HW: live '79 vs complete '79

[J D]

Hi,
Must disagree in the strongest terms on this one.
Complete 79 is bootleg quality with muffled sound when compared to live 79.
(OK, so we're not talking Glastonbury 90 here.)
It also suffers from a few very clumsy edits, in some cases, part way
through songs.
Inexcusable, to my mind, especially when considering the excellent quality
of Live 79.
A huge disappointment, which has made me very wary of subsequent live
recordings.
Jez


----- Original Message -----
From: ANDREW GARIBALDI <andygee at DIAL.PIPEX.COM>
To: <BOC-L at LISTSERV.SPC.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: HW: live '79 vs complete '79


> raw?- yes - good? - yes - better??? - with you on that one Keith.
> Andy G'b
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "K Henderson" <henderson.120 at OSU.EDU>
> To: <BOC-L at LISTSERV.SPC.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 3:41 AM
> Subject: Re: HW: live '79 vs complete '79
>
>
> > Colm says...
> >
> > >the complete '79 2cd i realise is from a different gig but sounds alot
> > >better as it seems to have a raw live feel to it.
> >
> > You must be kidding.
> >
> > Grakkl (FAA)
>