Replication/Duplication

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hi All:

What's the difference between replication and duplication (of CDs)?

TIA
Irwin

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>What's the difference between replication and duplication (of CDs)?

Replication - mass producing of a CD, using special VERY expensive equipment,
and a glass master disk. Requires major setup work. Usually used for runs of
at least 500-1000 and up.

Duplication - the type of producing you can do on your own home computer.
Typically uses CD-R disks. Different printing is available, from labels to
inkjet on disk to thermal on disk, etc. Lots of different duplicator machines
available at different price points which can automate producing a run of
disks. Typically used for runs less than 500 units.

-lee-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <20040814203351.19209.00003450@mb-m04.aol.com> isschwartz@aol.com writes:

> What's the difference between replication and duplication (of CDs)?

I'm sure that a certain degree of snobbishness and marketing are
involved, but the term "replicate" implies an exact replica, a clone,
which is what, ideally, we want a CD copy to be.

"Duplicate" is a more general term, meaning making a bunch of copies
as accurately as you're willing to pay for.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:
>
>In article <20040814203351.19209.00003450@mb-m04.aol.com> isschwartz@aol.com
>writes:
>
>> What's the difference between replication and duplication (of CDs)?
>
>I'm sure that a certain degree of snobbishness and marketing are
>involved, but the term "replicate" implies an exact replica, a clone,
>which is what, ideally, we want a CD copy to be.
>
>"Duplicate" is a more general term, meaning making a bunch of copies
>as accurately as you're willing to pay for.

Gotta disagree with you on this one, Mike! I think the industry has been
pretty darn consistent that replication involves pressing and a glass master,
and duplication is CD-Rs.

-lee-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <20040815094549.19313.00003696@mb-m04.aol.com> leoaw3@aol.comnospam writes:

> Gotta disagree with you on this one, Mike! I think the industry has been
> pretty darn consistent that replication involves pressing and a glass master,
> and duplication is CD-Rs.

That's an industry definition and I guess they can define it any way
they choose as long as it's known. Apparently it's not all that well
known (to me and the original poster).

There used to be a "Replication Conference" (that was the name of the
conference or the organization sponsoring it) that I almost atteneded
one year where they talk about record pressing and tape duplication.
That sounds like an industry group if there ever was one.

I wonder if they took a vote on what you think the definition is, or
just let it evolve and let observers like you draw their own
conclusions.





--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" wrote ...
> There used to be a "Replication Conference" (that was the name of the
> conference or the organization sponsoring it) that I almost atteneded
> one year where they talk about record pressing and tape duplication.
> That sounds like an industry group if there ever was one.
>
> I wonder if they took a vote on what you think the definition is, or
> just let it evolve and let observers like you draw their own
> conclusions.

If the conference was about record pressing and tape duplication,
it sounds like the data point may be expired by now?

This seems to be the current consensus IME...
http/www.datadisc.com/site/tt01.html
(and many other URLs stating the same)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Aug 15, 2004, Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> commented:

> There used to be a "Replication Conference" (that was the name of the
> conference or the organization sponsoring it) that I almost atteneded
> one year where they talk about record pressing and tape duplication.
> That sounds like an industry group if there ever was one.
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

Still is. That would be REPLITECH, which I think happens once a year,
usually in the San Jose/San Francisco area.

It's incredible to see like 250 different kinds of disc-pressing/stamping
gear under a single roof. One day there will give you more information about
how CDs and DVDs are made than you could find out in an entire college
course.

I was also shocked to find out just how small an actual CD replication line
can be. We're talking about one that could fit in a 6' x 6' space -- just
amazing. (Clean room additional, of course.)

--MFW
[remove the extra M above for email]

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Marc Wielage <mfw@mmusictrax.com> wrote:
>It's incredible to see like 250 different kinds of disc-pressing/stamping
>gear under a single roof. One day there will give you more information about
>how CDs and DVDs are made than you could find out in an entire college
>course.

But no more bin loop machine demos or cassette loaders?

Where do I even _get_ bin loop mastering tape now that BASF is gone?

>I was also shocked to find out just how small an actual CD replication line
>can be. We're talking about one that could fit in a 6' x 6' space -- just
>amazing. (Clean room additional, of course.)

The new Nimbus glass mastering system doesn't even need a clean room! It
has a sealed case with positive pressure filtration!
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <0001HW.BD47E442002676FAF05095B0@news-server.socal.rr.com> mfw@mmusictrax.com writes:

> That would be REPLITECH, which I think happens once a year,
> usually in the San Jose/San Francisco area.

Yeah, that's it.

> It's incredible to see like 250 different kinds of disc-pressing/stamping
> gear under a single roof. One day there will give you more information about
> how CDs and DVDs are made than you could find out in an entire college
> course.

I've really wanted to go, but I just could never justify it and nobody
will pay me to cover a conference like that (or any other conference,
for that matter). I really miss the section of the AES show exhibits
where they had all the tape duplicators - stuff that clicks and whirs.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" wrote ...
> I've really wanted to go, but I just could never justify it and nobody
> will pay me to cover a conference like that (or any other conference,
> for that matter). I really miss the section of the AES show exhibits
> where they had all the tape duplicators - stuff that clicks and whirs.

Nothing in the digital world compares to...
* Big, shiny Scully or Neumann lathe,
* Ampex VR-1000 2-inch video tape recorder (w/ 3 racks of tube chassis),
* Gas-fired Merganthaler Linotype machine.
Those are the prime exhibits in my virtual museum of communiation.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <10i6nifc8g0onff@corp.supernews.com>,
Richard Crowley <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:
>"Mike Rivers" wrote ...
>> I've really wanted to go, but I just could never justify it and nobody
>> will pay me to cover a conference like that (or any other conference,
>> for that matter). I really miss the section of the AES show exhibits
>> where they had all the tape duplicators - stuff that clicks and whirs.
>
>Nothing in the digital world compares to...
>* Big, shiny Scully or Neumann lathe,
>* Ampex VR-1000 2-inch video tape recorder (w/ 3 racks of tube chassis),
>* Gas-fired Merganthaler Linotype machine.
>Those are the prime exhibits in my virtual museum of communiation.

I'd put an Otari duplicator in there too. Not as complex or intricate as
any of your choices, but absolutely fascinating to watch all those loops of
tape moving.

In the digital world, though, a Jacquard loom and a plug-programmed card
sorter definitely need space in the hall.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Aug 17, 2004, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> commented:

> But no more bin loop machine demos or cassette loaders?
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

I believe Otari still had one or two being demoed, the last time I went to a
Replitech show (which was at least a couple of years ago.



> The new Nimbus glass mastering system doesn't even need a clean room! It
> has a sealed case with positive pressure filtration!
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

Well, it sort of HAS a clean room -- just a very small "self-contained" one.
That's essentially what we saw with those self-contained DVD and CD pressing
machines. At least for CD, the cost was around a million bucks, give or
take, which was not ridiculous when you think about it.

--MFW
[remove the extra M above for email]

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Marc Wielage <mfw@mmusictrax.com> wrote:
>> The new Nimbus glass mastering system doesn't even need a clean room! It
>> has a sealed case with positive pressure filtration!
>>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
>
>Well, it sort of HAS a clean room -- just a very small "self-contained" one.
>That's essentially what we saw with those self-contained DVD and CD pressing
>machines. At least for CD, the cost was around a million bucks, give or
>take, which was not ridiculous when you think about it.

If you can do glass mastering AND replication including silk screening for
a million bucks, I figure you could probably break even around the five
million disk mark. If you can get a few big CD-ROM customers, you have it
made.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cfvo9o$mu1$1@panix2.panix.com...
> In article <10i6nifc8g0onff@corp.supernews.com>,
> Richard Crowley <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:
> >"Mike Rivers" wrote ...
> >> I've really wanted to go, but I just could never justify it and nobody
> >> will pay me to cover a conference like that (or any other conference,
> >> for that matter). I really miss the section of the AES show exhibits
> >> where they had all the tape duplicators - stuff that clicks and whirs.
> >
> >Nothing in the digital world compares to...
> >* Big, shiny Scully or Neumann lathe,
> >* Ampex VR-1000 2-inch video tape recorder (w/ 3 racks of tube chassis),
> >* Gas-fired Merganthaler Linotype machine.
> >Those are the prime exhibits in my virtual museum of communiation.
>
> I'd put an Otari duplicator in there too. Not as complex or intricate as
> any of your choices, but absolutely fascinating to watch all those loops
of
> tape moving.
>
> In the digital world, though, a Jacquard loom and a plug-programmed card
> sorter definitely need space in the hall.

And speaking of communication and "clicks and whirs"; the sight,
sounds (and even scents) of a big telephone central office implemented
in "Strowger switches" is another phenomenon lost to the digital
generation. [A "Strowger switch" is a kind of 2-dimensional relay.
Sort of a 1-pole, 100-throw switch/relay.]

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <10ihik0m18quh2d@corp.supernews.com> rcrowley7@xprt.net writes:

> And speaking of communication and "clicks and whirs"; the sight,
> sounds (and even scents) of a big telephone central office implemented
> in "Strowger switches" is another phenomenon lost to the digital
> generation.

Heck, most people under 30 don't know why we say "dial" a phone number.

I have a couple of dial telephones stil in use here and it continues to amaze me
that they still work for outgoing calls. I remember thinking that I was cheating
the phone company when I wasn't paying the extra $3/month for Touch-Tone
service since I had only dial phones, but discovered that my modem worked
on the home line in the tone mode, so I used that. Then I got a second line for
a BBS and specified (again) that it was dial-only. This line was on a different
exchange than the house line and darn if the modem only dialed in pulse mode.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1093199216k@trad...
>
> In article <10ihik0m18quh2d@corp.supernews.com> rcrowley7@xprt.net writes:
>
> > And speaking of communication and "clicks and whirs"; the sight,
> > sounds (and even scents) of a big telephone central office implemented
> > in "Strowger switches" is another phenomenon lost to the digital
> > generation.
>
> Heck, most people under 30 don't know why we say "dial" a phone number.
>
> I have a couple of dial telephones stil in use here and it continues to
amaze me
> that they still work for outgoing calls. I remember thinking that I was
cheating
> the phone company when I wasn't paying the extra $3/month for Touch-Tone
> service since I had only dial phones, but discovered that my modem worked
> on the home line in the tone mode, so I used that. Then I got a second
line for
> a BBS and specified (again) that it was dial-only. This line was on a
different
> exchange than the house line and darn if the modem only dialed in pulse
mode.

In those days Touch-Tone was extra-$$ because it paid for the
little converter boxes they had to hang one each subscriber line
to convert the DTMF to dial pulses so that the old dial-only
switches would understand what number you were calling.
Presumably all the old dial-only switches have been replaced
by now with more modern solid-state, DTMF central-office
equipment.