Release country of CD/Vinyl releases / Release identification methods

Here is a link to one of my “hub” scans. @jesus2099 gave you some appropriate links for matrix info. I scan the hub [center] of the cd or vinyl and add any other info that is not easily visible in order to help the next Ed with identification. Matrix info may be found on both sides of the medium. Some hub info is hard to read [tiny]. I actually bought a used microscope to aid me in my compulsion. White LED light is the best I have found to highlight the etchings or mirrored image.

Having said that, if you have the same release with barcode, artwork, Disc ID, cat #, etc, you may notice some of the hub markings may be slightly different. Some of these differences are called Variants. Again, since MB does not have an official place in the software to enter matrix info, I would add a scan of your hub and include the differences in the comment section if they were not visible on your scan. This is not MB protocol, just something I do. Releases can have MANY different variants. Some are as minor as to show who was running the pressing for “Alvin” while he was on vacation.


It is!!! :laughing:

You’re right and I learned again.

Yes, but it has these times now and is a container for DiscIDs from unknown releases. Maybe I should remove this Disc ID from the container, although it’s not impossible, that the source of this ID was in fact another release.

No longer, as I’ve gone into details of Mastering SID Code and other codes on the matrix :cold_sweat:
In fact the third release (St Germain ‎– Tourist) is very close to mine. It seems to have 19 variants on Discogs.
Mine would be No 20: Matrix / Runout: EMI UDEN 5251142 @ 3 3-1-14-NL
Variant 7 has EMI UDEN 5251142 @ 3 3-1-9-NL :sob:

1 Like

Which userscript is that?

That’s probably best.

Fine, have fun! … but it’s a great album. I hope you’ll find the time to listen to it. :rofl:

High resolution scans might be helpful too!

I’ve learned about variants most recently. The probably matching Discogs release¹ has 19 variants by now. Mine is none of them!!!
¹) Scroll down to Barcode and Other Identifiers!

Thanks to you all: it’s a bit crazy, but still quite informative! And there’s still much to learn … :crazy_face:


Now I know when a microscope would be useful … :smile:
A magnifying glass wasn’t sufficient to decipher the second, moulded IFPI code! (upper right)
But me recently acquired knowledge was very useful to relate my release exactly to the one on Discogs.

I don’t want to talk about my problems, but there’s a question left…

So if I find a perfectly matching release, with no DiscID and false track times from Discogs, and if I add my TOC to this release, the track times would be unchanged (it seems so) - and my track times in ms will be lost. Is this correct?

1 Like

It is a pity you don’t have any decent second hand stores in Vienna. If you did you’d realise that there is a grading system and a second hand disc - CD or Vinyl - can be as good as new. Just comes down to people being careful. Most of the CDs I have bought from EBay are as good as new.

Yay! The more you add, the more mistakes you correct, the better you get.

This is your Training. Throw in a release, let us give it a kicking, and if you survive that barrage you are ready for the next one. I know I made all kinds of weird mistakes on my first Releases because my “common sense” didn’t always follow the guidelines. After a few disks I started to see those daft little differences in the artwork, matrix, hub, etc…

I’ve seen some people add their discIDs to the annotations. At least whack it into the edit notes.

Trouble is that it is possible for a discID to be on more than one Release making it really hard to know for sure where the error is.

I have a head start on you all. “I’ve been mad for f**king years – absolutely years” (bonsus points for naming source of the quote…) :crazy_face:

I also want a microscope for IFPI as my scanner never gets them lit correctly. Have sometimes needs a to use my camera phone instead to get shadows \ lighting at a different angle.

I like @jesus2099 logic of making a Good Fresh Release. This should lean weight on to getting the accurate Releases into place. Eventually the release with dozens of discIDs will stand out as a lone mess and easier to remove.

I think “The Powers That Be” have already realised we are learning more here by rambling on tangents. (Lol - was that intentionally a Roger Waters quote? :+1:) This is a Voyage of Discovery learning the parts that are important of adding a Release. It would not make sense splitting out the discID parts…

Ahhh - innocence… IFPI is another Rabbit Hole of details, but needs a pesky magnifying glass to read. I tend to add matrix \ hub scans especially on those releases with loads of versions. For bands with less reissues I’ll often not bother.

This is why that REM Mumors drove me around in circles… (I have about six page of notes for that one CD - but I learnt LOADS about how disks are made)

List of IFPI codes:

A Pink Floyd specific page, but very interesting and a quick summary of how EMI did things

Handy to scroll around that page as you start to see how often the “same” disc is actually subtly different to another. And how a “GB (SWNDON) Release” or a “Dutch UDEN CD” is also a European release.

That site is good for a focused understanding of some of this from the viewpoint of just one artist.

Random threads on where some of this stuff come from talking about Glass Masters and versions and little scratches in the hub for some other manufacturers:

You may need to open a beer or three and have a spare evening for reading through some of them threads… but to me I find this stuff fascinating.

You can see why it is impossible to learn all this stuff on your first entry at MB. You have to start simple… and then work upwards with your detail levels. You were kinda lucky by starting with those Peter Gabriel concert disks as they are unique and fairly easy to nail down specific details.

You can click on your DiscID and find a link to Set Track Durations. DiscIDs should always overwrite the manual and make those times not editable in the Tracklist GUI. This is also possible when you find one of those Releases with a dozen discs attached - you can set yours as the one that sets the times.

BUT this is why I know there are releases here which do have very different length CDs on the same Release. I’ve set the times based on my CD, only for someone else to come along and hit the button on another CD, changing those times. This is why I personally have never deleted a DiscID. “If in doubt, leave it out in”.


So, before I even start reading @IvanDobsky’s reply, I have to put another “find the difference” riddle. :wink:

Jorja Smith - Lost & Found
Easy task, matching release with front image only. I added scans.
But then I tried to relate it to a Discogs release and I found one I doubtlessly would have added last week. But there should be a “Mould SID Code: IFPI UU015” and I can’t spot it.
Probably it is a variant and I should add it nevertheless.

1 Like

Lets say I have mixed experiences with ebay. I usually buy only, if I really have to have it and there’s no other source.
I don’t reply on “mistakes” as I took again some extra laps today…
But it’s in fact an excellent training, even better then a professional course from Oracle. Longer lasting and in-between practice continues as long as I like. Perfect!

My scanner is crap, but with 1200 dpi it’s … although there’s actually a code missing at the moment. (previous post)

Bookmarked! Thanks.

Will be helpful to distinguish between releases should I like to tag them a new. …maybe I will do, interesting stuff!

:laughing: I haven’t known what it means, to have such a simple release structure. But it will be a bit more complex as there will be a digital release of all Encore Series releases and it depends on how much it will cost if I will buy all of them. :face_with_thermometer:

I cannot practice it yet as the reason for this question as the otherwise matching release was in fact a promo. I had to cancel some edits, but I hope will remember, when this problem occurs.

Me too. And these “recycle bin releases” with numerous DiscIDs should remain untouched. In case someone has it in use.

1 Like

As for your missing mold code on Jorja Smith, it is not strange to find one or the other of the IFPI codes missing as the pressing plants can use different blanks during one run. I didn’t see hide nor hair of it on your hub scan (I did see the IFPI LK97) and I’m sure you have seen it too. Not sure of the reverse side since I don’t have the release. I have seen mediums with 2 mastering codes and no mold and visa versa. One was 95% hidden by the label art. By the way, in case you haven’t discovered it yet, when you pull up cover art and choose “original” you should see the + symbol which will let you magnify the art. TTFN


The reverse side is also scanned (600 dpi should be sufficient). But I haven’t seen anything. I suppose it is such a “variant” of this release.


Another pick and I had to Set Track DurationsDeodato - Prelude
Track times were different, but hub information matching the associated Discogs release saved me!
(Variant 1) :slightly_smiling_face:

That’s one of those that even when I whack my scanner up to 1200dpi it can often miss the mould SID code. @Llama_lover’s microscope is a cunning solution, or trying to take a photo from a slight angle to change the shadows.

Darn You MB… I am about to go to Amazon and buy one of those USB Microscope gadgets. :smile:

I have a Quick Search setup on my web browser to let me search Discogs. Usually using the barcode to narrow down the results. They are a very handy sanity check.


Do you really think, there’s still a Mould SID code hidden? I’ve read about CD manufacturing for the last hour (or hours?). And about IFPI. And I learned that Mould SID codes are almost mandatory today. They point not only to a plant but to a specific machine which manufactured the CD. It’s a a voluntarily used tool for Quality control, but it was successful, because of its potential for piracy control and the customers insisted on it. So in fact there should be one.
I’ve looked at some hubs of new CDs (only magnifying glass) and I was able to spot (not to read) it on all of these. (When I read “microscope” I thought this would be completely over the top, but now …)
But we have to face it’s an old CD. IFPI was introduced in 1994. On Tourist (2000) no IFPI codes are used. Instead they imprinted their own (changing) Mould Identification. So it’s possible that this one came from a plant without Mould SID.

1 Like

How do you manage to do this? I’ve got no such setup and really do not know how to set it.

In fact, therefore my *** scanner seems to be useful after all. I’ve got problems with shadows scanning booklets, but I can easily read a tiny engraved code. Maybe I scan the hub again, rotated by 90°…
But as I’ve learned, it might be better having a “preview”, because own scans might be unnecessary afterwards.

And regarding scanning …
When scanning old CD media, I have a huge problem to remove them afterwards. New CDs are uneven at the edges and you can easily pick them up with your fingernail and remove it.
Old CDs are completely cylindrical and it’s not possible to slide a sheet of paper under it. The first one I removed by turning the whole device upside down. Then it plummeted - not instantly - to the table. For the second scanned CD I finally accelerated it with the paper sheet, it hit the wall hard, tumbled, the following sheet slit under it and I was able (carefully!) to remove it from the glass. Both methods are not recommendable, but I didn’t want to use a razor blade on the glass. Is there a safer method?

1 Like

I can’t help but to chuckle, I don’t have a solution. I do have an old credit card that I sanded down on one edge, it is razor sharp… This works most of the time without any damage to anything. Maybe the Brit’s have a better solution. :face_with_monocle:


No chance to do so. These CDs are absolutely plain, so there has to get air under them for lifting them up. After I turned the scanner around, it took a second to fell off (maybe not a second but quite some time).
My fight must have been funny to watch :sweat_smile:

1 Like

I’ve added two 2400 dpi scans of the central part of front and backside of the disc.

I’ve made more from different angles, but there’s nothing a additional to be seen. I’ve chosen those where it is best seen. To spoiler: It’s P74, printed on the inner ring of the front (printed) side of the CD. But that’s not the expected IFPI 72xx code. Might this be an illegal copy? I bought it from ebay, so I don’t know where it was originally purchased.

1 Like

Haha - no idea. I just know that on my own CDs I have sometimes scanned at 1200dpi and still not seen anything until I changed the lighting and started looking sideways at the disc with harsh white light.

Hence me buying one of those £15 USB microscopes from Amazon just for larks. :smiley:

My music is also neatly confusing as many of my CDs are late '80s \ early '90s. Just as those SID codes were settling in. I have some 1993 Nimbus printed CDs in hand at the moment with no IFPI codes anywhere.

That is more of a Web Browser specific thing. I used to use the classic Norwegian Opera Browser and now I use Vivaldi (by the same author). That allows me to add extra searches to the Search box. I can then select text like a barcode and just Right Click, then Search for it at Discogs \ Wikipedia \ etc. Whatever custom search I like. There is a pop-out menu I can fill with all kinds of custom search options.

Just checked and Firefox and eight other browsers I have installed doesn’t do that. Maybe only an Opera \ Vivaldi thing.

HAHAHA!! Me too!! But I have a secret that I will share!! I use a sucker cup to get them back.


In Firefox you can add search engines too, but not to the context menu AFAIK:

You can use them like this:


Vivaldi is very tweakable. Blame the guy who wrote it - he wants to be able to adjust things in the core browser.

Here is Vivaldi’s menu as it appears on the right click after I highlighted “Firefox” in your post

A totally random mix of extras on mine. Some added by Vivaldi, and then others I have added over the years. The search results pop-up in a new tab making it real quick to chase.

I add the custom searches in a similar way to Firefox, but it is much more usable on the right click like that. Makes it really handy when adding a new release here at MB as I can quickly find the Wikipedia\data and Discogs links from within the page.

I really should add a few more on here like ISRC searches. In my old Opera Browser this list was about 50 items long. And get rid of junk like Startpage\Yahoo\Ecosia\Qwant - never used

1 Like

… and I can’t set any specific search options, I think.

I was very happy with Opera for some years, but later my then old machine struggled with its system requirements. And then I was used to Firefox again and didn’t like to change back. But I think, I’ll try Vivaldi.

Thought on these myself after I sent my post, but you have to avoid placing it over the hub, probably.

1 Like