[mb-style] Concert Recordings & Release Dates

[Chris Bransden]

On 04/12/06, Aaron Cooper <cooperaa at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/2/06, Thomas Tholén <badnewsbnw at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't see the point in  messing up the fields by using them for anything
> > else than what they're meant for. They should only keep the date of the
> > concert if it's in fact available on the date of the concert (which I
> > believe is quite unlikely? Or did I get your Pearl Jam example wrong?).
> >
> > //[bnw]
> >
> >
> > On 12/2/06, Aaron Cooper <cooperaa at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey everyone,
> > >
> > > Some fukker (hehe) got me thinking about concert recordings and how we
> > > date them here on MB.  You may be aware that Metallica has been
> > > recording their concerts for a few years now and releasing them on
> > > www.livemetallica.com for purchase to download.  Several other artists
> > > are doing this same thing (... ummm ... Pearl Jam! They record their
> > > shows and give out CD copies after the show) and I bet this practice
> > > will only become more common as it becomes easier to deliver concert
> > > recordings to fans.
> > >
> > > What I want to propose is that we use the concert's Performance Date
> > > as the release date ONLY for official concert recordings that the band
> > > sells/gives out on a regular basis.  The term "regular basis" isn't
> > > hashed out very well at all, so maybe that's something we can discuss.
> > > I think, in cases such as Metallica's and Pearl Jam's, it is
> > > reasonable to use the performance date as the release date.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts?
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Aaron
> >
>
> The hard part of this is that we cannot always be 100% sure when these
> are available - there's no way to confirm it really.  I think in the
> Pearl Jam case you pick up your CDs while you're still at the concert
> so I think it's safe to say they are released same day as performance
> date.  Unfortunately, in Metallica's case, they often upload several
> shows from a leg of a tour at the same time and this date isn't
> officially documented.
>
> I guess what I'm thinking is that in cases where an artist releases
> their concert recordings regularly and doesn't publish specifc release
> dates, we should just use the recording date.  The problem with
> "guessing" when the recordings were made available is that we can't be
> sure.  What if the show was performed on December 26, 2005... was it
> released in 2005-12 or was it released 2006-01?  I think it would save
> us a lot of headaches to just say that it was released on December 26,
> 2005 - OR just not set release dates for ANY of these concert
> recordings.  I don't have a preference either way, but I don't think
> we should be able to say "this was released in 2004" for one show
> because it was recorded in July, and not be able to say that for other
> shows that were released near the end of a year.  The same is true for
> which month they were released in.

IMO only give them a release date if there was a specific release
event. the pixies put out live CDs of a similar nature which i *think*
were released at the same night of the shows (they used this
'disclive' technology that could press the discs straight away), so
there's a release date to go on.

if they don't have this, or you're not sure, i say leave it blank.