REC
Active topics
  1. Doesn’t work on a Tascam recorder BTW
  2. Originally posted by UnderARedSky:BONO: “My feeling, is that it is cool for people to share our music, as long as no one is making money from the process. We tell people who come to our concerts that they can tape the shows if they want. I think it is cool that people are so passionate about our music”

    It can't get any more simple than that
    but does that also apply to IEM?? I think it's not that hard, in general tapers wishes should just be honoured, I think that should be the no 1 rule. But indeed tapers should also realize that they don't own the music they are recording. They should not come up with all sorts of unreasonable restrictions, I don't think that's part of being passionate about U2 music. Just share with as little limitations as possible. I can understand Sharebear when he doesn't want his recordings to be used by mr Vetri anymore because of his attitude in the past but I don't see why he was trying to control everything in the first place. Does it really hurt you or your recordings when someone uses your great audio with maybe little less video quality? I don't think so. On the other hand I can see that it must frustrating when someone is stealing your credits as of course those video's would not be the same without good audio. All in all, I think if you want to use that Bono quote, I think it says more than 'don't sell it', but don't have any bad intentions with it. Don't become an arrogant prick, don't make fights over it etc...
  3. Can't they encrypt their feeds if they really wanted to?
  4. To quote Bono again, aren't some of thesa video makers just "stealing from the thieves"?
  6. you could argue like that, but don't forget the 'thief' shared his loot in the first place. And when you want him/her or other 'thiefs' to share more you maybe want to give them credit and honour their wishes. It's not really stealing from the thieves, it's stealing from fellow fans, it's stealing from tapers who spent a lot of money and time on taping, it's just a matter of politeness. It's not always easy and sometimes it's a bit of a thin line, but justify these kind of things as stealing from the thieves is not really fair. And in the end, tapers should also realize they don't own what they tape. As long as they do that, I don't think you should see them as thiefs.
  7. Originally posted by Ricku2:[..]
    I can understand Sharebear when he doesn't want his recordings to be used by mr Vetri anymore because of his attitude in the past but I don't see why he was trying to control everything in the first place. Does it really hurt you or your recordings when someone uses your great audio with maybe little less video quality? I don't think so.


    Generally in agreement with Rick's statements. Just wanted to add something here where we might disagree. In general I do think it diminishes the audio, if not at least diminishes the hard work that went into it. But I know I'm a bit fussy on stuff like that, so I do see your point.

    It's funny--I did give permission to Vetri back in the day to use some of my 2011 stuff for a compilation he did. Then I saw some of his work, and especially the misaligned janky Vancouver 2015 release he did. Prior to Brazil 2017, I reached out to see if they were planning on doing a coordinated audio/video for those shows. I was told it would only be cell phone videos, and nobody was running an audio rig because "it is illegal to bring that into the stadium." So yeah, I made a decision to not participate in that project. Lot of good it did, as they took the audio, butchered it with camera audio, and didn't give credit. So I'll agree with you in principle Rick, I don't own the audio and once I release it, ultimately I have no control. Nothing I can do in regards to U2Brazil's crappy actions other than casually insult them online.

    You do identify the broader issue--it's stupid to insult and dishonor basic taper requests for multiple reasons. I do think we're on the same wavelength there.
  8. Originally posted by hoserama:[..]


    Generally in agreement with Rick's statements. Just wanted to add something here where we might disagree. In general I do think it diminishes the audio, if not at least diminishes the hard work that went into it. But I know I'm a bit fussy on stuff like that, so I do see your point.

    It's funny--I did give permission to Vetri back in the day to use some of my 2011 stuff for a compilation he did. Then I saw some of his work, and especially the misaligned janky Vancouver 2015 release he did. Prior to Brazil 2017, I reached out to see if they were planning on doing a coordinated audio/video for those shows. I was told it would only be cell phone videos, and nobody was running an audio rig because "it is illegal to bring that into the stadium." So yeah, I made a decision to not participate in that project. Lot of good it did, as they took the audio, butchered it with camera audio, and didn't give credit. So I'll agree with you in principle Rick, I don't own the audio and once I release it, ultimately I have no control. Nothing I can do in regards to U2Brazil's crappy actions other than casually insult them online.

    You do identify the broader issue--it's stupid to insult and dishonor basic taper requests for multiple reasons. I do think we're on the same wavelength there.
    funny to see you think his work is crap and he thinks he's the best. I guess the truth must be somewhere in the middle why did you decide to release that Sao Paulo matrix, when you already knew they were probably going to 'steal' it?
  9. Stupidity I guess. Both romulobortolozzo and vetri said they wouldn't use my audio, which of course ended up being a lie. At the end of the day, I don't regret releasing it, but the actions by U2BR certainly irritated me enough that I held back on releasing any other Brazilian 2017 shows, and talked another taper out of releasing their audience recordings (yes, I know that's petty).
  10. Originally posted by hoserama:Stupidity I guess. Both romulobortolozzo and vetri said they wouldn't use my audio, which of course ended up being a lie. At the end of the day, I don't regret releasing it, but the actions by U2BR certainly irritated me enough that I held back on releasing any other Brazilian 2017 shows, and talked another taper out of releasing their audience recordings (yes, I know that's petty).
    petty maybe, but it's understandable and defendable
  11. Originally posted by hoserama:[..]


    Generally in agreement with Rick's statements. Just wanted to add something here where we might disagree. In general I do think it diminishes the audio, if not at least diminishes the hard work that went into it. But I know I'm a bit fussy on stuff like that, so I do see your point.

    It's funny--I did give permission to Vetri back in the day to use some of my 2011 stuff for a compilation he did. Then I saw some of his work, and especially the misaligned janky Vancouver 2015 release he did. Prior to Brazil 2017, I reached out to see if they were planning on doing a coordinated audio/video for those shows. I was told it would only be cell phone videos, and nobody was running an audio rig because "it is illegal to bring that into the stadium." So yeah, I made a decision to not participate in that project. Lot of good it did, as they took the audio, butchered it with camera audio, and didn't give credit. So I'll agree with you in principle Rick, I don't own the audio and once I release it, ultimately I have no control. Nothing I can do in regards to U2Brazil's crappy actions other than casually insult them online.

    You do identify the broader issue--it's stupid to insult and dishonor basic taper requests for multiple reasons. I do think we're on the same wavelength there.
    Still fightning?
  12. I think you have an interesting definiton of fighting.