THE LINCOLN PARK MARK COLLECTION - RON WOOD and BO DIDDLEY - TOKYO 1988

March 7, 2013 – 6:29 am

GUITAR MAN RUSSELL “SKIP” GILDERSLEEVE R.I.P.

Russell “Skip” Gildersleeve has passed away on September 17, 2013. He was 57. Among musicians, Skip was the guitar tech who had worked with Bob Seger, Rush and Steely Dan, among others. As a music fan, Skip had even reached out to other fans across the sea, generously offering music either for sharing or for personal listening (in instances where sharing was not possible). As a result, BigO readers benefiited whenever there was an Evil Dr Louie or Lincoln Park Mark offering to be shared - that’s Skip giving props to a place he loved.

We shall miss you Skip.

+ + + + +

Click on the panels for a better view or to download artwork.

RON WOOD and BO DIDDLEY
With The Jim Satten Band [The Gunslingers Tour In Japan]
Live In Japan [unknown label, 1CD]

Live at the Shibuya Inn, Tokyo, Japan. March 2, 1988. Excellent stereo soundboard.

Thanks to Lincoln Park Mark for sharing this show.

The following write-up was posted by rocker at collectorsmusicreviews.com:

“Live In Japan” is a pristine clean sounding stereo soundboard recording. In February 1988, Jagger was rehearsing for his upcoming solo tour in Japan and actually rehearsed between the 12th and 14th of March in Osaka. Wood and Diddley were joined by the Gunslingers from March 2nd through March 15, 1988 to play clubs in Osaka, Nagoya, Tokyo, and Sapporo, Japan. The Stones, of course, had never played in Japan up to this point.

“Live In Japan” was recorded in Tokyo and was the first of 11 club gigs for Ron Wood and Bo Diddley in March ’88.  “Crackin’ Up” was a compelling reggae-influenced track that jammed with crowd exuberant cheers intermittently audible surfacing in the softer passages.

Mike Fink on drums offered excellent rhythm and percussion for this 9:00 minute performance. Wood broke into the chorus of “Prodigal Son” in the “Guitar Medley” and then right into a sizzling blues jam that continued to build in “Little Red Rooster”. He ended it with: ”Regards from the rest of the Stones. Alright”.

The harmonies were strong to sweeten Wood’s delivery on “Ooh La La”. Hal Goldstein kicked into gear on keyboards and the Jim Satten Band sounded tight. The Wood lead “Honky Tonk Women” sounded lean and fresh with on key chorus harmonization. The crowd went wild after this one ended. Bo cranked it up even more on “Diddley’s A Gunslinger”. The separation was outstanding and the performance rock solid. Once again, a nice touch on keyboards from Goldstein. It’s a shame the track had to end at 4:57.

The band was totally fired up for “Who Do You Love?” as the track exploded into a guitar frenzy with Bo chanting: “Go go” as they continued to sustain their fever playing pitched pace and then let up just as fast. The Jamaican reggae-tinged “It’s Mine” featured an extended gentle sounding finger picking guitar fade out. Wood sounded more like a latter day Bob Dylan on vocals as the band let it all out on “It’s All Over Now”. Total track time was 44:17.

Wood, Diddley and The Gunslingers laid claim to an inspired upbeat performance that could have been easily extended on just about every track. The flawless stereo soundboard recording incorporated the crowd’s enthusiasm beautifully. The magnificent separation allowed for appreciation of the intricacies of all the instrumentation  and the band sounded as tight as a well fitting glove. This release comes with high recommendations.

Click on the highlighted tracks to download the MP3s (224 kbps). As far as we can ascertain, these tracks have never been officially released on CD.

Please Do Not Hammer The Links. Due to the size of some of the files, please be very patient when downloading the tracks. It could be that the server was very busy. The tracks should still be around. Please try again later. Kindly email us at [email protected] if you encounter persistent problems downloading the files.

Track 01. Crackin’ Up (15.3MB)
Track 02. Guitar Medley - Around The Plynth/Gasoline Alley/Prodigal Son/Stay With Me/That’s All You Need (9.7MB)
Track 03. Little Red Rooster (5.1MB)
Track 04. Ooh La La (6.1MB)
Track 05. Honky Tonk Women (6.3MB)
Track 06. Diddley’s A Gunslinger (8.4MB)
Track 07. Who Do You Love? (7.3MB)
Track 08. It’s Mine (9.5MB)
Track 09. It’s All Over Now (6.6MB)

Lineup:
Ron Wood - guitar, vocals
Bo Diddley - guitar, vocals
Jim Satten - guitar
Debby Hastings - bass, vocals
Mike Fink - drums
Hal Goldstein - harmonica, keyboards, vocals

To celebrate the partnership, Ron Wood and Bo Diddley had released Live At The Ritz in April 1988. The New York show was recorded in November 1987. Click here to order the reissue album.

+ + + + +
+ + + + +

Click here for more shows that are still open for sharing.

Click here for closed shows.
(Readers can email us a request to reopen closed shows.)

  1. 63 Responses to “THE LINCOLN PARK MARK COLLECTION - RON WOOD and BO DIDDLEY - TOKYO 1988”

  2. Saw these guys together in Newark, Delaware. thanks so much for this download.

    By RastafErion on Mar 7, 2013

  3. steve winwood and iggy pop showed up to see the ritz show in 87. i got a pic of me with winwood that nite as he left and i got 2 pics of iggy as he went into the show. he was much nicer than steve was. it was around this time in fact that bo diddley did a set at the lone star cafe and beck and page came to see him play. i got some very nice shots that nite too. its so great when u just know the right events to show up at to see people. if anyone ever has the chance to see bo diddley jr play.. dont pass it up. hes incredible altho very different from his dad.

    By darth on Mar 7, 2013

  4. Sad to hear of Alvin Lee’s passing. Maybe a few TYA or solo posts would be in order. Great guitarist and a nice person. Met him in ‘72 backstage in Madison, WI. J. Geils Band were opening and a friend connected with their band got me backstage. After TYA was done with their soundcheck, Alvin handed me the “Woodstock” Gibson guitar by mistake, thinking I was a roadie. I mentioned the error and asked the dumb question of “Is this the guitar …”. He was very nice and offered to let me play it. Three chords from “Love Like A Man” and I handed it to the roadie. Unforgettable.

    By Johnny Kinkdom on Mar 7, 2013

  5. PS: I was at the Bo/Ronnie show at the Ritz. Saw Iggy inside but not Winwood. Don’t have pics but I did enjoy the show.

    By Johnny Kinkdom on Mar 7, 2013

  6. Son you’re inviting your haters to come forward,please show everyone your picture you hang so proudly in your master-bating room!

    By Darths Mom on Mar 7, 2013

  7. http://dirtyfunky.blogspot.ca/2013/03/ten-years-after-at-olympic-auditorium.html

    By sluggo on Mar 7, 2013

  8. http://onlygoodsong.blogspot.ca/2013/03/ten-years-after-john-peel-session.html

    By sluggo on Mar 7, 2013

  9. http://dirtyfunky.blogspot.ca/2013/03/alvin-lee-rip-ten-years-after-boston.html

    theres a few to listen to to keep you from crying sometimes…

    By sluggo on Mar 7, 2013

  10. Bo’s greatest backup band ever was the Ben Vaughn Combo. They did one show, I think it was City Gardens in Trenton NJ, late ’80s. After the show, Bo sent his girlfriend to tell the Combo it was the most fun he’d had in months. Thanks for this one bigO and Mark.

    By Dingus on Mar 7, 2013

  11. Thanks for this post. A quality Bo post is always welcomed. Appreciated.

    By shadreck on Mar 8, 2013

  12. johnny - thanks for that.
    btw from the way winwood was acting that nite and the next few days around town that i had run into him i could tell that he wasnt looking to be seen or found or shot. he looked incredible so im not sure why. but that could be why u didnt see him.

    btw.. he also showed up at the ritz within a few weeks or months (i forget) of that show u saw and that is released to see joe cocker play at the same venue. it was a hell of a place to see shows. even mike oldfield played there in 82 or 3. ive seen well over 500 shows there before it moved up to where studio 54 was. living colour was the first band to play the new location. they aired that on the radio. i remember recording it. i dont know why but the date 4-22-89 rings a bell. they played there a lot in 88 and 89 so it could be that date or another but it doesnt really matter i guess. any previous ritz shows were at the village location and the studio 54 location was the first nite it opened.

    By darth on Mar 8, 2013

  13. “btw from the way winwood was acting that nite and the next few days around town that i had run into him i could tell that he wasnt looking to be seen or found or shot.”

    its because youre such an irritating pain in the ass

    By barth on Mar 8, 2013

  14. darth, did it ever cross your mind that winwood just wanted to go out and enjoy himself without being bothered by an obsessive paparazzi? He was gracious enough to pose for a photo with you the first night, but then he also sees you every day after that. It’s entirely possible that he just wanted to go out and be left alone, and not have to deal with strangers trying to ingratiate themselves.

    By Kodak Moment on Mar 8, 2013

  15. it doesnt matter if thats the case. i didnt bother him while he was in the show. i waited til he left the show. when a celeb is in a public place.. and no the ritz isnt what i mean here.. they give up their privacy. what i mean is.. if they can be seen from a public place or they are in a public place its legal to snap a pic of them. and hes been in the music world and used to this and famous since 64/5 at least. this isnt new to him. i was doing my job. if i didnt approach stars and snap a pic.. 95% or more of the time with permission and by asking mind u.. i wouldnt be able to do what i was doing. it isnt for u to judge since u werent there or anywhere at the time. its like going up to a celeb u see at any place other than an actual signing event and asking for an autograph. i find it literally impossible to believe u have never in your life done that. its the exact same thing. but my autograph is a photo. i rarely did both. handling something to hand them with a pen etc. and a camera to snap a pic was more than i was interested in attempting. it rarely worked out and often resulted in obtaining nothing.
    u have no idea nor did he.. how obsessive i was. and u dont know if he posed for the pic i got with him. he actually didnt but thats another story. i didnt say he saw me every day after that either. he was in town for publicity purposes if i recall. normally people like him dont go to nyc otherwise. his home at the time was nashville. it may still be. i didnt attempt to ingratiate myself. i barely talked to him other than to get his attention for a pic or two.
    u are assuming way too much here. not doing what i did would mean i didnt get what i was after. i wasnt after a pic of me with him anyway. i had not made it to his appearance at the waldorf 2 yrs earlier for the rnr hall of fame induction ceremony ..the first one. he showed up there i didnt. this was my first time meeting him. if he had done the usa arms shows i would have met him but joe cocker joined that tour instead and paul rodgers of course which inspired the firm being created. so my next chance was that nite. not doing what i did (for a hobby and job) would have meant going home (or staying home) and not doing what i did. that wasnt an option. i may not have sold the pic to anyone but if i had..if that was the sort of work i did.. magazines and newspapers dont sell themselves without pics. im sure u dont really get this whole thing. thats ok. u choose your hobbies and professions i choose mine. i dont tell u how to do what u do. no need to tell me how to do mine or even if i should.
    nuff said.

    By darth on Mar 9, 2013

  16. blah blah blah blah blah..you a worse than alittle girl darth

    By a tool named darth on Mar 9, 2013

  17. talk about sitting on the edge of your seat waiting for me to post on here. my comment’s ink wasnt even dry before this idiot felt the need to respond to it with ridiculous stupid gibberish. it took less than 20 seconds for his comment to appear after mine. make of that what u will.

    By darth on Mar 9, 2013

  18. you using carbon paper now ?

    By a tool named darth on Mar 9, 2013

  19. “they give up their privacy.”
    I disagree. Everyone has a right to privacy, no matter what the situation. Celebrities don’t give it up, it’s taken from them. They have less than the normal person because of their status. Too many paparazzi don’t respect this.

    “if they can be seen from a public place or they are in a public place its legal to snap a pic of them.”
    I agree, as long as the photographer is polite and respectful.

    “i find it literally impossible to believe u have never in your life done that.”
    Now you’re the one who assumes way too much. The few times I’ve been close enough to a celebrity to ask for an autograph is when we were on the same job site. If I had an album, book, or some memorabilia for them to sign, I may have asked, but I didn’t. A signature on a scrap of paper isn’t very important to me. I’ve known people in my situation who have been fired for asking for autographs or taking snapshots of celebrities.

    “i wasnt after a pic of me with him anyway.”
    But you did that on the first night, then photographed him “the next few days around town”. In a town the size of NYC, I’d say that’s more than a mere coincidence, it’s an obsession. These days, it could also be called stalking.

    “normally people like him dont go to nyc otherwise.”
    I disagree, it’s New York City, why would someone of his means avoid it? Paparazzi?

    “u are assuming way too much here.”
    I’m just going with what you’ve said here. You say “i didnt say he saw me every day after that either.” which contradicts what you’ve already said about seeing him “the next few days around town”.

    “im sure u dont really get this whole thing.”
    Again you assume way to much. You have no idea what my work experience is. I’ve been “getting it” for a long time.

    “i dont tell u how to do what u do.”
    That makes us even, since I never told you what to do.

    “i was doing my job.”
    To whom did you sell the Winwood photos?

    By Kodak Moment on Mar 9, 2013

  20. Sluggo, I am not sure how to acquire the music in the links above, some good stuff on those sites but I did not have any success with downloading anything.

    Please advise an thanks in advance

    By Tunafan on Mar 9, 2013

  21. darth how can you be so dense that you don`t see how you make people laugh at your claims?
    Seriously, I think you are just putting everyone on.

    By walter w. alltregh on Mar 9, 2013

  22. i’m sorry darth

    i know i should be taken out back and severely beaten…along with walter seen above

    By a tool named darth on Mar 9, 2013

  23. kodak - all your comments are incorrect. u know this and u dont care.
    there is no such thing as .. as long as. u dont make the laws. the law doesnt say.. as long as.. thems your own words. theyre not in the actual law.
    whether or not u disagree with what i said doesnt matter. facts are facts. u dont have to agree with them. whether or not u agree with them wont change them. celebrities give up their privacy when they leave their homes or go out in public. when i say this.. i mean with regards to their images etc. they want all the photos and attention they can get til they are rich n famous.. then suddenly when they are where they wanna be with millions and women and fame.. they want to decide who should take their pics and when and where. sorry guys.. it dont work that way. once u pick the world of film tv music or just entertainment in general..where u get awards for it by the public.. where your income is generated by the public and so on.. u belong to the public. u sacrifice your freedom for this fame. if u dont want that.. find another way to earn a living. no one is rushing to get any pics of my plumber or the local druggist. no one is shooting shots of waiters or librarians or teachers etc. we each choose our paths. its the cost of privacy. u may not like this when u are famous. but sorry. its part of the price u pay.
    as for the autographs.. im not talking about when u were working. and what u are willing to admit doesnt matter. u know in your heart that u have asked someone in your life for an autograph. if u claim u havent.. that doesnt matter. facts are still facts even if u dont admit them. just cuz u dont offer them up doesnt make them suddenly not exist. just cuz i dont know them doesnt matter either.
    the point is.. its the same thing. and u get it. like it or not.
    me knowing where winwood was on his ny trip that year wasnt obsession nor stalking. it was my hobby / job. i made it my business to keep track of where people stayed where they were going and when. who their drivers were if using a limo and what times theyd be in and out of their hotels. what tv or radio stations theyd be going to etc. even what airport theyd fly in or out of. if they were recording in nyc i would find out what studio and what their schedule was. its how i did what i did. i couldnt spend unlimited hours waiting without having any info and in the wrong places wasting my time. what sense would that make? if i want pics of winwood and i have info on him then going to the wrong places hoping he would show up wouldnt make any sense. he isnt in town that often so i only had a few days. i couldnt care less about anything else at the time.. only when and where he would be. then id snap my shots and move on to the next subject. i didnt just run around town for one celeb or musician. that would have been a waste of time. course there were times no one was in town and i wasnt in the mood to put too much energy into it. so i only got a few pics of one or two people. again it was mostly a hobby. 2ndly a job. if i didnt have the pics.. i had nothing to sell.
    your opinion of what i did doesnt matter. but u dont have to get it. u bought the mags and papers and programs and so on that the pics i took appeared in. u meaning not only u personally but all the people out there who spent money on such things. there are a lot of u out there.. people who say those photographers should leave them alone.. but are the first ones on line at the newstand or grocery stores looking at the pics and stories accompanying them that people like me took. gimme a break.
    again whether or not u disagree with things i said.. have no meaning here. u may not understand why things happened or didnt happen. no one avoided or avoids nyc because of photographers. but if he has no business in nyc he would have no reason to go there. he made the trip for a reason.
    u are reading into what i said assuming what i meant by what i said. u add to it and twist what i said as if i said something else entirely. i didnt say what u claim i said but then u attribute what u wanted it to appear that i said to me. sorry buddy.. it doesnt work that way. u didnt see me say those things. i didnt contradict myself. u just falsely accused me of saying things i didnt say.
    im not assuming anything. i saw what u said and by that i can see that u dont get this whole thing. u claim i dont know what your work experience is. i dont care. it doesnt matter. i know u dont do and never did what i did. therefore u dont get it. u couldnt get it. i can see from what u have said that u dont get it. i didnt assume. i read. its obvious that u dont get it. no assumptions necessary.
    as for telling me what to do.. actually u did.
    your first comment up above where u start that stupidity with.. did it ever cross my mind.. etc.. thats what im talking about. u can claim u arent telling me what to do. but u are. u are making suggestions as if i should do things how u think they should be done. i dont agree with u at all on that.. i answered u. u didnt get it. when i told u that u dont.. u dont like that either. so u run to the other side saying u have always gotten it. well make up your mind. u cant have it both ways. either u get it or u dont. if u got it u would agree with what i did and how i did it. not your way..but mine. it was my hobby/job not yours. i did it the right way. u didnt do this. i did. u cant dictate how it should be done since u were never in this business or hobby. i know this by your own admission. u cant go back now and say i dont know this.. u already admitted that much. so before u even try to back peddle.. think twice.
    i already told u that i didnt sell the winwood ones. u dont sell pics before theyre taken. and u cant know if anyone will or who will buy them til theyre taken. i have over 156000 pics that i took. not all of them sold. winwood isnt the only one i shot. i only mentioned him because he went to the show that was ultimately released of these 2 men.
    but why would u need to know even if i had sold the pics to whom? why is that your business? i sold many pics to many magazines newspapers etc. my pics have appeared on cd covers programs on tv and on websites. ive been on the front page of the daily news in nyc and in time mag esquire mag and the globe and many other publications in the usa and abroad.
    if u respond to this.. i wont reply to u.

    walter - why would i care how others react to what i say? i cant control people. can u? all i can do is tell my experiences and share my knowledge. i cant be bothered worrying whether people laugh at me. do u really spend time in your day worried about such things? how old are u? if u are young.. hopefully u will learn eventually to not let other peoples reactions affect or bother u that much. u cant control people. all u can do is worry about u and your own reactions and actions.

    By darth on Mar 9, 2013

  24. “kodak - all your comments are incorrect. u know this and u dont care.”
    Wow! This should be interesting…

    “the law doesnt say.. as long as..”
    Yes it does. California and Hawaii recently enacted laws restricting paparazzi behavior. Several European countries have done the same. Just do a Google search.

    “u belong to the public.”
    That’s so wrong, I’m not sure where to begin. darth, your thinking here is that of a paparazzi, someone who hunts and exploits celebrities and other well-known people. This mentality is what gives paparazzi such a bad reputation of being obnoxious and intrusive. You and other paparazzi tell yourselves this to justify your (generally) rude behavior.

    “and what u are willing to admit doesnt matter. u know in your heart that u have asked someone in your life for an autograph.”
    Are you calling me a liar?? No wonder so many people here ridicule you! As I’ve stated, I’ve never once been close to a celebrity unless it was work related. When it was, I thanked them for their time, as did others, and they left. My experience is that celebrities/actors/singers do not want to hang around signing autographs and posing for snapshots, they just want to leave. There are at least 20 people on the set, and if two people do it, they ALL want to do it, and that can easily waste an hour. Some celebs bring their publicist, who becomes “the bad guy” and stops that behavior quickly, so the celeb doesn’t look bad.

    “facts are still facts even if u dont admit them.”
    This is a truly bizarre statement, actually just a very rude way to claim that I’m lying.

    “just cuz i dont know them doesnt matter either.”
    What on earth does that mean?? No, don’t bother to explain.

    “your opinion of what i did doesnt matter.”
    Then why did you just type a 5000 word response to my comments??

    “gimme a break.”
    I would, if you weren’t so obnoxious and unwilling to see any viewpoint other than your own.

    “u just falsely accused me of saying things i didnt say.”
    Wrong again, I quoted you verbatim.

    “u claim i dont know what your work experience is.”
    You don’t. Prove me wrong.

    “as for telling me what to do.. actually u did.”
    That’s a blatant lie, show me my quote!

    “i already told u that i didnt sell the winwood ones.”
    No, you didn’t. I’m not surprised that you didn’t sell any, that’s why you keep calling what you did a “hobby”.

    “if u respond to this.. i wont reply to u.”
    Thank God for that! darth, you’re the most distasteful person I’ve ever seen online. It’s no surprise that so many people here attack and insult you, their behavior is justified. I’m afraid Walter is wrong, you don’t have the wit or intelligence to make your comments in jest.

    By Kodak Moment on Mar 9, 2013

  25. hopefully u will learn eventually to not let other peoples reactions affect or bother u that much.

    is that why you typed a 5000 word essay trying to defend yourself?

    By walter w. alltregh on Mar 9, 2013

  26. Darth, I`m surprised that someone who claimed to be friends with aerosmith doesn`t know about Steve Tyler and his efforts to promote anonymity in Maui.
    your thoughts on stalking as a right are wrong dummy.

    By poppa rattsi on Mar 9, 2013

  27. 5000 words to say I don`t care what you say or think.

    By poppa rattsi on Mar 9, 2013

  28. I SENT DARTH`S RANT TO AN ONLINE PERSONALITY
    ASSESSMENT AND THEY RESPONDED SAYING “LOCK THIS NUTBAR UP RIGHT AWAY”.

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 9, 2013

  29. I forgot this one:

    “but if he has no business in nyc he would have no reason to go there.”

    Steve Winwood has no interest in… Music clubs? Concert halls? Museums? Art galleries? Restaurants? Delis? Theater? Broadway shows? Architecture? Shopping? Visiting friends? Visiting Baron von Swine at Rudy’s? A Yankees game?

    You’re absolutely right darth, there’s no reason other than business for Steve Winwood, or anyone else for that matter to ever visit NYC, the greatest city in the world.

    By Kodak Moment on Mar 9, 2013

  30. darth hobbyist lmfao !!

    darth for the prosecution:
    “if u claim u havent.. that doesnt matter. facts are still facts even if u dont admit them. just cuz u dont offer them up doesnt make them suddenly not exist. just cuz i dont know them doesnt matter either.”

    busted! rotflmfao !!

    By barth on Mar 9, 2013

  31. for sluggo - thanks for the links to dirty funky.some more great AVLIN there!

    By btlfan on Mar 10, 2013

  32. Darth, I have only one thing to say to you…..You’re a SWINE!!!!!!!!!!
    P.S. How do you sleep ya cunt?

    By Lucifer on Mar 10, 2013

  33. LUCIFER,
    YOU ARE LATE TO THE PARADE BUT YOU ARE VERY PERCEPTIVE.

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 10, 2013

  34. im not ambitious enough to take this on. theres no point and u idiots arent listening anyway. its mind boggling how u can be wrong more than 100% of the time tho. wow. if there were any among u who could be convinced one way or the other on all the specific bits brought up and wanted my side on any of them i would talk to u about them. feel free to email me. but posting here to people who refuse to pay attention and just contradict for the sake of doing so.. is tiresome. it doesnt mean he/theyre right. it just means im tired of going back and forth with people who arent listening anyway and have their minds already made up. if there was hope to reverse it.. i would bother. im sorry. im not here to convert u to my way of thinking. i offered the correct and accurate information. u dont have to believe or accept it. im here for the music. i add my comments when i wish. but going back and forth with u when u attack each line i typed.. cmon now. why? u dont know what youre talking about on any of these points. i do. there are so many things u were wrong about here and that u didnt consider and i just dont have the umph to fix them.

    By darth on Mar 10, 2013

  35. What’s with the name calling…swine, cunt? If you don’t like the guys posts, don’t read them.

    By joe psycho on Mar 10, 2013

  36. darth, you said you wouldn’t reply….

    “i offered the correct and accurate information.”
    I disagree. You hate it when that happens. The most obvious point where you were 100% incorrect, is claiming that you KNOW without a doubt that I’ve asked celebrities for their autographs.

    “u attack each line i typed.. cmon now. why?”
    Correcting your mistakes is not an attack.

    “i just dont have the umph to fix them.”
    There’s nothing to fix. Try looking at things from someone else’s point of view sometime. Your information isn’t always as correct and accurate as you think.

    By Kodak Moment on Mar 10, 2013

  37. “i just dont have the umph”

    thats what your ex-wife said!! :-)

    By barth on Mar 10, 2013

  38. but posting here to people who refuse to pay attention and just contradict for the sake of doing so.. is tiresome.

    NO WONDER YOU ARE TIRED. 5000 WORD POSTS TO TELL US YOU DON`T CARE WHAT OTHERS THNK.
    TOO BAD YOUR INFO IS OFTEN MISLEADING, DATED WRONG, PARTIALLY WRONG , OR COMPLETELY WRONG AS IN YOUR BLUNDERING OF THE HISTROY OF BOOTLEGGED RECORDINGS. YOU CAN`T DENY IT .
    LIONEL MAPLESON OWNS YOU DARTH.

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 10, 2013

  39. im not surprised thats all u get from what i say. funny thing is.. u actually read them and tell me how u dont. thats hysterical.
    ive said it before.. u saying that my info is misleading dated wrong (thats a new one) or wrong either partially or completely.. doesnt make it so. your info is what is misleading. there were no bootlegs in the time of mapleson. i dont know why u think there were. but as i said u are entitled to think and believe what u wish. if u think what he did was bootleg then u go get yer shine box.. ahem i mean wax cylinder player and grab up all those cylinders u have and enjoy em. as for the rest of us who play lp’s and cds and cassettes and 78s even and 45s etc..we will worry about the real bootlegs. the ones that actually came out for the public so we could enjoy them. u dont understand the entire story of bootlegging. u dont even seem to know what a bootleg is or why it varies from the definition of pirated recording or counterfeit. i am pretty sure u dont know much about anything. youre dumber than a box of rocks. why u insist on showing everyone is beyond me.
    as for being tired.. yes. im tired of trying to get thru to people who refuse to listen. none of u have open minds and u dont wanna think that anything i tell u could be true. thats fine.

    if anyone wishes to learn more about bootlegs and the history of them go to the site -
    http://www.hotwacks.com/
    i am sure that the story of.. is on there somewhere. i havent bothered with the site but ive used the books and magazines they used to put out for about 25 years. i think the site has been there since 09. im sure that lots of info could be found there. enjoy it.

    By darth on Mar 11, 2013

  40. “i havent bothered with the site”

    Of course not, they charge a monthly subscription fee to access their information! All the bootleg information that Sarge presented is readily available online, for free.

    We’re all open minded, darth, but you keep making mistakes that we have to correct. You need to get your ego in check, most of your comments above to Kodak Moment were ridiculous. I’ve said it before- you love the attention, no matter how derogatory.

    By Dingus on Mar 11, 2013

  41. your info is what is misleading. there were no bootlegs in the time of mapleson. i dont know why u think there were

    ALL YOU HAD TO DO IS READ HIS HISTORY, BUT NO THAT WOULD BE TOO EASY AND YOU MIGHT HAVE TO ADMIT YOU MADE A MISTAKE.SOMETHING IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO DO WITH YOUR MANIA.

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 11, 2013

  42. Hot wacks/Lionel Mapleson and darth , boy did you ever blow this one.
    You mentioned the hot wacks books and I thought , hey i`ve got a few of those, {6 to be exact} I`ll go get them out and see if they mention mr Lionel Mapleson or not.Darth say no, he never bootlegged nor were there any bootlegs in his time yet he PRETENDS that he has looked in the Hot Wacks books.
    WRONG..I have Hot Wacks Book XV The Last Wacks published 1996, and Hot Wack Book Supplements numbers 1,2,3,4,and 5.
    Also I have some of the old Hot Wax quarterly magazines and guess what each one of these bootleg bibles has as its second story .
    The History of Bootlegs.
    I quote, and you can actually look this up in any of these books..Dean Meador [author] writing in Hot Wacks quarterly traced bootlegs back to the turn of the century.’Mapelson, the librarian of the Metropolitan Opera at that time,recieved a cykinder RECORDER from Thomas Edison.He took his gift right up into the fly-loft on several occasions during the Met`s 1901-03 seasons and recorded bits and pieces of the performances….it goes on to say Mapleson gave COLLECTORS a chance to obtain and hear performers ,singers and artists and speakers of that era who NEVER appeared on commercial recordings others in roles they didn`t duplicate on authorized discs….
    well well well..you didn`t even bother to check your own sources Darth.
    This has been most interesting and I`m really glad I had these books laying around to check on the real history of bootlegs as told by HOT WACKS BOOKS.

    By sluggo on Mar 11, 2013

  43. Darth says…i am sure that the story of.. is on there somewhere. i havent bothered with the site but ive used the books and magazines they used to put out for about 25 years.

    Then you should know that each and every Hot Wacks books tells about Lionel Mapelson .Each and EVERY ONE.

    By sluggo on Mar 11, 2013

  44. checkmate

    strike three

    knockout

    By barth on Mar 11, 2013

  45. Barth,
    I`ll bet he never acknowledges this post.

    By sluggo on Mar 11, 2013

  46. agreed

    By barth on Mar 11, 2013

  47. WELL , MY OL` MA SAID ITS NOT POLITE TO GLOAT BUT THIS LATEST BIT OF BOOTLEG HISTORY PROOF HAS ME SMILIN` FROM EAR TO EAR LIKE A DANG CHESHIRE CAT.
    HELLO DARTH ? WHAT SAY YOU NOW BOY-O ?

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 12, 2013

  48. HE`LL SAY, “JUST BECAUSE ITS IN YOUR HOT WACKS BOOK DOESN`T MEAN ITS IN MINE, JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY ITS WRITTEN IN THERE ABOUT LIONEL M. DOESN`T MAKE IT TRUE.”…..OR SOME SUCH NONSENSE BECAUSE HE`LL NEVER EVER ADMIT THAT HE WAS DEAD WRONG.

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 12, 2013

  49. COME ON DARTHY BOY TIME TO MAN UP. YOU GOT IT IN YOU ?

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 12, 2013

  50. well i didnt have a copy of the 96 book for sure. i stopped buying those in the early 90s. and if one person (mapelson in this case) puts his own recordings on a cylinder u think this is bootlegging? and if u refer to my original post on here about bootlegs and their history wont u find that i mentioned that before rock boots there were jazz ones earlier? or do u ignore the parts u wish to ignore and just attack the parts u find easiest to attack? sure seems like the latter.
    now sure mapelson may have recorded opera or other classical music but i didnt say that the dylan and stones boots were the first ever boots. i said they were the first ever rock ones. the great white wonder came out first. soon after that was the stones live r than youll ever be. there may have been some between those but i didnt know about them. not til later mind u. how many of those cylinders do u have? hmmm didnt think so. how many of them do u think made it out for public consumption? none? imagine that. if u record something off the radio for yourself and your own personal enjoyment.. do u call (and did u back in the 70s thru 90s) these items bootlegs? i sure didnt. nor did anyone else. they werent and arent bootlegs. theyre personal private recordings u made for yourself. thats all they are. if u distribute them on a format other than cassette tape such as lp or cd then that is bootlegging. sure if u were back in mapelsons time and using cylinders u could have mass produced these things and sold them or given them away and they then would have been considered bootlegs. i surely dont think that a single copy that is in actuality the master itself is a bootleg. now u can disagree. thats up for debate. its an opinion based concept. in my opinion it isnt a bootleg. come later on.. when recordings were produced en masse like they were even in small quantities in the 40s and 50s with jazz record boots.. then thats what i am and was discussing here. i said this in my first posting. i also said later on in 69 the first rock bootlegs came out. i stand by what i said. u may not like it. u may disagree all u like. but i stand by it and its true and accurate.

    i have all the original hot wacks books and mags they put out til the early 90s. no i dont have the one from 96. i left nyc in nov 95 and ended my hobby at that time. i then moved back to ny state where i started up with them again in june 97. i didnt get too heavily into it cept for videos. i put audios on the backburner. i tell u this because it was back in the early 90s when i no longer had access to the books. i didnt buy them online–no. i was out of the world of music and collecting for the most part. and the books were mostly geared around audios.
    i got into cds and audio collecting again in 06. i didnt have any reason to have these books or new updated ones since the early 90s. i had no longer collected the music and all the info i needed i had already. my stuff went into storage in july 02 where its been since. i dont have the books on hand to look thru like u do. but even if i did.. i wouldnt agree with u on the start of them as i explained above.
    now im done with this topic.. and no not because i lost but because theres no point any longer. u ignored my point and attacked the wrong parts of what i said. u twisted what i said around and insisted u were right about things u were not right about. if u really think that im wrong.. thats fine. i dont think i am. live your life believing what u wish. i can not spend all my time worrying about that. stop spending all your time worrying about me and what i believe. my beliefs are my business and my right. i have reason to believe as i wish. its not like i wanna think the world is flat even when it isnt.
    i will not respond to any more of this shit.

    By darth on Mar 12, 2013

  51. darth, no matter how yuo try to spin it, the books I quoted from are the exact same ones you have just in their 6th printing.

    By sluggo on Mar 12, 2013

  52. darth- I have all the original hot wacks books and mags they put out til the early 90s.
    sluggo-then take a look at them the story about mapleson is there.

    darth-and if one person (mapelson in this case) puts his own recordings on a cylinder u think this is bootlegging?
    sluggo- yes, and so does your beloved Hot Wacks .
    they weren`t his recordings, he snuck on stage in the fly-loft and recorded performances of other people then made them available to collectors. are you so stupid you can`t get this.It comes from the reference you made , HOT WACKS.
    the editions I have are the same as yours,they are merely 6th and 7th prinings of the same one you have.Its like a reprint album nothing different just not first edition.This just means the initial printings sold out and probably every year they did a reprint.

    Darth-sure if u were back in mapelsons time and using cylinders u could have mass produced these things and sold them or given them away and they then would have been considered bootlegs.
    sluggo-WHAT?? this what I `m trying to tell you are you an idiot ?????????? this is what he did..jeepers creepers what a friggin` moron you are.

    By sluggo on Mar 12, 2013

  53. darth: try saying “oops, guess I was mistaken.” Or, if that’s too painful, maybe “oops, guess I was mistaken, but you don’t have to be a jerk about it.”
    Just try it. I promise it won’t kill you, and it’s a lot easier than coming up with endless bogus rationalizations.

    By Innocent Bystander on Mar 12, 2013

  54. better yet darth… try shutting the fuck up. LIAR.

    By barth on Mar 12, 2013

  55. a new term for futile.
    darthcredibility.

    By lawyers guns and money on Mar 12, 2013

  56. it is better to remain quiet and appear stupid, wrong, and dishonest, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. sigh.

    By darthfucious on Mar 12, 2013

  57. Now if we can just get bootlick sarge to stfu all will be well…..

    By a tool named darth on Mar 13, 2013

  58. sorry sarge , didn`t really mean it.

    By a tool named darth on Mar 13, 2013

  59. I’m schizo…. I really did mean it

    By a tool named darth on Mar 13, 2013

  60. Now if we can just get bootlick sarge to stfu all will be well…..
    sorry sarge , didn`t really mean it.
    I’m schizo…. I really did mean it
    a tool named darth

    YER NAME`S DARTH WHATTYA EXPECT.

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 13, 2013

  61. YER NAME`S DARTH WHATTYA EXPECT.

    not much-more intelligent posts than yours,but one can always dream…

    By a tool named darth on Mar 13, 2013

  62. YER NAME`S DARTH WHATTYA EXPECT.
    not much-more intelligent posts than yours,but one can always dream…
    By a tool named darth

    YAWN..YOU`RE NOT JUST A TOOL NAMED DARTH …

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 13, 2013

  63. YAWN..YOU`RE NOT JUST A TOOL NAMED DARTH …

    By DROPKICK SARGE

    Yawn…zzzzzzzzzzz…

    but you’re just a tool

    By a tool named darth on Mar 14, 2013

  64. AT LEAST A TOOL IS USEFUL !

    By DROPKICK SARGE on Mar 14, 2013

Post a Comment