Seasick Yet Still Docked unreleased acoustic is on YouTube

I hate to be Mr Pedantic, but is 'acoustic' the best description for this? Surely that's an electric guitar playing the lead line as soon as the track starts?
 
Oh I thought this was an elusive track a la There Speaks a True Friend longer version. I think it is more stripped back rather than acoustic too Mr Pedantic
 
Like a lot of your sound cloud postings, too...
The majority of the tracks Peter shared on Soundcloud were uploaded there first, and then posted on Solo. The ones shared by others were only uploaded to his Soundcloud account after he got permission, as he points out. Whatever point you're trying to make is moot.

But to be fair, the video description for this YouTube upload does credit IR and Solo as the source, as do a few of the other recent uploads from the account. It seems like they're getting better about providing credit where it's due.
 
Last edited:
The big, big difference though is I always asked and got permission first. Always.

Even if you hadn't, does it matter? Once it's out there, have at it, I say.
He/she usually links and credits sources in the description anyway, so no harm done.
 
I hate to be Mr Pedantic, but is 'acoustic' the best description for this? Surely that's an electric guitar playing the lead line as soon as the track starts?

I would agree. It sounds like the released version, but without the percussion, sound effects, and eBow guitars that Ronson added.
 
Acoustic is how it is described here...

15apn4.jpg


I named the track the same way Rhino did on their cd-r to ensure people know what exact version they are listening to, and where it was originally sourced from.
 
Acoustic is how it is described here...

15apn4.jpg


I named the track the same way Rhino did on their cd-r to ensure people know what exact version they are listening to, and where it was originally sourced from.

Oh, I know - I had seen the pic and description previously. Any quibble on my part is with Rhino. They often label additional tracks on reissues somewhat disingenuously, in part to gild the lily of what the buyer is getting. They should have called this an "alternate mix," imo.

IR, thanks for your part in bringing the bevy of unearthed relics to the people.
 
Even if you hadn't, does it matter? Once it's out there, have at it, I say.
He/she usually links and credits sources in the description anyway, so no harm done.

There is a difference between asking first, and just going ahead and crediting. Either you're polite and you do the right thing or you don't. I could have gone ahead and posted, then credited the source, just as the Youtube user does, but I didn't. I asked first. I'm guessing you don't see it that way. Plus - most of the ones I posted were given with permission to post from the word go, and posted on Soundcloud first before anywhere else.
 
Last edited:
There is a difference between asking first, and just going ahead and crediting. Either you're polite and you do the right thing or you don't. I could have gone ahead and posted, then credited the source, just as the Youtube user does, but I didn't.

The Youtube user in question, this "hipsterdisco" douche, notoriously neglects to credit sources. He has been doing this for YEARS. The only reason he has gotten a little better is because I have harassed him on Youtube about it, especially after your initial Soundcloud shares were taken by him and put up on Youtube with NO mention of either you or this site or even your Soundcloud account.

Having said that, I see ZERO reason for compunction regarding any shares or mirrored postings of bootlegged material (i.e. adding the tracks to the Never Heard Symphonies comp, or making a downloadable folder of the leaked tracks, etc.) PROVIDED the source of the leak is given credit accordingly at the time. And the reason for that is that as nice as it was of you to share this stuff, and as much as the community is in debt to you for giving them the opportunity to hear the material, it still doesn't belong to you.

Now, one could go to a concert and record a show without permission, and then share the show on Dime or Smithstorrents or something, and get all proprietary about it, and say "do not share elsewhere" or "do not convert to mp3" or whatever, but the fact is that while this person has a right to claim the recording itself, he has NO right to dictate if, when, where, or by who it can be shared because he never got permission from the artist in the first place before he recorded and disseminated their material...or in your case, or your sources' case, leaked it.

Therefore, this whole "manners" thing, and asking permission, is for the birds. Give credit where credit is due regarding leaks and sources, but from there it's a free-for-all considering that the only person/persons who have ANY real claim to the material is the artist and, perhaps, their record company.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Youtube user in question, this "hipsterdisco" douche, notoriously neglects to credit sources. He has been doing this for YEARS. The only reason he has gotten a little better is because I have harassed him on Youtube about it, especially after your initial Soundcloud shares were taken by him and put up on Youtube with NO mention of either you or this site or even your Soundcloud account.

Having said that, I see ZERO reason for compunction regarding any shares or mirrored postings of bootlegged material (i.e. adding the tracks to the Never Heard Symphonies comp, or making a downloadable folder of the leaked tracks, etc.) PROVIDED the source of the leak is given credit accordingly at the time. And the reason for that is that as nice as it was of you to share this stuff, and as much as the community is in debt to you for giving them the opportunity to hear the material, it still doesn't belong to you.

Now, one could go to a concert and record a show without permission, and then share the show on Dime or Smithstorrents or something, and get all proprietary about it, and say "do not share elsewhere" or "do not convert to mp3" or whatever, but the fact is that while this person has a right to claim the recording itself, he has NO right to dictate if, when, where, or by who it can be shared because he never got permission from the artist in the first place before he recorded and disseminated their material...or in your case, or your sources' case, leaked it.

Therefore, this whole "manners" thing, and asking permission, is for the birds. Give credit where credit is due regarding leaks and sources, but from there it's a free-for-all considering that the only person/persons who have ANY real claim to the material is the artist and, perhaps, their record company.

Can't disagree with any of that, maybe I just feel it's polite. And you're right, none of it is ours, and ultimately we're al doing it for the fans.
 
Well, i think this one is not so special - it sounds like the album take, minus the double-bass and Ronson's slide (?)
 
Back
Top Bottom