I am still not done looking at matrix numbers to verify Discogs release data and I am uncovering more and more. In a previous post I wrote about how Cinram has embedded the manufacturing date of the glass master in the matrix and how effective it can be to find releases with an incorrect release year.
But there are also other companies that did this, such as P+O. In typical German fashion they were very thorough with their matrices, and until 2007 they put a few markers possibly indicating the date in the matrix (later they used a different matrix and since then it is not so easy).
Each old style P+O matrix has:
One observation that I made is that the release numbers seem to be reused for represses, but the character for the master (remaster?) and the month/year combination change. However, most people seem to focus just on the release number in the matrix.
In the data I looked at I focused only on the month/year combination. The good news is that for the vast majority of the releases it actually is correct. For 5017 releases that have a P+O matrix I found that they are correct (although there might be other matrix fields which are incorrect).
For 247 releases I could see that they did not match.
Finally for 1616 releases I could not properly process the matrix (either wrong data, or the new matrix format).
In the next few weeks I will be searching for other companies that also have interesting data in the matrix field, because I am very certain that there is a lot more low hanging fruit.
But there are also other companies that did this, such as P+O. In typical German fashion they were very thorough with their matrices, and until 2007 they put a few markers possibly indicating the date in the matrix (later they used a different matrix and since then it is not so easy).
Each old style P+O matrix has:
- a number identifying the release
- a character indicating the master (for example A, or B)
- an optional number indicating the stamper
- a month/year combination indicating the production date
One observation that I made is that the release numbers seem to be reused for represses, but the character for the master (remaster?) and the month/year combination change. However, most people seem to focus just on the release number in the matrix.
In the data I looked at I focused only on the month/year combination. The good news is that for the vast majority of the releases it actually is correct. For 5017 releases that have a P+O matrix I found that they are correct (although there might be other matrix fields which are incorrect).
 |
| Releases made by P+O where matrix and year correspond |
For 247 releases I could see that they did not match.
 |
| Releases made by P+O where matrix and year do not correspond |
Finally for 1616 releases I could not properly process the matrix (either wrong data, or the new matrix format).
 |
| Releases made by P+O where matrix does not contain a year, or has weird data |
In the next few weeks I will be searching for other companies that also have interesting data in the matrix field, because I am very certain that there is a lot more low hanging fruit.
Comments
Post a Comment