Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

Next Archive - Any Rumors?


Recommended Posts

On 10/10/2021 at 12:55 AM, Buddhabone said:

The delay indicates it's tape, that requires more steps to prepare.

Cooking, transferring to digital, mixing, mastering...all steps that require time and hand offs.

I am very excited for Friday. "Let it Be" super deluxe box and a new archive. (they wouldn't tweet unless it's so!!!)

We are due for a River show, please make it happen.

 

@Buddhabone must be super excited now :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BigBoss said:

Nope, paying for stuff that i want is not a gift.

Do you buy every download! And it's OK if you do. 

Getting back to the gift thing, are you good with just audience tapes? If so see Jim CT.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Niels said:

What does this even mean? So no release this month?

7A205087-9E59-49AE-A107-472AB58E2AA0.jpeg

There's one way I can think of to make sense out of that, especially the bit about the schedule being adjusted.

Perhaps they were working on a 1980/81 show (as expected by many), but somebody (Bruce, JLM, Sony?) has decided that there shouldn't be another release from that era before the No Nukes release. In that case work would have to start again on a different show, hence the delay.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, musicdav24 said:

Honestly, I'm probably in the minority, but i would much rather have a full show archive release than No Nukes. As great a show as it was, i’m more excited about a classic 3 hour show than No Nukes. again, just me

I would like a 3-4 hour archive show, but at the same time it's great that we're getting the No Nukes DVD/Bluray as well as a CD and LP 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigBoss said:

This "there's another release colliding with that" crap is getting ridiculous. One thing hasn't got to do anything with the other.

I agree.  And do they truly think that No Nukes will dissuade someone from buying a Nugs show, or vice versa?  I don’t think that a casual fan is sitting on the fence out there saying “Crap; now I have to choose between No Nukes and a Nugs show.”

I think it’s really only us die-hard fans who care about all these crusty old shows anyway, whether that be No Nukes or Nugs or some other upcoming box set of 40 year old archive material.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Born To Walk said:

Perhaps they were working on a 1980/81 show (as expected by many), but somebody (Bruce, JLM, Sony?) has decided that there shouldn't be another release from that era before the No Nukes release. In that case work would have to start again on a different show, hence the delay.

Now that is very good explanation.:)

One could add this 'problem' could maybe easily fixed with a quick release of a 2012/2013 show; as is assumed shows from that tour don't need that much work as shows from other tours. Except that would be the 3rd WB Tour release this year, only a few months after the previous one (But then many would not have any problem with that).

Edit: if this really is a problem anyway, release of a River Tour show (or Darkness Tour show) around the same time as No Nukes. Or even release of a BUSA Tour show just before or just after the BUSA Box.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, badlands78 said:

I agree.  And do they truly think that No Nukes will dissuade someone from buying a Nugs show, or vice versa?  I don’t think that a casual fan is sitting on the fence out there saying “Crap; now I have to choose between No Nukes and a Nugs show.”

I think it’s really only us die-hard fans who care about all these crusty old shows anyway, whether that be No Nukes or Nugs or some other upcoming box set of 40 year old archive material.

Completely agree.

I think there is a bit of a misconception in Bruce world about just how many people truly care.

If his commercial department are behind what you suggest above, then its a bad call.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, musicdav24 said:

Honestly, I'm probably in the minority, but i would much rather have a full show archive release than No Nukes. As great a show as it was, i’m more excited about a classic 3 hour show than No Nukes. again, just me….:(

I'm with you 100%... plus, most of us already have both full Nukes shows via Nugs

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lampi said:

Now that is very good explanation.:)

One could add this 'problem' could maybe easily fixed with a quick release of a 2012/2013 show; as is assumed shows from that tour don't need that much work as shows from other tours. Except that would be the 3rd WB Tour release this year, only a few months after the previous one (But then many would not have any problem with that).

Edit: if this really is a problem anyway, release of a River Tour show (or Darkness Tour show) around the same time as No Nukes. Or even release of a BUSA Tour show just before or just after the BUSA Box.

Or even 2007/08/09. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lampi said:

Now that is very good explanation.:)

One could add this 'problem' could maybe easily fixed with a quick release of a 2012/2013 show; as is assumed shows from that tour don't need that much work as shows from other tours. Except that would be the 3rd WB Tour release this year, only a few months after the previous one (But then many would not have any problem with that).

Edit: if this really is a problem anyway, release of a River Tour show (or Darkness Tour show) around the same time as No Nukes. Or even release of a BUSA Tour show just before or just after the BUSA Box.

great idea

I'll send your application off for you for the JLM marketing position (that they surley need)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Daisey Jeep said:

great idea I'll send your application off for you for the JLM marketing position (that they surley need)

Yes, but that is already Step 2.

The first thought [of Bruce Inc.] is a Nugs release of a 1980/1981 show would 'clash' with No Nukes (because of the similar era).

Or that any Nugs release would clash with any Sony release, be it new album, live album, box set, or whatever.

Like was said before the last pages of this thread, the thought some of us diehard fans would not buy No Nukes because he/she already spend his/her money on a Nugs release is ridiculous. People will buy No Nukes if they want it. Or not buy it if they do not want it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, musicdav24 said:

Honestly, I'm probably in the minority, but i would much rather have a full show archive release than No Nukes. As great a show as it was, i’m more excited about a classic 3 hour show than No Nukes. again, just me….:(

I disagree. What the No Nukes release will show, once again, is the difference between what we get, and what the Archive series could be. I’d rather have a professionally mixed, lovingly packaged, with audio, and visual content, release than the Nugs Archive release. Don’t get me wrong, I follow the Archive series, and get a lot of enjoyment from it, but I’m not blind as to how much better it could be if they went with a quality over quantity approach.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bobfan1976 said:

I disagree. What the No Nukes release will show, once again, is the difference between what we get, and what the Archive series could be. I’d rather have a professionally mixed, lovingly packaged, with audio, and visual content, release than the Nugs Archive release. Don’t get me wrong, I follow the Archive series, and get a lot of enjoyment from it, but I’m not blind as to how much better it could be if they went with a quality over quantity approach.

100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The archive releases ARE professionally mixed. But they are not intended to be some kind of big "live albums" with 100 page booklets, expensive packaging and all that stuff. That's reserved for releases like No Nukes, and that's okay, i'm loving these kind of box set releases aswell. But that's excactly why it should be possible to have an archive release on time every month, because it's something different, and it doesn't want or need to be anything else as it is: Great sounding, official live recordings.

  • Like 3
  • Bruuuuce! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I want to listen to No Nukes, I'm going to play the uncompressed FLAC-HD full show recording I already purchased... I have no interest in streaming a shorter version of the show on something like Spotify when I have a higher quality, longer, unedited version downloaded. The Nugs show was professionally mixed from the multitracks.

Now, the film is something I'm interested in. I will be purchasing and watching the film only of No Nukes, because based on the Sherry Darling footage, it looks to be Tempe-level or better. But still, how often am I going to watch it? A few times a year? When I listen to music I listen on my phone or while I drive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, BigBoss said:

The archive releases ARE professionally mixed. But they are not intended to be some kind of big "live albums" with 100 page booklets, expensive packaging and all that stuff. That's reserved for releases like No Nukes, and that's okay, i'm loving these kind of box set releases aswell. But that's excactly why it should be possible to have an archive release on time every month, because it's something different, and it doesn't want or need to be anything else as it is: Great sounding, official live recordings.

I suspected some one might mention the fact they are mixed but ok, let’s say that London ‘81, or the NYC ‘80 releases don’t come close to Tempe ‘80, they aren’t mixed to the same standard. A quick a-b of the Nugs release against the new No Nukes will very quickly show that. I don’t think all the Nugs releases are ‘great’ sounding either. However, I do agree there’s no reason to not release both, unless they are thinking that people won’t have enough time to listen them!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bobfan1976 said:

I suspected some one might mention the fact they are mixed but ok, let’s say that London ‘81, or the NYC ‘80 releases don’t come close to Tempe ‘80, they aren’t mixed to the same standard. A quick a-b of the Nugs release against the new No Nukes will very quickly show that. I don’t think all the Nugs releases are ‘great’ sounding either. However, I do agree there’s no reason to not release both, unless they are thinking that people won’t have enough time to listen them!

Absolutely bang on. The difference between Tempe/No Nukes and the Nugs releases from the same period is night & day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sean McNeill said:

Absolutely bang on. The difference between Tempe/No Nukes and the Nugs releases from the same period is night & day.

And yet, I listen I listen to the nugs releases regularly and have not watched Tempe all the way through one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brucefaninnyc said:

And yet, I listen I listen to the nugs releases regularly and have not watched Tempe all the way through one.

I think people accept Nugs for what they are, and it is fun getting a regular stream of releases. The pay off though is that they don't always sound as good as they could, and the packaging is non-existent. They might sound perfectly fine to your ears, but they could sound better, and I think that's the crux of the matter really. Every 'legacy' artist has some kind of Archival release system in operation, Bruce's doesn't seem to stand up well against his peers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...