On the Subject of Making Recordings at Gigs
Posted: 10 Nov 2010, 01:53This thread was created to confine the controversial topic of unauthorized, secret, bootleg recordings and minimize the resultant discord. The following posts were copied from other threads and is a beginning.
Are going to post it without regard to the quality of the recording?
I'm going to warn you in advance--as I'm not too sure about your native sagacity--that this is a trick question.
Wanbli wrote:...Colleen was easily the highlight for me- this was the first performance of it with this lineup and this particular arrangement- I got an audio recording i will try to post....
Are going to post it without regard to the quality of the recording?
I'm going to warn you in advance--as I'm not too sure about your native sagacity--that this is a trick question.
phideaux3 wrote:Here's last night's setlist she signed for me with an archaic, petroleum based implement aka a 'Sharpie.'
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=5690641&l=07abd50121&id=653553880
I also have audio of the entire show I need to edit for posting, possibly without regard to quality just to piss off relayor.
Good talkin' w/ you last night, Peter.
Also just wanted to add how much fun it was to meet Bryce, Josh, Beverly, & Will too.
peas be with you.
Relayor wrote:phideaux3 wrote:...I also have audio of the entire show I need to edit for posting, possibly without regard to quality just to piss off relayor....
I think you misunderstand. You will make an ENEMY of Joanna. That you haven't thought of this should scare the pants off you--or dress. This kind of "blindness" may result in you stepping in front of a moving bus.
There is nothing more destructive of an artist than for some hopelessly self-centered clown to make available to all of posterity and beyond some recording of awful quality. Do you know who is the final judge of such things? Not the recorder (you)--it's the artist who is at the mercy of self-centered strangers.
ann wrote:She doesn't like any recordings, I believe.
doublewuzzy wrote:ann wrote:She doesn't like any recordings, I believe.
I can attest to that after being hauled out of the Chicago show and treated like a criminal (they let me back in after molesting me/my camera - but I was the only one in my area of the venue to be treated that way).
Relayor wrote:doublewuzzy wrote:ann wrote:She doesn't like any recordings, I believe.
I can attest to that after being hauled out of the Chicago show and treated like a criminal (they let me back in after molesting me/my camera - but I was the only one in my area of the venue to be treated that way).
That was the best thing I've read all week--except for the part about you being let back in. Dblewoosie: the victim. That's roll-on-the-floor laughable.
Ann: you've made a monumental understatement.
Weirdelves wrote:Hey, sorry if this is a bother but do you mind, like, not being such a dick scherado? Can't you just be pleasant?
You made a big show of coming back and clogging up the forum with ridiculously long and largely obscure threads, which you expect us to take seriously even though you seem to be going out of your way to be rude to most of the people around here. If you want respect and to be liked, you have to earn it.
Jordan~ wrote:Consider Tom a moderator, I'd make him one if I could. Same goes for Ann.
Wanbli wrote:doublewuzzy wrote:ann wrote:She doesn't like any recordings, I believe.
I can attest to that after being hauled out of the Chicago show and treated like a criminal (they let me back in after molesting me/my camera - but I was the only one in my area of the venue to be treated that way).
Actually- this is entirely up to the venue to enforce. JN would have nothing to do with this type of behavior.
From my experience she does not like flash photography and asks venues to request patrons not to do that
Relayor wrote:Weirdelves wrote:Hey, sorry if this is a bother but do you mind, like, not being such a dick scherado? Can't you just be pleasant?
You made a big show of coming back and clogging up the forum with ridiculously long and largely obscure threads, which you expect us to take seriously even though you seem to be going out of your way to be rude to most of the people around here. If you want respect and to be liked, you have to earn it.
What do you have to say about the destructive effects directly to Joanna of secret recordings of live performances?
Attacking me for having the common decency to not spit into the eye of the very person celebrated on the forum for whom said forum exists is much like nailing Jesus to a cross because he has become a nuisance. Don't you think?Wanbli wrote:...Actually- this is entirely up to the venue to enforce. JN would have nothing to do with this type of behavior.
From my experience she does not like flash photography and asks venues to request patrons not to do that
Which is it?
Jordan~ wrote:Ladies and gentleman, we have a messiah complex!
He's attacking you for being boorish, not controversial.
Relayor wrote:Jordan~ wrote:Ladies and gentleman, we have a messiah complex!
He's attacking you for being boorish, not controversial.
I dare you to address the larger point.
Jordan~ wrote:Which larger point? About how she doesn't like recordings? Irrelevant. Play nice or get out.
Gerritsón wrote:
Wanbli wrote:Gerriston
Until said person does stop, simply click the name and click the Foe button.
Then like me, you will be blissfully ignorant of whatever this person is posting!
Relayor wrote:Jordan~ wrote:Which larger point? About how she doesn't like recordings? Irrelevant. Play nice or get out.
The larger point--and the only meaningful point--is that the subject recordings are more than a little destructive of the well-being of the very person to whom this site is dedicated.....supposedly.
You've misused entirely the word irrelevant. Anyone who disagrees with my position can not possibly in good conscience, nay, any conscience at all, approach Joanna to ask for a signature or chat and still think they have not perpetrated a monumental arrogance and obscenity.
I, on the other hand, am free to do anything.
ann wrote:I do not respect the fact that Joanna Newsom has previously expressed her dislike at recordings in that I continue to watch videos and listen to recorded shows. I think these recordings bother her a bit more than destruct her well-being. There's lots of things I don't agree with Joanna Newsom, the person, about. So, since I adore her as an artist, I ignore what she would probably prefer in order to get more of her music. I understand that sounds sort of vulgar, but it seems many people do the same. With all of these opinions, I did approach her for a signature, and I'm not so sure I did anything terribly wrong.
Weirdelves wrote:I don't understand why you must obfuscate and blur everything we say until nothing is concrete or serious or comprehensible anymore. I asked you to stop being so rude, and all you've done is put up petty counter attacks. A sane response would be 'Oh, well I did/n't realise I was being rude but I didn't mean to hurt anyone, and as I want to be part of this community I'll try and not be such a cock in future.'
Jessie wrote:Yikes.. what's going on in here?!
Ann, I do the same. Thank GOD there are so many great boots out there! Especially on YouTube, hours of entertainment.
polliwog wrote:What is going on here? You all seem to be talking to yourselves. Oh, you haven't made him a foe, so you still see what he is posting. Poor you.
phideaux3 wrote:Relayor - you really need to get a sense of humor. LURK MOAR.
My capture is 96/24. Sure it's a crowd, but the audience so f'ing respectful, it makes for a sweet recording if you can put up w/ the volume between songs (which I was considering working on a bit.)
As for the artist's desires, it's easily verifiable that well-moderated trading sites have respectable relationships with attorneys and police their distributions vehemently. JN's material is traded regularly; her representation has yet to deliver a C&D.
"Can't we all just get along?" - Rodney King
"Obviously not." - me
Jordan~ wrote:Relayor wrote:Jordan~ wrote:Which larger point? About how she doesn't like recordings? Irrelevant. Play nice or get out.
I, on the other hand, am free to do anything.
Wrong. You're not free to come here and be a dick to people I care about. You'll get banned if you do that. Rethink that position. I suggest you see the error of your ways, apologise, and mend them; otherwise your stay here will be brief.
doublewuzzy wrote:You can't have your cake and eat it too... if you are going to be a musician, people are going to record you - you can't really get away with doing one without experiencing the other. Unless you're a really major artist with a ton of security, of course (my own experience was the enforcement of a venue rule - I had skipped the opener so I didn't know it).
She doesn't like being recorded. Okay, I get it, but... too bad. It happens, it's going to happen, and it has happened countless times before - and it hasn't stopped her from becoming popular. If anything, it helps to "get the word out" about her to new listeners. Perhaps, in a roundabout way, bootlegs are increasing her profit...
Relayor wrote:ann wrote:I do not respect the fact that Joanna Newsom has previously expressed her dislike at recordings in that I continue to watch videos and listen to recorded shows. I think these recordings bother her a bit more than destruct her well-being. There's lots of things I don't agree with Joanna Newsom, the person, about. So, since I adore her as an artist, I ignore what she would probably prefer in order to get more of her music. I understand that sounds sort of vulgar, but it seems many people do the same. With all of these opinions, I did approach her for a signature, and I'm not so sure I did anything terribly wrong.
If you had a freshly recorded show in your pocket and then asked her for the signature you would have done something obscene. What you did was much less vulgar.
I think that some of the recordings are so awful that she is bothered more than you care to imagine.
Relayor wrote:Jordan~ wrote:Relayor wrote:Jordan~ wrote:Which larger point? About how she doesn't like recordings? Irrelevant. Play nice or get out.
I, on the other hand, am free to do anything.
Wrong. ...
No right because I meant I can do anything with respect to approaching her with a clear conscience. You ignored the context.
Weirdelves: Your request is unreasonable because I am right about what I've said about the subject. Sometimes, being right takes a lessor priority: this IS NOT one of those times.
elseanio wrote:I for one am grateful for the 3 bootlegs I own. They are the 3 gigs I attened, and instantly transport me back to those nights. The audio isn't perfect, but that doesn't matter to me. I can see how it would, however, matter to Joanna. I don't imagine she listens to bootlegs of her shows, but that's perfectly acceptable. I get the impression you feel she will have a problem with me enjoying a less than perfect recording of her, which I don't think is true at all.
Jordan~ wrote:Relayor wrote:Sometimes, being right takes a lessor priority: this IS NOT one of those times.
You're not listening. It is. *primes the banhammer*
Relayor wrote:Jordan~ wrote:Relayor wrote:Sometimes, being right takes a lessor priority: this IS NOT one of those times.
You're not listening. It is. *primes the banhammer*
I don't want this topic to have this effect; and I don't want to "clutter" threads, as has been suggested. I'm going to move my posts on this topic to a single thread aptly named. Others can remove their contributions in kind or not; Alex can use his superhuman powers to tidy the remains. I do want the forum to be a better place too.
