Re: Reissues etc.

--- In [email protected], "schokofueralle" <schokofueralle@...> wrote:
>
> 
> > > or became swallowed by Beggars 10 years ago (just imagine: no barcode clash, [...]
> > The barcode clash would still exist, that was a 4AD issue, nothing to do with Beggars. 
> 
> That's exactly what i meant. If Beggars would have taken over 4AD in 1999 all subsequent releases could have been allocated to the Begga numbering system (which in my memory was rather imune to barcode trouble). After all that's where 4AD came from - not the other way round. 

Trust me, there's enough problems with the Beggars numbering systems as it is - what with all the sublabels, we'd have probably come close to running out of UPC's to allocate - sounds easier said than done, I know! Before someone brings up the "well buy a new prefix then!" that's not possible either!
 
> On the other hand i understand that the business perspective on catalogue matters is probably far more complicated than that of a collector. Nevertheless it seemed to work for nearly 20 years. Special editions got the additional 'D' or the XAD prefix for even more special cases. 
> 
> Well nevermind.

Generally, that does still happen - for example, there's an album coming up (I can't remember which) but it'll have a limited vinyl, which will have the CADD prefix, as well as the standard CAD when that happens. Same tracks though, bar an additional extra. There's been a few CD issues which have had the CADD too (The Breeders last album springs to mind), as well as the CAD. This Tune-Yards one is just a bit more confusing, as the proper release will have extra tracks - and it's probably the best way to disginguish the two (plus the US office have problems with catalogue numbers and prefixes - due to ADA's systems - hence their Breeders numbering being different to ours). Which of course might point to the CADD vinyl being something the US isn't releasing (before someone picks up on that, 
 too!)



------------------------------------