Concert recordings..
 

Hi guys, I read through the rules to make sure I could post a request like this, and didn't see anything against it, so here we go!

Are there any tapers on this board, and will anyone here be taping any shows this summer? I will be doing a Meat Loaf/Cyndi Lauper show, and I am looking for people to trade with. I collect on Cyndi, not Meat Loaf. But I would love to trade the Meat Loaf show for Cyndi. I do fan-to-fan trading.. not sales of live recordings.

So - if anyone will be taping any of the following dates.. please tape Cyndi as well and we will have a trade!

July 23 - Denver, CO
July 25 - Los Angeles, CA
July 26 - Las Vegas, NV
July 29 - Phoenix, AZ
July 31 - Reno, NV
August 2 - Kelseyville, CA
August 25 - Syracuse, NY
August 29 - Essex Junction, VT
August 30 - Holmdel, NJ
September 3 - Uncasville, CT

Hope to hear from you -
Colin
duranie@nb.sympatico.ca

I'd never bootleg tape one of Meat's concerts, and I don't think he'd be happy to see this here

meats opinion
 

id like to know what meats opinion on this is.some bands really dont mind being bootlegged as long as profit isnt made from the reordings,but wouldnt like to say meat is one of these artists.im sure he is well aware of what goes on at concerts.for all the years he has been going im sure many recordings have been made.so if youre reading this meat what is your opinion,do you accept it or would you kick someones ass over it. :??:

I'd be surprised to learn that Meat didn't mind bootleg recordings. Whatever the original intentions, eventually one of these is likely to end up on eBay, and bootlegs are generally of poor sound quality and do not do the performer justice.

Meat puts huge effort into giving the best performance he can, and I can only imagine how distressing it would be for inferior recordings to be circulated and, even worse, offered for public auction.

Imo bootlegs are bootlegs, whatever the source or motivation, and can harm the performer's reputation and damage sales of legitimate recordings. When I buy a ticket to a Meat Loaf concert I buy the opportunity to hear a great performer deliver an incredible performance. I do not believe I buy his permission to take in a recording device and make a tape which is bound to be of poorer quality. In the same way when I buy one of Meat's CDs I do not believe I buy the right to copy this for others so they do not need to buy it. The latter infringes copyright law, and I would have assumed unauthorised amateur taping of concerts was the same. However, even if it is not, I would consider it dubious form.

bootlegs
 

ive heard it said and i agree with it that people who buy/trade bootlegs already have evrything that is official.also i cant undertstand how record sales can be affected if the people who buy boots already have all official albums by meat( or whoever).im not here to defend bootlegs but just saying that i dont think record sales can be affected if people trade bootlegs.bono from u2 has said they encourage fans to turn up to the concerts with recording gear as long as no profit is made from the recordings.im sure meat wouldnt like to think that people are recording his concerts and people selling them.as i said im not here to defend or encorage people to buy bootlegs but i would like to hear meats opinion.

duranie
 

i have nothing against people collecting bootlegs( its your choice) but you could have found a better place to ask about them.meat posts on here and all i can say is be careful as i wouldnt like to be you ass if it gets kicked.as i said its your choice to collect boots but its a bit daft posting on a site where the artist concerned is posting. 8O

cyndi/meatloaf
 

i cant believe that duranie is expecting people to ( on his behalf ) to record the concerts listed.now why cant you tape the shows yourself if you want them so bad ( are you not going to the concerts????). :oops:

plymboy wrote:
Whilst it may well be that many of those who buy/trade bootlegs already have anything that is official, (and this can probably only be said for illicit recordings and not for offical released CDs) it is by no means true that all do. I have seen on other message boards requests for people to "burn a copy of CHSIB" for them as they want to hear it but don't want to buy it. Bootleg tapes and CDs do harm sales. Just as many people subscribe to sites where they can download movies free, some people will seek free copies of recordings.

With this I concur wholeheartedly!!!

bootlegs
 

ok you have your opinion and i have mine,but we both seem to agree that the quality of some of these recordings are crap.i just cant see ( and probably never will ) how by trading cds/cassettes ( no money changing hands whatsoever) can affect meatloafs or any other artists record sales.if 100 people wanted a copy of the new album and someone burned a copy of it that ( imo) would affect his sales as its an official album stand corrected not every bootleg collector has every other album of the artist,but a big percentage has( once again,its my opinion).please dont hate me for my opinion.

No one has ever produced solid evidence to that claim. Bootlegs (== non authorized live recordings and/or unreleased material/outtakes) are, afaik, mostly sought after by the 'die-hard' fans. A lot of bands (old Metallica, Dream Theater, U2, Iron Maiden, ...) allow recording of their concerts, as long as no profit is made of such recordings. That can easily be done by trading -- that's not selling, nor buying -- bootlegs. If you don't have material to trade with, there are various other options...

Burning CD's, however, is a completly different story. But please do note that there is also no solid evidence that the global trend (decrease in album sales) is caused by burning/downloading. The record industy tries to let us believe that, but they have got no proof of their claims being true. Meanwhile, they're throwing in copy-protections, etc... often while they're breaching copyright law themselves doing so (explanation: a 'copy protected' CD does not comply to the standards for CD's, therefore they are NOT cd's, and it's illigal to put the "compact disc digital audio" logo on said pieces of plastic. Not many companies seem to know that.)

And about being "a bit daft posting on a site where the artist concerned is posting. ": I'd like to see Meat comment on this, before getting all hot-headed about this. Bootlegs exist, I have no problem with them, and I see no good reason why artists should have them...

William

hot headed ...not me
 

i wasnt getting hotheaded,and im pleased to see someone shares my opinion.

When I said bootlegs can and do harm sales it followed on from
I meant that illicit copies of officially released recordings can harm sales. I have no idea of the quantities, but it seems to me that every time someone gets a free copy rather than buying a CD it is a sale lost. Enough of these and it harms sales.

I don't think anyone was getting hotheaded either. As far as I can see every post here has been contained and expressed no anger, merely opinions put in a civilised way .. which surely is the basis of discussion and debate.

:twisted: Unfortunatly bootlegs are the only way to get rare live performances.How many OFFICIAL live albums have been released in the UK in 25 years.Two? 8O
I would like to see a lot more official releases.
I've said it many times before,and i'll keep saying it,Meat should have every concert recorded and sell them as orderd if neccersary through the fan clubs and other official vendors at a premium.A good quality official CD of a concert you have attended has got to be the ultimate momento.
That would make the fans very happy,with the added bonus of making Meat's bank manager thank god he's alive.EVERYONE WINS 8) .
How about the videos no longer available?Why let good material sit on a shelf gathering dust? 8O
Forget Hits Out Of Hell.Let's have a double DVD set containing every video Meat has done during his career.

Pearl Jam did this with GREAT sucess, that being selling copies of every show from a tour.

Further, Jimmy Buffett (who I have mentioned before) is cool enough to broadcast every concert he plays via the Internet! Buffett's CD sales and ticket sales went through the roof after "the world at large" was able to hear how awesome of a show he put on.

ROCK ON FIRE BALL!!!

On a slightly different note: a friend told me that the Deftones are going to do almost the same. Almost. They don't bother with CD's -- just plain downloads. That's another idea...

Yep, i though it was illegal

Not always true. There are some venues here in America where you can do all of the recording you want to (i.e., a lot of the small fairgrounds like where Meat did some shows). They do not have policies about recording and taking pictures during the show.

Sad...but true.

ROCK ON FIRE BALL!!!

I certainly do not like the idea behind this thread.
I do consider bootlegging as illegal and the recent changes in european copyright laws reflect this too. Even if venues don't have policies regarding recording a show, the artist still holds the copyright of that particular show. And unless he gives you an explicit permission to use the recorded material (radio broadcast as an example), you are committing a crime.
Obviously Metallica and some other artists have done that, Meat hasn't.

Having said that, please respect that I do not want to see any direct or indirect links to bootlegged, ripped or any other copyrighted material in this or any other thread.

R.
webmaster@mlukfc.com

Thanks R. I had a feeling that was the case. Well, and clearly said.

I don't think Bootlegging is bad if the person is doing it for their own pleasure or for no profits. What's bad are the people who buy a block of tickets for a concert only to sell them for a huge profit :evil:

Now these people should be put somewhere cold and all be made to stay :D

Bootlegs are illegal, but I know a lot of performers that allow them, as long as no one is making money.
I know a guy that has personal permission from the band "Live" to offer bootlegs to fans. He is allowed to do that, as a courtesy from one fan to another fan.

What is Meat's opinion exactly about bootlegs?

FM wrote:
Isn't that rather like saying
Unfortunately grave robbing's the only way to get a decent corpse for dissection
Unfortunately buying a kidney from a third world live donor living in poverty's the only way to get one quickly

Being the only way doesn't really make it right imo :roll:

And Guppie said:
As R said:
One of the many qualities I respect in Meat is his drive for excellence, his obsession with improvement and that he always strives to give you his best possible standard plus 10%. Frankly it seems to me inconceivable that someone like this would want to have in circulation amateur recordings of his performances made by people with concealed tape recorders. These bootlegs can and frequently do finish up for sale on sites like eBay, however "innocent" the original intention.

This is a man who will never settle for less than his best; who comes on this forum and apologises when a venue let him down on sound quality. R says Meat hasn't given permission. That's enough for me. :)

If Meat doesn't allow it, that's his right of course. I only said a lot of bands do allow it.
Selling bootlegs? that is NOT done. No performer would ever allow that.

Morning Guppie :))

I agree some bands do allow bootlegs .. I was just saying why it seemed to me that this was something Meat would be unlikely imo to welcome. He's about quality and bootlegs generally aren't the best quality. I agree absolutely that it's not on to sell them .. but eBay abounds with ones which have found their way there .. and some clearly recorded for that purpose, along with unofficial compilations. There was one .. can't remember the name now .. but it was a collection of live recordings in a case with a printed cover .. there were some telling mistakes in the track listing of song titles, and it was being sold from Russia.

It appears I have been quoted out of context :roll:
Fans want live performances.If official releases are not available it is inevetable that a market will open for bootlegs.

I said...
This would bring an end to the trading of illegal bootlegs, provide the fans with much better quality performances, and, put a hell of a lot of loose change in Meat's pockets.
everybody wins.Nobody loses.

Bit confused about the dead body conection 8O , but if you want to use that as a metophore, death row inmates have been selling their bodies to medical science for years.
Why give away for free what you can make a profit from?

Actually,it does work doesn't it. :mrgreen:

FM I know you said you'd like to see more official releases .. although surely the reality, given what has been released in the last 25 years, and that this is Meat's last world tour, is that you won't. And I quoted one piece of your post to make a point, albeit a humourous one, about what you seemed to be saying .. ie people will make bootlegs if they want live recordings and these are not released officially.

This thread started because someone was asking others to tape Meat's concerts .. R has pointed out that Meat does not give permission for people to do this, and however much one might like to have records of live concerts, given they are not made available, it is only inevitable that a market in bootlegs opens up if people are prepared to go against this particular performer's wishes and carry this out.

It is inevitable sadly that we will have muggers of old people .. but it doesn't make it right. Who was it said that for evil to flourish all that is required is for good men to stand back and do nothing? So I tend to think on a board whichthis performer comes to, those of us who support and respect him should stand up and say this is wrong if we believe it to be so.

uumm I don´t know what Meat´s views are on Bootlegs but I don't like the idea personally I think apart from poor quailty it is taking something away from the live venue experience and obviously money from both artist and venues which I doubt either would like.
ooohhhh hang on a moment thou´ its a bit like the only front row tickets going for 200quid+

bootlegs
 

how can the venue be losing money when we all paid £30 for a ticket,id say they made a lot of money from it.as has been said if trading bootlegs then money is not made,it is not selling or buying ( not a single penny changing hands.lets face some people agree with bootlegs some of us dont,at the end of the day trading is trading and that is not a money making business if no one is parting with cash.as ive also said im not here defending bootlegs i can just see both sides of the story.i would like to know how the venue itself loses money by people taping concerts.also how artists can be losing money via trading .

Trading bootlegs is not wrong. Then you are not making money, and if you sell bootlegs well... it is possible, if you only count the money of the recordable disks and porto costs.

Think the site that Michel and I have is the most complete bootleg site at this moment. (but that is my opinion.)

The Butcher.

well said tim trading itself is not illegal as much as peoiple would like to think its a criminal act.selling is illegal beacuse thats when money comes into it( bootleggers are making the money while the artist loses out).i know people are still going to say trading is illegal( why is it) but its not.the dirty word in bootlegs is money,and that is far seperated from trading.

Tim wrote:
As R has pointed out, the artist holds the copyright of any particular show, and unless he/she has given explicit permission to use the recorded material (radio broadcast as an example), the activity is illegal. He also pointed out that Meat has not given his permission for this. This would suggest to me that Meat does NOT endorse this activity, so a Meat Loaf fan would imo not consider the making of bootlegs at his concerts either legal or respectful of his wishes, nor would the trading of them be considered fair.

And once a bootleg leaves your hands "in trade" you have no control over whether it will be offered for sale, so trying to justify the activity by claiming it is for trade only is a specious argument frankly, and may well explain why those artists who withold permission do this. They have no control over the quality, and thus no control over something which may well be offered for public sale down the line, and often is. Just check eBay .. it abounds with these things.

Bootleg recordings of concerts are generally either
1) of a reasonable quality because they have been made by someone involved with the sound on stage, in which case this theft from the artist is a betrayal of trust
2) amateur and of poor sound quality, made by someone taking a portable recoding device into the audience, which is not only illegal without the artist's permission, but which in Meat's case will also be of a standard that will fall far short of that which he strives to deliver, and imo is a betrayal of loyalty

Bootleg copies of released material available for sale are also illegal

Tim then continued:
Does this not fly in the face of R's request?:

If it looks like an indirect link, walks like an indirect link, and quacks like an indirect link .. it probably IS an indirect link :lmao:

plymboy wrote:
The word "bootlegging" itself implies an illicit activity, and without the artist's permission you are stealing a performance to which he or she has copyright. Your illicitly obtained recording is therefore illegal.

And how can you say that once a "trade" has left your hands you have any control over whether it will be sold or not? Quite simply you can't .. well I suppose you can SAY that, but it is without any real basis of knowledge or certainty.

very verybtrue.once you have traded a bootleg tape/cd you have no control whatsoever.yes bootlegging is wrong,its illegal,its also too big a thing to stop ( altogether).whatever people think of bootlegging it wont be stopped( i dont think it can be).until record companies can give fans of meat( or any other recording artist) enough live material on cd then bootlegging will continue.going back to what i said you do not have any control over what happens to a recording once it has been traded with another person.

Which is why I would never illicitly record a concert, nor trade in or buy bootlegs.

I'm sure it won't be stopped completely, any more than car theft or muggings. But if no-one would buy stolen car radios there would be less incentive for thieves to steal them. And if Meat's fans refused to bootleg concerts, and to trade in or buy these, the market would take a knock!

yes youre right it wont be stopped completly( like any other crime) unfortunatley.there will always be a few fans that wont take any notice and bootleg a gig regardless of what is printed on a ticket.bootlegging will never go away so it is silly to think otherwise.

plymboy wrote:
Far be it from me to be silly .. however .. it would be nice to think that in a fan club forum which Meat takes the time, trouble and interest to visit, the fans in such a forum condemned the practice and disassociated themselves from it don't you think?

Bit of a slap in the face with a wet turbot if they don't imo

i agree with you .

You're exactly right Caryl

Vicki

bootlegs
 

what do we all think of them ,good, bad .do they serve any real purpose to the fans.whay do you think meat would think of them.i know this may be a bit of a taboo subject but im just curious

I think you'll find this subject has been discussed - you may find more if you try the the search function

I don't agree with the copying of original albums, but I do download and copy Live performances that I can't find on cd, as some are not available to buy.

Whenever these kind of discussions come around, a lot of people seem not to understand what a bootleg is.
A bootleg is in the most accepted use of the word a not endorsed/'illegal' live recording or collection of unreleased tracks (demos, outtakes, etc).
A bootleg is not, or at least, not in these kind of discussions, a 'pirate' copy of a legal, commonly available album.

Whereas I find selling copies of albums morally questionable, I think that there is no harm in trading bootlegs. The content is not commercially available, and in most cases, only the die hard fans are interested. Selling bootlegs on the other hand, is an absolute no-no.

Then i hope that people who don't like bootlegs don't go to the site that Michel and I have made!!! :lmao:

Well, again, I say Meat Loaf fans would all benefit from LiveDisc. I have heard them, I love them, they are awesome, and are what the fans who really appreciate the music want to have!!!

'Nuff Said!

ROCK ON LIVE DISC!!!

(Posted on "Favourite live songs" before I saw these posts)

Hear! Hear!

(I have a few very treasured Roy Orbison bootlegs in my possession!)

Most songs I have are on CD bought from shops/ebay/ etc. Bootlegs just enhance my collection! For every bootleg I probably have 20 or thirty of the genuine article!

I think there are likely to be NO fans of any artist who ONLY have bootlegs in their collection! Most bootlegs are inferior to the genuine article, and we get them to get a different slant on a song, or they are precious to us because we were at the concert where they were recorded.

I don't honestly think any artist is worse off because fans have bootlegs - they are an addition to, not a replacement for genuine songs.

Just my thoughts.

Heather.

well what aturn around not so long ago it was quite the opposite.some ppl were saying that they shouldnt exist basically,and that it affects record sales.now all of a sudden we seem to be almost supporting them.i have quite a few and have been collecting for a few years now.anyone intrested om me.

does anyone know how many ( im sure some exist) boots of this tour are out there .il get thrown off here for saying that but its the chance il take. :D

I'm pretty sure you won't get an answer in this thread.