KingSausage said:

databank said:

What's with all the snips? I can't believe so many people r stupid enough to ask where to find this or to post links, so what else's been censored?

Sadly, I think most of them are people asking those questions. How hard is it to follow that rule? NO. SOLICITING. FOR. BOOTLEGS. Come on, people. MOD EDIT For the purposes of clarity: we are also not allowing discussion of unreleased bootlegs. We can clarify this in various other places too - thanks. l'ange bleu moderator

What is this nonsense?!? We CAN discuss unreleased outtakes but we CANNOT discuss unreleased bootlegs?!? Can we still discuss released bootlegs?


Talking about bootlegs is in no way illegal.

I'm really feeling this emoticon for the first time ever...

djThunderfunk said:

KingSausage said:

databank said: Sadly, I think most of them are people asking those questions. How hard is it to follow that rule? NO. SOLICITING. FOR. BOOTLEGS. Come on, people. MOD EDIT For the purposes of clarity: we are also not allowing discussion of unreleased bootlegs. We can clarify this in various other places too - thanks. l'ange bleu moderator

What is this nonsense?!? We CAN discuss unreleased outtakes but we CANNOT discuss unreleased bootlegs?!? Can we still discuss released bootlegs?


Talking about bootlegs is in no way illegal.

I'm really feeling this emoticon for the first time ever...

It's ridiculous, this definitely needs some explanation.

I think it means unreleased BOOTLEGS--meaning those things you can buy--until they've been released. In other words (based on what I've seen removed, if I remember right), you can't talk about "NAME OF BOOTLEG COLLECTION, VOL X" until the company in question has released it. I might be wrong.

TheEnglishGent said:

djThunderfunk said:

What is this nonsense?!? We CAN discuss unreleased outtakes but we CANNOT discuss unreleased bootlegs?!? Can we still discuss released bootlegs?


Talking about bootlegs is in no way illegal.

I'm really feeling this emoticon for the first time ever...

It's ridiculous, this definitely needs some explanation.

This is very sad.

.

I wonder if there's been contact from his lawyers or are the mods just being ultra cautious.

EddieC said:

I think it means unreleased BOOTLEGS--meaning those things you can buy--until they've been released. In other words (based on what I've seen removed, if I remember right), you can't talk about "NAME OF BOOTLEG COLLECTION, VOL X" until the company in question has released it. I might be wrong.

Are we getting cease & decists from the boot labels now?

Averett said:

EddieC said:

By original version, of course, you mean at the point that he left it... the final mix sounds a lot like the Back in Time title track, actually--just longer.

"The original version was a solo recording dealing with Prince's break-up with Susannah Melvoin, and thanking Wally Safford for being his friend. He felt the song was too personal, however, and kept adding layers of percussion and changing the feel of the track. Engineer Susan Rogers pleaded with him to leave it as a barebones track, but he insisted on recording over all 24 tracks to erase it." (per PrinceVault)

I like to believe in miracles

Does "Wally" actually exist? It was my understanding that Prince completly destroyed the track.

TheEnglishGent said:

It's ridiculous, this definitely needs some explanation.

.

It is simple.

It is the USA.

They have laws there.

But the money plays too big a part in everything.

So to avoid issues for the owners of the org they bend the rules so that they can avoid needing to spend money on legal stuff.

It is the sad state of the country.

wouldntulove2loveme said:

Averett said:

"The original version was a solo recording dealing with Prince's break-up with Susannah Melvoin, and thanking Wally Safford for being his friend. He felt the song was too personal, however, and kept adding layers of percussion and changing the feel of the track. Engineer Susan Rogers pleaded with him to leave it as a barebones track, but he insisted on recording over all 24 tracks to erase it." (per PrinceVault)

I like to believe in miracles

Does "Wally" actually exist? It was my understanding that Prince completly destroyed the track.

Apparently the inital recording that Susan Rogers was so amazed at was erased on Prince's insistence, but he rerecorded a version with less personal lyrics the day after, which also had additional instrumentation, and apparently that was kept. So I guess the lyric thing is somewhat similar to what happened to Old Friends 4 Sale, although the recorded lyrics of that were done a long time after its initial recording, and thankfully both versions survive.

I don't think the rerecorded Wally is circulating amongst anyone though.

Also wtf is up with the not discussing unreleased bootlegs, how does that work? Talking isn't illegal, I don't know why such a ridiculous rule is being enforced.

wouldntulove2loveme said:

Averett said:

"The original version was a solo recording dealing with Prince's break-up with Susannah Melvoin, and thanking Wally Safford for being his friend. He felt the song was too personal, however, and kept adding layers of percussion and changing the feel of the track. Engineer Susan Rogers pleaded with him to leave it as a barebones track, but he insisted on recording over all 24 tracks to erase it." (per PrinceVault)

I like to believe in miracles

Does "Wally" actually exist? It was my understanding that Prince completly destroyed the track.

My Wally reference was intended to set an incredibly high bar (I dare say impossible) for any future bootleg. The reference was intended to be no less insane than the "Sugar Walls" demo with Prince vocals. Some people just have a tendency to get too literal around here. This follow up comment is not intended toward you wouldntulove2loveme as you I suspect get the joke and are just doing a quick reality check.

[Edited 4/1/15 9:14am]

udo said:

TheEnglishGent said:

It's ridiculous, this definitely needs some explanation.

.

It is simple.

It is the USA.

They have laws there.

But the money plays too big a part in everything.

So to avoid issues for the owners of the org they bend the rules so that they can avoid needing to spend money on legal stuff.

It is the sad state of the country.

It's not simple, what laws are being breached? Don't they also have freedom of speech?

Averett said:

wouldntulove2loveme said:

Does "Wally" actually exist? It was my understanding that Prince completly destroyed the track.

My Wally reference was intended to set an incredibly high bar (I dare say impossible) for any future bootleg. The reference was intended to be no less insane than the "Sugar Walls" demo with Prince vocals. Some people just have a tendency to get too literal around here. This follow up comment is not intended toward you wouldntulove2loveme as you I suspect get the joke and are just doing a quick reality check.

[Edited 4/1/15 9:14am]

If you're referring to me I don't expect Wally to be on any future bootlegs, and I understood your tracklist to be made in jest I was just trying to offer some information on the likely existence of the recording or not. If you're not referring to me sorry if this message sounds combative

RaspBerryGirlFriend said:

Averett said:

My Wally reference was intended to set an incredibly high bar (I dare say impossible) for any future bootleg. The reference was intended to be no less insane than the "Sugar Walls" demo with Prince vocals. Some people just have a tendency to get too literal around here. This follow up comment is not intended toward you wouldntulove2loveme as you I suspect get the joke and are just doing a quick reality check.

[Edited 4/1/15 9:14am]

If you're referring to me I don't expect Wally to be on any future bootlegs, and I understood your tracklist to be made in jest I was just trying to offer some information on the likely existence of the recording or not. If you're not referring to me sorry if this message sounds combative

Actually EddieC was on my mind when I left this comment

EddieC said:

I think it means unreleased BOOTLEGS--meaning those things you can buy--until they've been released. In other words (based on what I've seen removed, if I remember right), you can't talk about "NAME OF BOOTLEG COLLECTION, VOL X" until the company in question has released it. I might be wrong.

It might indeed be the case but then I agree that it needs a clarification because it would be a NEW rule. So far releases of bootlegs have always been announced, including artwork and all and this has never been a problem. Besides it seems confusing because bootleg "companies" can't sue anyone so this would have to be from P's camp but then I fail to understand the legal ground on which discussing released bootlegs is fine and discussing planned ones isn't.

.

The rule on the front page says NO SOLICITING FOR BOOTLEGS! Discussion is fine ; requests/offers to copy and links to bootleg sites are not. That's it, period.

.

If there is a new rule the very least is to announce it clearly on the front page, and explaining why the sudden change wouldn't hurt, too.

.

It would for one thing save the mods a lot of snipping time and also avoid us breaking a new rule that we don't even know exist.

.

And I apologize Langebleu because you say it should be discussed elsewhere (in the Org forum I guess) and I know questioning mods decisions in a random thread isn't allowed but please understand that I am not questioning your snips themselves, or the new rule itself, only asking for you to make the new rule clear and explain to us its motives (not that you have to explain it but I think explaining the reasons behind a rule make it more likely for people not to question it or try and transgress it).

RaspBerryGirlFriend said:

Averett said:

My Wally reference was intended to set an incredibly high bar (I dare say impossible) for any future bootleg. The reference was intended to be no less insane than the "Sugar Walls" demo with Prince vocals. Some people just have a tendency to get too literal around here. This follow up comment is not intended toward you wouldntulove2loveme as you I suspect get the joke and are just doing a quick reality check.

[Edited 4/1/15 9:14am]

If you're referring to me I don't expect Wally to be on any future bootlegs, and I understood your tracklist to be made in jest I was just trying to offer some information on the likely existence of the recording or not. If you're not referring to me sorry if this message sounds combative

We never know - maybe Susan Rodgers made a back-up copy of the original 'Wally' before being told to erase it by the boss. Maybe she's got it stashed away somewhere and is hyping the track up so one day she can sell the one and only copy for big bucks.... or maybe the only take really was flushed down the toilet.

One thing I'm sure of is that if we ever did get to hear this lost masterwork, our expectations will be so high that if it does anything less than bring about world peace, unite the nations, align the planets and make a free slice of pizza pop out of the CD player after it's finished will be considered a crushing disappointment.

Averett said:

RaspBerryGirlFriend said:

If you're referring to me I don't expect Wally to be on any future bootlegs, and I understood your tracklist to be made in jest I was just trying to offer some information on the likely existence of the recording or not. If you're not referring to me sorry if this message sounds combative

Actually EddieC was on my mind when I left this comment

Ah, fair enough then

TheEnglishGent said:

udo said:

.

It is simple.

It is the USA.

They have laws there.

But the money plays too big a part in everything.

So to avoid issues for the owners of the org they bend the rules so that they can avoid needing to spend money on legal stuff.

It is the sad state of the country.

It's not simple, what laws are being breached? Don't they also have freedom of speech?

Unfortunately it costs a bunch of $$ to fight for that right in court. Prince has that $, the org does not.

TheEnglishGent said:

It's not simple, what laws are being breached? Don't they also have freedom of speech?

.

It is not laws.

It is the money.

And exactly their money is failing too.

databank said:

Oh! U're back!

For the first time in well over three years. How time flies.

On BFTP 3.0, what do you think will be included? I personally think the remaining Crystal Ball Volume 2 tracks alongside the unchosen songs will be included.

heard a vtrack from milan 88 --sounds good

anyone know if roseland NYC 88 is on a bootleg? sounds great

mcmk785new said:

scififilmnerd said:

databank said:

For the first time in well over three years. How time flies.

Missed ya

mushmackalenta said:

mcmk785new said:

On BFTP 3.0, what do you think will be included? I personally think the remaining Crystal Ball Volume 2 tracks alongside the unchosen songs will be included.

A truckload of rehash. If they had anything truly exciting they would have advertised it as being on the set to create more orders, why do you think no tracklist has been published yet.

mcmk785new said:

Hard To Get (1981)! Free it now!

Absolutely 100% agree with that!

mcmk785new said:

On BFTP 3.0, what do you think will be included? I personally think the remaining Crystal Ball Volume 2 tracks alongside the unchosen songs will be included.

The flyer is out but no track list yet?

seanski said: