Although speed/pitch accuracy, as opposed to consistency, was apparently not done until the unintentional “miss” on the PNW box, although I had finally convinced the unofficial community to make it a priority in 2007.
One of those voices is Sandy Troy, author of the book Captain Trips. The others are people not especially known to this community at large.
I was home alone with my two dogs last night, so we listened to parts of 3/22/90 and 3/29/90. Scar>Fire from the former and "Bird Song" from the latter are as good as it gets. Think I'll be spending more time in 1990.
July 18, 1990 One of my favorites from 90. IWT so i'm not without a great deal of bias but I think the show stands out as a fantastic example of 1990. I think it was the last great performance Brent gave.
Currently on 4/22/77. One of the best PITBs I've ever heard, a great Estimated Prophet and a hot Mississippi Half-Step are some of the highlights so far. A really laid back vibe overall on this show.
Those 2 nights are etched into my mind, but the 18th is one of my favorite nights of live music. Shows #8-9 for me. Watched a girl dance the grass away during H>S>F...the bridge(>) in China>Rider was old school awesome...D/S til the end was raw, awesome power leading into the best Dew I ever saw. There was bungee jumping afterwards and that was some of the best people watching you could hope for dosed.
Gun to my head, the 3 22 ScarFire is my favorite of all time. Do NOT skip out on the first shows with Vince Welnick in, I think Richfield or Philly or something. They are terrific.
Richfield and Philly were great. I can still feel the crowd react to the Rectum Shakedown the first night. Aud version is a must if you haven't heard it. God I miss that band. Does anyone remember Mickey playing the Tibetan drum of the dead, maybe night #2 of Richfield? I know he played it there one year and after Brent makes sense. Also...remember the “rainbow” around the sun at Richfield, before that first night. Everyone in the lot was like, “Look up...Brent’s here!” Not a cloud in the sky.
For those of you who don't have it, Real Gone has RT Vol 3. No. 2 (11/15/71 - Austin, TX) up for preorder...release date is 3/27/20. No bonus disc material naturally (don't go looking on Ebay for it, I gave myself sticker shock on the prices). Grateful Dead Road Trips Vol. 3 No. 2
WOW. If the Grateful Dead was a horse, I would have taken it and a shotgun behind the barn the first time it inflicted this 'song' on a paying audience. Clearly, it was all over. They didn't know what the 'Grateful Dead' was any more and they didn't care. Tragic.
I'm curious why you think she should get "a fair cut" from these releases? Should the guys in the crew who set up and tore down the equipment those nights get "a fair cut?" Should Healy for running sound? What about whoever was running the monitors? Who in the crew gets "a fair cut" and who doesn't?
If she was a photographer, taking pictures with her own camera and her own film, she would still own the copyright on those images, even if she lost physical possession of them. Seems like it should work the same way for audio recordings but I ain't no lawyer.
But it sounds like she may not have simply lost possession of the tapes, but also ownership. I think every storage unit agreement says that if you don't pay you lose ownership in the contents and they can sell it all. My understanding is that's what happened with the Betty Boards tapes.
I think you're wise to be wary of "guest performers". My experience (like yours, apparently) is that they don't always live up to expectations. Branford has that perfect combination of chops and attitude where he was able to hang with whatever the Dead laid down, but he was musically sensitive enough to know when to step up and when to step back. Unfortunately, that combination of talent and sensitivity is not that common among musicians.
I'm pretty sure that only applies to the physical contents. If an author left a manuscript in a storage unit and it was reposessed, someone could buy it and sell the physical pages, but they couldn't publish the book without the author's permission.
In this instance, her ownership (if she had any) was of the physical tape only and not the music contained on the tape.
That's what, I think, is still ambiguous, depending on the specific circumstances and agreements under which she recorded the tapes.
If they're using someone's name in the promotional hype to assure potential buyers that they're getting the best possible sound, I'd say that's a good indication that she should be getting "a fair cut" of the royalties or some payment. Especially when they know darn well that they're using her properties, even if she doesn't have a legal claim, and why the tapes fell out of her possession. They also ought to recognize that they did her wrong in letting her go in the first place ("the best ears in the business," as Phil put it, who had been engineering and producing their work almost from the start, and she was out because the new keyboard player briefly dated her and couldn't handle being around her after they broke up?), and that they continue to take advantage of part of her labor that she wasn't really paid to do. But if nothing else, even if they can't recognize that they owe her in a big way, she should get paid every time they use the words "Betty Board."
Admittedly I’m not a copyright/intellectual property lawyer, but my understanding is that the actual music on the tape is owned by the performers. I can’t imagine a circumstance where a performer would sign over those rights to a recordist. If I go and tape a show with my own gear and tapes, I still can’t claim ownership of the music on that tape and sell copies
