Source # | 12686 |
Entered by | Joe Jupille |
Checksums | d1 |
Disc Counts | 1 / 1 |
Media Size | |
Date Circulated
Date Added |
06/30/2002 10/26/2002 |
Other Sources (comments) Garcia, Nelson et al; via... (1) High County(Garcia & Nelson... (1) Jerry Garcia (banjo), David... (1) High Country w/ Garcia &... (2) High Country w/ Garcia &... (0) High Country: SBD > Master... (0) MR(Bill Abrams)>R@7.5... (0) High Country; flac1644;... (0) High Country: SBD > Master... (0) |
|||
Date | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|
10/26/2002 | Joe Jupille | I added this user-submitted .shn set because it is in circulation and because it could well be the proper date, but I suspect that this might be the same material that circulates with the date 2/19/69. If anyone with this .shn set can provide a setlist, that would be very helpful in figuring out whether the material is the same. | |
10/27/2002 | Matt Vernon |
It would be helpful if the people that submit shn sets supply a track list that a). is internally consistent with the shn set submitted (number of tracks) b). track song names or a statement why they aren't included c). a statement if the tracks are knwon to be cut on sector boundaries (i.e. shntool was run and confirms no sector boundary errors) d). a list of flaws that would be noticed by someone who listened to the tracks e). a list of track and total disk times so that people that don't have the shns can compare their audio track times to see if they might have audio disks from the source used in the shn encoding When these guidelines aren't followed in my experience eventually someone else will supply a second shn set which follows more of these guidelines which is then the preferred set. There is so much music circulating especially for Jerry and the Grateful Dead that the slight delay in doing a marginally better job is worth it since it avoids an unnecessary upgrade cycle. |
|
11/20/2003 | Gary Field | The tunes on this disc are the same as those that circulate on 2-19-69. | |
01/30/2004 | Lewis/Klitschko |
Let's be honest. This is 2/19/69, isn't it? |
|
01/31/2004 | Joe Jupille | Probably, certainly probably the same as what circulates as 2/19/69. But since I don't know of any hard evidence linking the material circulating with that date to that date, this remains speculation, I'd say. | |
02/02/2004 | Joe Jupille | BTW, as usual the Jerry Site provides some very useful information about this performance. Seems pretty likely that it's 2/19/69, based on this. | |
02/03/2004 | hanno | and '2-19-69' is a misdate as the grateful dead performed on that date. just to confuse you ;) | |
02/03/2004 | Joe Jupille | So it would seem for Deadlists. We should all probably file this one in the 'uncertain' category unless something more definitive turns up, but continue to use the conventional 2/19/69 dating. That's what I plan to do, anyway. | |
12/24/2004 | XDennis Carter |
I'am sure Sandy Rothman, or David Nelson, could help clear up this confusion over the dates in question. 1964 seems entirely likely, as Jerry was playing acousticly during this time. 1969 was an experimental period, with electric instruments & alot of studio time, spent working on the upcoming LP. In my experience, no matter how "in question" a "date" may be, one must have a little faith in what was written down, all those years ago. My vote is for the 1964 date. |
|
12/25/2004 | Joe Jupille | It was 1969. | |
03/16/2008 | sotm53092 |
both 2-19-64(35270) and 2-19-69(12686) share the same md5's |