So it is obvious that they are released worldwide, regardless of the number of listeners of these rare recordings.
And the releases were not entered by me in last.fm. I just noticed this when I did some research after these releases
And another one.
Yes exactly that is the crux, these “official” releases have no front/back cover and no other referencece
I think this is one thing that should lift these above the torrent style\home compilations. If this is hard to get hold of music being exchanged between various people and passed on and passed on - then it seems worthwhile of documenting.
There are bootlegs that can only be picked up on fan websites. (I am thinking Pink Floyd, Zappa, etc) These are often filled with rare concerts and other unreleased music. That fits the bootleg tag and is documented here.
If this was just a list of tracks available easily elsewhere (like the torrent compilations) then there are too many to add and it would be a mess.
The problem with this modern digital world is it is now very easy to repackage and release something to the masses. This will become a growing problem.
3 Likes
When a user adds a release to the database, he must select one of the four statuses:
- Official
- Promotion
- Bootleg
- Pseudo-Release
Then, what status should he choose for this release?
I suggest to add the option “False release” or “Homemade”… That would be at least true.
I can’t imagine including such a release in a more or less serious discography.
Due to support for such releases, MB loses its well-deserved reputation as a source of accurate discographic information. Do we really need this?
4 Likes
This would be good to see. It would then stop them being confused with Real bootlegs.
“A Homemade Compilation of officially released tracks” is an accurate description
3 Likes
Exactly. Why do bootlegs always have such value? Because they include unreleased recordings. For this, connoisseurs forgive them for their illegitimacy, because there is no other way to get these unique recordings. And what is the value of these self-made compilations if everything included in them was published earlier? So calling these compilations bootlegs is too much of an honor for them.
7 Likes
Yep. And many artists actually encourage and allow bootlegs as long as they don’t use material already released. They know that the true fans love that kinda stuff. I know I already have a heap of bootlegs ready to add to MB database when time allows.
These Homemade compilations need their own box. When looking at an Artist page it will get annoying to find these all scattered in with the more interesting bootlegs.
3 Likes
In my opinion a release should be released. Something made up and mixed by someone and used by one or some persons more is not a release to me. A torrent that spreads and has a homemade cover is a bootleg release for me. I don’t understand why a bootleg release from a popular website should be any worse than a pirated cd sold at the black market
I still would like to see proof that something has been released in the first place
3 Likes
I should have been less implicit.
0 listeners, or 3 in this case, for a worldwide release, means that there is hardly only the person who made it and their best friend.
1 Like
I agree that a new selection should be added, if (big IF here) they are allowed. I would never add my personal compilations, sorry @jesus2099, I never called them mixtapes or mixCDs. I would make collections of current popular tunes or ‘best of’ sets for artists with big catalogs (i.e. Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin, or Van Halen.) I made a lot of these comps for use in vehicles back in the 1980’s to the early 2000’s, but I don’t have them in my music collection DB and I find it absurd to think they should be in a global DB, like MB. My ultimate answer would be to remove them all from MB, since they are neither officially released items, digitally or physically nor a bootleg. Just my opinion, of course.
6 Likes
Most of my cassettes had hands drawn covers, most of my CD compilations had computer made covers, back covers. And both had catalogue numbers.
But I never thought I would add them to MB, it’s irrelevant. Even if I distributed my CDs among friends and family.
5 Likes
Here are about a dozen of my car tapes from the 80’s, that I had out for nostalgia. Now the NIN EP is definitely in the my DB, lol. I made these and the CDs mainly for thief protection, so the originals were safe at home. The comps were never intended as rare, one of a kind items. They were just copies to be used up or lost in the car, period.
3 Likes
Oh, and if the creators (and that’s a bit of a stretch) actually marketed and sold these compilations, I definitely say take them down. Illegal copies are just illegal copies, right? But hey, I’m just an old user, newer commenter, eh? 
4 Likes
I’m not seeing any clear line once we cross the boundary from official Releases. (And even that line isn’t unblurred.)
Drawing a line for what is “MB Recorded music” and MB “Live music event” on qualitative grounds, other than" it’s out there", and “the live music event is planned, happening or happened”, has other problems too.
The sort of problems that occur within another online community knowledge building project that come in part from seeking to exclude on the basis of notability are immense. A lot of editor/vandal/administrator time and resources go into disputes about what is actually notable, damaging and repairing the online content, attacking opposing editors, admin election wars, policing, persecution, corruption, hearings, blocks, bans, and sockpuppet abuse and detection. With a consequent negative work environment. Very likely, careers, mental health, physical health, lives and marriages have been lost as a result of exposure.
4 Likes
I can’t see why the legality of it matters.
Should The Grey Album or Kind of Bloop be removed from the database? They’re “illegal” after all.
5 Likes
Legality does not matter, indeed.
I would suggest splitting the current “bootleg”, keeping “bootleg” only for bootlegs as described on WP, so unauthorized recordings (usually, but not necessarily, live), and using “pirate” or “pirated” for pirated releases, i.e. unauthorized distributions of existing material. The latter would include both the commercial kind, and the homemade/torrented kind.
I would then also favour a user profile setting to include/exclude pirate releases from results. I personally see no value in them and would not want to see any of them, but if others want them, *shrug*.
11 Likes
Hmmm, I don’t know about @RocknRollArchivist, but my examples are definitely illegal. It would be like K-Tel, Ronco or That’s What We Call… repackaging songs into their comps and not paying for the use of said songs. Your remix examples are certainly in a gray area (pun intended) and from that Kind of Bloop link, a very nasty can of worms. It’s no wonder ‘Weird Al’ prefers to get permissions before doing a parody. But to get back on point, personal compilations, of pre-existing songs, do not really need to be cataloged on MB, IMHO.
4 Likes
There was a bootleg LP (more than one, presumably) put out in the 70s called “Buddy Holly In Person, Vol. 2” . It’s not in MB (it is in discogs) but I think most would agree it could be.
So one of the bloggers that @alfg cited earlier has made this bootleg available on https://grandpastockorecords.blogspot.com/2020/02/good-rockin-tonight.html . It’s got a title, tracklist, cover and label images, and a download link. It’s available to anyone who wants it (although it actually gives me a permission error, so maybe it wasn’t the best example).
So assuming the first is fair game for MB, why wouldn’t the second one be?
If I understand you correctly, your “first” instance is the original bootleg and the “second one” is a simple repackaging of the very same bootleg (?). If this is so, I would argue that this is an instance one might say is a pseudo-release of the bootleg and not, strictly speaking, a homemade compilation. If I have made an incorrect assumption about your meaning, I withdraw my reply, having only that to say.
OT (With the advent of cassettes - a marvel to our lives - we would often refer to homemade compilations as “mix tapes”.)
IMO too, please!
Untangling recordings is already difficult enough without those bogus releases that no one will ever be in capability of ear checking if we should merge the recording for no benefit or keep tons of even more duplicate recordings.
5 Likes