# Krystian Zimerman stops concert, criticises Youtube



## Andreas

I've just read this:

Pianist Krystian Zimerman stopped a concert in the German city of Essen because he noticed that someone in the audience was filming him with a mobile phone.

At first he paused and asked the person to stop that. But then, apparently unable to regain concentration, he stopped the concert and went backstage. He did return, however, and addressed the audience. He said many of the recordings he had planned were rejected because, as he was told, "they were already on Youtube". He went on to say that the destruction of music through Youtube was enormous.

Zimerman finished the concert, but refused to play any encore despite audience ovations.

One of the organizers of the concert later commented on audience members filming concerts and putting them on Youtube: "It's theft."


----------



## Neo Romanza

I can't say that I blame Zimerman. YouTube has been a thorn in many musicians' sides.


----------



## KenOC

Neo Romanza said:


> I can't say that I blame Zimerman. YouTube has been a thorn in many musicians' sides.


It's only going to get worse. Ban Google Glass in concerts?


----------



## PetrB

No offense, but I downloaded all of your music....








The more this goes on, that many more of several generations will be assuming musicians work for free.

Some years ago, I saw a series of comments to the question of free / illegal downloading. A yuppie in his late twenties said, "If I had made a song I was proud of I'd be happy to share it with everybody." -- affirming his notion that musicians had a day job and just fooled around with the craft as a hobby on weekends.


----------



## Turangalîla

I have to agree that YouTube has made it rather unnecessary to purchase real recordings these days. Not at all convenient for musicians. In general, it is a negative thing.

On the other side of things, however, through YouTube I have discovered many, many musicians and minor composers that I otherwise would not have heard of. There have been a few pianists who have come to Vancouver, and I only went to see them because I heard all sorts of their playing on YouTube and knew that they would be excellent. (I then buy CDs at their concerts.)

But then again, we come back to the issue of musicians' work being stolen and distributed.


----------



## Ravndal

Without youtube - Zimmermann wouldn't have such a large fanbase.

This clip seen 2.3 million times 



 with 12,5k likes and 263 dislikes.

In my opinion, he shouldn't complain.


----------



## ptr

Haven't he always been slightly high strung, I remember when he played the Concert hall in Gothenburg just a few years ago I was told by their Piano Tuner (whom I know very well) that Zimmerman did not allow any one near the Steinway he had brought and insisted on there should be armoured guards patrolling the hall all times He and/or his tuner weren't present?

I just don't think Youtube is his problem, not his major one anyway! It is a bit sad that the greatest ones often are quite labile...

/ptr


----------



## Ukko

ptr said:


> Haven't he always been slightly high strung, I remember when he played the Concert hall in Gothenburg just a few years ago I was told by their Piano Tuner (whom I know very well) that Zimmerman did not allow any one near the Steinway he had brought and insisted on there should be armoured guards patrolling the hall all times He and/or his tuner weren't present?
> 
> I just don't think Youtube is his problem, not his major one anyway! It is a bit sad that the greatest ones often are quite labile...
> 
> /ptr


Your anecdote suggests that YouTube is not the _only_ bugaboo he sees - but it may be the primary irritant; the theft is certainly pervasive, with clear secondary impacts. The 'other side of things' that Carter and _Ravndal_ refer to is not readily quantifiable in anything but 'hits'. _Their_ value, monetary, esthetic or otherwise, has not been established. We _do_ know that 500 hits cannot be exchanged for bacon.


----------



## DavidA

The sheer fact is that it is against the law to film a concert without express permission from the performer / management. Just like it's against the law to film a movie you are seeing. Therefore I do not blame the pianist for objecting to this illegal activity in one of his concerts. It was probably written on the programme that you shouldn't do this. Why does one jerk have to spoil the concert for everyone?


----------



## Andreas

If you cant beat them, join them:

Zimerman could embrace Youtube, start his own channel, have a friend record his concerts in HD, upload the videos, become a Youtube partner and make money off it.


----------



## Andreas

ptr said:


> Haven't he always been slightly high strung, I remember when he played the Concert hall in Gothenburg just a few years ago I was told by their Piano Tuner (whom I know very well) that Zimmerman did not allow any one near the Steinway he had brought and insisted on there should be armoured guards patrolling the hall all times He and/or his tuner weren't present?


I think one of his pianos was destroyed by U.S. border police some years ago, perhaps during the post-9/11 airport security paranoia. I remember a news story about that. Probably made him extra sensitive.


----------



## ahammel

Ravndal said:


> Without youtube - Zimmermann wouldn't have such a large fanbase.
> 
> This clip seen 2.3 million times
> 
> 
> 
> with 12,5k likes and 263 dislikes.
> 
> In my opinion, he shouldn't complain.


Again: he does this for a living. If none of those 2.3 million viewers buy a CD, it's money out of his pocket. Maybe thy being in more than they cost him, but if not, he's got every right to be angry about it. (And he's certainly right to chew out the jerk recording his performance without permission.)

It would be great if everybody used YouTube as a 'try before you buy' deal, but most don't.


----------



## Ravndal

No, and that's why performers have to adapt. It's not going to change. Youtube is a great way to promote a artist, and if he had been clever like _Andreas_ mentioned, he could have made money of his youtube videos. And most people who listens to that sort of music on youtube do it because their interested in seeing the fingers and hands move. If they just want to hear the music, they can download spotify for free. It's even more practical.

Concertos is the future in all music.


----------



## ptr

Hilltroll72 said:


> Your anecdote suggests that YouTube is not the _only_ bugaboo he sees - but it may be the primary irritant; the theft is certainly pervasive, with clear secondary impacts. The 'other side of things' that Carter and _Ravndal_ refer to is not readily quantifiable in anything but 'hits'. _Their_ value, monetary, esthetic or otherwise, has not been established. We _do_ know that 500 hits cannot be exchanged for bacon.


You may well have a point! In Zimmerman's case it is never a simple this or that. For the three decades I've known who he is and what he is capable of at the keyboard the discussion around his person has focused equally much on the fact that he is a person with numerous hang ups. Youtube is just the latest focal point for him! I'm not saying it is right to cut copyright corners by putting up clips on the tube, only that it might be in the artists advantage to work with it rather then against.

I think that what he mourns the most is the radical change the record industry has seen over the last decade, there are no more lucrative record deals (which I believe he had with DG), I believe that most artist of today have come to realise that recordings are a part of their advertising budget not the bread earner! (We should all mourn this as it leads to a less releases of interesting music!)

FWIW, Google (who owns Youtube) should really be forced to pay the artists in Bacon for every copyright violation that appears there! It would be a quite amusing clip to check; ..when when two tonnes of Bacon lands on Zimmerman's doorstep!

/ptr


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Uploading a CD on YouTube could indeed be considered theft. But a recording of a live concert with a cell phone? The quality is not anywhere near professional.


----------



## elgar's ghost

The choice is clear to me for this sort of thing - either a blanket ban or total amnesty. Surely any 'halfway house' rules would be too complicated and nebulous to administer efficiently? To tolerate it up to a certain point is basically saying that it is a rule more honoured in the breach than in the observance (like home taping of vinyl back in the 70s/80s which, to be honest, most of us did - otherwise sales of blank cassettes from manufacturers like TDK, BASF etc would certainly have plummeted). 

A ban on recording and/or taking pictures, if ever it was enforced, may be harsh for those who just want an innocent memento of a concert but those individuals whose intentions are less scrupulous (i.e. the ones who hope to make money or, at the very least, gain some publicity) need to be dissuaded.


----------



## Ravndal

Haha. This thread reminds me of






LOL


----------



## DavidA

SiegendesLicht said:


> Uploading a CD on YouTube could indeed be consideres theft. But a recording of a live concert with a cell phone? The quality is not anywhere near professional.


Probably part of the proble. The vast majority of content recording downloaded like that are very poor quality. If I was the artist I would not want my playing repeated in a format like that.


----------



## PetrB

Any pianist who insists on traveling with their own piano (ala Glenn Gould) is hypo-neurotic, not living in the very real world of concertizing, and from such a performer "issues" can and should be expected.

As far as filming, recording, during a concert.. right on for 'glaring the turkey down.'


----------



## schuberkovich

I don't understand. The popular high quality videos of Zimmerman performing on Youtube are not filmed by phones - they are properly produced at the concert. Therefore, how can these poor quality phone videos be a substitute for a studio recording??


----------



## Ukko

PetrB said:


> Any pianist who insists on traveling with their own piano (ala Glenn Gould) is hypo-neurotic, not living in the very real world of concertizing, and from such a performer "issues" can and should be expected.
> 
> As far as filming, recording, during a concert.. right on for 'glaring the turkey down.'


Last I knew (which was a while back) Sokolov traveled with his own piano; does he still?


----------



## DavidA

PetrB said:


> Any pianist who insists on traveling with their own piano (ala Glenn Gould) is hypo-neurotic, not living in the very real world of concertizing, and from such a performer "issues" can and should be expected.
> 
> As far as filming, recording, during a concert.. right on for 'glaring the turkey down.'


I don't think anyone thinks many of these artists live in the real world. Gould didn't - he didn't even perform in public for the last part of his life.
Horowitz was another who took his own piano around. I think Richter did as well. It is said towards the end of his life he loaded his piano onto a truck and played it in various obscure parts of the Soviet union where they had never heard of classical music.

Live in the real world these guys? Not a chance! And why should they?


----------



## Ukko

DavidA said:


> I don't think anyone thinks many of these artists live in the real world. Gould didn't - he didn't even perform in public for the last part of his life.
> Horowitz was another who took his own piano around. I think Richter did as well. It is said towards the end of his life he loaded his piano onto a truck and played it in various obscure parts of the Soviet union where they had never heard of classical music.
> 
> Live in the real world these guys? Not a chance! And why should they?


I think Richter's adventure was via the Trans-Siberian Railway. Many in the audiences had never heard classical music _live_. Many of those recitals were recorded, and released by Melodiya. My personal opinion is that he did a wonderful thing. Unfortunately, that railway does not penetrate Vermont's borders.


----------



## PetrB

Hilltroll72 said:


> Last I knew (which was a while back) Sokolov traveled with his own piano; does he still?


Every other instrumentalist (other than organists) usually have their own instrument with which they are intimately familiar.

It is an ideal, if you can get the deal. While I think it very desirable, on the reality front, I think it kinda wack


----------



## PetrB

Hilltroll72 said:


> I think Richter's adventure was via the Trans-Siberian Railway. Many in the audiences had never heard classical music _live_. Many of those recitals were recorded, and released by Melodiya. My personal opinion is that he did a wonderful thing. Unfortunately, that railway does not penetrate Vermont's borders.


Richter loved playing in these small towns, and in front of these people. It was a marvelous thing, whether from a personal goal or used as a stress reliever to play in front of such an audience.

Richter was terrified of flying -- and I think never boarded an airplane in his life. 
(Ray Bradbury was another fear of flying guy 

Richter's non-Eurasia appearances involved ship travel.


----------



## Bone

Prima Dona. Unauthorized videos and recordings are probably responsible for the discovery of artists more than the commercial versions. His concert audience is proof that there is a paying audience for him; was he even willing to acknowledge the patrons at the concert (or any of his other concerts) who learnt about him on Youtube? I have no use for artists who want to make exclusivity a part of their work: if he makes a living at it and can assume even a bit of positive advertisement from 2nd or 3rd party word-of-mouth, then he shouldn't begrudge Youtube exposure as haughtily as he did.


----------



## DavidA

Hilltroll72 said:


> I think Richter's adventure was via the Trans-Siberian Railway. Many in the audiences had never heard classical music _live_. Many of those recitals were recorded, and released by Melodiya. My personal opinion is that he did a wonderful thing. Unfortunately, that railway does not penetrate Vermont's borders.


According to Wiki

In 1986, Richter embarked on a six-month tour of Siberia with his beloved Yamaha piano, giving possibly as many as 150 recitals, at times performing in small towns that did not even have a concert hall. It is said that after one such concert, the members of the audience, who had never before heard classical music performed, gathered in the middle of the hall and started swaying from side to side to celebrate the performer.It is said that in his last years Richter contemplated giving concerts free of charge.

Towards the end of his life he also liked to play in the dark!


----------



## DavidA

Bone said:


> Prima Dona. Unauthorized videos and recordings are probably responsible for the discovery of artists more than the commercial versions. His concert audience is proof that there is a paying audience for him; was he even willing to acknowledge the patrons at the concert (or any of his other concerts) who learnt about him on Youtube? I have no use for artists who want to make exclusivity a part of their work: if he makes a living at it and can assume even a bit of positive advertisement from 2nd or 3rd party word-of-mouth, then he shouldn't begrudge Youtube exposure as haughtily as he did.


I went to a pop concert the other day and one of the things that was announced beforehand was please do not use mobile phones to record the concert. When you go to a concert you are paying for the live concert you are not paying for the recording no matter how it is done. This is a general principle. Like at the movies.


----------



## Marisol

For clarity's sake, it is not against the law to *make* a recording of a concert, however it is (generally) against the law to *publish* such recordings without permission. However it may (and most often is) be a violation of the contract of the ticket to make recordings and when violated it would invalidate the contract and thus you could be asked to leave, if you would not leave then you would break the law for trespassing.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Andreas- Zimerman could embrace Youtube, start his own channel, have a friend record his concerts in HD, upload the videos, become a Youtube partner and make money off it.

Ahammel- Again: he does this for a living. If none of those 2.3 million viewers buy a CD, it's money out of his pocket. Maybe thy being in more than they cost him, but if not, he's got every right to be angry about it. (And he's certainly right to chew out the jerk recording his performance without permission.)

I can't say I'm overly sympathetic for Zimerman. I question how many viewers of a bootleg YouTube video were likely to purchase a CD but settled for the video on YouTube. I suppose it happens... but then again... how many viewers were led to purchase a recording after seeing such a video? As Andreas suggested, if you can't beat them, join them. Anna Netrebko, Joyce DiDonato, Hillary Hahn, Magdalena Kozena and many others have embraced YouTube and digital technology as a means of reaching a wider audience. I'm sorry but the genie can't be put back in the bottle. The days when recording companies had total control and could charge $16 or $18 for a disc that cost them mere pennies to make is over.

As a visual artist I have always had to live with the reality that 100s... even thousands may view my paintings in a gallery for free. Some may even take a photograph... but not buy. Even if the work is sold I have no claims to future resale profits (royalties). Probably only poets have it worse in terms of the ability to make money... and even then... it costs virtually nothing to be a poet. A pen or pencil and paper (or an ipad) and a little corner anywhere will suffice... where the serious painter must put forth a sizable investment in terms of materials and studio space.


----------



## PetrB

DavidA said:


> According to Wiki
> 
> In 1986, Richter embarked on a six-month tour of Siberia with his beloved Yamaha piano, giving possibly as many as 150 recitals, at times performing in small towns that did not even have a concert hall. It is said that after one such concert, the members of the audience, who had never before heard classical music performed, gathered in the middle of the hall and started swaying from side to side to celebrate the performer.It is said that in his last years Richter contemplated giving concerts free of charge.
> 
> Towards the end of his life he also liked to play in the dark!


That beloved Yamaha concert grand was provided by Yamaha, along with their best technicians to keep it tuned and regulated, and they also handled the bulk of the transport, if not all.

This was a high-profile musician, sponsored by Yamaha (I ijmagine if Richter had come out in favor of Steinway, a German made piano, in post WWII Soviet Union, it would have been tantamount to a political suicide, leaving him in Siberia vs. playing in Siberia.

With all those costs met and with the network support, knowing you get the "soviet pay' wherever and whenever you play, who might not enjoy playing in Podunsk for people who have never heard great classical music?

Glenn Gould's piano was a rebuilt Chickering grand, for which no one was a sponsor. Gould had to include the cost of the shipping in his fees.


----------



## DavidA

PetrB said:


> Glenn Gould's piano was a rebuilt Chickering grand, for which no one was a sponsor. Gould had to include the cost of the shipping in his fees.


Gould had a Chickering but I believe the piano he used for recording was a Steinway.
Gould found the piano, a Steinway CD 318, at the Eaton Auditorium in Toronto in 1960. The instrument was already 20 years old at the time, but he became enamoured of it and used it extensively.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/story/2012/06/13/glenn-gould-piano-nac-chair.html

There is also a book called 'a romance on three legs' about Gould and his piano.


----------



## KenOC

PetrB said:


> Glenn Gould's piano was a rebuilt Chickering grand, for which no one was a sponsor. Gould had to include the cost of the shipping in his fees.


I think that people who blithely advise people like Zimerman to "get with the 21st century" have little idea how much it costs to tour (even without a piano!) and how difficult it is for all except two or three "names" to make a living. I recently attended a Jeremy Denk recital which was definitely world-class. There were only about 200 people there, and tickets were quite cheap. After subtracting venue and other costs, I doubt the pianist had enough left over to cover his airfare, hotel, and lunch at McDonald's...or any one of the three!


----------



## Marisol

For the digital Goldberg variations Gould used used a Yamaha grand.


----------



## Marisol

KenOC said:


> how difficult it is for all except two or three "names" to make a living.


I completely disagree, top musicians get very well payed. At least in the US a significant part of the cost comes from corporate sponsorship but for instance in Europe it also comes from taxpayers which I think is indefensible.

San Francisco symphony players had a minimum salary of about $140,000 they went on strike because it was not enough. Note that that does not include royalties they can receive for 70 (or 95) years for recordings.


----------



## Bone

DavidA said:


> I went to a pop concert the other day and one of the things that was announced beforehand was please do not use mobile phones to record the concert. When you go to a concert you are paying for the live concert you are not paying for the recording no matter how it is done. This is a general principle. Like at the movies.


I'm not arguing the general principal and KZ could certainly have left the stage and requested that the offender be removed if it disrupted his concentration. My issue is with his "preach to the choir" moment. As a classical artist, he has to know that his genre is different than pop music or movies: he ought to be thankful for any and all advertisement to make people aware of his product. It's not like he is the composer or filmmaker anyway - he makes his living on his ability to reproduce someone else's work. KZ is yet another reason why the current patrons of art consider classical musicians to be rather self-important.


----------



## Neo Romanza

ptr said:


> You may well have a point! In Zimmerman's case it is never a simple this or that. For the three decades I've known who he is and what he is capable of at the keyboard the discussion around his person has focused equally much on the fact that he is a person with numerous hang ups. Youtube is just the latest focal point for him! I'm not saying it is right to cut copyright corners by putting up clips on the tube, only that it might be in the artists advantage to work with it rather then against.
> 
> I think that what he mourns the most is the radical change the record industry has seen over the last decade, there are no more lucrative record deals (which I believe he had with DG), I believe that most artist of today have come to realise that recordings are a part of their advertising budget not the bread earner! (We should all mourn this as it leads to a less releases of interesting music!)
> 
> FWIW, Google (who owns Youtube) should really be forced to pay the artists in Bacon for every copyright violation that appears there! It would be a quite amusing clip to check; ..when when two tonnes of Bacon lands on Zimmerman's doorstep!
> 
> /ptr


A good point here. Given Zimerman's history, it shouldn't be surprising he's now blasting YouTube. If not YouTube, then he would definitely be blasting another website. While I don't condone his actions (there were people there that payed good money to see him perform), he does have a point about YouTube, but I think the way he went about dealing with the issue could have been handled differently.

Oh, and don't get him started on the United States, that's a whole can of worms there.


----------



## DavidA

Marisol said:


> For the digital Goldberg variations Gould used used a Yamaha grand.


That is because CD318 was dropped by careless removal men.


----------



## DavidA

Bone said:


> I'm not arguing the general principal and KZ could certainly have left the stage and requested that the offender be removed if it disrupted his concentration. My issue is with his "preach to the choir" moment. As a classical artist, he has to know that his genre is different than pop music or movies: he ought to be thankful for any and all advertisement to make people aware of his product. It's not like he is the composer or filmmaker anyway - he makes his living on his ability to reproduce someone else's work. KZ is yet another reason why the current patrons of art consider classical musicians to be rather self-important.


I just can't see how he acted wrongly. He finished the concert which the public paid for. Just unfortunate there was a jerk in the audience with a mobile phone.
The problem is that people today do not know what is appropriate. You can go to the movies and hear someone having a conversation on a mobile phone. If you ask them to desist they look gone out at you!


----------



## KenOC

Re recording concerts etc. I was amused tonight to ready a passage from Wiki about Harlan Ellison, the well-known sci-fi author:
-------------------------------
Since those settlements Ellison has initiated legal action and/or takedown notices against more than 240 people who have allegedly distributed his writings on the Internet, saying, "If you put your hand in my pocket, you’ll drag back six inches of bloody stump".


----------



## Ukko

KenOC said:


> Re recording concerts etc. I was amused tonight to ready a passage from Wiki about Harlan Ellison, the well-known sci-fi author:
> -------------------------------
> Since those settlements Ellison has initiated legal action and/or takedown notices against more than 240 people who have allegedly distributed his writings on the Internet, saying, "If you put your hand in my pocket, you'll drag back six inches of bloody stump".


Aside from saying "Go get'em, Harlan", I think it's germane to point out that HE is an _ancient_ author.


----------



## KenOC

Hilltroll72 said:


> Aside from saying "Go get'em, Harlan", I think it's germane to point out that HE is an _ancient_ author.


Nonsense. Harlan Ellison is the same age as Verdi was when he wrote Falstaff. I prefer to think of it as "well-polished by the passage of years."


----------



## kv466

Andreas said:


> I've just read this:
> 
> Pianist Krystian Zimerman stopped a concert in the German city of Essen because he noticed that someone in the audience was filming him with a mobile phone.
> 
> At first he paused and asked the person to stop that. But then, apparently unable to regain concentration, he stopped the concert and went backstage. He did return, however, and addressed the audience. He said many of the recordings he had planned were rejected because, as he was told, "they were already on Youtube". He went on to say that the destruction of music through Youtube was enormous.
> 
> Zimerman finished the concert, but refused to play any encore despite audience ovations.
> 
> One of the organizers of the concert later commented on audience members filming concerts and putting them on Youtube: "It's theft."


Sounds like a little bitch to me. :lol:


----------



## Ukko

kv466 said:


> Sounds like a little bitch to me. :lol:


Is this the guy who teamed with Boulez in an attempt to destroy Bartók's piano concertos? I think so.


----------



## apricissimus

Hilltroll72 said:


> Is this the guy who teamed with Boulez in an attempt to destroy Bartók's piano concertos? I think so.


How does one even attempt to destroy a piece of music? Burn all existing copies, recordings, etc.?


----------



## Ukko

apricissimus said:


> How does one even attempt to destroy a piece of music? Burn all existing copies, recordings, etc.?


Create an abomination under it's moniker.


----------



## PetrB

Hilltroll72 said:


> Aside from saying "Go get'em, Harlan", I think it's germane to point out that HE is an _ancient_ author.


If you are alive, it is impossible to also be ancient.


----------



## moody

PetrB said:


> If you are alive, it is impossible to also be ancient.


The Troll is the exception to the rule.


----------



## Ukko

PetrB said:


> If you are alive, it is impossible to also be ancient.


I remember reading HE's stories when the world and I were young. Now, all three of us are ancient.


----------



## KenOC

Hilltroll72 said:


> I remember reading HE's stories when the world and I were young. Now, all three of us are ancient.


So true, the world has aged. The sun doesn't shine as brightly, the summer breezes don't cool me as before, and little dog Jack no longer runs happily at my heels! Now where'd that book of Norman Rockwell paintings go...


----------



## Lunasong

Blog feedback:

Slipped Disc
_Some artists and venues, however, allow audiences to share the experience, pop-style. A few, such as Valentina Lisitsa, actively encourage them to do so, regarding the act of sharing as a democratisation of their art. This tendency is growing more popular and cannot be reversed. We will see more Zimerman-like incidents in the coming months where performer and public do not regard the concert in the same light._

Adaptistration
_What makes Zimerman's situation stand out is he apparently went on to lecture the audience on how he has lost out on recording contracts because label execs claimed the performance was already on YouTube.

Let's take a deep breath here and set a few things straight. I have yet to meet a record label executive who refuses to engage an artist to record because some half-baked Smartphone recording of a live performance of the same piece was on YouTube. Perhaps Zimerman's troubles are the result of him not understanding the medium he's talking about or someone is pumping him full of smoke (or a little of both)._

WXQR (New York radio)
_A growing number of venues find that photography and video are not something to be outlawed but embraced, if in a limited manner.
Some of the most assertive change is coming from America's regional orchestras, who are determining that more media-friendly policies will help them reach fans who already share concert photos on Twitter and Facebook. Nashville Symphony spokesperson Laurie Davis says in an e-mail, "It seemed a waste not to be taking advantage of our biggest fans."_


----------



## elgar's ghost

'Some artists and venues, however, allow audiences to share the experience, pop-style. A few, such as Valentina Lisitsa, actively encourage them to do so, regarding the act of sharing as a democratisation of their art. This tendency is growing more popular and cannot be reversed. We will see more Zimerman-like incidents in the coming months where performer and public do not regard the concert in the same light.'

Rock was always like this during the golden age of bootlegs - the Grateful Dead never persecuted anyone over illicitly recording their gigs, and that was at a time when most of their output was live albums. However, if you were caught trying it at a Led Zeppelin concert the chances are that manager Peter Grant would have had your balls on a fork. The rules in the UK concerning bootlegs was muddled - there was nothing to stop you putting in a 'bootlegs wanted' ad in the music press but it was illegal to advertise any for sale.


----------



## Lunasong

Ha ha, despite that I probably have at least 20-30 Zep bootleg recordings. Some are of concerts so long they require 4 CDs! I did not buy any of them; they were sent by request from various members of a Zeppelin forum (now defunct) on which I used to be very active.


----------

