Who leaked the pro-shot 1980 The Wall videos?

[aybesea]

Hell probably want them buried with him.

[lvri]

Don't give him the idea

[aybesea]

That could be the inspiration for his next concept album titled "Take it with you when you go"!

[DaveTheRave]

Fans have been demanding this release for ever. You open any Pink Floyd official post on Instagram or YouTube related to the wall and there's tons of people wanting it. Even some people on the non-Wall posts.

If you ask me, Roger is just self entitled. I'm not the Roger hater I use to be years ago, but that doesn't mean I agree with him 100% of the time.

My guess is that Roger doesn’t want the old Wall stuff to
conflict with his updated Wall and political messages on his current tours.

Original Wall has the burned out rockstar as part of it’s focus. Clearly he’s moved on from that part.

[Waldsman]

In my opinion it will come out when they sell the catalog, if it's not them then the family will sell.

[aybesea]

Watch Roger live to 100

[paulrammylad]

Yep stuff like this only comes out when either the back catolog is sold or when the main pretagonists have shuffled off this mortal coil.

[svaerige]

very interesting but

I just can't figure out why these two videos - Nassau Coliseum and Earls Court - have different audio sources - Earls Court is SBD but Nassau is audience ?

can anyone explain

[NuffM]

very interesting but

I just can't figure out why these two videos - Nassau Coliseum and Earls Court - have different audio sources - Earls Court is SBD but Nassau is audience ?

can anyone explain

Earls Court is soundboard from the final two nights of the leg, Nassau is audio from one of the cameras (probably the right one).

[svaerige]

Nassau is audio from one of the cameras (probably the right one).

This means that they filmed the video with multiple cameras. Each camera recorded an independent audio track. And then someone merged the video from different cameras to single video, but for some reason he took the sound track from only one camera.

As for me it is too complicated combination. I would rather assume that the first bootlegger had only video without audio tracks and he himself overdubbed some audience audio to the video.

[jmr]

This means that they filmed the video with multiple cameras. Each camera recorded an independent audio track. And then someone merged the video from different cameras to single video, but for some reason he took the sound track from only one camera.

"But for some reason": Combining audio from multiple unsynced cameras would have been a nightmare - you'd get so many phase / combing issues when trying to combine microphones in different parts of the room. Not to mention dealing with filming stops and starts, time drift over time, etc. Most of these issues are easy enough to correct and compensate for now in a DAW with speed correction, but this would have been analog. You'd get better, more consistent audio using only one set of mics at at time.

I haven't checked for it specifically, but do the audio dropouts in the circulating video coincide with moments where the right camera isn't shown? Perhaps the missing audio corresponds to a reel change. This obviously wasn't cut together for public viewing so I can totally understand someone being "sloppy" and not bothering to patch the gaps.

[svaerige]

Combining audio from multiple unsynced cameras would have been a nightmare - you'd get so many phase / combing issues when trying to combine microphones in different parts of the room. Not to mention dealing with filming stops and starts, time drift over time, etc. Most of these issues are easy enough to correct and compensate for now in a DAW with speed correction, but this would have been analog. You'd get better, more consistent audio using only one set of mics at at time.

Well, I don’t know - but obviously they also had a SBD audio track

why bother with the video so much to spoil it with bad audio ?

questions questions questions

[jmr]

Well, I don’t know - but obviously they also had a SBD audio track

why bother with the video so much to spoil it with bad audio ?

questions questions questions

Speculating here, but I've read that filming as Nassau was done sort of a lower-budget practice run for filming the Earl's Court shows. It makes sense that the audio would be treated with lower priority.

[NuffM]

This is the truth.

[rontoon]

This means that they filmed the video with multiple cameras. Each camera recorded an independent audio track. And then someone merged the video from different cameras to single video, but for some reason he took the sound track from only one camera.

As for me it is too complicated combination. I would rather assume that the first bootlegger had only video without audio tracks and he himself overdubbed some audience audio to the video.

This was standard practice back then and this footage was obviously never meant for an official release. Believe what you will but it's not really complicated at all and your assumption is completely incorrect and far fetched.

[svaerige]

Your comment explained everything
Thanks a lot

[lvri]

When you think that this is the only Pink Floyd full live concert ever filmed, and it sleeps in a vault...
It's always strange to understand this band when it comes to concert film...

[NuffM]

When you think that this is the only Pink Floyd full live concert ever filmed, and it sleeps in a vault...
It's always strange to understand this band when it comes to concert film...

Other full shows exist, just not to the full pro-shot degree that most want. Most of the other "full shows" they would have are test recordings to see how they can improve a concert, with a camera at the back, just like Nassau 1980. Roger continued this into his solo tours, as far as I'm aware (I think the P&C Earls Court video is one of those recordings but I'm not csught up on Roger's solo lore, so correct me.)