Rush On Bootlegging

[Lorraine]

The bottom line is money they feel they are being cheated out of, but no one makes any money off of the bootlegs, and I don't think anyone ever did.

 

Sure they do. Plenty of people sell bootlegs still today but it was much more prevalent before they were as easily available on the Internet.

It says right on each and every bootleg I have that they are for free trade and not for monetary gain.

Which doesn't prevent them from being sold.

 

That's not our problem if people can't read and follow simple instructions.

[JARG]

The bottom line is money they feel they are being cheated out of, but no one makes any money off of the bootlegs, and I don't think anyone ever did.

 

Sure they do. Plenty of people sell bootlegs still today but it was much more prevalent before they were as easily available on the Internet.

It says right on each and every bootleg I have that they are for free trade and not for monetary gain.

Which doesn't prevent them from being sold.

 

That's not our problem if people can't read and follow simple instructions.

Yup. I was just pointing out that EagleMoon is almost certainly correct.

Edited April 22, 2016 by JARG

[The Cat 3]

[edhunter]

The bottom line is money they feel they are being cheated out of, but no one makes any money off of the bootlegs, and I don't think anyone ever did.

 

Sure they do. Plenty of people sell bootlegs still today but it was much more prevalent before they were as easily available on the Internet.

It says right on each and every bootleg I have that they are for free trade and not for monetary gain.

Which doesn't prevent them from being sold.

 

That's not our problem if people can't read and follow simple instructions.

 

I bought a few before I had permanent internet access and learned of the trading community. Once I started trading/downloading I became an eBay Nazi for a while, getting boot listings shut down. I haven't downloaded a show in years, ever since I got into it with some prick who had taped a New Hampshire show I was at.

[geezer]

Bootlegging official releases and merchandise can still be an unpleasant matter, but nowadays thanks to internet no one makes money out of unauthorized live recordings.

However, when we bought LPs or CDs of this latter kind in the past we already owned everything officially released by the band/artist.

And then we started downloading/sharing freely live recordings and in the meanwhile we kept buying remastered/deluxe/WTF legal editions....

[EagleMoon]

People bought unauthorized recordings all the time up until just recently. I still see them being sold here and there. Now that they're so easily available for free (even though some of the download sites can be pretty iffy as far as viruses go) it's harder for people to make money doing it.

[lerxt1990]

Geddy seems to have a really reasonable take on it. Neil can come across as a little bit more than sour, but in this particular case I think he just sounded like he was joking.

I think he was more or less just parroting Ray Daniel's opinions.

 

HWQ: In a segment of a Montreal news feature called Pulse Probe the statement was made that the band felt the public was being ripped off by bootleggers. We feel the public rarely has access to bootlegs due to their very limited distribution and that bootlegs sell to collectors who know what they're buying. Any comments?

 

Danniels: To admit to being a collector of illegal goods is similar to being a habitual shoplifter.

 

Don't you think bootlegs are a tribute to a band and serve much the same purpose as a promotional album?

 

No.

 

Are you opposed to the music on bootlegs getting out to the general public?

 

Certain things are not intended for the general public. Recording a transaction between an artist and the audience without their knowledge is no different than recording a private telephone call.

 

What are the band members' views on bootlegs (a bootleg consists of unreleased or unavailable music as opposed to pirates or counterfeits which are copies of released records)?

 

Bootlegs rip off the public. They are not quality products. They deceive the public by capitalizing on the artists' name and image.

 

Does the band listen to other bands' bootlegs?

 

No comment.

 

How large do you feel the pressing of a bootleg is?

 

No comment.

 

Without going into areas you can't get into, can you tell us about the lawsuit in Montreal and what caused it?

 

No comment.

 

How many copies of the Rush bootleg were seized in Montreal?

 

No comment.

 

How many do you think were pressed?

 

No comment.

 

Any comments on the recording quality?

 

There is no quality involved. It was recorded on a $40 cassette player and then lost even more "quality" in pressing.

 

What do you think of the terrible cover on the Rush Around The World Recorded Live In Montreal boot?

 

As bad a rip off as the album.

 

If a Rush bootleg that was well recorded with a limited run came out would you take action?

 

Yes. If it was "well recorded" it would be a commercial release. It takes sales in excess of three to five hundred thousand albums to break even on what we consider well recorded.

 

What does the band or its management do about tape recorders at concerts?

 

Our people are instructed to confiscate and deal with the person(s) involved as seems appropriate to the time they are found.

 

Has Rush had any problems with counterfeit records?

 

Same as anyone.

 

Bootleg t-shirts and other unauthorized merchandise is a direct loss of money. Are you actively seeking out persons involved?

 

Yes. We don't appreciate calls and letters from irate parents because their kids have been ripped off. Most of the bootlegs are poor quality and a direct reflection on the band. Kids feel if the shirt has a Rush logo on it and it falls apart the first time it's washed, the band has ripped them off. We want to sell a second shirt the second time we come to a city and if you rip off someone the first time you can be sure they won't buy a second shirt.

 

"Certain things are not intended for the general public. Recording a transaction between an artist and the audience without their knowledge is no different than recording a private telephone call." Ray should stick to music, this is an assinine comparison.

[lerxt1990]

Geddy seems to have a really reasonable take on it. Neil can come across as a little bit more than sour, but in this particular case I think he just sounded like he was joking.

I think he was more or less just parroting Ray Daniel's opinions.

 

HWQ: In a segment of a Montreal news feature called Pulse Probe the statement was made that the band felt the public was being ripped off by bootleggers. We feel the public rarely has access to bootlegs due to their very limited distribution and that bootlegs sell to collectors who know what they're buying. Any comments?

 

Danniels: To admit to being a collector of illegal goods is similar to being a habitual shoplifter.

 

Don't you think bootlegs are a tribute to a band and serve much the same purpose as a promotional album?

 

No.

 

Are you opposed to the music on bootlegs getting out to the general public?

 

Certain things are not intended for the general public. Recording a transaction between an artist and the audience without their knowledge is no different than recording a private telephone call.

 

What are the band members' views on bootlegs (a bootleg consists of unreleased or unavailable music as opposed to pirates or counterfeits which are copies of released records)?

 

Bootlegs rip off the public. They are not quality products. They deceive the public by capitalizing on the artists' name and image.

 

Does the band listen to other bands' bootlegs?

 

No comment.

 

How large do you feel the pressing of a bootleg is?

 

No comment.

 

Without going into areas you can't get into, can you tell us about the lawsuit in Montreal and what caused it?

 

No comment.

 

How many copies of the Rush bootleg were seized in Montreal?

 

No comment.

 

How many do you think were pressed?

 

No comment.

 

Any comments on the recording quality?

 

There is no quality involved. It was recorded on a $40 cassette player and then lost even more "quality" in pressing.

 

What do you think of the terrible cover on the Rush Around The World Recorded Live In Montreal boot?

 

As bad a rip off as the album.

 

If a Rush bootleg that was well recorded with a limited run came out would you take action?

 

Yes. If it was "well recorded" it would be a commercial release. It takes sales in excess of three to five hundred thousand albums to break even on what we consider well recorded.

 

What does the band or its management do about tape recorders at concerts?

 

Our people are instructed to confiscate and deal with the person(s) involved as seems appropriate to the time they are found.

 

Has Rush had any problems with counterfeit records?

 

Same as anyone.

 

Bootleg t-shirts and other unauthorized merchandise is a direct loss of money. Are you actively seeking out persons involved?

 

Yes. We don't appreciate calls and letters from irate parents because their kids have been ripped off. Most of the bootlegs are poor quality and a direct reflection on the band. Kids feel if the shirt has a Rush logo on it and it falls apart the first time it's washed, the band has ripped them off. We want to sell a second shirt the second time we come to a city and if you rip off someone the first time you can be sure they won't buy a second shirt.

 

Ray's just annoyed thinking about all the $$$ lost.

 

I find it amusing that someone like him - a wheeler and a dealer if there ever was one - should suddenly get moral.

 

What Ray fails to realize because its his job to protect his and the bands bottom lines is that being ripped off is up to the consumer with regard to recording quality. In the absence of a live album people were happy to pay for an audience recording (and just look at what the Dead and Pearl Jam have done with that) to get more and different live recordings (I even remember Vapor Trails tour boots). To dismiss them as crap is too much, yes they are not professional recordings, but if not, then why are people buying them?

 

Ray says what Ray has to say, but some of it is just obviously support for his industry, especially because many in that industry are becoming wholly irrelevant now.

[djflex]

Cant stand when bands bitch about bootlegging.

 

 

[treeduck]

I think Geddy's got the most sensible opinion on this:

 

Geddy Lee Actually, you know, that's a very good point. A lot of people say 'It takes away from record sales' but I think you made the best point because the fact is that any fan who buys a bootleg is still going to buy your record. So, who is it harming? That's the other side of the coin.

 

Peart is just being Peart:

 

Neil Peart: You "got hold of"? You mean, you abrogated our rights, circumvented protective copyrights, violated international statutes, and supported piracy by buying a bootleg album, don't you? Ah- I thought so. Never mind.

[treeduck]

In fact Peart sounds like the Hannibal Lector of drummers with that quote...

[grep]

Us prog fans, we buy all the records anyway. The boots are material that we'd buy if it were available.

 

Second point, casual fans barely know that boots exist. So it's a non factor in that space.

 

So, in my opinion boots don't hurt sales, but they do enhance fandom.

[jamie]

I love how Alex is just kinda like "whatever man, it happens" because honestly same

[HalfwayToGone]

The bottom line is money they feel they are being cheated out of, but no one makes any money off of the bootlegs, and I don't think anyone ever did.

That's actually not at all true of the old days. Now with it all being downloaded free and videos up on YouTube for free, it's only an issue when something that is really embarrassing to the band is put out there, like that horrific video of Scott Weiland when he was completely wasted singing Vaseline. A lot of those older shows, before the Internet, were sold in large numbers to fans at non-chain, local record stores worldwide. Jack from Jack's Music in Red Bank, NJ got in trouble for selling non-licensed tshirts, recordings etc, and lost a ticketmaster outlet deal, because of scalping. Ther was a lot of money to be made on that stuff back then, and it was very risky to try to record shows back then when no one had cell phones that could record anything, and one would have to smuggle recording equipment past the gate. There also wasn't digital recording back then, so duplicating boots meant serious drops in quality with each generation of copy--all we had were cassette tapes back then. If you wanted a boot, you had to pay for it or trade, it might sound great or like complete crap, and vinyl boots weren't cheap, either. Getting caught landed you in police custody. Toward the late 80s early 90s when gear got small enough, it got easier to get away with it, but no less illegal, and security wasn't as thorough--no metal detectors or frisking, etc--pre WTC disaster. They might peek into your bag if you had one. Still a big deal if you got caught, though.

[Anthemic]

Geddy seems to have a really reasonable take on it. Neil can come across as a little bit more than sour, but in this particular case I think he just sounded like he was joking.

I think he was more or less just parroting Ray Daniel's opinions.

 

HWQ: In a segment of a Montreal news feature called Pulse Probe the statement was made that the band felt the public was being ripped off by bootleggers. We feel the public rarely has access to bootlegs due to their very limited distribution and that bootlegs sell to collectors who know what they're buying. Any comments?

 

Danniels: To admit to being a collector of illegal goods is similar to being a habitual shoplifter.

 

Don't you think bootlegs are a tribute to a band and serve much the same purpose as a promotional album?

 

No.

 

Are you opposed to the music on bootlegs getting out to the general public?

 

Certain things are not intended for the general public. Recording a transaction between an artist and the audience without their knowledge is no different than recording a private telephone call.

 

What are the band members' views on bootlegs (a bootleg consists of unreleased or unavailable music as opposed to pirates or counterfeits which are copies of released records)?

 

Bootlegs rip off the public. They are not quality products. They deceive the public by capitalizing on the artists' name and image.

 

Does the band listen to other bands' bootlegs?

 

No comment.

 

How large do you feel the pressing of a bootleg is?

 

No comment.

 

Without going into areas you can't get into, can you tell us about the lawsuit in Montreal and what caused it?

 

No comment.

 

How many copies of the Rush bootleg were seized in Montreal?

 

No comment.

 

How many do you think were pressed?

 

No comment.

 

Any comments on the recording quality?

 

There is no quality involved. It was recorded on a $40 cassette player and then lost even more "quality" in pressing.

 

What do you think of the terrible cover on the Rush Around The World Recorded Live In Montreal boot?

 

As bad a rip off as the album.

 

If a Rush bootleg that was well recorded with a limited run came out would you take action?

 

Yes. If it was "well recorded" it would be a commercial release. It takes sales in excess of three to five hundred thousand albums to break even on what we consider well recorded.

 

What does the band or its management do about tape recorders at concerts?

 

Our people are instructed to confiscate and deal with the person(s) involved as seems appropriate to the time they are found.

 

Has Rush had any problems with counterfeit records?

 

Same as anyone.

 

Bootleg t-shirts and other unauthorized merchandise is a direct loss of money. Are you actively seeking out persons involved?

 

Yes. We don't appreciate calls and letters from irate parents because their kids have been ripped off. Most of the bootlegs are poor quality and a direct reflection on the band. Kids feel if the shirt has a Rush logo on it and it falls apart the first time it's washed, the band has ripped them off. We want to sell a second shirt the second time we come to a city and if you rip off someone the first time you can be sure they won't buy a second shirt.

 

Ray's just annoyed thinking about all the $$$ lost.

 

I find it amusing that someone like him - a wheeler and a dealer if there ever was one - should suddenly get moral.

 

What Ray fails to realize because its his job to protect his and the bands bottom lines is that being ripped off is up to the consumer with regard to recording quality. In the absence of a live album people were happy to pay for an audience recording (and just look at what the Dead and Pearl Jam have done with that) to get more and different live recordings (I even remember Vapor Trails tour boots). To dismiss them as crap is too much, yes they are not professional recordings, but if not, then why are people buying them?

 

Ray says what Ray has to say, but some of it is just obviously support for his industry, especially because many in that industry are becoming wholly irrelevant now.

 

this interview may or may not still reflect how ray danniels feels, but some things are different now. someone said earlier this interview was from the spring of 80. back then audience recordings WERE crap, and the music industry was still powerful.

[lerxt1990]

The bottom line is money they feel they are being cheated out of, but no one makes any money off of the bootlegs, and I don't think anyone ever did.

That's actually not at all true of the old days. Now with it all being downloaded free and videos up on YouTube for free, it's only an issue when something that is really embarrassing to the band is put out there, like that horrific video of Scott Weiland when he was completely wasted singing Vaseline. A lot of those older shows, before the Internet, were sold in large numbers to fans at non-chain, local record stores worldwide. Jack from Jack's Music in Red Bank, NJ got in trouble for selling non-licensed tshirts, recordings etc, and lost a ticketmaster outlet deal, because of scalping. Ther was a lot of money to be made on that stuff back then, and it was very risky to try to record shows back then when no one had cell phones that could record anything, and one would have to smuggle recording equipment past the gate. There also wasn't digital recording back then, so duplicating boots meant serious drops in quality with each generation of copy--all we had were cassette tapes back then. If you wanted a boot, you had to pay for it or trade, it might sound great or like complete crap, and vinyl boots weren't cheap, either. Getting caught landed you in police custody. Toward the late 80s early 90s when gear got small enough, it got easier to get away with it, but no less illegal, and security wasn't as thorough--no metal detectors or frisking, etc--pre WTC disaster. They might peek into your bag if you had one. Still a big deal if you got caught, though.

 

I'm sure though the way the music industry ripped off the artists, and artificially throttled down music availability, makes one pause to see some irony in them not getting the profits. That doesnt make recording them and selling it right, its clearly illegal, but I also am a little skeptical of the music companies whining on the subject given some of their behavior over the years.

[lerxt1990]

Geddy seems to have a really reasonable take on it. Neil can come across as a little bit more than sour, but in this particular case I think he just sounded like he was joking.

I think he was more or less just parroting Ray Daniel's opinions.

 

HWQ: In a segment of a Montreal news feature called Pulse Probe the statement was made that the band felt the public was being ripped off by bootleggers. We feel the public rarely has access to bootlegs due to their very limited distribution and that bootlegs sell to collectors who know what they're buying. Any comments?

 

Danniels: To admit to being a collector of illegal goods is similar to being a habitual shoplifter.

 

Don't you think bootlegs are a tribute to a band and serve much the same purpose as a promotional album?

 

No.

 

Are you opposed to the music on bootlegs getting out to the general public?

 

Certain things are not intended for the general public. Recording a transaction between an artist and the audience without their knowledge is no different than recording a private telephone call.

 

What are the band members' views on bootlegs (a bootleg consists of unreleased or unavailable music as opposed to pirates or counterfeits which are copies of released records)?

 

Bootlegs rip off the public. They are not quality products. They deceive the public by capitalizing on the artists' name and image.

 

Does the band listen to other bands' bootlegs?

 

No comment.

 

How large do you feel the pressing of a bootleg is?

 

No comment.

 

Without going into areas you can't get into, can you tell us about the lawsuit in Montreal and what caused it?

 

No comment.

 

How many copies of the Rush bootleg were seized in Montreal?

 

No comment.

 

How many do you think were pressed?

 

No comment.

 

Any comments on the recording quality?

 

There is no quality involved. It was recorded on a $40 cassette player and then lost even more "quality" in pressing.

 

What do you think of the terrible cover on the Rush Around The World Recorded Live In Montreal boot?

 

As bad a rip off as the album.

 

If a Rush bootleg that was well recorded with a limited run came out would you take action?

 

Yes. If it was "well recorded" it would be a commercial release. It takes sales in excess of three to five hundred thousand albums to break even on what we consider well recorded.

 

What does the band or its management do about tape recorders at concerts?

 

Our people are instructed to confiscate and deal with the person(s) involved as seems appropriate to the time they are found.

 

Has Rush had any problems with counterfeit records?

 

Same as anyone.

 

Bootleg t-shirts and other unauthorized merchandise is a direct loss of money. Are you actively seeking out persons involved?

 

Yes. We don't appreciate calls and letters from irate parents because their kids have been ripped off. Most of the bootlegs are poor quality and a direct reflection on the band. Kids feel if the shirt has a Rush logo on it and it falls apart the first time it's washed, the band has ripped them off. We want to sell a second shirt the second time we come to a city and if you rip off someone the first time you can be sure they won't buy a second shirt.

 

Ray's just annoyed thinking about all the $$$ lost.

 

I find it amusing that someone like him - a wheeler and a dealer if there ever was one - should suddenly get moral.

 

What Ray fails to realize because its his job to protect his and the bands bottom lines is that being ripped off is up to the consumer with regard to recording quality. In the absence of a live album people were happy to pay for an audience recording (and just look at what the Dead and Pearl Jam have done with that) to get more and different live recordings (I even remember Vapor Trails tour boots). To dismiss them as crap is too much, yes they are not professional recordings, but if not, then why are people buying them?

 

Ray says what Ray has to say, but some of it is just obviously support for his industry, especially because many in that industry are becoming wholly irrelevant now.

 

this interview may or may not still reflect how ray danniels feels, but some things are different now. someone said earlier this interview was from the spring of 80. back then audience recordings WERE crap, and the music industry was still powerful.

 

Yes - put my post in the past tense. The recording were crap but they were gold because you had NOTHING else. And some were not crap - Ive heard bootlegs that were done by some very clever people that were not bad (for an audience recording).

[Lorraine]

Geddy seems to have a really reasonable take on it. Neil can come across as a little bit more than sour, but in this particular case I think he just sounded like he was joking.

I think he was more or less just parroting Ray Daniel's opinions.

 

HWQ: In a segment of a Montreal news feature called Pulse Probe the statement was made that the band felt the public was being ripped off by bootleggers. We feel the public rarely has access to bootlegs due to their very limited distribution and that bootlegs sell to collectors who know what they're buying. Any comments?

 

Danniels: To admit to being a collector of illegal goods is similar to being a habitual shoplifter.

 

Don't you think bootlegs are a tribute to a band and serve much the same purpose as a promotional album?

 

No.

 

Are you opposed to the music on bootlegs getting out to the general public?

 

Certain things are not intended for the general public. Recording a transaction between an artist and the audience without their knowledge is no different than recording a private telephone call.

 

What are the band members' views on bootlegs (a bootleg consists of unreleased or unavailable music as opposed to pirates or counterfeits which are copies of released records)?

 

Bootlegs rip off the public. They are not quality products. They deceive the public by capitalizing on the artists' name and image.

 

Does the band listen to other bands' bootlegs?

 

No comment.

 

How large do you feel the pressing of a bootleg is?

 

No comment.

 

Without going into areas you can't get into, can you tell us about the lawsuit in Montreal and what caused it?

 

No comment.

 

How many copies of the Rush bootleg were seized in Montreal?

 

No comment.

 

How many do you think were pressed?

 

No comment.

 

Any comments on the recording quality?

 

There is no quality involved. It was recorded on a $40 cassette player and then lost even more "quality" in pressing.

 

What do you think of the terrible cover on the Rush Around The World Recorded Live In Montreal boot?

 

As bad a rip off as the album.

 

If a Rush bootleg that was well recorded with a limited run came out would you take action?

 

Yes. If it was "well recorded" it would be a commercial release. It takes sales in excess of three to five hundred thousand albums to break even on what we consider well recorded.

 

What does the band or its management do about tape recorders at concerts?

 

Our people are instructed to confiscate and deal with the person(s) involved as seems appropriate to the time they are found.

 

Has Rush had any problems with counterfeit records?

 

Same as anyone.

 

Bootleg t-shirts and other unauthorized merchandise is a direct loss of money. Are you actively seeking out persons involved?

 

Yes. We don't appreciate calls and letters from irate parents because their kids have been ripped off. Most of the bootlegs are poor quality and a direct reflection on the band. Kids feel if the shirt has a Rush logo on it and it falls apart the first time it's washed, the band has ripped them off. We want to sell a second shirt the second time we come to a city and if you rip off someone the first time you can be sure they won't buy a second shirt.

 

Ray's just annoyed thinking about all the $$$ lost.

 

I find it amusing that someone like him - a wheeler and a dealer if there ever was one - should suddenly get moral.

 

What Ray fails to realize because its his job to protect his and the bands bottom lines is that being ripped off is up to the consumer with regard to recording quality. In the absence of a live album people were happy to pay for an audience recording (and just look at what the Dead and Pearl Jam have done with that) to get more and different live recordings (I even remember Vapor Trails tour boots). To dismiss them as crap is too much, yes they are not professional recordings, but if not, then why are people buying them?

 

Ray says what Ray has to say, but some of it is just obviously support for his industry, especially because many in that industry are becoming wholly irrelevant now.

 

this interview may or may not still reflect how ray danniels feels, but some things are different now. someone said earlier this interview was from the spring of 80. back then audience recordings WERE crap, and the music industry was still powerful.

 

Yes - put my post in the past tense. The recording were crap but they were gold because you had NOTHING else. And some were not crap - Ive heard bootlegs that were done by some very clever people that were not bad (for an audience recording).

 

Some of the Rush bootlegs from the seventies are amazing considering what those that recorded them had to work with.

[Jaminbenb]

The concept that people WANT live shows is the fact that a lot of people just want everything they can get their hands upon... I was like that years back, but now I'm a little more discerning about it. I think the band doesn't like it from the old "people are making money off of our work" attitude, but that was something pre-1990-2000-ish...once the internet took off, and people started trading, and the more serious traders would go buy ONE bootleg, and trade the living crap out of it (and tell people that wanted to buy it to send them some blanks) was the test that showed that the real fans just wanted the music. I actually think the bigger issue was when people would take the "official" version of a release, and make copies and sell them, as opposed to a concert recording. THAT seems to be a big issue in some countries (like Lorraine said..the Russians)

 

I think that bands need to open their vaults in order to have the best version of any given tour, but that said...people are going to want a document of a show that they attended! (which is pretty much how I live these days, unless someone says that ______ is a great version of ________'s tour!) I read every review of whatever is released on sites like Dimeadozen, for the bands I'm interested in, and if I don't have the date, or it claims to be a better version of a show I like, I'll download it and give it a whirl.

[JohnnyBlaze]

The bottom line is money they feel they are being cheated out of, but no one makes any money off of the bootlegs, and I don't think anyone ever did.

 

Sure they do. Plenty of people sell bootlegs still today but it was much more prevalent before they were as easily available on the Internet.

Exactly. If there was never any profit, it would never have continued.

[Slack jaw gaze]

The issue isn't 3rd parties making money (or not making money) off of bands (who cares?), it's bands making less money than they otherwise would and not being in control of the products that reach consumers. To try and argue that illegal copies of various products have not hurt bands flies in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

[edhunter]

The issue isn't 3rd parties making money (or not making money) off of bands (who cares?), it's bands making less money than they otherwise would and not being in control of the products that reach consumers. To try and argue that illegal copies of various products have not hurt bands flies in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

 

Well, I was hurt by listening to the dreadful Test For Echo album, so we're even.

[Lorraine]

The issue isn't 3rd parties making money (or not making money) off of bands (who cares?), it's bands making less money than they otherwise would and not being in control of the products that reach consumers. To try and argue that illegal copies of various products have not hurt bands flies in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

 

Well, I was hurt by listening to the dreadful Test For Echo album, so we're even.

That was very funny. :cheers:

[Jaminbenb]

Dream Theater is very "present" in my mind since I just saw them the other day...but when I was choosing something to put into my car to listen to, I reminded myself of the series of recordings that Portnoy had them release because he knew that people "wanted more"... he was an avid boot collector, and IIRC, back when he would frequent the old AOL boards, would ask people to send him copies of stuff they got..kind of wild! So when he started their YtseJam records, and released the demos, live stuff, and other things it was awesome! And you sort of knew that it would happen..just a shame that it seems to have gone to the wayside since he's no longer in the band...(although that website is still online)

[grep]

Dream Theater is very "present" in my mind since I just saw them the other day...but when I was choosing something to put into my car to listen to, I reminded myself of the series of recordings that Portnoy had them release because he knew that people "wanted more"... he was an avid boot collector, and IIRC, back when he would frequent the old AOL boards, would ask people to send him copies of stuff they got..kind of wild! So when he started their YtseJam records, and released the demos, live stuff, and other things it was awesome! And you sort of knew that it would happen..just a shame that it seems to have gone to the wayside since he's no longer in the band...(although that website is still online)

 

When Portnoy was in the band, almost every show was recorded. He had them all.

 

That was indeed the whole point of YtseJam, to give us more. As per my above post saying that we'd buy boots if they were avail, I have 95% of the Ytse catalog... There were 2 dvd's that I just didn't want to bother watching, though I did buy the CD versions.

 

I've been through the Metallica, Phish, Pearl Jam, and Govt Mule online archives... have pulled down most of the old shows I want...

 

I'd do the same for Rush. Absolutely.