Would it be wrong of me to collect a few boots on vinyl?

[DiegoFermoli]

The only one I own and regularly listen to (although, iirc, I do have a random bootleg/silver CD of some Dark Side gig somewhere, picked up at Greenwich market in London decades ago)

https://www.discogs.com/release/3688...nd-The-Journey

This is the only Floyd bootleg I actively sought out on vinyl - I had the roio files shared online around 2000/2001 but I'm a bit of a vinyl purist when it comes to music and it's the only physical media I have ever really bought - since I started buying music and checking out record shops in the early 1990s. I do have a fair few CDs gathering dust in a box, but it's just bits and pieces to me - and I don't even have a CD player wired up to my stereo at the moment (I should probably do something about that!)

But the Man and the Journey is, if you have your main albums and things on vinyl, for me at least, downright essential. It's the missing album that should have been released in the official catalogue. Although, if I'm not mistaken, it has been released officially in the Early Years box?

Beyond that, where's the harm if there's a particular gig you like and you'd listen to it on vinyl? You're not hurting anyone. Chances are, if you own 5 or 10 legitimate Floyd albums on CD or vinyl (heck, even streaming) then you've already given the Floyd more than the average person has. If you own 20, 30, 40, etc... albums - you are well beyond the average person. In fact, if we remove all these die-hard and even casual collectors, and it was just the 'average guy' buying the odd Floyd album then they (the Floyd) would be very much poorer. They'd still be filthy rich, of course, but quite a shade less filthy.

Don't think twice, it's alright, so sayeth Dylan

[jmr]

Do what you want. 😀

I've bought a few modern boots over the past few years - one store around me typically has a handful that get bandied about as "imports" - and while they're neat, for the most part they're inferior to what's already easily available here or elsewhere. I've also seen a handful of pressings that are just existing CD releases from the Early Years and Immersion sets just pressed to vinyl. They're maybe neat to have but not really worth the effort to seek them out, and not worth spending a lot on.

These days I'm mostly just watching for stuff where the vinyl record is the only surviving source for that particular recording. So far I've tracked down M-502, a Best of Tour '72 first press, and Dittolino Santa Monica 70.

[Frankymole]

I have nostalgic memories of buying ROIO LPs at record fairs in the early 1990s. Most of them would not be regarded as great copies of great sources, but just looking at the sleeve artwork makes me happy. And at the time, this was all I had outside the official "canon", a few cassettes, even fewer CDs, and some great vinyl LPs. Happy days.

[Emdy]

I’ve noticed that a lot of the “modern” vinyls boots are sourced either directly from recent official box set releases or popular existing boots. I’ll pick them up if the material is attractive enough, but the pre-internet boots are what get me excited.

There’s nothing worse than hearing an MP3 YouTube rip of “What Shall We Do Now” on a $30 purchase.

[MGoBlue1989]

I say go for it if it makes you happy. I bought a few vinyl boots and a couple tape boots from early 80s through mid 90s, before I discovered the Echoes mailing list and tape trading. I've since sold most of them but still have a few - Eclipsed, Brain Damage, War in the Head, Taylor Fury & Floyd, and Reg are all I have left. Still contemplating selling them but the nostalgia has won out so far. I had a few more that I sold a long time ago, one being Dark Side of the Moo which I now wish I'd kept. That one was a goldmine before the early singles were released in the Shine On box and before I was able to locate a copy of Zabriskie Point on VHS. I might still have the tape of The Wall "soundtrack" that I got around the time the movie was in theaters. I'm pretty sure someone just took a recorder into the theater because I got it before the commercial releases.

[Tony_Floyd]

Yes, im calling the cops!

JK.. I couldnt resist.

[aybesea]

LOL Hilarious

[ILuvHoney]

I have bought a few boots on vinyl, although the fact that they are all here for free and that vinyl boots are expensive (particularly the old ones) have made me quit doing this. However, I might do it again in the future if I find something really special and/or my economic situation changes for the better.

But I have bought things like Best of Tour 72 and British Winter Tour 74 that I consider essential. Also a copy of the Zabriskie album that is a necessary addition to a full collection. And really well-produced boots with great packaging and great quality are ofc tempting; Atom Heart Mother Goes on the Road was a boot that i just HAD TO get, for instance, as it's a very great-sounding, well-packed, well-pressed boot from an era I like, with nice gatefold and all.

if I should buy vinyl boots in the future, i assume it would probably be something from 1977 or 1980-81 as I have none and those are my favourite tours. But boots from those tours tend to be really expensive so it's out of the question right now. The fact that eBay is the main place to get them does not exactly help in this regard, as shipping costs to Europe are high, especially when you get VAT on top of that again. Or maybe I could be tempted to buy something from Roger's Pros and Cons tour (from which i already have one, but far from one of the best) or KAOS tour.

I personally don't think it's unethical to buy bootlegs. I guess anyone who buys bootlegs are die-hard collectors who already own the official stuff anyway. So buying boots don't take any money away from the artist that they would otherwise get. It just does not add anything to their fortune, so for them it does not make any difference economically at all whether you buy them or not.

[Son of Nothing]

Firstly, I'm not saying don't buy boots if that's what you are into. While I don't have any Floyd boots, I do have a tiny number from another band.

But I didn't want to let this go unchallenged.

I personally don't think it's unethical to buy bootlegs. I guess anyone who buys bootlegs are die-hard collectors who already own the official stuff anyway. So buying boots don't take any money away from the artist that they would otherwise get. It just does not add anything to their fortune, so for them it does not make any difference economically at all whether you buy them or not.

Sure, only fans are going to buy boots and those fans will be buying the legit stuff also. But I think where boots are ethically shady has nothing to do with the original artist but rather that subset of boots that sell the work others have volunteered to make available for free. I.e. profiting from the work of others.

But yeah, the "classic" boots predate this era. It's just the ethics aren't so black and white. But also, the statement was "I personally don't think it's unethical to buy bootlegs" so to be fair I guess that's not so easy to challenge. I'm more arguing about the ethics of the sellers of them.