Expecting Rain

Go to main page
It is currently Mon December 11th, 2017, 03:36 GMT

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 124 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu January 22nd, 2015, 19:47 GMT 
Promethium Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat October 27th, 2007, 12:44 GMT
Posts: 16783
Location: Workin' as a postal clerk
Illy Dylan wrote:
Is this real life?


No.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu January 22nd, 2015, 20:31 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Mon April 22nd, 2013, 00:28 GMT
Posts: 127
oldfan wrote:
chrome horse wrote:
How can this be? Self appointed Bob Dylan worldwide expert oldfan has repeatedly assured us from his lofty perch that this is not true! Why, he even snapped at me - "no use talking to you" for doubting his wide wisdom!

Certainly oldfan has more credibility than Paul Williams, right oldfan?


ok children - the shows have been recorded by bootleggers! And that is what Paul WIlliams refers to! Is there an iota of common sense here to think otherwise/to read WIlliams otherwise NO!?

And if you only most of you can read - it is in my first or second post here. AGAIN - the vetting by those of the audience and their recordings by a couple of people not on Dylan payroll but who are respected - big time - by Rosen and friends. Just not recorded by Dylan (actually sony/columbia)

I a not trying to show i have knowledge…I DO HAVE THE knowledge - -again read my post about the couple of people who vet the audience/bootleg recordings. I ain't trying to prove that i have knowledge and you guys don't. But it is a fact….and most of it is based on common sense (not found here quite often) and a bit of knowledge I DO have from those i know in the 'Dylan Circle".

Why the juvenile!!!! vitriol coming at me….rather than showing - again - a common sense - sense of what i post….virtually all of you can not help but express the ultimate low-brow/juvenile/non-sensical responses. it is stunning. but for quite a while - these dumb posts by what i would guess are very young and poorly-read members here.

To reiterate - the Paul Williams references - please i beg you..show me where he refers to dylan/sony recording the shows as opposed to his explicit statemtes that most of all the recordings come from the audience. 75-76 recorded by dylan for Renaldo and Clara. 1981 (there was thought of a live album) 1984 just a handful shows he recorded for the live album. None i 1987….very shows in the early 90's (such as supper club)…and yes the soundboards from 1993 (thought of putting out live album by sony)

I would say to you people - THINK - but none of you know how. Deal with it.

And really to make it interesting - let's figure a way to put money on this…..i would like that…..and i an show the proof of what i am saying - not just leaning on kindergarten common sense. I will have no problem getting more correspondence from Dylan people confirming everything I have said. how about it? Putting your money where your mouth is….the thought of it makes my mouth water……buyt contact me privately - we put money in escrow and I will produce correspondence from more than the horse's mouth….certainly dylan's main trainer/jockey/manager.


Yes, judging by your maniacal blathering and obsessive overuse of punctuation, you seem completely normal and trustworthy. I wouldn't trust sharing a private business conversation with you if my life depended on it. It's tempting though. You could pay for my Shadows in the Night vinyl!

They record the shows, believe it or not. I don't really care.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu January 22nd, 2015, 20:36 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Fri September 5th, 2014, 09:50 GMT
Posts: 3626
Of course they record them. It would be a piece of piss, so why not?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu January 22nd, 2015, 21:02 GMT 

Joined: Thu June 8th, 2006, 13:31 GMT
Posts: 140
Location: Minneapolis, MN
My assumption is most/all shows are recorded. Looking at the SBD at concerts, there's a lot of MAC computers. It seems silly NOT to hit record with that many computers plugged in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 07:31 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Tue June 21st, 2011, 07:36 GMT
Posts: 270
oldfan wrote:
i DO HAVE THE knowledge .


:lol:

1. I had much contact to Paul Williams
2. I had also contact to people of the inner circle around Jess Rosen.
3. PW and the others confirmed that every single Show since 1974 (at least to 2003) was recorded by Bobs Team. Not always professional and complete but from the PA. Bob personally keeps these tapes.
4. It seems likely that there are all Shows from Europe 1965 and 66 in the vaults.
5. The releases on BD.com were from audience tapes, cause Bob wasn't interested in releasing and Rosen had not access to Bobs personal tapes but they also(believe it or not) keep ans even bought most of the known aucience recordings since decades to have an overview whats in circulation and whats not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 09:46 GMT 

Joined: Fri July 18th, 2014, 08:19 GMT
Posts: 207
Not sure if it's been posted (I'm sneaking on at work so don't have time to read the whole thread) but if they were to record a show, they need to have signs up around the venue to let the audience know this. I spoke to some site manager at the Albert Hall a few years back who told me that for any show to be professionally recorded, the venue and artist('s crew) need to make the audience aware of this.

My stepdad, who does lighting for a lot of live shows around Europe has told me the same, too. Not sure if the same applies in the US and so one, but unless you see any signage telling you they are recording the show, they probably aren't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 12:46 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Tue November 27th, 2007, 18:46 GMT
Posts: 209
Location: Cleland, Scotland
other artists are getting in on selling these.... there must be a market or they wouldn't do it
http://live.brucespringsteen.net/
http://www.livemetallica.com/
http://www.muletracks.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 13:01 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Tue June 21st, 2011, 11:15 GMT
Posts: 1557
ingate94 wrote:
Not sure if it's been posted (I'm sneaking on at work so don't have time to read the whole thread) but if they were to record a show, they need to have signs up around the venue to let the audience know this. I spoke to some site manager at the Albert Hall a few years back who told me that for any show to be professionally recorded, the venue and artist('s crew) need to make the audience aware of this.

My stepdad, who does lighting for a lot of live shows around Europe has told me the same, too. Not sure if the same applies in the US and so one, but unless you see any signage telling you they are recording the show, they probably aren't.



Are they crazy? Is it because of privacy protection or something? Do they want to save me from being heard shouting something I'd be ashamed of later?
I could understand, if I would so, that there's a reason for this when they want to videotape the gig and I randomly could be seen in the audience (when I alledgedly visited my Grandma). But for an audio tape? How far do we go?

Do you think I can stop a live broadcast of a football match when there are no signs at the stadium that the match will be professionally filmed? Or, even better, can claim a compensation?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 13:30 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Sat February 28th, 2009, 13:40 GMT
Posts: 785
Hillarious thread. Advanced miscommunication, me thinks. In other words: No, they're not recording every show in a professional sense that would be good for a live album. Yes, they're recording every show from the soundboard. They used to to this on cassette tapes in the 80ies and 90ies, nowadays they're using computers and Pro Tools, of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 16:55 GMT 

Joined: Wed May 18th, 2011, 19:28 GMT
Posts: 920
I know they have to put signs up if they're filming but I've never heard of any such requirement for audio-only recordings. It's not as if individual audience members could be identified from it, so what would be the problem, legally speaking?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 16:59 GMT 

Joined: Mon August 28th, 2006, 20:35 GMT
Posts: 321
20yearsofschooling wrote:
I know they have to put signs up if they're filming but I've never heard of any such requirement for audio-only recordings. It's not as if individual audience members could be identified from it, so what would be the problem, legally speaking?


Yeah, that sounds more like a video thing to me, like if they're going to be doing cutaways to crowd shots. Concerts get audio-recorded all the time (like, nearly 100% of the time).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 20:34 GMT 

Joined: Sun May 18th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 807
received email from Rosen's office:

"…we and Sony/Columbia have not recorded a tour's worth of shows by Bob Dylan in over 2 decades. Indeed, while there were discussions of a live album the year after the release of "Love & Theft," circa 2002, it was deemed to be both too expensive to produce and market."

"In regards to your question about cost, should it ever take place, Sony would indeed cover all expenses as they all have all exclusive rights to the recording of Bob Dylan in performance".

"We hope this has satisfied your inquiry."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 20:44 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Sun September 15th, 2013, 22:58 GMT
Posts: 422
Location: waitin' for it to rain
oldfan wrote:
received email from Rosen's office:

"…we and Sony/Columbia have not recorded a tour's worth of shows by Bob Dylan in over 2 decades. Indeed, while there were discussions of a live album the year after the release of "Love & Theft," circa 2002, it was deemed to be both too expensive to produce and market."

"In regards to your question about cost, should it ever take place, Sony would indeed cover all expenses as they all have all exclusive rights to the recording of Bob Dylan in performance".

"We hope this has satisfied your inquiry."


Is this is an actual reply or did I miss a joke while I was skimming? Oh do please share the email address, I'd love to have a chat with Rosen since he's so willing to divulge details about one of the most private people in the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 21:59 GMT 

Joined: Mon August 28th, 2006, 20:35 GMT
Posts: 321
oldfan wrote:
received email from Rosen's office:

"…we and Sony/Columbia have not recorded a tour's worth of shows by Bob Dylan in over 2 decades. Indeed, while there were discussions of a live album the year after the release of "Love & Theft," circa 2002, it was deemed to be both too expensive to produce and market."

"In regards to your question about cost, should it ever take place, Sony would indeed cover all expenses as they all have all exclusive rights to the recording of Bob Dylan in performance".

"We hope this has satisfied your inquiry."


oldfan has been right about stuff in the past, so maybe it's best to just take him at his word, but I refuse to believe this is the whole story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 22:29 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Sat February 28th, 2009, 13:40 GMT
Posts: 785
oldfan wrote:
...they all have all exclusive rights to the recording of Bob Dylan in performance.


No. Dylan Inc. has. You should know this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 22:32 GMT 
Promethium Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat October 27th, 2007, 12:44 GMT
Posts: 16783
Location: Workin' as a postal clerk
I think the question of two track soundboard vs multitrack raised by Hanns probably hits it on the head.


I had no idea Jeff Rosen responded to such inquiries, including grammatically incorrect descriptions of why plans for a specific live album were aborted. I'm not going to make any accusations but it does strain credulity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 22:46 GMT 

Joined: Sun May 18th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 807
hanns wrote:
oldfan wrote:
...they all have all exclusive rights to the recording of Bob Dylan in performance.


No. Dylan Inc. has. You should know this.


Not to releasing it. Thought that went without saying - from my response that i go. Meaning Dylan cannot release a recording without Sony.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 22:57 GMT 

Joined: Sun May 18th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 807
Sweetheart68 wrote:
oldfan wrote:
received email from Rosen's office:

"…we and Sony/Columbia have not recorded a tour's worth of shows by Bob Dylan in over 2 decades. Indeed, while there were discussions of a live album the year after the release of "Love & Theft," circa 2002, it was deemed to be both too expensive to produce and market."

"In regards to your question about cost, should it ever take place, Sony would indeed cover all expenses as they all have all exclusive rights to the recording of Bob Dylan in performance".

"We hope this has satisfied your inquiry."


Is this is an actual reply or did I miss a joke while I was skimming? Oh do please share the email address, I'd love to have a chat with Rosen since he's so willing to divulge details about one of the most private people in the world.


That was an actual reply from office management. Want the email address? Not terribly hard to find out. Seems to all here that it getting touch with the right people at management is soooo impossible….maybe so - if you do not know who to get in touch with…..or do not know who to know. Sorry just takes nothing more than putting in one's time over time…not like trying to reach god. For me - i have been around a while with those who have worked on and off (mostly on -with those who do.

Finally - the ideas that are projected on what i wrote….and the mystical and mysterious reading in-between the lines ….is truly plain silly at this point. Gtw - private people hahahaha - dylan has given about 1000 interviews over the course of the last 50 years….but seems you buy into whacky legend instead of the reality. do your work do your research and see what he actually does and why.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 22:59 GMT 

Joined: Sun May 18th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 807
eltedioso wrote:
oldfan wrote:
received email from Rosen's office:

"…we and Sony/Columbia have not recorded a tour's worth of shows by Bob Dylan in over 2 decades. Indeed, while there were discussions of a live album the year after the release of "Love & Theft," circa 2002, it was deemed to be both too expensive to produce and market."

"In regards to your question about cost, should it ever take place, Sony would indeed cover all expenses as they all have all exclusive rights to the recording of Bob Dylan in performance".

"We hope this has satisfied your inquiry."


oldfan has been right about stuff in the past, so maybe it's best to just take him at his word, but I refuse to believe this is the whole story.


sorry - except for a brief hello and goodbye at the beginning of email - that is it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 23:18 GMT 

Joined: Sun May 18th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 807
and by the way - there was some comment that i live on some lofty perch vis-a-vis dylan. THat phrase "lofty perch" more than implies i am closer to some kind of god or something like that. And that view that dylan is on some loftier perch is nothing more than inappropriate view of who he is….just a guy who is a most superlative musiciansingersongwriter…..and that view here reveals more about them (ER members here) than reality.

And to say that many here are a bit removed from reality is obvious. Thus the insane posts throughout this forum. so many of you do not get - that with nothing more than immersing one's self in reading….using a ton of common sense and putting in the time to meet those who do work for Dylan's work (or meeting dylan himself) - especially over the last 20 years….you get to know the artist….you make contacts….you get favors (whether listening to very rare uncirculating tapes….or leads on how to find them….and manuscripts what have you. But - put int he work/intelligent work and you get paid off - meaning you an ask smart questions.

But no one here seems to put in the time necessary. And because of that - they have wild ideas about his work/process of work/what he is doing - his goals as an artist.

The wild speculation and bizarre meanings and "inner workings" of an artist of a high plain….of totally high-brow work….in the end, comes across of nothing but sophomoric opinions and conclusions.

Again it is not about fantasia-like thought for those who are interested….it is simple putting in the work. Intelligent work. And those here do not understand that….well….'forever young' is your theme song.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 23:21 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Sat February 28th, 2009, 13:40 GMT
Posts: 785
oldfan wrote:
Meaning Dylan cannot release a recording without Sony.


He could. He would have to offer it to Sony first, though. How come you don't know this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 23:38 GMT 

Joined: Sun May 18th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 807
hanns wrote:
oldfan wrote:
Meaning Dylan cannot release a recording without Sony.


He could. He would have to offer it to Sony first, though. How come you don't know this?


you are wrong. It is not that i have seen a contract lol…..but i am told by someone who absolutely knows….the lawyer/law firm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 23:41 GMT 

Joined: Sun May 18th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 807
^ in fact can you name the last song or album released by dylan or one of his labels? please do tell. and i refer to one of his own recordings


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 23:54 GMT 

Joined: Sun May 18th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 807
eltedioso wrote:
oldfan wrote:

are you serious with that question? money - duh!


I honestly don't know what you mean. Do you think it would be too much more money beyond what's already being spent for the live technical team, that Columbia or Dylan's archive team wouldn't be willing to shell out? I don't believe that to be true. It would be a minimal cost.

Also, why so rude? Don't be rude. We're having a conversation here. "Are you serious with that question?"? Whatever dude.


not being rude - just pointing out the ignorance/specualtion with no basis in fact. things like that run rampant around here….sorry if you think it is rude for me to point out the total of lack of common sense here. and as i stated above due to lack of pertinent reading and a huge lack of how to think.

I have yet to see anyone respond to any of my critical posts with the following: Hey - you know what old fan you just may have a point. Or maybe I am wrong. Or maybe i was being sloppy or just plain dumb in my thinking…or maybe i should read more before i post…..that never happens…..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri January 23rd, 2015, 23:59 GMT 
Titanium Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue February 17th, 2009, 02:57 GMT
Posts: 6236
oldfan wrote:

you are wrong. It is not that i have seen a contract lol…..but i am told by someone who absolutely knows….the lawyer/law firm


You're not Goombay under another name are you?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 124 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group