A definite pass for me. There is merit in releasing it (historically speaking anyway) but you wonder why they chose to release it this month? I mean, if they were going for a 2009 show, why not one with Darkness in full instead?
That is true, however there's an official alternative that I prefer. Combine: Tempe 1980 (18 of the 20 songs) Nassau 1980 (the remaining 2, plus a b-side!)
I think part of the problem, and I include myself on occasion, is that people are tracking the archive releases month-to-month instead of taking a macro view of the series. Overall, it's obvious that this 2009 complete River show should see the light of day at some point -- I just think that people, in looking month-to-month, are disappointed that it's filling a monthly slot right now. Does that make sense? People would always prefer a classic E Street era show and when (another) 2009 show pops up it leads to almost universal disappointment...but that's the micro viewpoint. We're completely spoiled, I think, in getting one new show a month and July will bring yet another opportunity for people to be either disappointed or thrilled. Personally, I already have a few dozen 2016 shows that feature the full album of The River, but I'm happy to get this -- the encores are good and it does feature the only full album show with Clarence...and a nice and rare US version of "Seven Nights to Rock". I'm not trying to be a Bruce homer here, but I think we need to take the long view on this series and realize that not every release is going to be from 1975 or 1980. I still think that some of these release are simply important to Bruce and that's why they get an official release.
I have many, many Springsteen boots including this one. I always think "would I buy this if I didn't have the boot?". In this case, most definitely. So I'm buying it. I'm sure it'll sound at least a little better.
This is a really great idea for a playlist that I never really thought of. I should do this for all his albums, actually.
Update from Backstreets.com on why there hasn't been a Rising show yet: "As we dive into the latest from Springsteen's live archive series (below), there's still an elelphant absent from the room: an official recording from the Rising tour. The 2002-2003 gap remains a source of frustration for many fans who can't understand why a single show from the Rising era has yet to emerge from the archives while other tours already have multiple titles (today's is the third from 2009). From what we've been able to piece together in recent weeks, from various sources, the omission is completely down to technical issues. It seems all extant multi-track recordings of the Rising tour were made on an early, high-resolution DSD (Direct Stream Digital) system. Fifteen years on, there are major technical challenges in accessing the master recordings on the original platform. There is an ongoing effort to restore and extract the multi-track files, but to date, no complete show is available to mix for release. We hope those efforts are successful soon."
I can understand the frustration among fans, but I personally have no interest in a Rising tour concert release. That said, I hope the Springsteen camp properly deals with the technical issues so that fans of the 2002/2003 tours can enjoy some releases in the future.
August 30th 2003 would be my choice. Only boots available have "skipping" the last third of the concert. I was there that night with my wife and the show was amazing. Bruce Springsteen Setlist at Giants Stadium, East Rutherford
It's the managers job to look after the artist. Allowing a year long tour to get recorded on what was back then a new format without back up in a more Conventional format is total incompetence. Nobody in the organisation took responsibility for those recordings. The problems with extraction are because of the nature of the format Bruce Inc should have archived these shows in traditional formats at the time.
When they filmed at Giants Stadium or Fenway with extra cameras in 2003 they didn't have back up audio options? Some stealth fans might have enough IEM stems to manufacture a multitrack of a particular show. If that "leaked" collection of recordings with the Harry Potter song was an inside job, where did they source the 2003 Vancouver Devils & Dust soundcheck recording?
I kind of doubt it. The boot of 11/8/09 sounds better than most (maybe all) of the official Springsteen releases from around that time
It also speaks to the horrifying obsolescence---for the music fan----of many digital formats. If a popular and well funded artist like Springsteen can be having this sort of problem 15 years after the event, one can imagine the vast quantity of music that is going to be inaccessible in 40 years.
I've always had a soft spot for The River album (flawed and comparatively poor sounding to me) and the 81 tour (the first time and probably the best Bruce show I saw - London 81 don't remember which date). Hoping for an 81 release one day in these downloads or is there a reason that will not happen?
From Backstreets Twitter (6/1/18) “Would love a Rising show as well, but thought a Roxy or Winterland 78 show was coming. This may be the first archive show I pass on.” From Brad [email protected]. “I think you'll be pleased with next month's release.”
Can't be a Rising show as it wouldn't generate that much interest. Has to be a pre Tunnel of Love show.
They've already said there are technical difficulties with the Rising Tour tapes, so it'll be a while until those can be released. So it may finally be time Roxy or Winterland.
Maybe but it was in reply to a post bemoaning the Lack off rising, roxy 78, winter land 78. But yes technical difficulties over Rising shows suggests it will be a 78 show. My money is on Roxy... it will be within a few days of its precise birthday (7/7)
It has to be Roxy next month. I don't know what other time could possibly have as much impact as releasing it on basically its 40th anniversary.
Agree with most of what has been said. I have no problem with the release of this show, as it is a good one that deserves release, I just find the timing of it poorly chosen. It also doesn't help that the whole release schedule and project is shrouded in secrecy and subject to changes on a whim it appears. If I ran this archive I would have a set schedule and I would do it in chronological order where month 1 would be a show from the 70's, month 2 is from the 80"s and so on until the 2010's and then repeat. You could also have bonus releases of newer shows since there are so many more of them on anniversary of those shows even if the month does not coincide with the decade. Or something different where there was some sort of order or expectation so this way everyone knew what to expect and there would be no disappointment or at least not as much. I think the lack of transparency leads to rampart fan speculation and theories which run amok and get us all hyped for what would appear to be a logical release only to be blindsided with something that while it may be good on its own, isn't something that is wanted as much.
