Who Likes Zeppelin Bootlegs?

[JayZep]

I've heard 3 bootlegs by Led Zeppelin recently. "Ballcrusher," "Don't Mess With Texas," and "Ottawa Sunshine." They've all been released on vinyl, and I need a question answered: does a vinyl release automatically make an album official as a bootleg? These albums are not rarely known about to trhe best of my knowledge. Also, let's talk about which Zeppelin Bootlegs we like.

Personally, I likie all three of the bootlegs I've heard. They're all better than ITTOD (which I give a 70), but not as good as Physical Graffiti or The Song Remains the Same. All of these bootlegs can be found on YouTube.

[DropDown]

Try this thread:

http://forums.ledzeppelin.com/index.php?/topic/18394-bootlegs-with-a-perfect-balance-of-sound-quality-and-performance-quality/

[JayZep]

Ah.. There are so many threads I couldn't find that one.

None of these answered my question. I looked through them, but I need a "yes" or "no" answer unless a little more complicated. I'm not planning on reading through a bunch of threads as I'm already busy with other things. Does a vinyl release automatically of a bootleg make the bootleg official?

Edited December 14, 2013 by JayZep

[reswati]

And no, a vinyl release does not make an album officially a bootleg.

A bootleg is a recording of a performance that was not officially released by the artist or under other legal authority. This means also video's, dvd's, cd's.

[JayZep]

Then how do they become officially released? I would like to know because I help add albums to another site, and I sadly know squat about bootlegs.

Actually, I do know Bob Dylan made the first bootleg.

No one's answering my question again. I hope I don't seem stupid, but what does a bootleg need to go through for it to be released and still be called a bootleg? Is there more to it than someone finnaly deciding to release it?

Edited December 14, 2013 by JayZep

[The Dark Lord]

Bootlegs, no matter what the format (CD, Cassette, DVD, LP (vinyl), etc) are all unauthorized recordings, and are technically unlawful. They infringe on copyrights, etc, and production of bootlegs constitutes Criminal activity in many jurisdictions. They are produced by unscrupulous entrepreneurs, who have them produced in their medium of choice and then distribute them. Bootlegs do not become officially released, that is why they are called bootlegs. it is implicit in the name that they are unlawful. In today's world, there really is no way to prevent the creation and distribution of bootlegs, and public views have softened as to the ethical issues involved. Bootlegs are an example of technology out pacing enforcement in an increasingly electronic world.

Edited December 14, 2013 by The Dark Lord

[JayZep]

What about Dream Theater's live Dark Side of the Moon? That's an album that is known as an "official bootleg."

[The Dark Lord]

Dream Theater are performing someone else's album. That's just a title for their crappy rendition.

[JayZep]

Still, it's an official bootleg. What about the Pearl jam official bootlegs? What about the Weezewr ones? Google "official bootleg." I need to know if the three I mentioned at the top are official, and I've spent a couple days trying to find the answer and for the freaking no one's telling me.

[reswati]

The three mentioned in post one are UNOFFICIAL, they were not recorded by Led Zeppelin or their record company.

The so called "official bootlegs" are recorded by the band themselves and distributed by them.

Edited December 14, 2013 by reswati

[JayZep]

OK. How do you know? Can I get an answer soon, please? I hate posting too often to get an answer and I don't want to appear as a rude person or a troll on my first day. I'm just tired of looking for the answer.

Edited December 14, 2013 by JayZep

[The Dark Lord]

The name "bootleg" is being used as a cutesy title in those cases. Just remember this, if a band does not authorize a release, and is not receiving credit and royalties for their work, then it is likely a bootleg. Ironically, a real bootleg is not likely to make any reference to the fact that is is a bootleg, as the objective is to fly under the radar and not be detected as usurious leach. I can't help you beyond that. Much of this knowledge comes from years of being a fan of a particular group and knowing their official releases. You could always try to narrow it down by exclusion: run a bands discography in wikipedia, and then approach it such that anything not mentioned in the discography could be a probable bootleg. You can drill down from there and do your research on the individual album/ bootleg.

Edited December 14, 2013 by The Dark Lord

[reswati]

For instance Ballcrusher:

Issued by The Amazing Kornyfone label.

http://www.discogs.com/Led-Zeppelin-Ballcrusher-The-1972-Tour/release/3786339

(you can search out the rest of those records on that site yourself)

Also some info about Kornyfone:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kornyfone

(and there are many many more bootleg labels, such as TMQ, TMOQ, Wizardo, Great Dane..........blah too many to mention)

Edited December 14, 2013 by reswati

[Pb!]

Then how do they become officially released? I would like to know because I help add albums to another site, and I sadly know squat about bootlegs.

Actually, I do know Bob Dylan made the first bootleg.

No one's answering my question again. I hope I don't seem stupid, but what does a bootleg need to go through for it to be released and still be called a bootleg? Is there more to it than someone finnaly deciding to release it?

I assume you are adding them to Discogs, and you just need to add the 'Unofficial Release' tag in the description field. These releases are segregated from the rest of the discography (here is Zep's:http://www.discogs.com/artist/Led+Zeppelin#t=Unofficial_All&q=&p=1). Almost every release by a Major-label artist that is NOT on a major label is a bootleg; I will assume you know what a major label is. There is no process that makes a bootleg 'official'. Many bootleg releases have seen an official release (like Zep's BBC sessions), but the original bootlegs are still illegal.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Pb!

[Pb!]

Also, this book is essential for anyone wanting to know more about the history of bootlegging:http://www.amazon.com/Bootleg-Secret-History-Recording-Industry/dp/0312142897

[chef free]

An "official bootleg" is a concert recording officially released by a band. They are different from a "live album" because they are usually a complete show, unedited, do not have any overdubs, and are sourced from two track (stereo) recordings. There are no "official bootlegs" from Led Zeppelin. Some bands do release them however. The Doors, King Crimson, The Rolling Stones come to mind. Led Zeppelin bootlegs, like the ones you have, are a great way to enjoy the band once you have heard all the official releases. I've been collecting bootlegs since the '70's.

[The Dark Lord]

There's no such thing as an official bootleg, apart from a name that may have been given to an album by the artist or holder of the rights (for fun). Calling something an official bootleg is capitalizing on a cutesy name, but does not make it so. Calling a duck a moose does not make it so either. A true bootleg (not a cute album title or sub-title) cannot be officially released as it is an unauthorized recording and criminal enterprise. As defined by Webster's dictionary: an unauthorized audio or video recording.

Edited December 15, 2013 by The Dark Lord

[Matjaz1]

Just to add something to the topic title:

[kingzoso]

How about this to clarify the "bootleg" interpretation that the JayZep is wanting a supreme answer to:

This is what is considered a "Bootleg" (And one of the best). Over 3 1/2 hours of Led Zeppelin in Los Angeles at Their very Best. It was once a vinyl (record) album and then transferred to the cd format and now is available for all Us Led Zeppelin fans to hear any time we (I) want to hear it.

I would like to "Praise" the founder of YouTube for creating a website that allows such Great and Awesome Music to be Heard (and not just bythe "Mighty Led Zeppelin).

Edited December 15, 2013 by kingzoso

[Matjaz1]

Vocal wise it was one of Plants worst nights obviously!

But most bootlegs are great and asking such a question on a Zep forum is just weird!

[The Dark Lord]

I have quite a few Zeppelin bootlegs, that I hunted down relentlessly as a kid, but I must say that they eventually caused me to completely avoid most live music altogether, as Zeppelin really do sound horrible on some of them. I find it hard to see past the crappy quality, and I find that I would rather hear a studio album for the fifteen thousandth time, than listen to Zeppelin in a compromised state.

Edited December 15, 2013 by The Dark Lord

[Matjaz1]

I think they are the most bootleged band for a reason!

Most of the concerts are fantastic and many of the early or even latter ones that have rather poor sound, are still so great, I can get pass that many times! As long as I can still hear everything and in particulary the low note fast runs on Jimmy's guitar, which are sometimes particulary hard to hear on poor audio bootlegs!

Edited December 15, 2013 by Matjaz1

[kingzoso]

I believe that Led Zeppelin "bootlegs" have definitely added to the Magic and Mystique of the whole Led Zeppelin Legacy. I, personally, would rather listen to a LZ bootleg (and actually do) than a LZ studio album. I would prefer 45 minute version of Dazed and Confused then an 8 minute version. There is more virtuosity and dynamics in the (way) longer live version then the studio version. But that is just me. Anyone else agree?

[Melcórë]

I have quite a few Zeppelin bootlegs, that I hunted down relentlessly as a kid, but I must say that they eventually caused me to completely avoid most live music altogether, as Zeppelin really do sound horrible on some of them. I find it hard to see past the crappy quality, and I find that I would rather hear a studio album for the fifteen thousandth time, than listen to Zeppelin in a compromised state.

That's mind-boggling to me. I want to say insane, but don't want to offend.

[Aspensound]

That's mind-boggling to me. I want to say insane, but don't want to offend.

I second that, these "recordings" are the best what we can get, until someone invents a time machine.