|
Halloween Jack
|
 |
« on: July 12, 2008, 09:53:31 PM » |
|
David Bowie Courting Disaster Earls Court London May 12, 1973 Audio Source: Audience Artwork: None Running Time: 93.03 Lineage: Audio Cassette---Wav---Flac(level.  ---MWP An audience tape of the infamous opening show of the UK Aladdin Sane tour, this was the first time Earls Court was used for a concert gig and a large proportion of the 18,000 audience had a very bad view and poor sound, hence a riot ensued, fistycuffs and general mayhem. Not bad for an opening night!! At one point Bowie left the stage and the audience were passified by a roadie, the audience finally calmed down when Bowie refused to carry on unless they behaved. This is a typical audience recording with the usual pops and squeaks etc although the quality is much better than average (8-8+), I have removed a tiny bit of hiss from the top end but thats about it. The tape does have a drop in quality from "Panic" onwards (6) and I had to do a bit of work, mainly by amplifing this section to keep the level as consistent as possible. Whether this is only on my recording or the master i do not know (Perhaps the guy was being trampled by this point!).  Tracklisting: 01 Ziggy Stardust 02 Watch That Man 03 Wild Eyed Boy from Freecloud/All the Young Dudes/Oh you pretty things (Medley) 04 Prettiest Star 05 Cracked Actor 06 Moonage Daydream 07 Changes 08 Space Oddity 09 Jean Genie 10 Time 11 Width of a Circle 12 Lets Spend the Night Together 13 Drive In Saturday 14 Aladdin Sane 15 Quicksand/Life on Mars/Memory of Free Festival (Medley) 16 Panic in Detroit 17 Suffragette City 18 Rock n Roll Suicide Torrent History: Uploaded to Mind-Warp PaVilion by *Haloween Jack* on *12/7/08* There are a couple of CDR's floating around of this show, hopefully this is an earlier gen as CD's hadn't been invented when I got this tape. If anyone has a better copy of this gig please upload it so we can all enjoy it. Jack P.S. If anyone can upload the Aylesbury 71 gig, please do as the toorent died when I was halfway through the download, and that really sucks.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
june
Newbie
 Offline
Posts: 4
|
|
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2008, 04:47:54 AM » |
|
Thanks !
Looking for this one since a long time...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
shooky
|
|
« Reply #2 on: July 13, 2008, 05:47:27 AM » |
|
the shooky inquisition: a large proportion of the 18,000 audience had a very bad view and poor sound, hence a riot ensued
call me old fashioned, but this little observation does not fill me with confidence in the sound quality department. a 1973 cassette of unknown generation of a show in which sound was so bad people rioted? This is a typical audience recording with the usual pops and squeaks etc although the quality is much better than average (8-8+)...The tape does have a drop in quality from "Panic" onwards (6) and I had to do a bit of work, mainly by amplifing this section to keep the level as consistent as possible.
8-8+ on a scale of what, 50? i'd just about go along with that. seriously, forget all the arguments about a rating being based on tapes from the same era, forget about the rarity of the show... this rating has been given in direct reference to the sound quality. and people wonder why i request mp3 samples for all torrents to be mandatory? so, the tape has a drop in quality for the last three songs... it's now a 6. what is it with tape graders and their inability to even consider the numbers 1 to 5? even my recycle bin groaned when this one went in. If anyone has a better copy of this gig please upload it so we can all enjoy it.
unless King Midas is a member i won't be holding my breath. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
and just to make sure that you keep it to yourself, i've started digging holes, my friend, and this one here's for you
|
|
|
|
enrico
|
|
« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2008, 07:09:52 AM » |
|
the shooky inquisition:
call me old fashioned, but this little observation does not fill me with confidence in the sound quality department. a 1973 cassette of unknown generation of a show in which sound was so bad people rioted?
I have to admit, I was wondering about this issue as well.... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The empty space is mostly filled with serviceable falsetto funk and glassy-eyed yacht-pop.
|
|
|
steve23yh
Newbie
Offline
Posts: 24
|
|
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2008, 08:06:05 AM » |
|
Hmmm, not good.
I got a copy of the Old Gold version of this (same title) from a mate a few months back. Comparing the two, I don't notice masses of difference (maybe this one's a tad brighter, nothing to write home about, and the Old Gold version has two minutes of the riot). I rated that one 6½ and I wouldn't rate this one any more.
But...what's the point of the 12th May Earl's Court gig with the riot omitted? It goes between Space Oddity and Jean Genie. Take this out, and all you've got is a fair-to-poor quality Aladdin gig, and there are so much better copies around.
What really baffles me, however, is that when I built up my original Bowie collection on tapes back in 82-83, I had a recording of this gig (which at that time was widely known as Breaking Out At Court). The sound quality was better (from memory, that one was pushing an 8/10) but it was radically different. The tape started with Space Oddity (so the first seven songs were simply missing). Space Oddity deteriorated into the riot, and the riot lasted around twenty minutes. OK, it wasn't exactly the most riveting of listening, but it was Bowie history.
Whether the Old Gold version or this, the "fuller" version does appear to be a different recording (and a neutered one) - what I'd love to find is a copy of that other one (check out Pimm Jal's or Fletcher's books, that's the one I'm talking about).
Unless you're a completist, really wouldn't bother with this torrent.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Got any Soul Tour?
|
|
|
Piras
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 12,129
Uut Grunn
|
|
« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2008, 10:17:26 AM » |
|
Thanks for the upload.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To be insulted by those fascists is so degrading...
|
|
|
|
Homebrew
|
|
« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2008, 02:57:45 PM » |
|
Thanks Jack!
I'll see if I can post Ayelsbury 71 for you.
HB
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If nothing beats a Bud, given the choice, I'd take the nothing...
|
|
|
|
goa
|
|
« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2008, 03:43:04 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 If I gave you everything that I own and asked for nothing in return Would you do the same for me, as I would for you? Or take me for a ride and strip me of everything, including my pride But spirit is something that no one destroys |
|
|
|
goa
|
|
« Reply #8 on: July 14, 2008, 07:54:17 PM » |
|
http://www.helden.org.uk/earlscourtconcert.htmhttp://www.helden.org.uk/earl'scourtdisastervol1.htmhttp://www.helden.org.uk/earl'scourtdisastervol2.htmif anyone has those silvers, would be nice to know how they sound compared to this torrent...I understood OGC is less bright, according to steve23yh. To my ears, this sounds quite good. It's quite brighter and full that many stuff of that era. Unless you're a completist, really wouldn't bother with this torrent.
 If you are not a completist...what are you doing in this site shooky: admit it man...you simply don't like AUD!!!  and what's the problem, its'you HDD so small...or well, spent some money in blanks, instead of puting recordings in the recycle bin. seriously: thx for uploading stuff and take the time to do it. if someone consider some uploads are crap...why don't you upload upgrades of that "crap"?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 14, 2008, 07:56:51 PM by goa »
|
Logged
|
If I gave you everything that I own and asked for nothing in return Would you do the same for me, as I would for you? Or take me for a ride and strip me of everything, including my pride But spirit is something that no one destroys |
|
|
|
screen54
|
|
« Reply #9 on: July 14, 2008, 08:16:15 PM » |
|
instead of puting recordings in the recycle bin. Why make copies of a recording which won't get played again? Truth is, there will always be something new to listen to which is actually worth spending the time with. Most old audience recordings really are not worth the effort although like most here, I still download, compare and make back up copies ... old habits are hard to break. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Put your money in the mojo bucket!
|
|
|
|
goa
|
|
« Reply #10 on: July 14, 2008, 08:34:23 PM » |
|
well, for me put in the garbage some recording of Bowie, that I dont have it's quite weird, considering the cost that it have to put in a DVD data, it's near 0.
Also, I consider of value and uniqueness the transfer from tape to digital made in this particular case.
Last months I've been in Y!, and that is a good way to make things, imho.
PF community is great. You have plenty of recorders, tapes, transfers, the guy discusse 'em.
Surely sometimes discussions get "hot" and some topics are closed, but most of the times there is a dialogue about the qualitative pros and contras of each tape/recording/transfer/silver etc.
The fact of puting numbers or whatever is quite a waist of time (ojo, I'm not pointing at shooky, cause the uploader also wrote his number).
There are more important things that a number.
For example, I would appreciate if some guys here make freq analysis.
I don't have the software nor the knowledge.
I try to contibute with links and some test.
well, just some random ideas abaout what it is and what could be...for more, you could check in the VIP forum several topics...
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 14, 2008, 08:55:33 PM by goa »
|
Logged
|
If I gave you everything that I own and asked for nothing in return Would you do the same for me, as I would for you? Or take me for a ride and strip me of everything, including my pride But spirit is something that no one destroys |
|
|
rossy
Global Moderator
Gallery Admin
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 14,731
Almost Human
|
|
« Reply #11 on: July 14, 2008, 10:09:20 PM » |
|
I really think that this issue of quality rating will always create two "teams", or factions if you prefer: the one of "I shall download whatever appears of Bowie, as long as it's a recording of a good period, even better if the earlier years" and the one "whatever appears of Bowie is not worth downloading unless the quality is more than acceptable". I belong more to the second faction, although sometimes curiosity takes the lead and I end up downloading old audience recordings (that regularly end in my Bowie Crappy Downloads folder, never to be listened to after an initial suffered and cringing attempt  ) But maybe sentences like "wouldn't bother with this torrent" are not fair...who decides what is worth and what is not? This may be not worth for me but may be worth for someone else that doesn't care much abput quality but listens to Bowie's sighs or inflections, or to a certain different version of a certain song. So I guess advising people not to download is not right. On the other hand, the fact that if there is a criticism on quality (and of course it's related only to pure audio quality), there are people that get hurt and even indignated (and therefore make the person that posted about the quality refrain from doing it again) is not a good thing eother IMO. I honestly think that the Bowie Preston torrent uploaded before this is really terrible in quality and is already in my Bowie Crappy Downloads folder (and I hope that this will not offend in any way Halloween Jack, whom I thank for his efforts and his uploads that so many people here appreciated and enjoyed). So I think that it can be a good thing if there is someone that talks about it honestly, so that everyone will be able to make a decision and make the thread not look like an hymn to the torrent, since it may turn out to be a big disappointment for many. Of course noone's insulting anybody, it's just a discussion about what is considered good or acceptable quality and what is not. Giving it a low rating does not mean that I don't love the fact that it was uploaded here, for it gives people the opportunity to listen to something different and I am free to download it or not. In the end, it's all about a different criterion in rating a torrent...the ratings we see are often very optimistical, so it's an extremely subjective matter and surely does not take into consideration only pure quality standards, but relate quality to historical periods, to rarity, and other factors which make the ratings swell. So I think that since this issue will never get us all agreeing, and in fact the best way to avoid any misunderstanding would be to include an audio sample (or an attachment with an mp3 of a track)...in this way noone will get mad if someone rated the torrent 6 and instead it's a 2 for him. I really prefer to read all the various opinions and reactions to a torrent than a thread fiull of "thank yous", "ooohs" and "aaahs", which certainly doesn't give me the real picture of what is being offered |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The first light
that cast a spell to later cry
Will always remain
|
|
|
|
shooky
|
|
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2008, 11:46:38 PM » |
|
well said rossy.
i can only speak for myself because i made the initial response to the sound quality rating, but in this case it was simply inaccurate, not a matter of differing opinions. the idea that the old tape grading system can still be used, over twenty years since the advent of CD is ludicrous. this tape may well have warranted an 8 rating back in the early 80s and may have been an upgrade then, but it's irrelevant now in the light of what's happened between times. an 8 gives you just two more steps to what should be the absolute pinnacle of audience recordings (and no, not just of the 73 tour, of ANY tour). people aren't stupid, if they read it was an audience tape from the 70s they won't be expecting a DAT or similar digital recording from the later tours. so grading something accurately based on 10 being perfect (which accounts for maybe a dozen audience boots EVER) is a) more honest, b) more informative, and c) prevents any supposedly negative comments being misread as disingenuous or insulting. dimeadozen uploaders include mp3s for tapes both good and bad and use the catch-all phrase 'for completists only' which immediately sends the right message to people who will not play a crappy recording, regardless of who it is.
i should point out that HJ and I have had some PM contact on this, so i'm making my comments on the overall grading/quality issue and not this specific torrent.
goa, you're right i don't like aud recordings, but i also hate crappy soundboards, FM shows with DJs talking across the music, hand-held DVD footage. in other words, anything that does a disservice to the music of david bowie (or whoever)... listening to a third generation cassette transfer that's 30% hiss, 30% inane audience chat and drunken whooping, with a distorted 40% of a band in the background isn't what i call "listening", it's "enduring". and for what? to say i have a rare recording in my collection? i have plenty of stuff in my collection, i have no need for something just sitting there unloved and unheard until me or my HD die. it's, dare i use the word... hoarding. it's time that could be better spent listening to other things, better things.
so, either the mods here insist on an mp3 sample, or uploaders learn to use a 2 level grading system that takes into consideration audio quality based on a 1 - 10 scale (rather than the current 6 - 10) AND a performance/rarity rating (even more subjective, but we KNOW that), or these kinds of "disappointments" will continue. it's no hardship to download, listen and discard, but in the name of accuracy and honesty, let's stick to the facts and not oversell mediocre recordings.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
and just to make sure that you keep it to yourself, i've started digging holes, my friend, and this one here's for you
|
|
|
|
goa
|
|
« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2008, 12:25:54 PM » |
|
nice idea of the two grading systems...al César lo que es del César.
Anyway, I have ul some stuff, and no way expect form me any number. If anyone ons to put a 1 (1 to 10) I really don´t care.
why?
Cause the announcements have enough qualitative info (the guideas are quite clear about write some about quality and about the perfomance). So indeed we are discussing something that is already in the guides.
As ss and me and some otheres said, one of THE great differences of MWP, is that you could find (some) complete announces. Sadly some uploaders don't take the time...but well, they are taking the time to ul, so it's up to the rest to post about the torrent, and that is a responsability some of us take.
That's why, although we clearly disagree with shooky, I appreciate him, cause he takes the time to give his opinon.
This was heavily discussed in 2007, btw.
about this torrent, have to say I'm listening again and I'm really enjoying it, I feel there and thats quite a fantastic thing.
Yes I feel like being in an audience sourranded by people, in a shitty sound gig, so what?. I really like it.
And if someone has a better source in sound, more complete, or whatever, will be welcomed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If I gave you everything that I own and asked for nothing in return Would you do the same for me, as I would for you? Or take me for a ride and strip me of everything, including my pride But spirit is something that no one destroys |
|
|
GoblinKing
Global Moderator
Hero Member
 Online
Posts: 5,700
... or I'll rip yer bloody arms off.
|
|
« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2008, 01:53:06 PM » |
|
I agree with you, goa. If you close your eyes and block out everything else, (sensory deprivation, anybody? ), then it's possible to hear the music and surroundings as if you're there. You can almost picture where you are in reference to the stage (distance-wise) , and I (and I'm at least sure of goa) can appreciate that. I've so far only listened to a portion of this show, but I'm looking forward to giving it a good listen when I have the time and no distractions.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
