(my quote)
'If all I can get my hands on is audience recordings then so be it. Yeah some are terrible..'

- yep; my point all along. thanks

my whole point was that most early to mid 70s boots, including ones with MT on them, suck in sound quality, and that is patently true

I think you just contradicted your own point once again partner. My point was never your point at any time.






(my quote)
'but, as a completist, its like owning a first edition book from the 16th century.'

- not really; most 16th century books are available only by copy, and even then are very rare; recorded stones 70's bootleg stuff is all over the place and not 'first edition,' in many if not most cases

Again, you still don't get it, the comparison to rare books is just that, the rarity of having an extant tape of show from over 30 years ago is priceless. Are they all perfect, no, but having them available to get a "feel" of what the show sound was like back then is just fabulous.



(my quote)
'I guess you will never understand that passion "Taylor Era".'

- that's because I do not suffer from obsessive-compulsive disorder.. a form of mania which in many cases probably has more to do with being absorbed and obsessed with having to tell everybody they know that they have every Stones bootleg under the sun in their collection, even if half of them are totally unlistenable...well, big deal

what is gold to many 'completists' isnt worth the download/transfer time or cost of purchase to lot of other people, like me.

Being a completist does not imply that one has to "brag" about having every show. In fact it just satisfies ones interest or passion to hear a show from a particular era that one enjoys. For me at least, to each his own.

Your constant arguing with guys here hints to an obsessive-compulsive disorder yourself.

I think we have strayed from the original reason for my post, I was trying to stimulate some digging that might in some way help to kick up interest in finding and getting out to all of us a possibly new release from the 1972 tour. Sometimes you just never know as we found with the release of the 2 7/25/72 shows a couple of years back. I am getting old and have been a Stones fan since the mid 60s and I am especially interested in the Mick Taylors era shows. I am also eternally greatful to all of those who have taken their time and efforts to spread the wealth, as far as '72 shows. I am not one who is a stickler for great sound, I will take what I can get and share whatever I have, but I know and accept that there a many who are like and unlike me and that is fine.

it's quite odd that Sicilian has quoted in his last post specific things that I said in a previous post - a post that has seemingly disappeared from the thread...specifically Sicilian's post from from February 1, 2009 21:50

- Sicilian quotes me several times there, taken from a previous post of mine - my last one before this one, actually, which seems to have disappeared ..what's up with that, kids?? it's quite silly to delete posts, isnt it, especially when other people actually quote from it, afterwards....

'The whole disagreement started with your "opinion" that one recording from 1975 is sh-t which happens to be an opinion unshared by ANYONE else here..'

- it is sh-t, basically. it's a bootleg and most bootlegs are sh-t. however, as a bootleg, it is better than most other bootlegs, but ultimatelty still is prett sh-tty; not to mention that I dont particularily care if 'anyone else' agress with my assessment or not

'the rarity of having an extant tape of show from over 30 years ago is priceless'

- except these shows and their tapes are not rare; they can be found in fact just about anywhere; 16th century books ARE actually rare

'having them available to get a "feel" of what the show sound was like back then is just fabulous.'

- and one listen is about all it takes to get that; the bad sound makes repeated listens pointless .. except for the few actually decent sounding ones in existence.. of which I do NOT include Millard

'Being a completist does not imply that one has to "brag" about having every show. In fact it just satisfies ones interest or passion to hear a show from a particular era that one enjoys. For me at least, to each his own.'

- ah, yes; 'to each his own' - which is what I have been saying all along regarding the quality of these recordings; happy to see you finally coming around

'Your constant arguing with guys here hints to an obsessive-compulsive disorder yourself'

- dude, some of you guys post more times here in one day that I do in a whole year.. do you even know what your wives look like??

'I think we have strayed from the original reason for my post, I was trying to stimulate some digging that might in some way help to kick up interest in finding and getting out to all of us a possibly new release from the 1972 tour. Sometimes you just never know as we found with the release of the 2 7/25/72 shows a couple of years back. I am getting old and have been a Stones fan since the mid 60s and I am especially interested in the Mick Taylors era shows. I am also eternally greatful to all of those who have taken their time and efforts to spread the wealth, as far as '72 shows. I am not one who is a stickler for great sound, I will take what I can get and share whatever I have, but I know and accept that there a many who are like and unlike me and that is fine.'

- now there is a post I can relate to



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-01 23:22 by Taylor Era.

DUDE, you dont seem to be able to make a point without resorting to personal attacks, do you?

'DUDE, you dont seem to be able to make a point without resorting to personal attacks, do you?'

- hey, I've been called ignorant, deaf, and told to 'change my diapers', but you dont hear me whining about personal attacks.. do you??

- the fact is, and my point all along, is most Stones bootlegs from the 70s are crap, soundwise, and not worth chasing down

- duh; everybody knows that

The only thing I called you was ignorant(an obvious fact when it comes to this subject). So here you go: I'm rubber and you're glue. everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you. That oughta be on a maturity level you can understand.

Some of this thread is really funny, but only because the ridiculous statements and replies of a certain poster, who must be relatively new here.

I think we all know who the @#$%& idiot is here, don't we boys?


I laughed when it was suggested that Erik Snow didn't know when Taylor left the band. lol...

Come on man, I mean obviously he doesn't know Mr. Snow does he?

' laughed when it was suggested that Erik Snow didn't know when Taylor left the band....'


- hey, well, I am not in your little gang.. boys.. and I dont surely dont care who 'Mr Snow ' is, ..but I am a dude that has been listening to the Stones and to Stones tapes for over 40 years..and I know what is good soundwise and what is novelty .. so hey ...collect your crappy sounding tapes..for what ther're worth .. peace babies

See what I mean about the "final word"?

Hey Scottkeef,

Send him a blank CD to listen to. I'm sure he'll love great sound on that.

HEE HEE!!

Posted by: scottkeef ()
Date: February 2, 2009 16:37


''See what I mean about the "final word"?''

- LOL; yer a riot

''Hey Scottkeef,

Send him a blank CD to listen to. I'm sure he'll love great sound on that.

HEE HEE!!''

- gosh - hilariously witty and funny stuff; that.. you got writers, right??


- The fact is, clowns, audience recorded tapes as everyone knows are the worst sounding of all live recordings, and with the Stones as far as any bootlegs go soundboard or audience - the Brussels Affair Definitive Edition bootleg is all anybody really needs; that and perhaps Handsome Girls, Leeds 1971, and YCDTB or Ahmet Ertegun Thank you Kindly, since it has some different stuff on it like Don't Lie To me. Anything else is either redundant or sounds too crappy to bother with. These recordings absolutely blow away any live album the Stones have ever done before or since, because the Mick Taylor band blows the band with Wood away like confetti, and they blow away any other boots in terms of sound quality.

Now that we have those facts out of the way, if you feel the need to collect all the peripheral stuff out there under the sun and have the time to waste in doing it, which you apparently do, hey, go for it.

'Yeah, Handsome Girls is awesome, Taylor especially'

- never said he was on it; I was lumping it in with other decent sounding boots that exist; nice effort, but learn to read.

Handsome Girls is really the only Taylor-less boot anybody needs, even if most of Woody's solos are terrible and can't begin to compare with Taylor's on some of the same songs (ie All Down the Line) . Even so, it's still a hell of a lot better than Millard from 75.

Brussels Affair-the Definitive Edition is actually the worst sounding of that great recording,theres lots other cds much better sounding!
And how could anyone be so silly as to lump Handsome Girls in with the other mentioned. Dont you know when Taylor left the band?? (Sarcasm-in case you cant tell)
Finally, go hug a root, you silly twit!(wrote that MYSELF!)

Nearly forgot..to quote you "I don't surely don't care who "Mr Snow" is.." which means you DO care?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-02 20:21 by scottkeef.

the Definitive Edition is actually the worst sounding of that great recording,theres lots other cds much better sounding!

- BS, I have them all, and none are any better

how could anyone be so silly as to lump Handsome Girls in with the other mentioned

DimSon, it (Handsome Girls) as listed because of the sound quality - not because of who plays on it - exactly the same way you're goofy little pal 'Mr Snow' (no, I dont care) listed Millard as a 'Taylor Era' recording.. a statement which you, of course, at that time heaped massive praise upon.. making your statement now all the more hypocritical and ridiculous ..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-02 20:49 by Taylor Era.

Quote
Taylor Era
' laughed when it was suggested that Erik Snow didn't know when Taylor left the band....'


- hey, well, I am not in your little gang.. boys.. and I dont surely dont care who 'Mr Snow ' is, ..but I am a dude that has been listening to the Stones and to Stones tapes for over 40 years..and I know what is good soundwise and what is novelty .. so hey ...collect your crappy sounding tapes..for what ther're worth .. peace babies

The point I was making, which every one else here knows, is that Erik Snow has almost encyclopedic knowledge of the Stones. One of the most knowledgeable people on this board, and all the regulars know this.

As far as your argument about the sound quality of bootlegs, you're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but it's the insulting manor in which you're making these statements that has brought this argument on. Instead of denouncing all audience recordings as unlistenable crap, you could just say that you don't care for audience recordings. I admit alot of audience recordings are just plain awful, and I don't think anybody else will argue that. But some of them are quite good as well.


If you'd simply said that you didn't like audience recordings, I'm sure nobody would have cared.

Quote
Taylor Era


DimSon, it (Handsome Girls) as listed because of the sound quality - not because of who plays on it - exactly the same way you're goofy little pal 'Mr Snow' (no, I dont care) listed Millard as a 'Taylor Era' recording.. a statement which you, of course, at that time heaped massive praise upon.. making your statement now all the more hypocritical and ridiculous ..

lol dude can you not read? Go back and read Erik's statement again. He didn't list the Millard recording as a "Taylor Era" recording. He was comparing the quality of the Millard recording to the average quality of audience recordings from the Taylor Era and making the point that if you thought the Millard recording sucked, then there wouldn't be much from the Taylor Era that your picky ears could handle.

Nevermind, this is gonna go on and on and on......


If you don't like audience recordings, it's totally cool with me man. I'm finished. Have a good one.

'Erik Snow has almost encyclopedic knowledge of the Stones'

ROFL ! Does he now? You guys are a real laugh riot, let me tell you.. what does he know? All of their birthdays? ROFL

All the names of all the chicks Jagger's laid?

How to play all of 'Can You Hear Me Knocking' in open G tuning? Hell, even I can do that.

the insulting manor in which you're making these statements

hey, I've been called ignorant, deaf, and told to 'change my diapers', but you dont hear me whining about personal attacks; I supposed you missed all those ones..

you could just say that you don't care for audience recordings

I did, and was promptly attacked for being 'deaf'

lol dude can you not read? Go back and read Erik's statement again. He didn't list the Millard recording as a "Taylor Era" recording. He was comparing the quality of the Millard recording to the average quality of audience recordings from the Taylor Era

- can't you? I never said Taylor plays on Handsome Girls, either; I was comparing the sound quality of that recording to other good quality recordings out there; all of which are better than Millard.. meanwhile, I understand what Mr Snow said, and I have no argument with it; in fact it supports my original statement that most 70s bootlegs of the Stones, with either Taylor or Wood in them, sound terrible.. ok?? jeezuz ..it aint that complicated..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-02 21:11 by Taylor Era.

It aint that complicated-you dont understand peoples posts and dont know when yer whipped! And now I say "Good Day"! I said , Good Day!!

whipped??

ROFL

what is this, a game? what a goof..

whatever..ya 'good day' to you too, Fez

".... . I generally don't waste my time on 'audience recordings.' They are nine times out of ten useless and unlistenable. That's because they are bootlegs, and bootlegs generally sound like crap, unless they are from either a soundboard source or pre-FM."

Sure! Enjoy the L.A. 75 board tape or the Paris'98 SB recording. That won't get you far musically speaking... Hey if you like fine-sounding tapes why don't you stick to official CDs? They'll never disappoint you ;-)

To me fans like you are like men who don't @#$%& with a condom cos ya know "ya don't really feel the girl's pussy. It's too hard to get into it".
A true man enjoys safe-sex. A true Stones fan enjoys poor aud tapes. Period...

(TE : don't bother to reply... My judgement on you and the kind of fan you are is sealed)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-02 22:58 by dcba.

What's "funnier" in "Mr" TE prose is this : how can people on this board be taken seriously when they beg hoarders to share their uncirculated shows while some a-hole brags aud tapes are shite and only worth collecting... LOL



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-02 23:00 by dcba.

'bootlegs generally sound like crap, unless they are from either a soundboard source or pre-FM."

Sure! Enjoy the L.A. 75 board tape or the Paris'98 SB recording. That won't get you far musically speaking

ok, so now you are going to peddle some goofnut nonsense that that 99 times out of 100, soundboard sources are worse than audience sourced tapes, or something?? good luck wif that.. of course some soundboards suck, but on balance your average soundboard is much better than your average audience tape ..

To me fans like you are like men who don't @#$%& with a condom cos ya know "ya don't really feel the girl's pussy. It's too hard to get into it".
A true man enjoys safe-sex. A true Stones fan enjoys poor aud tapes.

that has got to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read, anywhere, and one of the most stupid analogies off all time. a true Stones fan probably avoids poor aud tapes because, well, they suck, and because poor sound quality basically makes for no musical interest, to a true Stones fan


'whipped??' LOL

all I have said throughout this entire joke of a thread is that by far most audience recorded Stones shows in the early/mid 70's sound lousy..muffly, echoey, out of balance - but hey they are boots .. so it is expected.. I mean only an imbecile would argue with that.. but, hey, some of you are and do ..so if your gig is to collect all that peripheral stuff, all the best to ya.. when really the essentials (I have mentioned already) are all that is really necessary ... for all but 'completists.' ROFL

What's "funnier" in "Mr" TE prose is this : how can people on this board be taken seriously when they beg hoarders to share their uncirculated shows while some a-hole brags aud tapes are shite and only worth collecting... LOL



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-02 23:00 by dcba

it was that difficult to write that one line??

All anyone had to do is read this entire post to see the countless times you have contradicted yourself and to see the truth of your character.

...but Handsome Girls is not a Taylor era recording....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-03 14:13 by Erik_Snow.

- lookit girls, nonwithstanding that you are both repetitively juvenile and boring, I never contradicted myself, I simply said from the outset that in most cases audience recordings sound like crap; to which you mounted a ridiculous argument to the contrary; and I have not wavered from my initial point all along

therefore, when it comes to collecting, I tend to stick to the better sounding sources; but if you want to collect all the prepiheral stuff, as I have also said before, you are more than welcome to, but it aint my cup o' tea

nice effort though; but hey.. do you always post in tandem? do you call one another to coordinated your leisure suit outfits, too??

..but Handsome Girls is not a Taylor era recording....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-03 14:13 by Erik_Snow.


- of course Handsome Girls is not a Taylor Era recording, who said it was?

and you had to edit a 9 word post?? one with an 'a' counting as one of the words?? jeez, that alone is proof enough to me you are hardly worthy of this reputed 'encyclopedic' mind

You are right,erik!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-02-03 19:55 by scottkeef.