| YAFF 23.01.2012 19:06 |
I finally downloaded a couple Queen shows that were even "remastered" by the bootlegger and the sound still sucks. Crown too loud. Freddie's vocals hard to hear. Everyboy was raving about on here. Are there any really good SOUNDING shows out there. Something on par with the official releases? |
| 1sharppencil 24.01.2012 03:58 |
yes, there are bootlegs of high quality... Why ppl like bootlegs? A mystery if you ask me...although some ppl get off on discovering that deaky played the riff for "back chat" or "under pressure" for for the first time in that gig or brian started toying with "i go crazy" riffs round that era. It's cool, although bootlegs nowadays are cds;the old vinyls are way cooler, made in another technological era with far less means... p.s. bootlegs fill a void, a vacuum>>>if ppl want to hear the hippo concert or the bbc sessions, well, in time (could take decades) those will surface as official product |
| The Real Wizard 24.01.2012 12:04 |
A bit of semantics here. Bootlegs are just the recordings that have been manufactured by some company to make money, but that term doesn't encompass all unreleased recordings. The answer to your question is simple - because the band will never release everything, and there will always be avenues for more music to come out. Sometimes the sound quality is great, sometimes it isn't. And everyone draws their line somewhere for what's listenable and what isn't. It all started in the late 60s with a Bob Dylan LP of unreleased songs, and the interest in finding more music rose from there. Most of the unreleased stuff is from concerts, but then there is unreleased studio stuff, which is a whole different thing. This can be a very expensive but incredibly rewarding venture. And then there are things that were broadcast on the radio only once or twice. Lots of avenues. Most of us Queen fans aren't really that fervent. Genesis, Zeppelin and Zappa collectors go absolutely insane over any new tape in any quality, or even the slightest upgrade of an old tape. They're just happy to hear any new music from their favourite artist, even if it sounds like shit. It's all about capturing history. If nobody was in the audience taping on a particular night, or if nobody buys that tossed acetate at an auction, then that music has likely been lost forever. To a lot of people this is a big deal. Go back to that Tokyo 79 thread in the announce section. I recommended a half dozen or so shows for you to try. A few of them do sound as good as official releases. |
| YAFF 24.01.2012 13:30 |
The Real Wizard wrote: A bit of semantics here. Bootlegs are just the recordings that have been manufactured by some company to make money, but that term doesn't encompass all unreleased recordings.The answer to your question is simple - because the band will never release everything, and there will always be avenues for more music to come out. Sometimes the sound quality is great, sometimes it isn't. And everyone draws their line somewhere for what's listenable and what isn't.It all started in the late 60s with a Bob Dylan LP of unreleased songs, and the interest in finding more music rose from there. Most of the unreleased stuff is from concerts, but then there is unreleased studio stuff, which is a whole different thing. This can be a very expensive but incredibly rewarding venture. And then there are things that were broadcast on the radio only once or twice. Lots of avenues.Most of us Queen fans aren't really that fervent. Genesis, Zeppelin and Zappa collectors go absolutely insane over any new tape in any quality, or even the slightest upgrade of an old tape. They're just happy to hear any new music from their favourite artist, even if it sounds like shit.It's all about capturing history. If nobody was in the audience taping on a particular night, or if nobody buys that tossed acetate at an auction, then that music has likely been lost forever. To a lot of people this is a big deal.Go back to that Tokyo 79 thread in the announce section. I recommended a half dozen or so shows for you to try. A few of them do sound as good as official releases.okay, thanks. I downloaded "Done Under Pressure" & "La Fleur Du Mar" and those are good for a bootleg but when you have stuff like "Queen Rock Montreal" it's hard not to want more of THAT...but Queen is stingy or too "perfectionist" to release anything. |
| The Real Wizard 25.01.2012 10:06 |
YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:okay, thanks. I downloaded "Done Under Pressure" & "La Fleur Du Mar" and those are good for a bootlegThose are both from radio broadcasts, so they're pretty good. But try some of the earlier stuff. The Rainbow 3-31-74 and Hammersmith 75 recordings sound really good. Definitely as good as those 85 and 86 boots. Last year there were a few bonus live tracks on the album re-releases that sounded fantastic, and someone in the loop hinted that there will be great live releases this year ... so hang in there. |
| Micrówave 26.01.2012 10:31 |
The Real Wizard wrote: someone in the loop hinted that there will be great live releases this year ... so hang in there.Yes, your kids will see them one day.... |
| webby56 07.02.2012 22:48 |
If there is anyone that doesn't like boots and wants to get rid of theirs....ummm....I am always looking!! Donations gladly accepted. :) |
| YAFF 09.02.2012 09:05 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Obviously I'm hangin' in. But I'm bored with waiting. I don't feed bootleggers by buying anything but thanks to some true music fans on here I have downloaded (and seeded for a time) about a dozen shows but the only ones I haven't deleted are:YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:okay, thanks. I downloaded "Done Under Pressure" & "La Fleur Du Mar" and those are good for a bootlegThose are both from radio broadcasts, so they're pretty good. But try some of the earlier stuff. The Rainbow 3-31-74 and Hammersmith 75 recordings sound really good. Definitely as good as those 85 and 86 boots. Last year there were a few bonus live tracks on the album re-releases that sounded fantastic, and someone in the loop hinted that there will be great live releases this year ... so hang in there. Done Under Pressure La Fleur Du Mal Houston 1977 Hammersmith 1975 I just can't listen to audience recordings like some of you can. I've gone to the incredible "Queen Concerts" & "Queenlive.ca" and many audience recordings are listed as "Excellent". How can it be rated on the same level as the four above? No way. Video is better for audience recordings but I only like the soundboard, FM or professional video ripped stuff. If Hammy 75 is "excellent" there's no way "Nagoya Japan 82" is also "Excellent" IMO. I haven't downloaded the Rainbow shows because I believe they will be officially released. Same for "Rock In Rio". Other than those are there any other of that quality/lineage? Is there a full Budapest show? |
| Holly2003 09.02.2012 14:24 |
I know what you mean. A lot of recordings are unlistenable to me. I'm not a completist: I only download stuff now that's of good quality and I usually delete the very worst recordings. Do you listen to them through your computer speakers or on a proper stereo system? It can make a huge difference. Cologne 79 sounds dull on my computer but much better on my stereo. Anyway, Manheim 86, Boston 76, Sun City 85, and of course the usual sources that were properly recorded but never officially released i.e. Earl's Court, Rainbow, Houston and Hammersmith all sound very good. |
| brians wig 19.02.2012 04:22 |
The Real Wizard wrote: Most of us Queen fans aren't really that fervent. Genesis, Zeppelin and Zappa collectors go absolutely insane over any new tape in any quality, or even the slightest upgrade of an old tape.Oh Mr Wizard, I'm disappointed. You've COMPLETELY shattered my illusion of you. I've always pictured you as a rampant (in the non-violent way), drooling obsessive with a mad twinkle in his eye everytime even the smallest upgrade appears... ;-) LOL. |
| The Real Wizard 22.02.2012 11:13 |
YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote: If Hammy 75 is "excellent" there's no way "Nagoya Japan 82" is also "Excellent" IMO.I rate Nagoya as an A- and Hammersmith as A+. They're not even comparable. Of course these things are all objective, but here's the rating system I use: A+ Superb sound quality A Great sound quality; minor flaws A- Very good sound quality; some disturbance ...and downhill from there. Other than those are there any other of that quality/lineage? Is there a full Budapest show?All the good ones have already been mentioned in this thread. Rainbow 74 (March), Hammersmith 75, Boston 76, Earls Court 77, Houston 77, Oakland 80, Sun City 84, Tokyo 85, Mannheim 86. Everything else is a step down from those. There is a full Budapest show, but it's a raw video feed that isn't nearly as good as the official release. |
| The Real Wizard 22.02.2012 11:17 |
Whoops, double post... The forum is having quoting issues... AGAIN. Why must things keep getting changed when they already work? If it ain't broke, don't fix it! |
| The Real Wizard 22.02.2012 11:17 |
brians wig wrote:HA!The Real Wizard wrote: Most of us Queen fans aren't really that fervent. Genesis, Zeppelin and Zappa collectors go absolutely insane over any new tape in any quality, or even the slightest upgrade of an old tape.Oh Mr Wizard, I'm disappointed. You've COMPLETELY shattered my illusion of you. I've always pictured you as a rampant (in the non-violent way), drooling obsessive with a mad twinkle in his eye everytime even the smallest upgrade appears... ;-) LOL. I did say "most" of us, not "all" ;) |
| br5946 31.03.2012 15:35 |
To be honest, as long as I get a sufficent-quality recording, I'm happy. However, I would like a few well-known concerts get offical releases so reasonable flaws are fixed. Main one being Hyde Park. The clip of Prophet's Song from that show that was included in the 'Making of' special features disc on the 30th anniversary ANATO DVD was superb quality, and unfortunately we have to accept this average-ish recording: link Of course, the performance IS mindblowing as can be in such quality, but still... |