|
Question
Mon, 9 Oct 2006 17:04:17 -0700
rec.music.beatles
previous
Lookingglass...
|
Anyone familiar with this item...?
DanKaye...
|
Why is your shorter link longer than his?
Lookingglass...
|
...you makin' fun of my short link? Step outside!!!
;^)
dancin' dave (...she's not a girl who misses much...)
|
Dale Houstman...
|
Good genetics...
donz5...
|
Hey! I'm standing right here...
Dale Houstman...
|
Then sit down. We can see your vienna sausages...
|
|
|
|
DC...
|
A knockoff of a bootleg?
A bootleg isn't good enough if it's not listed in one of those books?
donz5...
|
There were a number of bootleg knockoffs back then.
DC...
|
I was around, and foolishly bought some bad bootlegs, but by definition,
a bootleg is a bootleg (is a bootleg).
DanKaye...
|
Yeah, it just looks like a generic bootleg from right before Let It Be
hit the streets. I bought one back then in a plain grey cover, I don't
recall what the title was, but the quality was horrible. That's not to
say this one is, I just don't know. But I'd be skeptical.
|
donz5...
|
Then there are bootlegs of bootlegs of which this appears to be one.
|
|
|
|
dancin' dave (...you won't see me...)
GTverå...
|
This is obviously a bootleg containing tracks from the unreleased Get Back
album, possibly from a promo of that album. Some of the titles are spelled
terribly wrong. It could mean that the record pre-dates Let It Be lp, or
that the bootleggers didn't care to check out the correct titles.
I bet the sound is as bad as the spelling.
DC...
|
I agree. I had some vinyl bootlegs around that time that sounded
horrible, and looked similar.
|
|
|
next
|