Two Bootleg Recordings on the Floyd Page
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Report errors & omissions here
Forum Description: Seen a mistake in a band bio etc then please tell us
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=18899
Printed Date: November 25 2024 at 07:13
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Two Bootleg Recordings on the Floyd Page
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Subject: Two Bootleg Recordings on the Floyd Page
Date Posted: February 12 2006 at 20:15
| KQED: An Hour With Pink Floyd and The BBC Sessions, while both are professionally recorded, have never been officially released. They're available only as RoIOs, and yet they're still listed on the Pink Floyd page. |
Replies:
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Date Posted: February 13 2006 at 14:02
| Anyone gonna take the time to correct this? |
Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: February 13 2006 at 14:08
Yep, but unfortunately I can't delete albums. I have contacted Joren, he'll do it as soon as he comes online. 
------------- 
|
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Date Posted: February 13 2006 at 14:16
|
Ok, cool. By the by, KQED, while not official, is totally incredible. I suggest tracking down a copy from some bootlegging sites. www.dimeadozen.org has it. |
Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: February 13 2006 at 14:20
Thanks for the tip! 
-------------
|
Posted By: Joren
Date Posted: February 13 2006 at 14:37
| I deleted the BBC CD... the DVD had already been reviewed though, so I think we should let the reviewer know that we're gonna take it down, but I don't have his email adress. Maybe you should ask Max. |
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: February 13 2006 at 17:31
|
I'm very suprised the BBC album by Pink Floyd is a bootleg, BBC are a MAJOR professional TV/Radio company, the album was listed in a rival PROG website ProgGnosis.com and that's why it was thought to be alright for the album to be included here!! Well that's the rules it will have to be deleted if it is a bootleg but surely official bootlegs are fine?? ------------- CYMRU AM BYTH 
|
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Date Posted: February 13 2006 at 18:59
|
Both KQED and BBC are Harvested releases. Harvested is the premier Floyd bootleg distributor. They do fantastic work remastering, and otherwise fixing these recordings.... but they aren't official. http://www.harvested.org/ - http://www.harvested.org/ http://www.harvested.org/DVD001/ - http://www.harvested.org/DVD001/ http://www.harvested.org/CDR007%2DBBCArchives/ - http://www.harvested.org/CDR007%2DBBCArchives/ Proof^ |
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Date Posted: February 18 2006 at 15:47
|
Someone just added another Floyd Bootleg to the Floyd page... http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.asp?cd_id=11130 - http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_C D.asp?cd_id=11130 That's definitely a bootleg; I own it. The only official release from Zabriskie Point is the ZP OST. All others (i.e Complete ZP, Ultimate ZP, etc) are bootlegs. |
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Date Posted: February 18 2006 at 16:14
|
This is also pretty fishy... http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.asp?cd_id=7884 - Masters of Rock http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.asp?cd_id=11093 - The Best of Pink Floyd The first of those two is a known-legitimate release... the second one is fishy as hell. Compare those two. The track-listings are identical. However, on the latter, Candy and a Currant Bun is misspelled directly on the album. Not to mention, after researching it, I turned up precious little information. The best lead I got was the album's catalogue number... when I searched it... it led me directly back to Masters of Rock. According to the catalogue number, those two albums are one in the same. According to the tracklisting, they are one in the same. But according to the date of release.. there's a four-year difference. Frankly, I don't much trust that Best Of to be legit. |
Posted By: The Miracle
Date Posted: February 18 2006 at 19:08
|
She ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/ocellatedgod" rel="nofollow - last.fm |
WiguJimbo wrote:Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: February 19 2006 at 15:17
|
This recent addition appears to be another bootleg. http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.asp?cd_id=11130 - http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD. asp?cd_id=11130 |
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 19 2006 at 16:23
|
I don't think these "BBC session" albums (there are some of several
artists) can be considered as bootlegs. True, they have not been
published by the artists themselves, but the BBC has the full rights to
them. There are several "BBC session" albums in the archives. They can
be bought openly in any well-sorted record shop, which would not be
possible with bootlegs. -------------  A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Date Posted: February 19 2006 at 18:25
|
Yes, but not that particular recording. That's a Harvested
release. It's not sold in any stores. Go read that
Harvested site I posted, it might clear it up. It's a
Bootleg. The only way Harvested material can be obtained is
through downloading or trading. As for the Complete Zabriskie Point Sessions... it's a bootleg too. I mentioned it earlier. Anyone gonna take care of that? |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: February 20 2006 at 03:47
|
It is indeed true that the BBC had full rights to broadcast the sesssions, but as RA says, they rarely had the right to release them as albums. Even those which have been released offically are not usually on a BBC label. The fact that they are titled "BBC sessions" does not mean that they have been released by the BBC. |
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: February 20 2006 at 03:52
For me the fact that an album is officially available in a record shop makes it a none-bootleg. Record shops would not sell albums that are illegal; it would only get them into trouble. Take for example an album like "Maida Vale" by VdGG. It is not an official VdGG recording (proven by the fact that Hammill does not list it on his homepage). On the other hand PH even wrote some liner notes for "Maida Vale" (undoubtedly written by him; his style and sense of humour is unmistakeable). This makes the album a non-bootleg for me. -------------  BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Date Posted: February 20 2006 at 13:04
|
They wouldn't selll bootlegs? There's a local chain of record
shops (Record and Tape Traders) that did indeed sell bootlegs.
They did so for years. They got busted for it, and no longer sell
'em. But they did. And I repeat, there's nothing official about anything released under Harvested. They are straight-up bootlegs. |
Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: February 20 2006 at 13:23
|
Ok, I've contacted Joren again, he'll take a look at this...
-------------
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: February 20 2006 at 14:37
|
I agree with that BF, that VDGG album is certainly not a bootleg. The problem is, many of the albums of "BBC" recordings are bootlegs. Anyone can record them off the radio and press up copies. The letters BBC can give them a false appearance of legitimacy. |
Posted By: Joren
Date Posted: February 21 2006 at 08:37
?? I'm male! Or maybe you're suggesting I'm a sissy? Anyway, I'm not going to delete albums that have been reviewed already. Secondly I don't see any real evidence that those albums are bootlegs. The Masters Of Rock album for example was just an obscure release. And DVDs like KQED may very well be legal. And I don't feel like researching all this. Contact another admin if you guys would like to see this taken care of. Sorry. I'm currently busy doing things for University. |
Posted By: Bryan
Date Posted: February 21 2006 at 20:00
| ResidentAlien is right, these Floyd releases are definitely bootlegs. |
Posted By: ResidentAlien
Date Posted: February 21 2006 at 20:03
|
Ok... I'll post this link, one more time.... http://%0Awww.harvested.org. - www.harvested.org. That KQED DVD is created by Harvested.org. You can even click on the picture of KQED that's on that site; it clearly identifies Harvested on the back of the DVD cover. A little bit of trivia here... HARVEST RECORDS was the record company that Floyd signed with in 1969, and stayed with until The Final Cut, at which point they moved to EMI. So what is HARVESTED RECORDS? A clever play on the name HARVEST RECORDS. Like most bootleg suppliers, they find something on the band's history to base their name off of. Take, for instance, Free Range Pigs. That's another Pink Floyd Bootleg Distributor. Anyway, you can read Harvested.org's site. They create that stuff on their own. Their stuff can only be obtained by trading. All that information is right on their site. I fail to see how anymore research is involved. As for the Complete Zabriskie Point... I own it. It's a bootleg. It can only be obtainted by trading. What more proof does one need? But I suppose you want me to link you to some information, so... http://rateyourmusic.com/release/unauth/pink_floyd/the_complete_zabriskie_point_sessions/ - http://rateyourmusic.com/release/unauth/pink_floyd/the_compl ete_zabriskie_point_sessions/ Clearly labled as a bootleg^ http://www.pinkfloydfan.net/t6396-the-complete-zabriskie-point-sessions.html - http://www.pinkfloydfan.net/t6396-the-complete-zabriskie-poi nt-sessions.html They discuss how its up for trade on that board^ They clearly identify it as a CDR release... http://pf-db.com/index.php?list=songs&choice=244 - http://pf-db.com/index.php?list=songs&choice=244 There it is listed on an RoIO database (Recordings of illegitimate origin) http://www.roio.radzionkow.net/roio.htm - http://www.roio.radzionkow.net/roio.htm Another RoIO database^ And that Masters of Rock Album... that is legit. I said that. I spent an hour the other day researching it. Its the other album, The Best of Pink Floyd album that looks sketchy. Featuring the same tracklisting, the same Catalogue Number, a spelling mistake directly on the tracklist, and a release four years apart from the known legit Masters of Rock? That completely suggests being a boot. Especially the catalogue number. I can see no reason for it being exactly the same as Masters of Rock.. yet it is. That is pretty much a sure sign of illegitimacy. |
Posted By: DBSilver
Date Posted: March 01 2006 at 13:21
|
"rival Prog website" ??? Gee what's next... "Hated Enemy website"? Certainly the mutual patrons of the two web sites would consider both sites to be assets to the prog community rather than rivals. ------------- Regards, DBSilver www.ProGGnosis.com |
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: March 01 2006 at 18:17
OK point taken..... ....by all means not a critism both sites offer good PROG arguments, I didn't literally mean by the word "rival" just showing it was from a different source. Maybe I should have choson my words more carefully.  ------------- CYMRU AM BYTH
|
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: March 01 2006 at 18:56
|
At this moment there is a strange policy about illegal recordings: in The Netherlands you can by illegal cd's like Genesis Live and Pink Floyd Anthology (both featuring footage from the early years) in legal record shops. I have asked how this is possible, well their answer was this: as long as the bands don't start to pursuit the record shops that sell these illegal/bootleg recordings they are regarded as 'not illegal' ... can you follow me? About the illegal CD reviews I often got the idea that the reviewers consider it as interesting to review these rare cd's rather than they want to add something constructive to Prog Archives! |
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: March 01 2006 at 19:07
^^ very lucky
------------- CYMRU AM BYTH
|