correct typos

Myriad
Miki242
So, 4 different releases and each has '000.000'.

These all are for Koch releases, so I think that we can't add first NNN.NNN for Koch releases.

Good point. Those are all released on Koch-related labels. In these cases, the Koch pressing plant did not create its own cat# but simply placed the release cat# into the NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N format. So it would probably make sense not to enter anything in cat# field for Koch's manufacturing roles for such releases.

Yes looking again the Made By ones start 000.000 then the extract of the label cat number
However the [mastered by KOCH logo] ones appear to follow the same NNN.NNN scheme?
Antonio Forcione & Sabina Sciubba - Meet Me In London

Cl0ver
However the [mastered by KOCH logo] ones appear to follow the same NNN.NNN scheme?

yeah, so whenever the NNN.NNN manufacturing plant cat# was introduced was perhaps around the same time that the 'made by koch' was replaced by 'mastered by koch' in the matrix

Myriad

I'm seeing some IFPI L17* & IFPI 30** located here Giraldo Piloto Klimax & Friends* - Giraldo Piloto Klimax & Friends.
Would they be a broker? The profile does not suggest that.

Cl0ver
'm seeing some IFPI L17* & IFPI 30** located here Pit & Land example Giraldo Piloto Klimax & Friends* - Giraldo Piloto Klimax & Friends.
Would they be a broker? The profile does not suggest that.

If it's not Koch or kdg with those SID codes it must be a broker

Sorry, have been insane busy lately and not a lot of time to read in the forums.
But based on what I read above, and the good research undertaken by Myriad and others I would agree with the proposal to use only the first set of NNN.NNN.

Any idea about who owned/operated the Austria plant after 2007 (due to Lynic going into istration)?
I have a 2016 release with the mastering SID IFPI L173 and an IFPI 30** Mould SID. Austrian orchestra and an Austrian broker... or is it possible CSM Production GmbH acquired and is/was operating the plant in 2016?

Myriad
1) I think the NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN.N matrix number should be okay'ed for entry as LCCN catalogue# for KOCH.

+1. But I understand the reasoning for using just the first 6 digits, so I'm not opposed to it, either.

WolfXCIX
If it doesn't say either "Koch Digitaldisc" or "Koch Digitaldisc GmbH" in the matrix information, then crediting Koch seems ideal.

+1
Part of me is just bugged by this, though. Like, still credit the company that appears on the release, but the manufacturing number should just go to a single profile. e.g.
De Danann - The Best Of De Danann
CD label: Made in Austria by Koch-Digitaldisc
Matrix / Runout: MADE BY KOCH A30.965.079.047.8 @ 3

So LCCN credits for this release would be:
Made By – Koch Digitaldisc GmbH (per credit on CD label)
Glass Mastered By – Koch – A30.965 (per matrix - and if I understand the rest of this thread)

A few releases crediting Koch Digitaldisc GmbH actually have "MADE BY KOCH" in the matrix, so they will need to be moved. Makes it hard to provide several examples of what I mean when I can't find more than one release suitable for using as an example....

star_man_20
So LCCN credits for this release would be:
Made By – Koch Digitaldisc GmbH (per credit on CD label)
Glass Mastered By – Koch – A30.965 (per matrix - and if I understand the rest of this thread)

+1 I like this idea.

star_man_20
Any idea about who owned/operated the Austria plant after 2007 (due to Lynic going into istration)?

That would be Kdg. Lynic only ever acquired kdg's UK pressing plant; kdg HQ in Austria remained independent and continues until today.

star_man_20
So LCCN credits for this release would be:
Made By – Koch Digitaldisc GmbH (per credit on CD label)
Glass Mastered By – Koch – A30.965 (per matrix - and if I understand the rest of this thread)

I think I like this idea too. That way the "Koch" label profile kinda represents the pressing plant while the Koch Digitaldisc and Koch Digitaldisc GmbH profiles more represent the company(ies) that istered the plant. And it would be nicest to keep the matrix numbers all on one profile.

I've sorted the issue by year of issue:
Agressiva 69 - 2·47 Released: Mar 17, 1997
Matrix / Runout: 000.000.339.772.0 #1 Made by KOCH
Mastering SID Code: ifpi L172
Mould SID Code (Variant 1): IFPI 3050
Mould SID Code (Variant 2): IFPI 3022

Jesus Chrysler Suicide - Remixed By 2:47 Released: 1998
Matrix / Runout: manufactured by kdg [2x] 339.982 #1
Mastering SID Code: ifpi L171
Mould SID Code: IFPI 3001

At first glance, it suits me.

Koch
"When the matrix number is in the form 000.000.NNN.NNN.N, no part of it should be entered as the catalogue number for KOCH."

+1

"Preferred LCCN role(s):
· Glass Mastered At - when the 'mastered by KOCH' logo is present in the matrix
· Made By - when the text 'MADE BY KOCH' is present in the matrix"

+1

Myriad

Just "one" ;) question. What in this case Agressiva 69 - 2·47? Because I would like to avoid understatement or overinterpretation.

Matrix / Runout: 000.000.339.772.0 #1 Made by KOCH
Mastering SID Code: ifpi L172
Mould SID Code (Variant 1): IFPI 3050
Mould SID Code (Variant 2): IFPI 3022

1997?

LCCN
Made By - Koch
Glass Mastered At - Kdg
Pressed By - Kdg

"Otherwise:
· Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17*
· Pressed By - KOCH named in the matrix with no specific role given (with or without mould SID code), or with mould SID code 30**"

Are we only adding the Made By role for now?

Agressiva 69 - 2·47
Matrix / Runout: 000.000.339.502.0 #1 Made by [KOCH logo]
Mastering SID Code: ifpi L172
Mould SID Code: ifpi 3001
1998?
LCCN
Glass Mastered At - Koch
Pressed By - Koch

Jesus Chrysler Suicide - Remixed By 2:47
Matrix / Runout: manufactured by kdg [2x] 339.982 #1
Mastering SID Code: ifpi L171
Mould SID Code: IFPI 3001
1998?
LCCN
Glass Mastered At - Kdg - I understand it will be OK without this KOCH catalog number?
Pressed By - Kdg - As above without KOCH catalog number?

I have got also a question to the Kdg profile:
"Preferred LCCN role(s):
· Manufactured By - when the 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix

Otherwise:
· Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17* or LP57
· Pressed By - with any (or no) mastering SID code and mould SID code IFPI 30**
· Glass Mastered At and Pressed By - with mastering SID code IFPI L17*/LP57 and mould SID code 30**"

Why do we only credit "manufactured by kdg" although the SID codes might match glass mastering and pressed by, too. For example here: [+] Z.e.t.a. X - Feoh

"manufactured by" should for sure be the main credit role with the ID because it appears as such.
But aren't the identified roles correct, too? These information enriches the database because they individually express something different and the different roles of kdg - these roles should not be "merged" in a more generic container like "Manufactured By".

Or is there something I haven't seen?

pinging Myriad

Hi all,
for this release it is correct add Kdg as "Pressed by" in LCCN ? Malombra - T.R.E.S.
These are the identifiers :
Matrix / Runout: 119.964 155 13/03/2023 #1
Mastering SID Code: none
Mould SID Code: IFPI 3J06

Thanks!

neurosis76
Hi all,
for this release it is correct add Kdg as "Pressed by" in LCCN ? Malombra - T.R.E.S.
These are the identifiers :
Matrix / Runout: 119.964 155 13/03/2023 #1
Mastering SID Code: none
Mould SID Code: IFPI 3J06

Yes, I believe so. I've added some information about the IFPI 3J** in the 2020s to the profiles of both P+O Pallas

Myriad
neurosis76Hi all,
for this release it is correct add Kdg as "Pressed by" in LCCN ? Malombra - T.R.E.S.
These are the identifiers :
Matrix / Runout: 119.964 155 13/03/2023 #1
Mastering SID Code: none
Mould SID Code: IFPI 3J06
Yes, I believe so. I've added some information about the IFPI 3J** in the 2020s to the profiles of both Kdg and P+O Pallas

Thanks Myriad.
My doubt is about the matrix format with date that seems it is not used from both kdg and P+O Pallas

neurosis76
My doubt is about the matrix format with date that seems it is not used from both kdg and P+O Pallas

Possibly related to a broker company that ordered the CD manufacturing through kdg

Just a note regarding the profile text of Koch:

The first 6 digits, NNN.NNN, appear to be a sequential numbering scheme assigned by KOCH, which can be entered as the catalogue number for KOCH

"appear to be" is problematic imo. The numbers must be sequential as per guideline. If there is consensus to add the numbers (as per guideline) there should not be doubt noted in the profile. Though there are good notes and link to forum, such wording sets a precedent for adding data or similar instructions based on guesswork on other profiles.

The Kdg profile page indicates:

"NNN.NNN (suffixed NNN.NNN.L on multi-disc releases) can be entered as the catalogue# for kdg."

I'm working on a 2-CD submission and the only difference between CD1 & CD2's matrix runout is a different "L". It's not clear to me from the profile explanation whether I should be entering:

Glass Mastered At: Kdg - 717.364.A
Glass Mastered At: Kdg - 717.364.B

. . . or:

Glass Mastered At: Kdg - 717.364

It seems counter-intuitive to me to not include the ".A/B" because they're unique CDs with different glass masters, but I'm kind of reading the profile description as suggesting it should be the second way (i.e., w/o the ".A/B").

Can someone provide some guidance? Thanks!

Mylene-Clouseau
Glass Mastered At: Kdg - 717.364

I would prefer to use just this in LCCN. It's the same as how we handle Optimal Media Production and some other manufacturers (although in other cases the disc-specific suffix does end up in LCCN).

Myriad
I would prefer to use just this in LCCN. It's the same as how we handle Optimal Media Production and some other manufacturers (although in other cases the disc-specific suffix does end up in LCCN).

Ok - thanks Myriad! That's how I'll do it then!

Mylene-Clouseau
Glass Mastered At: Kdg - 717.364.A
Glass Mastered At: Kdg - 717.364.B

If these two were on the same disc, I's say skip the the suffix. But I wouldn't say that for 2 different discs. Generally, It wouldn't be a unique matrix if it appeared the same on 2 different discs.

Hello, I just edited my first www.flight13-duplication.com / Kdg sub.
Would Myriad, or some one, please check to make sure I parsed the profiles properly. Thanks.

toefootie
Hello, I just edited my first www.flight13-duplication.com / Kdg sub.
Would Myriad, or some one, please check to make sure I parsed the profiles properly. Thanks.

If you're talking about Austin Lucas - Collection then yes, looks good :)

Thanks for checking my edit Myriad, yes that's it. Sorry I forgot to provide the link.

Myriad:

in such cases 32Crash - Y2112Y should all 3 roles in LCCN be included?
Manufactured By - when the 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix
Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17* or LP57
Pressed By - with any (or no) mastering SID code and mould SID code IFPI 30**

Miki242
in such cases 32Crash - Y2112Y should all 3 roles in LCCN be included?
Manufactured By - when the 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix
Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17* or LP57
Pressed By - with any (or no) mastering SID code and mould SID code IFPI 30**

strictly yes, you can add all 3

Myriad
in such cases 32Crash - Y2112Y should all 3 roles in LCCN be included?
Manufactured By - when the 'manufactured by kdg logo' is present in the matrix
Glass Mastered At - with mastering SID code IFPI L17* or LP57
Pressed By - with any (or no) mastering SID code and mould SID code IFPI 30**

strictly yes, you can add all 3

... and add the NNN.NNN to all three LCCN entries?

Cl0ver
... and add the NNN.NNN to all three LCCN entries?

Wouldn't it be redundant?

If the first LCCN entry of kdg has the NNN.NNN ID, it will appear on the kdg profile. It is the ID of the company and not the id of the individual role here (in comparison to a Matrix where there is a glass mastering ID of company A and an ID of a broker company B).

On the kdg profile we cannot see the individual roles together with this ID, so there is also no benefit of adding 3 times the ID in my opinion. For the database it is only important that kdg is associated with the NNN.NNN ID.

Or did I miss something?

Miki242
in such cases 32Crash - Y2112Y should all 3 roles in LCCN be included?

What's that 42964 / 42965 number about ?

Myriad
NNN.NNN number is based on the release cat#. This makes sense to be as the same internal cat# was assigned by the KOCH structure and used by its record labels and manufacturing plant.

To be honest, 707.474 on 32Crash - Y2112Y looks more like a release catalog number than some kind of job number.
Especially because indeed this was the format Koch used for release catalog numbers too (see Koch Records) and the number is the same for both discs. Maybe it was an internal catalog number for records they distributed ?

jweijde
Maybe it was an internal catalog number for records they distributed ?

Is there evidence that kdg did distribute that release?

autumnyears
Wouldn't it be redundant?

If the first LCCN entry of kdg has the NNN.NNN ID, it will appear on the kdg profile. It is the ID of the company and not the id of the individual role here (in comparison to a Matrix where there is a glass mastering ID of company A and an ID of a broker company B).

On the kdg profile we cannot see the individual roles together with this ID, so there is also no benefit of adding 3 times the ID in my opinion. For the database it is only important that kdg is associated with the NNN.NNN ID.

Or did I miss something?

Just a question asked as has been brought up on other profile threads.

jweijde


What's that 42964 / 42965 number about ?

Alfa Matrix releases from same period:
Acylum - Karzinom - 42986 / 42987

jweijde
Maybe it was an internal catalog number for records they distributed ?

Myriad
Is there evidence that kdg did distribute that release?

I'd say it's worthy do do a little more research on that, or on these numbers in general.
I also wonder why the six digit numbers should take precedence over the five digit ones. I know the six digit ones are in the common Koch format but why are the five digit ones present then also ?

Another thing: there are two numbers on Austin Lucas - Collection and it's unclear why they are entered in the way they are.

jweijde
I'd say it's worthy do do a little more research on that, or on these numbers in general

Go ahead.

jweijde
I also wonder why the six digit numbers should take precedence over the five digit ones. I know the six digit ones are in the common Koch format but why are the five digit ones present then also ?

Those 5 digit matrix numbers are not found in any kdg matrix outside these few examples from Alfa Matrix. Far less than 1% of kdg discs have a 5-digit number.

jweijde
Another thing: there are two numbers on Austin Lucas - Collection and it's unclear why they are entered in the way they are.

Flight 13 Duplication had its own numbering scheme 61xxxx (later 62xxxx) which pre-existed their work with kdg:
Rip Torn (4) - For Daily Use
For some reason, the dot got added (making them 61x.xxx or 62x.xxx) on discs manufactured through kdg.
That was actually discussed further up in this same thread: https://www.discogs.sie.com/forum/thread/1008791?message_id=10387116#10348548

Myriad
Flight 13 Duplication had its own numbering scheme 61xxxx (later 62xxxx) which pre-existed their work with kdg:

Or maybe these were actually done by Koch - kdg's predecessor ?

jweijde
Or maybe these were actually done by Koch - kdg's predecessor ?

Myriad
Heimatglück - 2 Stück In Einer Packung
Rip Torn (4) - For Daily Use

These are not done by Koch. Did you actually look at the releases? I appreciate that you're getting involved in discussion here but I feel that if you read this thread and the current profiles of Kdg a lot of the questions that you're asking might be answered for you.

Myriad
These are not done by Koch.

How so ? Sure, the matrix has the Flight 13 URL but did that company indeed have their own plant ? I checked their old website and it's not clear. They could have been just a broker. That's also suggested here: https://www.discogs.sie.com/forum/thread/782730#7765644
For what it's worth, the mastering SID could relate to ODS in (via written credits on some releases)

Myriad
Did you actually look at the releases?

Yes I did and they don't tell me much.

jweijde
How so ? Sure, the matrix has the Flight 13 URL but did that company indeed have their own plant ? I checked their old website and it's not clear. They could have been just a broker. That's also suggested here: https://www.discogs.sie.com/forum/thread/782730#7765644

Yes, Flight 13 seems to have been a broker.

jweijde
For what it's worth, the mastering SID could relate to ODS in (via written credits on some releases)

Agreed.

And so why would Koch have anything to do with those releases? Also bearing in mind that Koch the manufacturer became kdg in 1998.

Myriad
And so why would Koch have anything to do with those releases? Also bearing in mind that Koch the manufacturer became kdg in 1998.

Alright, they're from the 2000s so they couldn't have been made by Koch obviously.

The main thing is that these items have a six digit 6 digit number in the matrix that is very similar to what Koch/KDG is using.
There are even Flight 13 products with two of these numbers:
I Might Be Wrong - Cold Comfort

Why is 617 Flight 13 and 654 KDG ? Sure, they might fit in nicely with the patterns on the respective pages but you get that when people just enter them.
Here's a 617 release credited to KDG without any sign of a broker: Camilla Ringquist - For Venus
Another with 617 does mention a broker in a similar fashion as Flight 13: Cephalic Carnage - Conforming To Abnormality

Even though the matrix and number look slightly different on Rip Torn (4) - For Daily Use I think it's too much of a coincidence to say that they must be Flight 13 numbers. Afterall, there is evidence that Flight 13 did use KDGs services. So why not for these two? 617xxx is used by KDG too.

neurosis76
for this release it is correct add Kdg as "Pressed by" in LCCN ? Malombra - T.R.E.S.
These are the identifiers :
Matrix / Runout: 119.964 155 13/03/2023 #1
Mastering SID Code: none
Mould SID Code: IFPI 3J06

Myriad
Yes, I believe so. I've added some information about the IFPI 3J** in the 2020s to the profiles of both Kdg and P+O Pallas

Not sure Pressed By is correct here. I'm seeing a variety of matrix formats for IFPI 3J. Ofcourse it could be Koch used other glass mastering companies, but why would they if they could do it themselves ?

jweijde
Why is 617 Flight 13 and 654 KDG ? Sure, they might fit in nicely with the patterns on the respective pages but you get that when people just enter them.
Here's a 617 release credited to KDG without any sign of a broker: Camilla Ringquist - For Venus
Another with 617 does mention a broker in a similar fashion as Flight 13: Cephalic Carnage - Conforming To Abnormality

You'll see there that the kdg 617.XXX numbers date to ~2005 based on Cephalic Carnage - Conforming To Abnormality, while Flight 13 was still using the 617XXX sequence in 2007 by which time kdg's own numbering had progress up to 65X.XXX.

jweijde
Afterall, there is evidence that Flight 13 did use KDGs services. So why not for these two? 617xxx is used by KDG too.

There is no instance where kdg ever used two distinct matrix numbers except where Flight 13 was involved. That suggests that one of the numbers belonged to Flight 13. We know that Flight 13 was using a 61XXXX matrix numbering scheme before they began manufacturing through kdg, It's clear that this scheme was therefore continued under kdg but with the period added (XXX.XXX).

jweijde
Not sure Pressed By is correct here. I'm seeing a variety of matrix formats for IFPI 3J. Ofcourse it could be Koch used other glass mastering companies, but why would they if they could do it themselves ?

From what I can see in the database IFPI 3J** seems to exist in Europe (P&O -> kdg) and also in Canada. Probably the unknown Canadian manufacturer acquired some disc presses from P&O at the same time that kdg did, hence the co-occurance of the 3J** SIDs in these two locations. I assume that's what you mean by the variety of matrix formats?

jweijde
Ofcourse it could be Koch used other glass mastering companies, but why would they if they could do it themselves ?

More likely the submitter either didn't identify the mastering SID code or it was 'cut off' during replication the same way that sometimes you'll see the top half of some matrix text lost. The presence of 'XXX.XXX' matrix number is suggestive of kdg, and the '#1' part is a constant in kdg matrixes since the 1990s. AFAIK kdg has always used its own glass masters since the 90s

Myriad
You'll see there that the kdg 617.XXX numbers date to ~2005 based on Camilla Ringquist - For Venus and Cephalic Carnage - Conforming To Abnormality, while Flight 13 was still using the 617XXX sequence in 2007 by which time kdg's own numbering had progress up to 65X.XXX.

I'm seeing that too but it doesn't convince me. It's just too much of a coincidence that they're using a very similar format. Especially since we believe they're just a broker. I'm not saying brokers can't have their own numbers, just that there's a possibility the releases have these numbers because Flight 13 brokered for KDG.

617xxx appears on Flight 13 from 2005:
https://www.discogs.sie.com/search/?sort=year%2Casc&type=release&matrix=617&matrix=flight
The ones from 2007 and later have two numbers: 617xxx and 64/65xxxx.

KDG has been using these numbers since 2005 too:
https://www.discogs.sie.com/search/?sort=year%2Casc&type=release&label=kdg&matrix=617&page=1

Myriad
There is no instance where kdg ever used two distinct matrix numbers except where Flight 13 was involved. That suggests that one of the numbers belonged to Flight 13. We know that Flight 13 was using a 61XXXX matrix numbering scheme before they began manufacturing through kdg, It's clear that this scheme was therefore continued under kdg but with the period added (XXX.XXX).

I haven't seen other cases with two numbers too yet. There are cases of 617xxx with a different broker than Flight 13 and even cases of 617xxx without any broker though.
Jan Hendrik Rübel, Landespolizeiorchester Brandenburg, Peter Vierneisel - Sinfonische Bläsermusik => without any broker

Why would 617xxx be used for these if it belonged to Flight 13 ?

jweijde
Why would 617xxx be used for these if it belonged to Flight 13 ?

Both companies used a 617xxx matrix number during their existence - kdg in ~2005 and Flight 13 in ~2007.

Myriad
Both companies used a 617xxx matrix number during their existence - kdg in ~2005 and Flight 13 in ~2007.

All we can really say for sure is that 617xxx numbers appear in the matrix of both KDG and Flight 13 products during the period 2005-2007.
How can it be that two seemingly unrelated companies use the same numbering scheme that even appears to be in sequence during the same period ? To me that shows that these numbers belong to one and the same company. Most likely that's KDG because they've been using these numbers on releases that are completely unrelated to Flight 13 too. Even more so because we know Flight 13 did use KDGs services at one point.

jweijde
Most likely that's KDG because they've been using these numbers on releases that are completely unrelated to Flight 13 too.

Examples I provided above show that Flight 13 was also using these numbers on releases completely unrelated to kdg.

Flight 13 also used a XXX.XXX numbering scheme on vinyl releases they brokered, this time not through kdg
211.462: Roy & The Devil's Motorcycle* - Good Morning Blues
211.561: Astrokraut - Der Fuchs Geht Um

Myriad
Examples I provided above show that Flight 13 was also using these numbers on releases completely unrelated to kdg.

Which examples exactly ? There have been quite a few links posted in this thread by now so I'm kinda lost.

Myriad
Flight 13 also used a XXX.XXX numbering scheme on vinyl releases they brokered, this time not through kdg

KDG also does vinyl so maybe that's still KDGs number?

jweijde
Which examples exactly ? There have been quite a few links posted in this thread by now so I'm kinda lost.

Rip Torn (4) - For Daily Use

jweijde
KDG also does vinyl so maybe that's still KDGs number?

The two releases I just linked list MPO in LCCN, so I doubt that kdg had any role there.

Myriad
The two releases I just linked list MPO in LCCN, so I doubt that kdg had any role there.

Yeah, that makes me wonder what MPO's exact role might have been. It doesn't directly dismiss the possibility of KDG involvement though. The A and B at the end of the xxx.xxx number is also seen on multi-disc CD releases for example, like on Johnny Winter - Blues Rock Legends Vol.3.

Heimatglück - 2 Stück In Einer Packung

I see where you're coming from, however there are no Mould SID codes provided and still the number format is very similar to KDG's. To say that there was no KDG involvement here feels like cutting corners a bit.
We believe Flight 13 is a broker and we know they have worked with KDG on other occasions so it's not really a crazy idea to think KDG was involved with these two aswell.
Another option that crossed my mind is: maybe these are counterfeits ? Could explain why the matrix looks the way it does and why there's no mould SID. That said, I haven't extensively compared with images of other KDG / Flight 13 matrices.

jweijde
Yeah, that makes me wonder what MPO's exact role might have been. It doesn't directly dismiss the possibility of KDG involvement though.

jweijde
I see where you're coming from, however there are no Mould SID codes provided and still the number format is very similar to KDG's. To say that there was no KDG involvement here feels like cutting corners a bit.

I feel like you're trying to hard to find a connection to kdg on releases where there is minimal or no evidence that kdg had any involvement based simply on a XXXXXX matrix number format.

Once you can prove that kdg had any involvement in those vinyl releases or the CDs with LT22 then maybe you can go from there, but right now I've outlined the fact that Flight 13 was using a 61xxxx matrix number BEFORE it began contracting through kdg, that the number began being displayed as 61x.xxx when Flight 13 began contracting through kdg, and that kdg has used a XXX.XXX matrix number format since the 1990s which due to the nature of numbers happens to overlap with the numbers used by Flight 13, although at a ~2 year time difference, as well as that vinyl manufactured for Flight 13 by MPO (not kdg) also carries a XXX.XXX matrix number suggetive that Flight 13 continued its matrix number scheme with the period and additional .A/.B side identifiers even when kdg was no longer involved.

jweijde
Another option that crossed my mind is: maybe these are counterfeits ?

Nothing is impossible but I see no reason to believe that.

Myriad
I feel like you're trying to hard to find a connection to kdg on releases where there is minimal or no evidence that kdg had any involvement based simply on a XXXXXX matrix number format.

There's also minimal evidence that those numbers belong to Flight 13. You seem to be assuming that because it appears in a matrix with only Flight 13 and is missing the dot KDG can't have been involved whatsoever.

Myriad
Flight 13 was using a 61xxxx matrix number BEFORE it began contracting through kdg

- We know Flight 13 is likely a broker
- We know they used KDG
- The numbers on these releases look very similar to KDGs numbers
- KDG and Flight 13 used these numbers at the same time
- These numbers - the 617 ones - also appear on KDG products done for other brokers

See ? It's just not as clear cut as you make it look.

Well, I disagree and I won't continue to restate the same things. I've updated label profiles for Koch and kdg pretty extensively and tbh I would consider myself an amateur expert on "kdg matrixes". If you have any other questions about Koch or kdg, I'm happy to address them here

So you're not prepared to properly backup your claims ? Just saying "I'm the expert" isn't convincing in these parts, you know.

jweijde
So you're not prepared to properly backup your claims ? Just saying "I'm the expert" isn't convincing in these parts, you know.

I've backed up my "claims" as best I as I can already. Let's let any other s who can be bothered to read our arguments chip in and give us their thoughts on the matter.