betles mono sets - counterfeits

[mhnso]

Not really a maccaissue but close. Remeber a while ago there was a discussion bying copied vesrions of the Beatlesmonosets or not. Well I ordered a used, set fom Amazon.com. Thougt it was rather safe and I have very good experiences buying from that sourse. When I recieved the package it looked very much like the real thing but there were certain details that made me somewhat suspicious. Things concerning the print of album sleeves, colours etc. Very, very small details indeed Soundwise it was OK -having listened to the real thing I couldn t tell a difference. But one of the albums were almost unlistenable due to digital noise. So I was tricked by some xyz bastard. Anyway Amazon.com gave me a refund of my money so now I have the beatles monobox in an acceptable version without paying anything( I arranged a version of the default cd from a friend).
The moral of this story is....Well I don t know really know. Don t trust anyone and if you do see to that you have a safetynet. For me it turned out rather good since I could use the refundmoney and buy the brilliant new monobox from the Kinks. In my book the greatest rrelease of anything Kinks ever.
The collector in me still feel a nagging hurt not being sure if I own the real thing or not...but I don t think I should invest anymore in this box since it mostly was the sound I was after.
One other question - do I recomend buying copies or counterfeits. Hell no - these business are dirty and belongs to the world of organised crime, There is also a big risk to get screwed and lose money. Downloading or buying bootlegs is for me a different thing than couneterfeits. Personally I think Apple made a a mistake releasing the monobox in limited version and don t selling the monoalbums separately. Think that this encourages illegal business.
Anyway - the monoversion of Helter Skelter really kicks a-s - even more so than the stereoversion. Surprising also how good listening experience you have with monoversions of some of the Beatles more phsycedelic songs like Fool on the hill, or Lucy in the sky.

[mr h atom]

i'm just not a fan of counterfits...

i can see the logic in the sort of boot where the stuff has little or no chance of being released, things like the lost mccartney 2, cold cuts, last flight...but things that exist just to rip off an artist, of somethng that is out there, for the sheer note of individual profiteering ?

nah...i'll save my pennies and when i can afford to do so, i'll buy the real thing

...and, btw...i've heard of 'the kinks'...but who in the heck are 'the betles'

must be a cover group , that explains everything

[mhnso]

Sorry I meant the KONKS of course. We seem to agree regarding counterfeits Even though I am pleased with owning the box without paying My moral standards are not so high that I threw it away. Would you?

[Girl4Beats]

I went to a record convention many moons ago and bought what I thought was the TV show, James Paul McCartney as the label suggested but when I got it home it was a bootleg copy of a Wings concert. I kept it. It goes in the Collection but I agree with all. Counterfeits are not something to be bargained with. They are cheap and lousy and I would rather have something the Lost Tapes or Cold Cuts, which I have, that to deal with something like that.

So thanks for sharing and I hope it keeps some schmuck from making the same mistake.

[mhnso]

There are some very good counterfeits both concerning clothes and stuff like that and cd:s dvd. Problem with it it that is illegal but not only that. They are often made i factories in China with very bad conditions for the workers much worse than the already rough circumstances there. The investors are often the same who invests in drugs , prostitution and weapons.
On the other hand bootlegs or cd/dvd:s with unreleased material are often distributed between collectors and fans - it s not legal but mostly doesn t feed organized crime.
On the third hand illegal downloading is somethin most people do ecspecially the young ones. This matter creates a deinitive problem for many artists who doesnt get paid for their work. But this is something that really can t be stopped.Actually I think it can be more problems for the big recordcompanies than the artists and many more unknown artists get a great exposure throgh the neti
Personally I still enjoy owning records physicalLY. Nowdays I mostly buy special editions and boxes. For intance Mvvartney 1 and 2 in deluxeeditions. Very expensive but something very nice to actually hold in your hand. The same goes for the Beatles monobox with it s replicas of the original coverart. That I now own a version whose origins are somewhat dubious spoils a bit of the fun but still it s a beatiful piece.
I am happy who has lived through the time of real LP_s and singles but think everyone has to move on - remeber when I first bought Abbey Road and played it on my cheap plastic grammophone with one speaker. Listening now to the remastered version in my rather state of the art Hi fI of course sounds way better but nothing beats the listening experience I had with this old grammophone
Guess that is why I go for the monomixes - that s the real Mccoy concerning sixties pop and rockn roll

[mr h atom]

both make valid points...i just want to make sure you understand, i'm not in any way making a moral statement over this about anyone, except maybe the counterfiter...

i have and would buy a boot of songs/concerts/alternative version IF it was pretty clear the artist was not about to release the stuff...i've paid an awful lot of $$, thru the years, into the pockets of various artists so that i don't feel the need to justify if, after 20 years, so-'n-so hasn't released, say, any of his early '70's shows, and there is a good boot by a fan, made for fans.

i'd rather buy from the artist, on all of it, but pretty much no one makes all this stuff available

i'm sure i'll get computer savvy enough one of these days to find a way to make copies of alt. vers. of songs and concert bits various artists haven't deemed fit for release...it doesn't worry me a whole lot: there is too, too much good music w/o worrying about the marginal stuff

its the counterfieters ripping artists and stores off that i won't deal with..and while the quality issue is definately there, as well, but nowhere near my top concern.

[Girl4Beats]

I AGREE WHOLE HEARTEDLY, GUYS. I would rather own physically also.

[cd1500rpm]

mhnso, did you buy it from a seller that sells through the Amazon site? I've bought an item from someone selling through the Amazon site & got burned. Since then I just buy items where it comes from the Amazon wherehouse. I hope your refund was hassle free.

[mhnso]

I bought it from a seller on the Amazon.com did that before with good results. When I got the package I mailed them but of course no answer. Put a claim to Amazon who take responsibility since I am signed there and used their payment system. No problems or hassles with them but the seller I guess has disapeared Never mind-I have a rather decent monocollection I cab enjoy andlisten to without no costs. I might buy the real thing sometimes but not for 200 dollars. Even less so when I have something that most normal people would t notice to be a counerfeit

[Girl4Beats]

Guys,

So. . . . bootlegs are fine but counterfeits are not? I have several bootlegs and some are good listening and some are not. I will not get rid of them though. But let me ask a question, which may sound dumb, but what difference is there between a bootleg and a counterfeit? I know some bootlegs are decent quality and some are not.

Just asking as I don't know whether what I have is a counterfeit and I know I have bootlegs.