I have a question for any of you insider types

I'm not in the camp, but I think we're going to see him continue to loosen up, put studio releases out more frequently and, for better or worse, more live stuff.
You've heard him say that he regrets not taping all those years and now it's all being recorded.

You can say LINYC is horrible all you want, but critics loved it and without it you wouldn't have the pleasure of my online presence. Frankly, it's the best thing that happened to any of you.

One day it'll all be there online, in perfect MP3 format, to download at will at $19.99 a pop.

These answers are all fine and dandy, but none of you are insiders.

I'm looking for insider information.

And no way did he not record everything all those years.

"I'm looking for insider information."

Then why did you post your request in this wasteland of a forum? Afraid d-t was gonna move it to artwork requests?

When I want your opinion I'll tear open your coffin lid and ask for it.

I'll give 5-1 for anyone who can guess the first Euro to reply that it's ALL good, so there's really no wrong decisions about what to release.

The simple answer is he doesn't want to be like the Stones with maybe 5 live albums out there.
He is just from the mentality that you should hold back on material (or in this case the thrill of hearing his re-worked vesions of old songs) and keep them (his hardcore fans)
wanting more

Awww, and I bet good money that Joebaby would have the stupidest post on the new board.

[]The simple answer is he doesn't want to be like the Stones with maybe 5 live albums out there.
He is just from the mentality that you should hold back on material (or in this case the thrill of hearing his re-worked vesions of old songs) and keep them (his hardcore fans)
wanting more [/]

He's got 4 live albums. One of them's good, and even that one isn't that good.

I'm convinced that he does have a mentality problem, though, I'll give you that.

this should be on the main board as i'm sure the insider types are too busy w/bruce's people (getting all that valuable detailed information they pass on) to read other forums..

I think Smokey put it here to preserve it after the General Board gets shut down.

[][]The simple answer is he doesn't want to be like the Stones with maybe 5 live albums out there.
He is just from the mentality that you should hold back on material (or in this case the thrill of hearing his re-worked vesions of old songs) and keep them (his hardcore fans)
wanting more [/]

He's got 4 live albums. One of them's good, and even that one isn't that good.

I'm convinced that he does have a mentality problem, though, I'll give you that. [/]

And given that his first one was 5 albums...

[]Earthslayer. That Sandy guy. Anybody else who knows somebody in the camp.

How is it that Springsteen can launch tour after tour after tour, record and video every second of every show, and not have the slightest fucking clue what to release, or in most cases, how does he not know that he should release anything at all?

There were great versions of a lot of things on the Joad tour. He released a few crappy things on Euro b-sides. There were a tremendous amount of great things on the Reunion Tour - we got LINYC, which is mostly horrible. No live albums from The Rising or the D&D Tour, which leaves about 50 great versions of things nowhere to be officially heard - Dancing in The Dark, Racing, the D&D Reason To Believe, Dream Baby Dream, all the Nebraska stuff . . . this tour's Open All Night, for starters.

And that's just the past ten years. How does he not know what's good and what's bad? You mean to tell me there's no one in the organization - not Landau, not Steve, not Dave Marsh - who has ever sat down with him and said "you know, Bruce, we could put together a hell of an album from a dozen or so of these 2005 shows". No one has ever pointed out to him just how off he is with his live release decisions?

Don't give me any of that Bruce is the Boss, he makes the rules horseshit - somehwere along the line somebody must've gotten fed up with all the miles of fantastic live tapes rotting on the shelf and said something to him.

I want an answer, dammit. [/]

SmokeyJ (sorry), I'm not an insider, but I have driven through New Jersey. That said, this isn't a new phenom. It took 15 years to get 75-85, and even then it was a piece of shit. It took 30 years to get Hammersmith, and it wasn't even the best show of the tour (by a lot). Live in NYC was shitty because it was spliced up (and I prefer the sound on some of the boots better actually). In '08 we'll get another so-so album/dvd documenting the hallowed '78 tour, and we'll still bitch because it won't be Passaic, or Winterland, or even Ala-frickin-bama.

My advice for you is to download the entire River tour from Jungleland. It will either sooth your pain, or set you off in a fiery rage when you realize how many incredible shows there were...left to the dustbin.

Yeah, yeah, we've already established the stupidity of his what to leave in/what to leave out skills. That's why I was looking for one of the insider types - is he really as dumb as his decisions indicate, or is he really as dumb as his decisions indicate, and isn't there anyone in the organization who brings his wacky choices up in conversation?

[]Yeah, yeah, we've already established the stupidity of his what to leave in/what to leave out skills. That's why I was looking for one of the insider types - is he really as dumb as his decisions indicate, or is he really as dumb as his decisions indicate, and isn't there anyone in the organization who brings his wacky choices up in conversation? [/]

Do you really think an insider stays inside if he brings those things up? Do you really think you'd tell him how wacky his choices were, if you were an insider? Let's be realistic.

For the record Bruce...LINYC, Live 75/85 and
Hammersmith 75 which was no doubt a "Tooth and Nail" thing with him.
Stones for the record have 8 live albums.

Which one is "good" from that group Smokey ?

[] No one has ever pointed out to him just how off he is with his live release decisions?
[/]

we have, but he insist on making he`s own decisions <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

He turned down the opportunity to appear on Saturday Night Live when 'Darkness came out. This was back when Saturday Night Live had pretty much everyone else us old people like as musical guests. One could assume was on their short list since the show debuted.

My answer is, as it always is, this: He's crazy. Some might term it 'high functioning.'

Landau is worthless, BTW.

Finally, an insider type.

I know he's nuts We all know he's nuts. I'm looking for somebody who can tell about a time when somebody, anybody, took his aside and said "hey, Boss - heh heh - why is it exactly that we don't make a decent live album, us being the greatest live blah blah blah and all that?"

I really think Bruce should hire smokeyjoe, for so many reasons.

[]Finally, an insider type.

I know he's nuts We all know he's nuts. I'm looking for somebody who can tell about a time when somebody, anybody, took his aside and said "hey, Boss - heh heh - why is it exactly that we don't make a decent live album, us being the greatest live blah blah blah and all that?" [/]

Oh, that somebody is around. The problem is that Bruce has compromising pictures of him without a head covering.

If I'd been an "insider", there would have been a live release per tour... or Bruce would be walking around with welts on his head.

I've got a feeling that anybody who doesn't nod their head becomes an "outsider" very quickly... except for Patti... and we've just witnessed her great idea... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleye0011.gif" alt="" />

Look at how long the E-Streeters have been with him... but they never raise a peep about anything. They come when called, they play what they're told, they fake laugh at every corny line or Bruce fuckup... hired guns. It's a good payday... just play & keep your thoughts to yourself.

And that load Landau is nothing more than a 20% skim off the gross.

[]If I'd been an "insider", there would have been a live release per tour... [/]

Plus your back wouldn't be so messed up from carrying all that 4 ot.

[]If I'd been an "insider", there would have been a live release per tour... or Bruce would be walking around with welts on his head.

[/]

Mid 70s to early 80s, everybody and their mother was releasing double and triple live albums. Regardless of what you may think of them, Frampton Comes Alive, Kiss Alive, At Budokan, Live Bullet, a hundred others - all became American FM radio regulars and are thought of as classic Rock albums.

How the hell did Columbia not get him to make a live album during the 75-81 years? His live show was supposedly a must see/hear, and yet the only things he released were Santa Claus and the edited Detroit Medley. He wasn't selling a billion albums, so how did he have the leverage to tell Columbia "NO" when it came to a live album all that time?

Supposedly they were very close to releasing the Agora 78 show officially during that tour.

The only time I met him, in 1978, the first question I asked was if he was going to release a live album. He said he was thinking about releasing one after the Darkness tour.

He thought it was funny when I said it would need to be four LPs long.

But ultimately, my hero lied to me.

[]How the hell did Columbia not get him to make a live album during the 75-81 years? His live show was supposedly a must see/hear, and yet the only things he released were Santa Claus and the edited Detroit Medley. He wasn't selling a billion albums, so how did he have the leverage to tell Columbia "NO" when it came to a live album all that time?[/]

If Mike Appel had had it his way, an official Springsteen live album would have come out as early as 1976. Bruce had already agreed to release a multi-disc live set after "Born To Run", and Appel had most of the December 1975 shows (incl. Greenvale, NY on 12/12, where "Santa Claus?" was taken from) recorded for this purpose?then Jon Landau came along and talked Bruce out of it; simple as that.

[][]If I'd been an "insider", there would have been a live release per tour... or Bruce would be walking around with welts on his head.

[/]

Mid 70s to early 80s, everybody and their mother was releasing double and triple live albums. Regardless of what you may think of them, Frampton Comes Alive, Kiss Alive, At Budokan, Live Bullet, a hundred others - all became American FM radio regulars and are thought of as classic Rock albums.

How the hell did Columbia not get him to make a live album during the 75-81 years? His live show was supposedly a must see/hear, and yet the only things he released were Santa Claus and the edited Detroit Medley. He wasn't selling a billion albums, so how did he have the leverage to tell Columbia "NO" when it came to a live album all that time? [/]



I don't think this is any big secret - there were quite a few shows audio recorded during the Oct-Dec, 1975 period because Mike Appel wanted to follow-up BTR with a 2LP live set as a potential mid-late 1976 release....and then issue the next studio album after that (in late 1977). However Springsteen did not want to go down the live LP route and this was just one of several issues that caused the gradual estrangement between Appel and Springsteen in the early months of 1976 (the lawsuits started flying in July 1976).

Columbia Records had no capacity to dictate the delivery of a live album for them to release....it wasn't that type of contract. Appel could have done a deal with Columbia and released such a live album during 1976 irrespective of Springsteen's wishes....however Appel knew that would irreparably damage his relationship with Springsteen.

When Springsteen finally settled with Appel in mid-1977 this was immediately followed by a complete renegotiation between Bruce (who now had control of his business affairs) and CBS....and that new contract did not call for Springsteen to deliver any live albums to CBS.

Springsteen has incredibly tight control over his sound recordings (both released and unreleased, live and studio) and has had such control ever since mid 1977.

I know he's nuts We all know he's nuts. I'm looking for somebody who can tell about a time when somebody, anybody, took his aside and said "hey, Boss - heh heh - why is it exactly that we don't make a decent live album, us being the greatest live blah blah blah and all that?" [/]


I suppose one might wonder why Jon Landau Management (which is a real office with real staff) does not have any internet web page and a forum (or other non-evasive mechanism) by which fans could email their suggestions and advice on Bruce's artistic and career decisions.

This would be an intriguing question to ask Jon, Barbara or Bruce.....I'd love to see a journalist have the guts to ask it in an interview...and then be given the opportunity to ask follow-ups if they get a spin response.

Earthslayer should have his own Q & A forum.

My take is that you have to recall the dominant parts of Bruce's personality at the time in the mid 70's, namely, neurotic control and huge insecurity. He couldn't tweak a live album of one show like he could tweak studio work. Probably scared the shit out of him. Add to that not being able to trust Appel, with the thought that Appel just wanted more versions of songs he had the rights to recorded and released, and the vision of a live album was critically tainted.

As far as the insecurity, recall how sheepish and overwhelmed Bruce was by the BTR breakout publicity. It wasn't until late in the summer of 78 of the Darkness Tour that he really broke out of his thick shell and canned show persona to gain energy and externalized confidence. I saw him in mid-July 1978 in Jackson MS, and believe me, he was very insecure and all-business when the band took the stage.

Plus, still in the late 70's, a fan going to a concert for most was a singular, finite experience, where memory was the only way to relive it. After Darkness, Bruce finally had realized how special his shows were, and why bootleggers craved copies, so, in not putting out a live album, he may have wanted to keep the concert experience pure for the fans that did go. (Concerts were a big deal. I think it was smokeyjoe who once talked about how in the 70's, you just knew you had a ticket to see the band on a certain night in your town. You had no clue from what towns they had just played along their tour -- and you had no idea or care what town they were going to next.)

I've said many times -- in my complete anger that Live 75-85 ended up being the release -- that there should have been a live album in 1980, after Bruce had allowed performance footage in No Nukes. But to my unexpected dismay, as unfuggingbelievable as that big screen film footage was, Jon Landau was in the final stages of turning Bruce's sound into cheez.

[] I think it was smokeyjoe who once talked about how in the 70's, you just knew you had a ticket to see the band on a certain night in your town. You had no clue from what towns they had just played along their tour -- and you had no idea or care what town they were going to next.)[/]

And like I tried to explain to Brucelegs... at least once a week, another hot band hit town. You could see Bruce, Bob Marley & Lou Reed in the same month at a small theatre for less than $15 each.
The next month might bring Genesis, Deep Purple, King Crimson & Caravan (this month for D-t)
The next, Dylan's Rolling Thunder, Little Feat & Fleetwood Mac
Then Queen, Jethro Tull & Pink Floyd

And that's just a few months in 1975

Bruce put on a great show, sure... but so did a lot of groups. You looked forward to the next band, you didn't dwell on "I can't wait to see Springsteen again".
AND... people forget how many live shows were played on FM radio... what are the best Bruce shows in your collection ?
That's right... the radio shows, which you could own for the price of a cassette. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Doesn't excuse him for not putting out a quality official product, though.

King Biscuit Flower Hour.

[] And like I tried to explain to Brucelegs... at least once a week, another hot band hit town. You could see Bruce, Bob Marley & Lou Reed in the same month at a small theatre for less than $15 each.
The next month might bring Genesis, Deep Purple, King Crimson & Caravan (this month for D-t)
The next, Dylan's Rolling Thunder, Little Feat & Fleetwood Mac
Then Queen, Jethro Tull & Pink Floyd

And that's just a few months in 1975

Bruce put on a great show, sure... but so did a lot of groups. You looked forward to the next band, you didn't dwell on "I can't wait to see Springsteen again".
AND... people forget how many live shows were played on FM radio... what are the best Bruce shows in your collection ?
That's right... the radio shows, which you could own for the price of a cassette. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Doesn't excuse him for not putting out a quality official product, though. [/]

Which makes me again circle back to hitting my knees for the real hall-of-famer heroes - the tapers of the 70's.

Everyone fawns all over our modern-day uber tapers, filmers, and DVD authors, but never on this board have I seen any of our current uber-mediamakers give any props to the tapers of the 70's. They are the real kings of history.

By the early 1980's, Bruce's ignorance about not releasing a live album just didn't matter anymore, because people had enough thirtieth-gen copies of the radio broadcasts, and so many other live pieces from the compilation bootlegs.

You're welcome... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Your filmwork for those Agora encores is really top-shelf, first-rate, sophisitcated-professional work.

Sorry I didn't have any room left for the intro video... my 45 minute drive to the venue.