"The Real Royal Albert Hall 1966 Concert" vs "The Bootleg Series, Vol. 4: Bob Dylan Live, 1966"

Can anyone tell me if there's really any compelling reason to buy "The Real Royal Albert Hall 1966 Concert" if you already have "The Bootleg Series, Vol. 4: Bob Dylan Live, 1966: The "Royal Albert Hall Concert" Live" as I do? I know the songs listed are identical, which would lead me to believe that it's the same thing, but the liner notes seem to suggest that it's a different recording, but I'll admit I'm dubious as to whether or why I should actually care. I know that the live version of "Like A Rolling Stone" on the bootleg Vol. 4 recording is a watershed moment in rock history far as I'm concerned, and if you ever wondered about the roots of the inspiration behind much of Bruce Springsteen's earlier music I'd submit you can clearly hear it here. Until I get to actually here the recording and can hear enough difference in it to justify another purchase I remain dubious. Sorry if this duplicates another discussion, but I didn't turn up anything along this line in my searches, so here it is.

 

Two different shows. Bootleg #4 is from Manchester. Boots incorrectly labeled it as coming from the RAH for years, hence the subtitle.

The Bootleg Series Vol. 4: Bob Dylan Live 1966, The "Royal Albert Hall" Concert - Wikipedia »

 

Interested in this as well. Is there a significant performance our SQ difference ?

 

I listened to both over the weekend, Was surprised to see how different the performance was, considering that the Royal Albert Hall was just 7 or 8 days later. I found that the RAH show has more energy, song arrangements are more interesting and sound quality is better. My opinion may be influenced by the newness of the RAH set, but if I had to choose between the two I would choice the RAH show without question.

 

Just read the 214 page thread on the 36-cd box set and it will all be made clear to you.

 

The acoustic set of the Royal Albert Hall show is MUCH better, to me.
The electric of Manchester I totally prefer, Bob's wrecked at the RAH show, and it affects the electric set. Some interesting banter I suppose - he sounds like he's on heroin. It's pretty bad, extremely disappointing.
But the acoustic set is something else.

 

I'm interested in this discussion as well, since I don't own either.

 

Just buy it and listen.

They are both spectacular, and in if you know anything about Dylan's music, you know how the same setlist can be a different experience every night.

Buy both and listen, then you'll understand.

 

As mentioned, they're two shows with the same setlist - BS4 was Manchester 5/17, the new album is London 5/26 - but some differences in performance. I think only Dylan fanatics would really care about the differences, but if you liked the 'Rolling Stone' on BS4 you might want to check out the stronger, angrier version on the Real RAH Concert. Song-by-song, sometimes one show is better, sometimes the other, sometimes it's a draw; the sound quality is similar on both.
(I think Jimmy B. above was listening to the wrong Royal Albert Hall show! - there were two. I agree with FritzL that the 5/26 RAH show is more energetic.)

An earlier post:

 

I think the official BS4 (Manchester) is the recording that is most iconic in the Dylan canon and it culminates with that amazing version of Like A Rolling Stone that follows the Judas comment. It's kind of like Bob's Brussels Affair. The actual Royal Albert Hall shows are similar but different.

 

The Manchester show is spectacular. The RAH is great. I'm glad to have both.

 

I like the sound of the RAH show more. Manchester has (at the very least) an iconic exchange that adds immerseably to the final product. Both feature an incredible performance. Hard to judge which is preferable. Glad both are readily available now.

 

I find myself strangely unmoved by the acoustic sets in both of these performances - there's nothing wrong with Dylan's performance per se in either, but with each I get a sense of little emotional connection and a bit of anxiousness to move on to the electric sets. I get more from some of the earlier performances on the tour, particularly Dublin, Sheffield, perhaps one or two others - and then the final 5/27 Royal Albert Hall.

But you absolutely must hear the 5/26 RAH electric set! The band played with a real edge here, a take-no-prisoners sense of menace that for my money tops the more streamlined Manchester set. Also, I prefer the greater sense of depth in the RAH recording for both portions of the show.

In short, even if you're just a middling Dylan fan, I can't imagine you not wanting to have this other show.

 

You're right!
Wow, glad they didn't decide to issue the second one as stand-alone; I thought they had!
I mixed them up.
I have the Genuine Live 1966 set also...wow...surprised about this. Thanks for the correction - the second night was the heroin show!

 

I've listened to 11 whole discs from it since it came out!

(it's a total must though)

 

Both Bob and the audience are much more convivial at RAH. Bob is gentle in his scolding and the audience is nearly not so hostile as Manchester.
The acoustic set is fantastic. I really am skeptical that he was in the midst of some heroin episode ok both the singing and guitar is way too good.
Manchester electric may have the edge but not by much. Essential.

 

How's the new RAH vinyl? I think when I last looked, I culd only find an import version on US websites. Is there a domestic release date?

 

Was released on Black Friday (11/25) in the US as an indie exclusive. Can order here: Bob Dylan - The Real Royal Albert Hall 1966 Concert (2 LP) (140g Vinyl) »

 

I have the new double LP 'The Real Royal Albert Hall 1966 Concert'.

Can anyone explain why the acoustic set [record 1] is recorded so well and the electric set [record 2] is so poorly recorded?

 

Maybe a close parallel is The Who - Live at Leeds and the Hull concert. If you're a pretty big fan, having both is easily justifiable.

 

At one point in an introduction to one of the songs in the RRAH electric set [record 2 side C], he, in a very low key, calm manner, says to someone in the audience "Do you want to come up here and say that?", and then he immediately continues on. There's no reaction, one way or other, from the audience (at least not caught on tape) and its so low key it almost sails under the radar unnoticed.

 

Different shows. Both essential.

 

I prefer the acoustic set of the RAH show and the electric set of Manchester.

The performance of Visions of Johanna from RAH is perfect to my ears.

 

This performance was on 'Biograph' and I thought it was perfect then, I still think it is now. Possibly the definitive reading of the song.

The first night at the Royal Albert Hall is a magnificent gig, the acoustic set possibly even better than Newcastle.
The electric set is fantastic but recording quality may not be quite as good as Newcastle. It does culminate in a magnificent 'Like A Rolling Stone' with Bob re-phrasing like crazy, and a great jam at at the end.

The second night is nowhere near as good (Bob was hungover from the previous night's mayhem), but the version of 'Just Like A Woman' where he almost dismantles the song is extraordinary.

 

He doesn't do the "don't talk so loud" bit nearly as obnoxiously as nine days earlier. Plus the applause at the end of side 2 seems genuine. In Manchester he was almost speaking in tongues while the audience was clapping real loud in a sort of protest (or plea) between numbers. That was on my bootleg LP anyway.