The Oldies Music Board

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

February 24, 2020 12:50 pm  #1

Let’s Go Crazy: 5 of the Weirdest Rock-`n-Roll Conspiracy Theories

From Buddy Holly's plane to Manson and the Monkees, I especially like the last one, about the supergroup album that wasn't - yet, kind of was. 

Let’s Go Crazy: 5 of the Weirdest Rock-`n-Roll Conspiracy Theories


February 24, 2020 1:52 pm  #2

Re: Let’s Go Crazy: 5 of the Weirdest Rock-`n-Roll Conspiracy Theories

What? No Paul is dead?


February 25, 2020 9:07 pm  #3

Re: Let’s Go Crazy: 5 of the Weirdest Rock-`n-Roll Conspiracy Theories

it's not so uncommon as you might think for bands to bootleg themselves for various reasons, 'counter-culture' acts in particular, but certainly not exclusively.

for example, there are a number of rolling stones boots which could not have possibly come from any source other than the band itself. perhaps i missed it, but i don't recall the airplane ever denying having done so as well.

depending upon industry or fan/collector point of view, it's an inconvenient or convenient fact.


Last edited by gopher (February 25, 2020 9:25 pm)


February 26, 2020 7:02 pm  #4

Re: Let’s Go Crazy: 5 of the Weirdest Rock-`n-Roll Conspiracy Theories

I can see that Goph but curious what you would say to the Beatle bootlegs. I have a few as well as a few Stones bootlegs. I can't see the Beatles doing it themselves. 


February 27, 2020 2:53 am  #5

Re: Let’s Go Crazy: 5 of the Weirdest Rock-`n-Roll Conspiracy Theories

for a start, i don't claim to be any sort of expert on the subject, though, mostly in passing, i have talked to musicians, producers, engineers, record company people and sellers about it from time to time. i don't think i've ever met anyone who distributed or produced boots, at least as far as i know, other than folks like myself who've traded or sold (boo!) cassette recordings of concerts. a lot of what i know comes mostly from reading goldmine, or what's been mentioned in various books or online sources.

i believe rock/pop bootlegging didn't become common or widespread other than as a hobbyist enterprise, at least in regard to concert recordings or alternative work being offered on vinyl, until the very latest sixties or turn of the seventies, when a guy who mysteriously called himself "rubber dubber" began to offer remarkably well recorded shows from the l.a. forum. he clearly had access to a pressing plant and perhaps a mastering lab in the area, and had his product on the street or indie stores within a day or two of a show, selling the boots for a dollar or two less than the cost of a commercially available lp. of course, that changed pretty quickly as boots became, certainly within a year or three, an industry (if clandestine) aimed more primarily at a collector market, no longer with regard to the expense of the average fan..

i agree, it's unlikely the beatles had much if any interest in the practice, or its furtherance, in regard to their contemporary recordings, especially since boots didn't become very common or particularly well distributed until after their tenure as a band had expired.

regardless, almost certainly they must have paid at least some attention to "great white wonder"  which was a boot of their friend bob dylan. i've read that this record may be considered to perhaps be the first widely distibuted (i.e. commercial) boot. it was a two-lp set in a plain white jacket emulating their "white album," as well as at least noticing what was beginning to happen on america's west coast mainly in regard to live material surfacing, if not also to studio outtakes and the like.which were beginning to nterest both fans and collectors, and therefore also bootleggers.

quite belatedly, to the point of your question, the source of beatle boots could well have easily been myriad... early on, well before bootlegging was an idea or consideration in the rock/pop world (to clarify: jazz boots had widely existied for decades prior, mostly of the reel-to-reel variety; the concept of booting pop/rock acts didn't arrive out of thin air), anybody who had access to the beatles or their recordings, recordings of them of any sort, were likely spiriting them away as collector items hoping for a big payoff in the future. some probably hit the jackpot i'd suspect.

combine that with capitol records having no better vault security than most other labels at the time (billboard published a scathing exposure of an industry-wide failure in many cases to protect artists' recordings and  company assets, many years ago). blend in the well documented chaos that was apple, and you can get a pretty good idea that bootleg beatles material, live, studio, home, hotel, or anything otherwise, could well have come from just about anyone within their relatively immediate realm..

at this late date, i'm sure at least some sources have been revealed. however, i wouldn't know of them, nor would i ask. in general if i find out something about the source of a boot, great, i'm interested and always curious. that said, my theory has always been that if i hope to see more boots, the less questions i ask is probably a good rule of thumb.

the last thing i wanna do is get anybody into trouble who's turning me on to music i wanna hear, which couldn't have otherwise been heard, i hope you understand.

Last edited by gopher (February 27, 2020 7:30 am)


February 27, 2020 8:56 am  #6

Re: Let’s Go Crazy: 5 of the Weirdest Rock-`n-Roll Conspiracy Theories

I agree.


Board footera


Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum