Besides The Soundhouse Tapes, are there other demos?

Bruce's voice did NOT sound like that in 81..

I think as _____no5 said this is probably some bootleg live track that has been exposed to a jumble of different effects to make it sound like that. Actually it sounds more like the singer could be Blaze come to think of it :p
 
Bruce did sound like that in 1981.

Besides, it sounds like a rehearsal since it's live and there's no audience. Also the song is played with some slight hesitation, e.g. sometimes a guitarist waits a bit too long with joining a next segment.

Maiden did play some songs from The Number of the Beast live in 1981, and I guess they were doubting if this one should be on the set as well, or else they were just doing it to learn the song better, before going in the studio, only a few weeks later already.

It's so logical, no reason to draw up a conspiracy theory since nothing points towards it. Not a single circumstance. Check out the November and December bootlegs and it might make more sense to you guys: http://www.ironmaidencommentary.com/?url=tour02_killers/bootlegs02_killers&lang=eng&link=tours
 
Hm yes, he sings Hallowed deeper than I remembered, I just checked the Hammersmith 82 version for comparison. Okay, that is plausible - it *could* be a tape recording of a sound check at one of those late 1981 gigs. I hadn't thought of that.

Still , unless it comes from a reliable source, it is just hard to know whether or not it is genuine...You can do so much today even to the point of making something sound crappy and distorted and call it "a secret basement recording". You always have to question it :)
 
I also remember some random fan once who added crowd noise to some of the rare or never played Maiden songs. I think he actually fooled quite a lot of people into believing they were from some rare show :D
 
This most definitely is Harris-Dickinson-Smith-Murray-Burr line-up, and it's a soundcheck recording all-right. What remains a question is the year of recording, 1981 or 1982. There is no proof of either. Nevertheless, this recording is pretty unknown, I won't say rare because the bootleg compilation it came from is not rare, but somewhat obscure. When I saw back cover of the bootleg in question (High Vaultage 2) with this track, I got it in couple of hours via DC++ hub. So - not rare.
 
I am not aware of such a thing. Bootlegs are shared, not sold, and any such behaviour (selling rare bootlegs for a big prize) won't work in general bootleg community. There was a show, possibly New York 2010, audience shot but really impressive quality (for an audience shot), taper only wanted to sell out copies, it was bought by one of regular guys on DC++ hub, and immediately shared there, and seeded on Dimeadozen.

Maiden became popular during the cassette age, so their boots were immediately shared (vinyl to tape). You are not infringing any copyrights by duplicating bootlegs, if the band themselves don't have any complaints about bootlegs. I don't think that Maiden had any sort of bootleg alike early 1960's Bob Dylan stuff, where boots had a production number of few thousand vinyls, people had no means of easy duplication, and if you wanted a copy you needed to pay.

It's great that in this age, when somebody surfaces with a rare bootleg of a popular band, and asks big money for it, a dozen of people from bootleg community gather and buy it. Then it's shared for free.

As for the most expensive official release, AFAIK it's Japanese version of 2 Minutes To Midnight 7" single.
 
Zare said:
You are not infringing any copyrights by duplicating bootlegs, if the band themselves don't have any complaints about bootlegs.
Click to expand...

Morally, of course. Legally, you have to be very careful with assumptions like these. There are lawyers who don't care for what the band thinks, only for what the law says will make them money. I imagine that if a bootleg hub would be based in Germany and it was brought to the attention of a lawyer, there will be hell to pay.
 
There is no law regarding audience recording. The live renditions of the songs themselves are property of players and authors, which are in this case both Iron Maiden. EMI, Sanctuary, or whatever company publishes their official works has nothing to do with it. So if the band says go ahead, it's good. However, the band can change that decision anytime, and stop all bootlegs from being legally shared.

Tapping into soundboards and video feeds is another issue, more from a property usage standpoint. TV, webcast and radio based bootlegs are based on a public broadcast anyway. Even video bootleg compilations, where you have recordings of various TV programs and shows, are based on public broadcast. But here lies a potential issue, because you have additional entities claiming rights for bootlegged material, from media houses themselves, that particular show owners, etc.

Third category would be foreign market bootlegs, for instance there's a Maiden England Japanese laser-disc rip, that's being shared inside bootleg community, despite of source being official recording. This made sense back when bands didn't have world-wide publishing or digital distribution, example would be no Accident Of Birth release in Brazil. That doesn't make it a less of a rip-off, since some 3rd company is making money from band's official material, but without it people would have little means to hear songs.

So, audience recordings are fine as long as the band agrees. Pro-shot stuff could be challenged on court, but there's really no point, and I don't think it ever happened. Foreign market bootlegs could be taken off-line by cease and desist order immediately.
 
Perun said:
I imagine that if a bootleg hub would be based in Germany and it was brought to the attention of a lawyer, there will be hell to pay.
Click to expand...

Pay to whom? Lawyers work for clients, and if no-one sues, who is going to prosecute hub owners? State? Until copyright infringement is ruled, there's no state involvement. Someone needs to press charges first, and nobody is going to do it. First the case is very murky and there are a lot of parties involved (band, publishers, media house, hub owners, hub participants, etc.). Second, there's no bootleg industry. They would be attacking small community of people that ain't doing nothing wrong. And third, we're talking about bootlegs that weren't sourced from community. Those are in great minority, and would be simply flagged as prohibited. There would be no big case - if Brazilian TV house that broadcasted Rock In Rio wanted action against that particular bootleg, the hub owners would immediately ban that bootleg. That's called cease and desist order, and only if no-one wants to comply (which includes hub owner, server owner, and internet uplink owner), then it's court action where the latter can challenge former's copyright claims.

I am not an expert on laws, but I've been following a lot of cases from software and media industry regarding copyright infringements, patents, and such. Taking into account all the elements around the case that form the basis for action, there are almost all missing in X vs bootleg hub.
 
Zare said:
I am not aware of such a thing. Bootlegs are shared, not sold, and any such behaviour (selling rare bootlegs for a big prize) won't work in general bootleg community.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean it like that. I was asking what is generally regarded as the most sought after, best quality, highest fan value Maiden bootleg out there?
 
I don't have a particular answer.

Pro shot '80s shows (Bremen 1981, London 1982, Dortmund 1983, Rio De Janeiro 1985, Philadelphia 1987) have a certain weight. Because there's only five of them, one for each tour between Killers and SiT.
FM / soundboard based full shows (Tokyo 1981, London 1983, Paris 1984, Chicago 1987) come in even smaller numbers.

I think there's more pro shot bootlegs of SBiT tour, than of whole 1980s. So quality 1980s boots are still the most "valuable".
 
And Zare is there anything, in your opinion, for SiT that (hypothetically; since Maiden show no sign of ever doing this) is of commercial release quality?
 
No. Spectrum 1987 master tape surfaced roughly 10 years after, and were already badly damaged.
That's pretty screwed, because if they were in better condition (audio is problematic, it's a partial bootleg, and there are in-out song cuts a few times), they could've restored them like RiR 1985.

I still hope for something to appear on the Maiden England DVD, like 20-30 minutes of Somewhere on Tour footage.

Straner In A Strange Land video was shot after the Sheffield show. Does anyone know the exact date? I'm getting 15.10.1986 as a result, but no official sources. There were 2 Sheffield shows, 15/16th of October 1986, the first date was a better than average show, on the second Bruce was ill and couldn't sing. Audience shot video boots of a good quality (in context) exist for both shows. In any case, equipment used to shoot SIASL video was there for the whole show.
 
If only they would release what they have of footage from Japan 87 in full, that they recorded for the "12 Wasted Years" video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=JrtghWeDjJM#t=4068s


Surely "Caught Somewhere In Time" must have been filmed in full, perhaps also other songs? Or maybe that is all there is. But this is, as far as I know the only official footage released by Maiden of that tour.

Edited with right link to exact time in the VHS.
 
Yep but they still recorded it so they must have the footage. It is just overdubbed with the studio track for the "12 Wasted Years" video. But this is the only official fottage of the band on that tour. Backstage stuff, live footage, interviews etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top