Bob Dylan: The Bootleg Series

http://www.ultimatemovierankings.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Claude-Rains-Casablanca.png

I thank in advance whoever is gonna boil this down to 4 CDs of the most killer shit

― I wish you could see my home. It's... it's so... exciting (Jon not Jon)

This ^^^
Although I don't even know if I'd even buy a 4-disc distilled version of this. Feel I've got enough mid-60s Dylan.

I'm still waiting on hearing the last box set, I don't have the money to pay for that shit :(

Likewise I still need to hear the last box set. I am really in an old-man phase of waiting to buy this stuff (because if I stream or whatever I'll listen once and never really grapple with it), but knowing at the same time I'll probably never buy it cos my money needs to go on more boring things.

hold on now! After tylerw's article linked upthread, he got some static: supercollector was extremely skeptical about the existence of a Jim Dickinson-produced Time Out Of Mind, b-but in that previously linked Stone piece from early March: Chaiken has only begun to dip into the hundreds of hours of raw Dylan recording sessions, but he's already come across a completely different version of 1997's Time Out of Mind produced by pianist Jim Dickinson, so there!

woah....that would be intriguing, time out of mind has such a lanois sound to it, it would seem like a completely different album

At least they agree on worthiness (also existence) of John Wesley Harding outtakes.

it's circular dow -- I got my info from that RS article, after which the supercollector got in touch with me, said it doesn't exist. chaiken then told me that RS got things mixed up -- there are different mixes, unreleased songs and jam sessions that Jim was a part of, but the production duties were all handled by Daniel Lanois.

Close enough!

That's what I usually look to prev. unreleased Dylan legit & boots for: more songs, not more versions.

But I'll take different mixes, esp. by J.D., and jams too.

"Likewise I still need to hear the last box set. I am really in an old-man phase of waiting to buy this stuff (because if I stream or whatever I'll listen once and never really grapple with it)"

i don't feel like copyright-extension archival mega-sets are something i need to "grapple with". like, i listened to that complete basement tapes or whatever once, and they don't contain a lot of hidden depths not previously manifested in his released work.

that's true, but if you feel like listening to basement tapes for 6+ hours straight it comes in handy

I got a 'copy' of that complete cutting edge thing, the final disc was the only one that was a drag, the 'live bits and bobs' one, apart from the first chunk of Joan Baez tracks..

for those that need the full 36, Bull Moose has it for $108.97 shipped in the US. for me, the calculus has to be cost per disc I'll actually ever get around to listening to (though at that price...).

nice.

Haha... never change those EU copyright laws

Wait, this is unrelated, isn't it? I thought the EU copyright thing only affected unreleased music from 1963 or earlier, and that everything after benefits from the change in law that extended copyright from 50 to 70 years. That's why we haven't gotten any more Beatles or Beach Boys archive stuff from 1964 or beyond, isn't it?

well, dylan did one last year -- not sure what the deal is with the beatles/beach boys. i don't understand that stuff at all.

There was a change in the EU copyright laws (2014? )from expiring 50 years after release to 70 years after release. But there was a loophole (right?) that excluded any unreleased material, which meant anything 50 years old or older in 2014 - that is, 1964 and earlier - so the Beatles, Beach Boys and Dylan rushed out those copyright extension packages. Beatles did "The Beatles Bootleg Recordings 1963," Beach Boys did "Keep An Eye on Summer: The Beach Boys Sessions 1964" and "The Big Beat 1963," Dylan did "The 50th Anniversary Collection 1963" and "The 50th Anniversary Collection 1964." But ... that's been it, right? Was there a '65 Copyright Extension set? What did Dylan do last year? You mean "The Cutting Edge?" Not sure that was under the Copyright Extension umbrella (not that it matters), because that stuff was covered by the new laws.

Someone out there can clear this up, right? I thought he big three (BB, Dylan and Beatles) are all caught up in terms of copyright, until they go into public (EU) domain beginning in 20 years or so.

there was a 65 copyright extension set in addition to the cutting edge (it was made available as a download to people who bought the deluxe cutting edge)
http://www.searchingforagem.com/2010s/2015_50thAnniv.htm

Becoming The Beach Boys, going back to the beginning in '61 (continuing into '63), came out recently, so guess the copyright coast is clear: http://omnivorerecordings.com/music/becoming-the-beach-boys-the-complete-hite-dorinda-morgan-sessions/

Why has there been no Beatles 64 or 65 stuff then?

ringo said he would personally murder anyone who put that stuff out w/o his permission

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2011/sep/15/copyright-extension-cliffs-law-beatles

Don't know how that works in America, or what happens after Brexit

Xpost no idle threat since as we know from the morricone song, "whenever ringo laughed, ringo fired".

for those that need the full 36, Bull Moose has it for $108.97 shipped in the US. for me, the calculus has to be cost per disc I'll actually ever get around to listening to (though at that price...).

― by the light of the burning Citroën, Wednesday, September 28, 2016 10:56 AM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

maybe i haven't been paying attention to box set pricing lately but this seems like kind of a big deal? much cooler than spending 100 bucks on 3 discs + assorted ephemera, imo. i dunno, maybe i'm nuts but i'd totally listen to all of these. just might take me a while.

c.f. the 27-disc pink floyd "early years" box which is at least 500 bucks

yeah this is a comparatively bare bones set, with no extraneous items. which is great imo -- one of the ridiculous selling points of the $600 Cutting Edge deluxe set last year was a leopard skin spindle.

aaw come OOON now

I get that the copyright was extended from 50 to 70 years. So why was that Beatles/Dylan/Beach Boys stuff released, then? 70 years past 1963 is 2033. 50 years was 2013 (before the law changed). So why release 1965 Dylan stuff in 2015 if the law had been successfully changed to push its public domain move all the way to 2035? Isn't 1965, for any act, now covered under the extended copyright?

i honestly have no idea

i dunno, maybe i'm nuts but i'd totally listen to all of these. just might take me a while.

― brimstead, Wednesday, 28 September 2016 22:38 (fifty-five minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I suppose you're right. But I dunno, I'm also happy to have one definitive live '66 version of "Ballad of a thin man" to listen to when the itch appears

my experience with the genuine live 1966 set was that every little change in dylan's vocal delivery, or hudson's bonkers organ fills, or robertson's solos got to be pretty exciting. granted this is more than double that set, so we'll see how I do.

yeah i could listen to a whole lot of that band

live disc of another self portrait also so great

I don't disagree at all. I just don't know how I can fit something of this size into my life.

I'm not sure about those EU laws, but over at expectingrain.com they're calling it "the Live 1966 Copyright Extension Collection" and I really can't think of other good reasons for this timely change in approach to the bootleg series

we have a thread on this but I'm not sure it helps to clear anything up:

The copyright extension release thread (w/r/t EU copyright law)

I guess the point is that the extension from 50 to 70 years only applies to released material.

Photo of the new box's contents:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtifXS_W8AACaeD.jpg:large

that's a lotta dylan 66

was it common to tour Australia back then?

haha I love that he flew back to Melbourne in April for a single gig

?

He played Melbourne on April 19 and 20, among his other Australian dates. The box isn't chronological, though; the April 20 soundboard is disc 3, and the April 19 audience tape is disc 35.

yeah, i don't know how common it was to play australia then -- beatles and the stones played there around then, i think?

Pretty Things got banned from there in 65 or so. Tarfumes probably has the deets, but The Who had a disastrous tour there as well.

The Who and the Small Faces played there in early '68, but the Who hated it so much that they didn't go back until 2004.

I think Zeppelin only did one tour there, in '71-'72?

Louis Armstrong toured in '64, with Angus Young in attendance at one of the shows.

ha xp

On closer inspection, the Pretty Things were banned from New Zealand

When was the last time you visited Australia, have you been back since the tour of ‘65?

Dick Taylor: We never actually did visit Australia. We were in New Zealand. I’m not sure if we were scheduled to come to Australia or not but we got in a bit of trouble in New Zealand. I mean the shows went great in New Zealand [laughs], don’t get me wrong. We were apparently behaving outrageously and there were questions asked in parliament about us, and we were told never to darken their shores again. And consequently there never was an Australian tour, so this’ll be the first time we’ve trodden your shores.

From: http://fasterlouder.junkee.com/the-pretty-things-we-tried-every-sweetie-in-the-shop/830945