deimos3428 wrote:Ok, I see 'em now. The only remaining question I have at this point is: Are all "4th whites" like this, or is your copy another previously-unknown variant?
SimperingToad wrote:Plastic comb binding Ideal for business reports and the like, this method uses plastic teeth that insert into a series of tiny holes made in a stack of pages. Comb binding machines are pretty inexpensive and the spines can be removed and reattached as needed."
TheMilford wrote:This is the same method as Chainmail and other similar books... not a hardbound method.
TheMilford wrote:PHBs[ Image ]7th top3rd bottom.The 7th has "stitching" but not the kind of heavy stitching I assume we are talking about here.Do we need to make a more clear distinction?
deimos3428 wrote:*sigh* There goes my plans for this evening.
deimos3428 wrote:Bear with me, please. We need to be very precise about this, as changes to the established printing order are things that need to be handled with care. I'm of the opinion that if it says "Random House", it's a 5th printing, period. That's a considerable shift, that also corresponds with a change in the cover material. That being said, there may indeed be more than one variant of the 5th printing.To confirm, you're stating that your 4th print white-flyleaf has the following features, which the 5th does not:* No TM on Yellow Banner * No prices for Star Probe or Star Empires, but otherwise the product list resembles the pg. 111 of the 4th red-flyleaf, not the overhauled 5th-and-later listLike the 5ths, it also has:* Hydra is small* Cover material is smooth (and has high color saturation?)* Random House added on copyright pageIf I've got that right, this is quite an interesting discovery, as it pretty much forces a change to the printing order. As described, it cannot simply be a 4th cover/5th interior. (Though I highly doubt it will cause them to soar in demand/value.)I would submit that such a book should belong to the 5th family due to the last three points; the copyright page in particular being the "trump" in my opinion. However, the lack of a TM and the unique pg. 111 would distinguish it from a standard 5th, so perhaps it should be designated as a 5th minus. Please confirm/correct, and if others have such a book, please respond as well so we know it's not just a one-off. I don't have one like this, unfortunately. Scans would be appreciated, if possible!
chromaticknight wrote:My 4th print with white flyleaf matches all the points above.Seems like the 4th print entry needs split into 4th print ( red flyleaf ) and 4th plus print ( white flyleaf )errr something like that. Unless, of course, someone comes up with a 4th white that doesnt match the points above. Then we have more fun to look into.Mike
TheMilford wrote:Geez, I wish people would take my B/X thread this seriously...
SimperingToad wrote:My red 4th matches the 1" stitch.My white 4th in a bit inconsistent. It appears to be 7/8" for most, but fluctuates on either side for some. It may not be the best example.
SimperingToad wrote:I'm not entirely certain that binding distance would work. A company as big as Random House would likely have several binding machines, probably of different makes/models (they wouldn't all be purchased at once), so it could be that different print runs would be bound on different binders.
deimos3428 wrote:It may well be further evidence that the 1st DMG predates August 1979, something we were talking about long long ago in a thread far far away.
deimos3428 wrote:The move from 5/8" to 1" seems to be somewhere in August 1979, just after the 1st DMG. (This should be further evidenced by a PHB 5th having 1" spacing, if anyone can confirm that hypothesis.) It may well be further evidence that the 1st DMG predates August 1979, something we were talking about long long ago in a thread far far away.
chromaticknight wrote:My 5th print PHB has 1" spacing on the stitching.