View Single Post
  #4  
Old 2005-08-15, 09:33 PM
joshd joshd is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Re: Confusion about generations and masters etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylz
Hey, I'm relatively new to the world of getting correct source and lineage info and I have a few questions about generations.

for example an audience MD recording
Is this correct?

MASTER = original data from MD (WAV on computer)
CDR(1) = 1st gen. Burnt directly from the master WAVs on computer
CDR(2) = 2nd gen. copied of CDR(1)
etc....

or is this correct?

MASTER = original data from MD (WAV on computer)
MASTER CLONE = Burnt directly from the master WAVs on computer
CDR(1) = 1st gen. Burnt directly from the master clone cdr
CDR(2) = 2nd gen. Copied of CDR(1)
etc....

I am confused.

Is there such thing as CDR(O)

Please help me.
Thanks

-Dylz
I've seen people do it both ways, and it is kind of confusing, but the second way is more correct imo.

Basically I think of it like tapes. The first tape is not the first gen. It's the master. When you make your first copy to another tape, *that's* the first gen.

If you have MD(master) > CPU, and you then burn the wavs onto a CDR, that's a CDR(m) or CDR(0) to me.

CDR(1) tells me that there was another set of CDRs before this one. Just like the tapes, the first CDR set is not the first gen. The CDR set that is copied from the first CDR set is the first gen.

It's also like with decades/centuries etc. The first year is not year 1, it's year 0.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes