Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

Hi Mason,

I've noticed recently that 2+2 books printed in 2005 seem alot tighter bound than their 2004 editions.

Was this a conscious decision?

Cheers,
SDM

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

Bump. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

Binding is something that we are always working on, and having books bound tightly is something we strive for.

MM

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Binding is something that we are always working on, and having books bound tightly is something we strive for.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

My honest opinion Mason was that the 2004 editions were alot nicer than the rigid 2005 editions.

Unfortunately the new tightly bound 2005 editions don't "open" as much as their predecessors, and this not only results in more spine creases but I assume the probability of pages falling out in the long run may also be increased.

It is for these reasons that I thought maybe you changed printers, to cut costs, yet I'll concede it was probably naive of me to think you'd tell me even if that was the case.

Anyway, thanks.

Cheers,
SDM

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately the new tightly bound 2005 editions don't "open" as much as their predecessors, and this not only results in more spine creases but I assume the probability of pages falling out in the long run may also be increased.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just the opposite is correct.

[ QUOTE ]
It is for these reasons that I thought maybe you changed printers, to cut costs

[/ QUOTE ]

As we have stated before, we have gone to a different, much more expensive glue (that is also much more difficult to apply). This glue is far more flexible and musch stronger than standard "hot melt" book binding glue. Thus our recent printings can withstand much more abuse than what is normal for books in their class.

MM

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately the new tightly bound 2005 editions don't "open" as much as their predecessors, and this not only results in more spine creases but I assume the probability of pages falling out in the long run may also be increased.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just the opposite is correct.

[ QUOTE ]
It is for these reasons that I thought maybe you changed printers, to cut costs

[/ QUOTE ]

As we have stated before, we have gone to a different, much more expensive glue (that is also much more difficult to apply). This glue is far more flexible and musch stronger than standard "hot melt" book binding glue. Thus our recent printings can withstand much more abuse than what is normal for books in their class.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for explaining the 'glue' thing Mason.

I'm sure the positives outweigh the negatives but the books are alot more rigid now with some of the words closer to the middle of the book, just'll take a little getting used to I guess.

Cheers,
SDM

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

Fedex Kinkos will do a nice spiral binding on them for
about $6 each. I did it to both of the HOH books and
they are much easier to read now. I can open to a
page and lay it next to my computer and it stays open
to that page without having to keep a hand on it.

For technical books I think a spiral binding is the
best way to go.

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

A serious idea for new 2+2 releases: Limited special spiral bound editions, hand-signed and numbered (by author & publisher). Sell at 4-5x regular cover price. Sounds crazy...but they will sell.

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

I don't know anything about binding and so forth...but I find the HOH and other 2+2 books to not be to my taste.

The 'feel' of the Weighing the odds book for example seems preferrable to me.
Not as stiff.

I don't know if it's technically inferior to the 2+2 binding or not.
But the 2+2 way of thick-paper with stiff-binding I just don't care for (maybe I'm supposed to...don't know).

Re: Mason: 2+2 Book Binding changes in 2005?
 

Hi Bob:

Part of the problem is the way our books get handled to a much higher degree than books in general. Therefore we have taken steps, and it is much more expensive, to solve this problem.

The book business is much tougher than many of you think. For instance, when books become "shop worn" at a book store like Borders or Barnes & Noble, they get sent back to us as returns. One of the ways this happens is that when a potential customer takes a book off the shelf, opens it, and then puts it back on the shelf, if the cover does not snap back in place, the book can become damaged by having the cover bent back. Once this happens it becomes a return and we not only lose the book, but we get charged shipping to return it to us. Thus we strive for books that snap back quickly to their original position. That's what you are calling tight.

Best wishes,
Mason