View Single Post
  #90  
Old 2010-11-16, 04:59 AM
GRC's Avatar
GRC GRC is offline
Trader since 1980
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
BUT some of my concert recordings now circulate with ALL stage announcements removed (Lou Reed 11081974), with wrong information purposefully added to the description (Robert Palmer 111776), some circulate with wrong dates now purposefully added (Moody Blues 1978), incorrect venues (Rolling Stones 060175), gaps between each song (Clapton 1974), set lists altered (Clapton 1976 Baton Rouge), missing songs (Rolling Stones 1975, Led Zeppelin 02281975, Clapton1976), songs from other shows edited in, seeders adding throughly wrong information ON purpose (Stones 1975)........nobody gets upset about that, right?

So why is this watermark different than someone who re-eqs a show that was already poorly eq-ed to begin with? Don't most of you already delete versions you don't like anyway?
Because no-one would know about these alterations unless you told us. Nobody can get upset about a missing song unless they know it's missing.

This is different because we know it's there, and because we know it's been deliberately tacked on to a tape where we all know it doesn't belong.