From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #54 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, March 2 2000 Volume 09 : Number 054 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support! [Aaron Mandel ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support! [Capuchin ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! [Capuchin ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support! ["JH3" ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! [overbury@cn.ca] Re: A Star (in Stereo) ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Re: Geek rants RE: USB [Capuchin ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! [dmw ] a bra for stan ["shane apple" ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! [Terrence Marks ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! ["Matt Browne" ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! [Capuchin ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! [overbury@cn.ca] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! [Mark_Gloster@3com.com] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! [overbury@cn.ca] re: tech support + 3 prepositions in a row [Eb ] circuit mag #4 ["brian nupp" ] Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! ["JH3" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:50:18 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support! On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Eb wrote: > Anyway, does anyone here own this new style of player? If so, my real > question: Doesn't this type of player scratch up the discs, or force > you to put big fingerprints on the discs, every time you pop them in > and out? i had one for about a month, and took it back to the store because it was completely not designed for someone who expects to listen to more than 200 of their CDs. you can input names, but the name sticks with the slot -- it doesn't actually identify it from the data on the disc the way computer CD players do. if you don't label them, finding something once you've put it in can become a mess. access times were about the same as me just grabbing something off the shelf and popping it in the player. this may have improved in the past year. they didn't scratch when removed, though. i've seen people pull things out by pinching the edge, which leads to fingerprinting, but i had no trouble just putting my finger on the top of the disc i wanted from the carousel and rolling it out with the friction. there are other models called, i think, "file-type" jukeboxes which hold all the discs in a straight row (and thus have a maximum size of about 100 discs); they've got this neat hand-operated slider thing that pops your disc forward into a waiting hand and, at least with the ones i've seen, there's enough space between the discs that you can look at it slantwise and recognize most of the discs from the art on the disc itself. overall, i decided to just forget it and go back to my single-disc Sony, which is now 12 years old and counting, with no problems. aaron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:54:24 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V9 #52 On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 DDerosa5@aol.com wrote: > This reminds me of the "Human Music" compilation, which was sort of > like an indie version of this Ktel thing. when Human Music came out, the bands on it were mostly still active, and half of them (maybe more, my memory is fading) contributed hard-to-find songs. it was a snapshot of the scene made by people in it, not someone pitching a record idea to K-Tel to save consumers from the trouble of having to track down 20 classic albums. but we'll see. my suspicion would be that most of their sales are going to be to people trying to buy gifts for someone whose music tastes they vaguely understand. and hey, it's a decent mix. aaron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 10:59:54 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support! Just thought I'd throw this out because it was on /. this morning and I thought it was pretty fantastic. Now, $800 is steep for a portable, but the point that it's about $10 per hour of playback (as opposed ~$250 per hour for other MP3 portables and $100 per hour for a good CD or MD portable, plus media) is fairly compelling. Most of the "features" they list are really for their jukebox software and it won't be too long before there's suitable connectivity software by other vendors or the free software community (I know if I could afford the unit, I'd be helping). Lemme see... 4.86GB=~40768634.88Kb And a reasonable sounding 128Kb/s, that gives you 318504 seconds or 5308 minutes or 88 hours. And that's 71 full length CDs (@74minutes). And if you walked one foot per second, you would have exactly enough music to last you one mile. So why are they saying 81 hours? That part I do find a bit odd. Are they using 393MB on that system for something else? That's a whole lot of space to just waste. Hmm... No idea. Just spouting. J. - -- ______________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ______________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 11:04:57 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 overbury@cn.ca wrote: > If I had the money to buy three 300-disc changers I'd spend it on a > single disc CD player with great D/A and transport mechanism and > a bunch of CDs. How much money is it worth to not get up and > change a disc? Sheesh! I think mainly it's the Storage Space required to keep all those cases accessible and the convenience of always seeing what track you're playing, etc. What I don't understand is my friend Ua who has two of these things, all fully programmed and loaded with all his discs, yet keeps his jewel cases on a CD rack not two feet from his stereo shelf. Sheesh. J. - -- ______________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ______________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:09:35 -0600 From: "Gene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Re: The Apples for Bram's Porcupine >From: "Joel Mullins" >Subject: The Apples for Bram > >Anyway, I got A Star for Bram today. I absolutely adore this record. Mine arrived yesterday (and David Greenberger was very helpful; he contacted me to let it know it had mailed. Nice guy) and I'm currently on my third listening. I'm so glad "Daisy Bomb" has finally been released. Ever since I first heard Robyn perform it (3/5/97 at the 8x10 Club in Baltimore) I've been waiting for it. It was worth the wait, I think. As was pointed out by another person in another post, the CD is exactly 50 minutes. And that got me to thinking about how the two Porcupine Tree CDs I have ("The Sky Moves Sideways", "Stupid Dream") are both exactly 60 minutes long. Anybody know if Porcupine Tree do that on purpose, and if any of their other CDs are exactly that long? Scary Mary -- can you confirm? >I also got the new Apples in Stereo single today. The single itself >(Look Away) fucking rocks. And all the b-sides are pretty cool. >Anyway, I'm looking forward to the new album. I'm pretty excited by that single, too. Haven't been able to pick it up, yet, but it's top on the list. Isn't Schneider working on a double album thingy, too? It seems the recent Apples records have been recorded rather well. I bet Schneider made quite a pile off of that Sony commercial and spent it in his studio. Well, I hope he did. >Both Elliott Smith and the Apples in Stereo will be here for SXSW. Any >fegs going? Yup, chances are good I'll be there. I can't pass up seeing the Apples in Stereo live. That's too much fun. I don't think I'm gonna get a SXSW pass, though, so I'll prolly spend a lot of time in lines. I also recently got into Elliot Smith -- I can't seem to go a few days without playing "Either/Or" so I'll prolly want to catch him to. The Frogs are playing, too. Can't miss them, either. Oh, and Calexico, too, if I'm not mistaken. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 10:46:28 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Geek rants RE: USB On 3/2/2000 10:23 AM, Capuchin wrote: >USB is way too processor intensive. I think Intel loves it so much for >exactly that reason. There are some that go so far as to say that it's >the reason Firewire isn't getting implemented in Intel controller >chipsets. But I don't know that I'm that paranoid. > >But anyway, USB for keyboards is pretty silly. You can build PS/2 with >pass-through if you like and save the USB for many many external devices >on a hub... but you don't want your basic input sharing a port with >anything. Uh? Some of this may be true for UHCI USB controllers, but most of the world uses OHCI controller chips which handle most of the data processing and implement DMA, thus for most USB transactions the CPU never deals with the data. For this exact reason, input devices like keyboards are perfect for USB. So why build a motherboard with many specialized I/O systems when you can save cost and support the same types of devices with only two, e.g., USB & FireWire? Sorry to those of you who aren't interested, but I think more than just the monkey were... - -tc p.s. Speaking of "the monkey", anybody ever read "Portnoy's Complaint"? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:18:59 -0600 From: "JH3" Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support! Personally, I'm not all that interested in fancy features on a CD player. I'm much more concerned with ruggedness. When I walk into the local Short-Circuit City to buy a new CD player, I always ask the guy, "Can this player withstand the weight of a 1,200-pound horse? Will it work properly at 20 degress below zero? Is it fully watertight down to six atmospheres? What happens if the front panel gets splattered with a bucket-full of mud and livestock excrement? Or even, for that matter, human excrement? Can it take two shotgun blasts in rapid succession? What about machine-gun fire?" And so forth. Mostly I just get blank stares... Also, I'm really not all that interested in this new-fangled "CDDB" concept. I'd rather know as little as possible about what I'm listening to at any given time; that way, if the wife walks in and asks "what's this gawdawful crap you're listening to," I can honestly say I have no idea. That's also why I remove and file away the printed jewel- case inserts from every new CD I buy, and replace them with vacation snapshots and pictures of my cats. That way, when I want to listen to something in particular, I'll just say to myself, "Hey, why don't I listen that one where I'm trying to strangle the Florentine train conductor" (I believe that's actually _Never Mind the Bollocks_) or "let's hear the one where Fu-Fu is ripping the spleen out of that poor little bunny rabbit" (probably Sonic Youth's _Goo_). I make an exception for the Robyn & XTC CD's, of course. Those I keep in a padded Anvil [TM] steel-reinforced case anyway, in the event of a severe tornado. John "blank quote" Hedges ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:22:37 -0500 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On 2 Mar 00, at 11:04, Capuchin wrote: > I think mainly it's the Storage Space required to keep all those cases > accessible and the convenience of always seeing what track you're > playing, etc. The space problem was starting to drive me bonkers about a year ago. I found a cheaper solution. I've got 500 or so CDs in flexible plastic sleeves in my living room. The jewel boxes are in the basement. The CD collection now takes up less space than a single changer, and I've got the booklets handy and a few hundred dollars more in my pockets. Make that several hundred dollars less debt. OK, OK -- a few hundred bucks worth of other junk. The sleeves cost something like $40 for a thousand. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 11:29:21 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: A Star (in Stereo) At 01:09 PM 3/2/00 -0600, Gene Hopstetter, Jr. wrote: >I'm pretty excited by that single, too. Haven't been able to pick it up, >yet, but it's top on the list. Isn't Schneider working on a double album >thingy, too? Not according to SpinArt (as posted to the E6 list awhile back): >Also, you guys can get it out of your heads that the new Apples full length >will be a double album. It will not. To quote Robert about the new album, >it'll be inspired by Phil Spector and Brian Wilson, but "this time, add Led >Zeppelin and Sly and the Family Stone dancing around a theremin." - --Jason, who has long harbored a twisted fantasy of replacing all his space consuming jewel boxes "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 11:42:41 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Geek rants RE: USB On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Tom Clark wrote: > Uh? Some of this may be true for UHCI USB controllers, but most of the > world uses OHCI controller chips which handle most of the data processing > and implement DMA, thus for most USB transactions the CPU never deals > with the data. For this exact reason, input devices like keyboards are > perfect for USB. So why build a motherboard with many specialized I/O > systems when you can save cost and support the same types of devices with > only two, e.g., USB & FireWire? Hmm. This is contrary to some other things I've read, but I trust your view more than those sources. I appreciate the correction very much. Not that you would know, but does this PC99 spec include Firewire? The idea is to drop legacy crap. > Sorry to those of you who aren't interested, but I think more than just > the monkey were... I hope so. And feel free to reply offlist. > p.s. Speaking of "the monkey", anybody ever read "Portnoy's Complaint"? I had a girlfriend that insisted I read Portnoy's Complaint and bought me a copy while we were driving through NoCal. I read it, but I don't remember "the monkey" to which you refer (and which, in retrospect, was probably the reason she wanted me to read it). I remember liking the book quite a bit, but thinking it was one of those self-loathing anti-semitic-semitic books that wasn't at all kind to women, either. But I tolerate that sort of thing from a certain group of people. I mean, it's they way the world was and they were raised that way. You don't have to like the opinion to enjoy the expression of it. J. - -- ______________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ______________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 15:17:33 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 overbury@cn.ca wrote: > The sleeves cost something like $40 for a thousand. i hesitate to ask this, but do you know if your sleeves are polyethelyne, or some sort of inert/archival substance (e.g. mylar)? i keep hearing rumours of archival sleeves in this price range, but have yet to track down an actual supplier. i'm exactly anal enough about the future to not want things in poly sleeves. - - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr pathos - - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews - - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 20:20:54 GMT From: "shane apple" Subject: a bra for stan whee! got mine today, and i'm listening to it now. i've only been able to listen to it in bits and pieces and fragments (my "give the kids some busy work and sit at the classroom computer listening to music" approach to teaching didn't seem to work well today...those damn kids and their questions!) but i think i'm going to like it a bunch. my first impression usually sticks when it comes to hitchcock discs, and i might even eventually like this one more than *jewels* which i liked a lot. "the green boy" sounds like a queen elvis outtake. i like "the underneath" more than the live version. "daisy bomb" was a song i hated on the christmas tape, but i thought it was a beautiful song to open the cd. why is "i saw nick drake" sung in a cave? there seems to be a lot more jon brion touches to this album. anyway, i'm impressed. this is VERY good for an outtakes album. i'm not sure what to think of the dub version of "antwoman" though. - --shane apple ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 15:23:15 -0500 (EST) From: Terrence Marks Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, dmw wrote: > On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 overbury@cn.ca wrote: > > > The sleeves cost something like $40 for a thousand. > > i hesitate to ask this, but do you know if your sleeves are polyethelyne, What's wrong with polyethelyne sleeves? Too fast & bulbous? Terrence Marks Unlike Minerva (a comic strip) http://www.unlikeminerva.com normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 15:44:25 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Terrence Marks wrote: > > i hesitate to ask this, but do you know if your sleeves are polyethelyne, > > What's wrong with polyethelyne sleeves? > > Too fast & bulbous? like a squid in a bag of reverb. the theory, as colorfully interpreted by yrs truly, is that poly-bags are full of promiscuous long chain molecules that want to, y'know, interact with almost anybody, and the molecules in the surface of your cd will do just fine. if eventually enough interaction happens (we're probably talking 10-15 years, but extreme heat & cooling cycles will accelerate the process) teeny little holes may form in the disc, allowing oxygen molecules to worm their horny little selves in there and oxidize the aluminum substrate, at which point, bingo, data dropouts, and, ultimately, no more disc. inert or archival grade packages are supposed to significantly retard the processs. as near as i can glean, this is somewhat grounded in reality, e.g., not pure paranoia. people who keep things like medical records in digital format are especially concerned, and i've recently seen the emergence of new product lines designated as "medical grade" archival. it is probably worth noting that CDR's are -->much<-- more vulnerable to this than pressed CDs. also perhaps worth noting: i had a brian eno disc in one of those little pouches of cd's you can carry around with you, with the standard poly-vinyl sleeve, and the cover transferred itself to the surface of the disc, rendering it completely unplayable. since i don't drive, i can assure you this wasn't a result of leaving the case on a dashboard or some easy goof like that; i don't know exactly how it happened. sure annoyed me, though. lost tiger mountain, poor planning - -- d. n.p. last days of may _radiant black mind_ - - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr pathos - - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews - - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 21:03:24 +0000 From: "Matt Browne" Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On 02/03/00, at 15:44, dmw wrote: >if eventually enough interaction happens (we're probably >talking 10-15 years, but extreme heat & cooling cycles will >accelerate the process) teeny little holes may form in the disc Hi all - Actually, it's probably worth pointing out that this 'CD rot' can occur within just eighteen months... I've heard lots of stories about certain CD single cases (those ones with the cardboard covers) from the early 90s causing pretty bad problems. Damn them! I blame it on the . - -- Matt Browne ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 15:06:56 -0600 From: "JH3" Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! >it is probably worth noting that CDR's are -->much<-- more >vulnerable to this than pressed CDs. Definitely worth noting! Too many people think CD-R's and mass- produced CD's are exactly the same thing. Mass-produced CD's are made with anodized foil sandwiched between two separate plastic discs, which is bad enough from an archival perspective, but CD-R's are just a micron-thick layer of polyester dye substrate pressed onto the bottom of a single disc, which can easily peel off under the right (i.e., sticky) conditions. You should always keep them (and, especially, *ship* them) in jewel boxes where the substrate won't touch any other surface. Sorry, that's one of my pet subjects. JH3 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:12:03 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, dmw wrote: > i'm exactly anal enough about the future to not want things in poly > sleeves. Are you actually concerned that your digital music will be lost to posterity? Trust me, there are plenty of copies in so many formats that all of the music you have on CD will be around well after you die. And as information stores become lower cost and higher capacity and data communications provide the big transfer rates we like to see, actual data loss will drop very low. I suspect JH3 has some reasonably good information on these archival sleeves, but are we really talking about damage within the next twenty or thirty years of storage (which is about as long as any of you can expect to care about your current music media). Barring pride of possession and sentimental attachment, you won't need your CD collection in ten years or less. J. - -- ______________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ______________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 16:30:46 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Capuchin wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, dmw wrote: > > i'm exactly anal enough about the future to not want things in poly > > sleeves. > > Are you actually concerned that your digital music will be lost to > posterity? Trust me, there are plenty of copies in so many formats that > all of the music you have on CD will be around well after you die. And yeah, actually, because some of it is just me and/or some friends, and there aren't any other copies of it. and on the offchance that i were to ever bamboozle some otherwise well-judgmented person into perpetuating any of my genetic material, i could certainly hope that they would want, fifty years hence, to hear what a crap musician da-da was, among more egotistical conceits. - -- d. n.p. sheila divine _new parade_ which i've been mispelling part of all day - - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr pathos - - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews - - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 16:30:43 -0500 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On 2 Mar 00, at 15:17, dmw wrote: > i hesitate to ask this, but do you know if your sleeves are polyethelyne, > or some sort of inert/archival substance (e.g. mylar)? i keep hearing > rumours of archival sleeves in this price range, but have yet to track > down an actual supplier. i'm exactly anal enough about the future to not > want things in poly sleeves. I figure my CDs have already been in contact with acrylic, ink, plastic dyes, paper (includes acid used to make non-archival paper), sweat and other potentially reactive materials. So far so good. I've never seen a case of CD-rot yet. I even write on CD-R right over the foil on the data area, although I'll admit to using water-soluble markers for that purpose. All this talk of migrating solvents, etc seems to be so much conjecture. If there's hard evidence, I'll pull the CDs out of the poly sleeves fast, but so far, so good. I've never bought one of those gold foil CDs either. As for micro-holes, my single-tray player can track a disc with visible pinholes in it. Remember the gold-foil CDs they came up with to cash in on CD- rot paranoia? Feh. I bought my bags from www.bagsunlimited.com, who sell them for $24.40 per thousand for the 2.4 mil thickness. The $40 figure I quoted earlier was in Canadian funds, and included shipping and duty. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:42:46 -0800 From: Mark_Gloster@3com.com Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! >the theory, as colorfully interpreted by yrs truly, is that poly-bags are >full of promiscuous long chain molecules that want to, y'know, interact >with almost anybody, and the molecules in the surface of your cd will do >just fine. if eventually enough interaction happens (we're probably >talking 10-15 years, but extreme heat & cooling cycles will accelerate the >process) teeny little holes may form in the disc, allowing oxygen >molecules to worm their horny little selves in there and oxidize the >aluminum substrate, at which point, bingo, data dropouts, and, ultimately, >no more disc. Yes, this is a simple act of chemistry. It's like what happens when you eat lunch with Russ, Nick, Tom, and/or Glen. A chemical reaction happens and fluids squirt out your nose. Incidentally, you can do a really cool experiment with PVC or "naugahide" or those old 60's car seat protectors. Run around on a hot day in the sun, wearing your most revealing summer attire. Then, when you're nice and sweaty, sit on said prewarmed substance. Then, after relaxing for 22 minutes, abruptly stand up. Notice the great swatches of your former skin that have now attached themselves to the seat covering. You may get an up-close and personal look at veins, capillaries, and even bones. Some lucky few have been able to see internal organs stuck to the seat, but I haven't been so fortunate since I was a young 'un in the land of pickumup trucks, gambling, and legalized prostitution (where in at least 12 counties you can get you some for a kidney!) As soon as I figure out what the Glostertron 2000 is, I'm going to do an infomercial and sell as many of them as I can before the end of the year. Happies, - -Markg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:10:03 -0500 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! On 2 Mar 00, at 15:06, JH3 wrote: > >it is probably worth noting that CDR's are -->much<-- more > >vulnerable to this than pressed CDs. > > > Definitely worth noting! Too many people think CD-R's and mass- > produced CD's are exactly the same thing. Mass-produced CD's are > made with anodized foil sandwiched between two separate plastic > discs, which is bad enough from an archival perspective, but CD-R's > are just a micron-thick layer of polyester dye substrate pressed onto > the bottom of a single disc, which can easily peel off under the right > (i.e., sticky) conditions. You don't mean to say the dye is on the readable side, do you? The first time I ever burned a cocktail coaster on my CD-R I broke the disc to check it out. The dye was under the foil layer, on the side farthest from the laser. You have more protection for the dye on the readable side. The foil side is fragile, because you can scratch away that layer without much effort. > You should always keep them (and, especially, > *ship* them) in jewel boxes where the substrate won't touch any > other surface. I store my CD-R in the same poly sleeves, and they're marked with nice big letters in water-soluble felt marker. I can't seem to make them unreadable! What am I doing wrong? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:33:23 -0800 From: Eb Subject: re: tech support + 3 prepositions in a row Oh my heavenly stars, what in the world did I start? ;) Thanks for the various insights into CD players...I responded to certain posts, privately. It was also interesting to read about the physical differences between CDs and CD-Rs, even though I still don't own a CD-R beyond a few rejected record-label advances (especially from Virgin -- they love those things). I bought a paperback of "Portnoy's Complaint" once for a quarter, and read it. Didn't think all that much of it. Eb, happy that the list recently reunited him with someone he hadn't heard from in about six years ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 18:22:57 EST From: "brian nupp" Subject: circuit mag #4 Is Circuit Music Journal #4 w/ Ben Harper the issue with our man in it? Thanks Brian ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:28:53 -0600 From: "JH3" Subject: Re: glostertron 2000 + tech support + decadence! >You don't mean to say the dye is on the readable side, do you? Assuming you mean readable by the laser, then yes! There are three to four layers: the deepest is a polycarbon substrate (ie., plastic film); over top of that is the dye, which is usually cyanine (green), phthalocyanine (brownish gold), or azo (blue). Then an ultra-thin layer of gold or gold-alloy (what you're calling foil, I think) is "spluttered" over that; and in most cases there's an additional layer of protective lacquer. The laser heats up the whole thing and changes the surface reflectivity by causing the metal to melt slightly into the dye. The dye is there simply to change the reflectivity. The key thing in terms of life-span is that there's no hard plastic seal over the substrate; it comes off when it loses its adhesion. And just to add to the confusion, when I say "dye substrate" I'm referring to the whole thing, all 3 or 4 layers. >The first time I ever burned a cocktail coaster on my CD-R >I broke the disc to check it out. The dye was under the foil layer, >on the side farthest from the laser. You have more protection >for the dye on the readable side. The foil side is fragile, >because you can scratch away that layer without much effort. Right. I'm just not sure I would call it foil, unless you define "foil" as being any thin refective substance. But hey, whatever! "Gold splutter" is probably an even worse term, actually. >I store my CD-R in the same poly sleeves, and they're marked >with nice big letters in water-soluble felt marker. I can't seem >to make them unreadable! What am I doing wrong? You have to store them in a sauna bath for a while, then take them out into a cool, dry room and peel the plastic sleeve away, and the substrate along with it. Or maybe it's put them in a cool, damp place for a while, and then take them out into a hot, dry place... I forget which now, to be honest... The rule of thumb with CD's and CD-R's is just to avoid any kind of prolonged dampness and air moisture. I wouldn't do it myself, but you could probably leave a CD-R in a chemically- inert poly sleeve for a fairly long time and not worry, as long as the air is dry enough and the temperature is stable. A mass- produced CD could be kept in a poly bag, or almost anything else, indefinitely - and it would probably be just fine, again, as long as ambient conditions are reasonably dry, etc. And I know it sounds strange, but a lot of it depends on conditions at the pressing plant. Try to avoid CD's pressed at plants located in the middle of tropical rain forests. >Remember the gold-foil CDs they came up with to cash in on >CD-rot paranoia? Feh. It's still a good theory, since gold doesn't oxidize, at least not as quickly as other metals. That's why it's used for CD-R's, albeit in tiny quantities. But I'd agree with you, actually - as long as you avoid dampness, it probably doesn't matter what kind of metal is in there, as long as it doesn't have any iron in it. That's why Eb keeps telling us not to buy heavy metal CD's with lots of ironic content, such as a typical Slayer or Vixen album, for example. He knows what he's talking about... JH3 ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #54 ******************************