Spring 1990 (The Other One) Box
•144-page paperback book with essays by Nicholas G. Meriwether and Blair Jackson
•A portfolio with three art prints by Jessica Dessner
• Replica ticket stubs and backstage passes for all eight shows
•8 complete shows on 23 discs
•3/14/90 Capital Centre, Landover, MD
•3/18/90 Civic Center, Hartford, CT
•3/21/90 Copps Coliseum, Hamilton, Ontario
•3/25/90 Knickerbocker Arena, Albany, NY
•3/28/90 Nassau Coliseum, Uniondale, NY
•3/29/90 Nassau Coliseum, Uniondale, NY (featuring Branford Marsalis)
•4/1/90 The Omni, Atlanta, GA
•4/3/90 The Omni, Atlanta, GA
Recorded by long-time Grateful Dead audio engineer John Cutler
Mixed from the master 24-track analog tapes by Jeffrey Norman at Bob Weir's TRI Studios
Mastered to HDCD specs by David Glasser
Original Art by Jessica Dessner
Individually Numbered, Limited Edition of 9,000
Announcing Spring 1990 (The Other One)
"If every concert tells a tale, then every tour writes an epic. Spring 1990 felt that way: an epic with more than its share of genius and drama, brilliance and tension. And that is why the rest of the music of that tour deserves this release, why the rest of those stories need to be heard." - Nicholas G. Meriwether
Some consider Spring 1990 the last great Grateful Dead tour. That it may be. In spite of outside difficulties and downsides, nothing could deter the Grateful Dead from crafting lightness from darkness. They were overwhelmingly triumphant in doing what they came to do, what they did best — forging powerful explorations in music. Yes, it was the music that would propel their legacy further, young fans joining the ranks with veteran Dead Heads, Jerry wondering "where do they keep coming from?" — a sentiment that still rings true today, a sentiment that offers up another opportunity for an exceptional release from a tour that serves as transcendental chapter in the Grateful Dead masterpiece.
With Spring 1990 (The Other One), you'll have the chance to explore another eight complete shows from this chapter, the band elevating their game to deliver inspired performances of concert staples (“Tennessee Jed” and “Sugar Magnolia”), exceptional covers (Dylan’s “When I Paint My Masterpiece” and the band’s last performance of the Beatles’ “Revolution”) and rare gems (the first “Loose Lucy” in 16 years) as well as many songs from Built To Last, which had been released the previous fall and would become the Dead’s final studio album. Also among the eight is one of the most sought-after shows in the Dead canon: the March, 29, 1990 show at Nassau Coliseum, where Grammy®-winning saxophonist Branford Marsalis sat in with the group. The entire second set is one continuous highlight, especially the breathtaking version of “Dark Star.”
For those of you who are keeping track, this release also marks a significant milestone as now, across the two Spring 1990 boxed sets, Dozin At The Knick, and Terrapin Limited, the entire spring tour of 1990 has been officially released, making it only the second Grateful Dead tour, after Europe 1972, to have that honor.
Now shipping, you'll want to order your copy soon as these beautiful boxes are going, going, gone...
Listening Party: 3/29/90, Nassau Coliseum With Branford Marsalis, Set 2
Enjoy the 2nd set of 3/29/90!
You Might Also Like
1. Congrats to all those who have already received their box sets.
2. My set should arrive sometime today-can't wait.
3. Re: big stereos and vinyl ritual-I plead quilty to all of it.
4. I don't know about hi-rez downloads-don't have any of them but I definitely think MP3 is virtually worthless for music enjoyment. I like HDCD, vinyl and SACD. I also have some excellent sounding modern CDs.
5. I agree however that I will listen to an ancient lo-fi recording of a brilliant performance over a state of art recording of a mediocre performance-I have many CD issues of historical classical (Furtwangler, etc) that I would not part with.
All along the tracking for my set has shown Friday 9/12. I just looked at it again. and it now says UPS is NOT going to turn it over to USPS and that they will deliver it today!!
Doing the happy dance as I try to type this. Tonite is going to be heaven!
I also received my order on September 9th. I was really amazed to receive it so quickly - especially after the delays with the first Spring 1990 box which saw all Australian deliveries sent via Germany.
And these sound REAL GOOD!
What's lined up as the Box Set release for 2015 I wonder.
@jrf68- they put the 2nd set of that show up with the two listening parties. The exact same giggling thing happened to me. It WAS redonckulus!!!!!! Also, after that whole Clint Eastwood DVD thing, I just got notification that my box should get here by end of day today. YAHOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@deadheadbrewer- aren't those grado's something? The warmth of sound, the 3 dimensionalilty, the clarity, and the feeling of space is like nothing I've ever heard in any other phones. I saw they have come out with ear buds. When I do finally take the plunge I think I will have to go with one of the full size phones, but I'd like to find out if their buds sound similar. They have 3 types of buds, but their lowest price one is the only thing they sell that isn't handmade in Brooklyn. The other two, though are $300 and $400. Can't do that and the regular headphones also.
@fourwinds- thanks, you too. I remember when most music junkies would get the best equipment they could afford. Huge floor standing speakers with the latest in tweeter and woofer technology, cool receivers, amps and pre-amps, turntables with the coolest new types of needle cartridges, and we were so careful to make sure it was spinning at 33 1/3 after we used those velvet things to gently remove the dust from the precious vinyl as it spun........
@HighThyme- hey now! First, I apologize to anyone to whom I came off as preaching. I just think that if they put up 24 bit flacs, they will probably charge more (I think they said $200?). That's a lot of money compared to $160 for the same music,
I assure you that i am thinking of NONE of that technical stuff when I am being transported to those magical places music takes us, whether jamming with thousands, or alone with my "deck". In fact, somewhere around half my music collection consists of music recorded before stereo was invented, and I have and enjoy and love a substantial number of recordings I have from before the electrical microphone was invented. The very opposite of hi-fi.
I, for one, will ALWAYS opt for a mediocre recording of great music over a great recording of good music. And I would certainly never judge who does and who does not know how to listen to music by what can be gleaned from comments on a message board. I was trying to save people money by explaining what they're not getting with their higher priced 24 bit file. I think I managed to do that without insulting any one, and certainly not aiming insults directly AT a particular person. Was that really necessary? While I may have been over-technical, I wasn't bringing any one down or tearing anyone down. Were you trying to make me feel like shit? Maybe you just had a crappy day. It happens.
To your point, though. I don't think you completely understand the issue (no big deal, though). Mp3 (and AAC files) even of 320kbs, are "lossy" formats meaning that a lot (a LOT) of music information is lost from the file in order to compress it down in size (by 70-90%!) from the original file it is created from. Most people will hear a significant difference between the original music file and an mp3, and virtually everyone will hear the loss in sound quality when comparing them on excellent equipment. There's no comparison.
But, that has nothing at all to do with fourwinds' or my points. The flacs, and alac files that we are talking about are "lossless" files. This means that no music data from the original file they are created from is lost (they only compress the original by about 50%), and are decoded to the exact original as they play, or you can decode them yourself and then convert to flac again over and over with zero loss in quality each time. When you create an mp3, though, you are throwing out a ton of music data that is gone forever. If you decode it to a wav, the wav is still missing what you threw out. If you compress to mp3 again you will degrade it even further, etc,
What we were discussing is the difference between digital recordings that are 16 bit and 44.1 kHz (what a CD uses), and 24 bit 96khz recordings. The bits refers to the number of data bits used to store each "unit" of music information sampled from the incoming analog electronic signal, and the kHz refers to how often "snapshots" of the incoming signal are captured (44,100 times per second vs. 96,000 times per second).
Most studies show no one can really distinguish between two music samples where one is 16/44.1 and the other 24/96 when created from the same source.
Most people CAN readily distinguish the poorer sound quality of an mp3 and the original 16bit or 24bit it came from. A substantial sacrifice in sound quality has been made to create a MUCH smaller file.
I only brought this up because many people have been jumping on the "hi Rez" bandwagon, paying substantially more for 24bit files while I was aware that the university studies done to date indicate that people can't hear the difference between a 16 bit file and a 24 bit file (which has nothing to do with mp3 degraded encoding).
Let's say they were offering a gd movie on actual film, one that plays at 72 frames per second and another at 144 frames per second, but they're charging a lot more for the 144. If I've just read that no one who watches both can tell which is which, I'm gonna come on here and suggest that people don't waste their hard earned money. And, to do that I'm going to have to explain the difference between the two and why having all those extra frames doesn't actually matter. Just trying to save some friends some scratch. By all means, when they put up the 16 bit alac file (they already have) which can be converted to 16 bit flac with no loss, and then they put up 24 bit flac and charge $40 more for it, then, because you can hear the difference between an mp3 and a flac (which most everyone can) by all means go ahead and get the 24 bit file if that somehow makes logical sense to you. It's like you're saying, " since I can hear the difference between a crappy mp3 and a perfect lossless 16 bit flac, well then I might as well pay even more for this 24 bit hi res flac!" I could just say "that's fine with me, no skin off my nose", especially after your purposely insulting and condescending comment, but it actually DOES bother me that you, someone who obviously loves music or you wouldn't be here and who I am sure knows how to LISTEN to music just fine, might be convinced to pay more for something without getting anything of any additional real value when that money could be going to more music that you love or other meaningful places.
In any case, I honestly do hope you just have great times with the music in whatever form you get it.
Long live the omnipotent Grateful Dead.
I'm 44 years old and I was just GIGGLING listening to the Branford show. It's redonckulus....just silly how awesome this is....
Re:listening to the listening party....picking up the set first thing @ the P.O.!
I've made some attempts to hear a difference between a 16-bit and a 24-bit version of the same source material, and I'll be darned if I can hear any. I use decent equipment, and second the opinion to get some nice Grado headphones. I went to a site that supposedly tested my hearing abilities, and it seems that I don't have the capacity to hear much difference in anything, and I've somewhat babied my ears over my 44 years. I had my wife randomly play me a Joshua Redman track that was in lossless FLAC and in 256 mp3. I guessed correctly five times out of ten.
Others swear by hi-rez, and I'm certainly no expert, but I would ignore the format and use the savings for more recordings you don't already have, plus some good ($100-300) headphones. One additional problem with the hi-rez version of older recordings is that they rarely state which source and process was used, so you're probably getting nothing more than you've already owned all these years. That, and you don't even get liner notes for your $20/disc! AND, they usually don't include the bonus tracks that were included on your remastered CD version! And then your hard drive crashes . . .
Your comments about higher res formats sound right on. At one time, I had a 320Kbps MP3 of a show which I had enjoyed thoroughly, but found the recording lifeless, unengaging, frustrating, unpleasant and quite difficult to listen to all the way through. After repeatedly being unable to enjoy it for nearly a year, I finally purchased the FLACs, taken from the exact same source recording, and now enjoy listening to and being surrounded by all or even just portions of it to no end. There's no comparison. You will never convince people who don't get it, because while you're listening to the music, they are analyzing data as they listen to it. Their opinion on how the music sounds is utterly pointless because they don't know how to LISTEN to music in the first place. Kinda makes you wonder why they even bother in the first place sometimes.
The person who scans the cover art on at this link is usually pretty quick about putting up the updated cover art, including the bonus discs...
...but seems to only be updated through Dave's Picks Volume 10.
...less than 24 hours of receiving an email letting me know it had shipped!! I got lucky on this "other one." I'm always blown away by the attention to detail on these sets. Even the box it's shipped in is cool,
My box arrived today here in Birmingham, AL. I'm looking forward to having time to listen to all of it soon...
Jessica Dessner's artwork is great - heck, all the GD artwork in the past few years has been impressive, but the artwork on the individual show digipaks and elsewhere in this set really brought a smile to my face. And the box's design really complements the artwork well. The smaller book was a nifty idea. Great job all 'round, folks.
I got myself a Marantz receiver sr7005 it has M-DAX expander. When I first got it I didn't use it much because I didn't hear much of a difference at first, but now I can't listen without it especially at a higher volumes. Makes the 16/44 files sound like a record when set on mid setting.
Nice talking with ya bro
@fourwindsblow - that could be. I just think that, because many of the folks in the studies I read were audiophiles very familiar with the best audio equipment/technology who are familiar with and listen to 24bit music, it seems to me that if they still get about a 50% success rate in picking out the 24 bit versus 16 bit recording of the same music samples then there can't really be more detail or a wider sound-stage that is discernible (by ears as opposed to electronic analysis equipment).
Also, it's not just a larger range of frequencies involved (although, as you indicated, those frequencies are generally beyond human hearing), it's also more frequent digital sampling (slices as it were) of the music (44.1khz versus 96 khz)) - more points in time; other stuff also.
My main point is that if a particular person can't tell the difference (can't detect the wider soundstage, more detail, etc) then the difference isn't really there for all intents and purposes - certainly not to pay for.
And, to my knowledge, no one particular person in any of the studies when put through double blind testing was able to get anything statistically significatnly higher than 50% which indicates no discernible difference. Obviously, when run through sound analysis equipment there is a difference, but that's moot to the listener.
Most people I have spoken to gauge their preference for 24 bit, etc., by their use of SACD or DVD audio, and as I mentioned before, that's not apples to apples because the SACD and DVD audio are almost always made from different masters, have different mixes, etc., not to mention able to be played back in more than two channels. So, first of all, they hear an immediate difference, and secondly, it DOES sound better but it sounds better because of those other things not related to the higher bit rate or sampling frequency.
Of course, I'm sure there are hearing savants out there. But, another, thing to consider - if you have exposed yourself to high volumes of music or are older than say 30ish then the issue really is moot because the odds of you're retaining the ability to hear that level of nuance when so very very few people indicate ANY ability to tell the difference under controlled conditions seems to me to be very low.
One last thing. It seems to me that rather than spend money on higher bit higher sampling frequency recordings, given the dubious nature of the difference it makes to the human ear, it would be a far better investment to make one time investments in superior playback equipment (particularly speakers and headphones, but other equipment as well) rather than pay more for each recording. A pair of $500 Grado headphones is going to do WAY more for the quality of your music experience than spending $5-$10 more for every recording you buy. And no, I do not own a pair like that, but have listened with them extensively (extended family). One day maybe...
I saw that upgrade a day sooner deal, but didn't want to open an account. Finally got a shipping notice on my box last night, first said by Friday 8 PM, then they updated that to Saturday at 8 PM. Hand-off to the USPS carrier. UPSMI is a pain, especially when a UPS truck goes down my street at least once a day.
Last time they shipped out Dave's 11 I got it the next day it was released. So you never know. I guess they gave overseas and Canada priority on this box since many are listening to theirs while I wait days longer here in Dallas.
Just received the BOX. First class job all the way! Did anyone mention the DEAD dice set that was included?
Could it be that you would want those frequencies in there even though the ear can't hear them as to provide separation between the instruments to give it more detail and a wider sound-stage.
Anybody know any links to the cover art of the individual shows? not the box cover. I would like to put each show with its individual art. thanks
what a great box!! I've made it through the 3/21 show so far, plenty of highlights The 3/21 Wharf Rat WoW!! now back to listening...
Makes me remember going down to the stereo shop, if you're old enough to remember those, haha
And having the salesman do his thing with all the setups they had. Man that was always a blast.
And after you spent hundreds or thousands you'd get home and set the new rig up. And possibly think
you know it just doesn't sound as good as down in the showroom!
I just improved my delivery day by 1 day (delivery now tomorrow!!!), by creating a UPS My Choice account and then upgrading from the UPS>USPS to UPS Ground for $3.50. UPS Cust Svc said I made the change in time - just did it.
Here are some links explaining in detail issues with the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit (and 44.1 vs 96khz), the abilities of the human ear and lots of other technical info.
I will get links to the university studies themselves when I have time to find them again.
I'm pretty sure that Dark Side of the Moon is one of the ones that had a complete remix/remaster than the CD.
Here is a link that shows and describes the differences in the mastering of the CD and the SACD of DSM. When you are done reading it you will see than anybody would probably be able to tell the differenced between them, even if they had both been put out in 16/44.1
You really need to read the studies to begin to realize how much went into trying to find out whether the human ear can detect those differences. The people looking had no agenda other than trying to answer the question. It can't be too much of a coincidence that all the academic studies come up with the same results.
I'm in agreement.
I was just curious if I could tell the difference with some of my "reference CDs": Darkside of the Moon, Aja, Lamb Lies Down on Broadway, Revolver, DP3, DaP5, Orig LedZep Box, Babylon by Bus on really good audio gear.
With that said, as I wait patiently for S90TOO (Friday delivery), I've autoripped the amazon mp3 of Wake Up set that I bought for my buddy's birthday in a couple of weeks and it sounds awesome on the office stereo - can't wait to crank it up from the boxset in HDCD on the big boy stereo!
Since I only have a better than average stereo (far from an audiophile rig found on audiogon), I don't think I could tell a difference.
What I was saying was have them listen to 24/96 files for a little while before doing the A/B tests.
I'm curious if this experiment were performed with a recording of a piece of music the listener was very familiar with. Could they pick up any nuances between the 16 bit and 24 bit versions?
I have not read the study, so I don't know that info.
But if one listens to a piece of music that person may not intimately know, I think the brain will be absorbing the composition as a whole, so it might not pick up the nuances between 16 bit and 24 bit.
For what it's worth, whether you believe in the superior quality of high-definition recordings or not, HD-Tracks is advertising digital downloads of Wake Up to Find Out: Nassau Colisuem: Uniondale, NY 3-29-1990 at both 96/24 ($40.98) and 192/24 ($53.98) sampling rates. Presumably, it's available now for download.
It will be interesting to see if the rest of the set is listed at these higher rates.
wow its so nice. time 2 lock myself in my house and ignore the world 4 a few days
wow its so nice. time 2 lock myself in my house and ignore the world 4 a few days
@fourwindsblow - That may be. And it may not. Before sticking to your opinion on this go ahead and look up the studies that have been done on this, read them thoroughly, and see if you change your mind. Because in order for what you say to be true all of the studies would have to be flawed in just such a way to create the 50% success rate they all get. See what you think after you read them. Or don't. It's not my money. And, even if someone can't hear a difference, if they think they can and they're happier, that's fine too.
You say things like "on a good system." Have you looked at what they used. Most of them didn't just use a "good system". The very purposely used severly "excellent systems" AND several "very good" systems AND several "basic" systems, etc. That's the whole point behind a truly scientific study. Address all known variables that might bias results. Not just the "sound system", but the people (audiophile, musician, other), ages (teenagers with young years, twenties, thirties, etc.), listening environment, kinds of music, and even factors that wouldn't necessarily seem relevent like educational background. They make as sure as possible that something as simple as "as is the system good enough" doesn't affect the ability of the study to be able to answer the question they are studying - can people hear the difference between A and B.
Anyway, as long as people are happy it doesn't really matter.
....Spring TOO should arrive Saturday. Oh, happy day....
... in Leeds, UK.
As stated in the digital download FAQs, FLAC files cannot be played in Windows Media Player. However, there is a plug-in which makes this possible, namely "Directshow Filters for Ogg Vorbis, Speex, Theora, FLAC, and WebM" from Xiph.org. The file (opencodecs_0.85.17777.exe) can be found here:
It's real and it's spectacular.
The box looks and sounds amazing.
Since Spring 1990 (The Other One) is now available digitally, why not do what you did for the Europe '72 box set and offer the shows individually as well? Not every Head has that sort of spare change lying around, and it would be nice to have the opportunity to hear more of this truly great era.
Anyway, I went out and picked up Wake Up To Find Out as a consolation prize (but what a prize!), and am not interested in paying for a show I already own.
Anyone else out there think this is a good idea?
#711 has arrived in Denmark. Really cool number, just like #710 would have been. Anybody here got that?
This box is a work of art, and I've not even started listening yet. Thank you, David & Rhino!
THIS is the box set. I have everything the band has ever put out...
This outdoes the original 1990 box set for sound and it out does it for quality of the box set.
I LOVE THE TIGER COIN IN THE COVER! OMG! It nearly brought tears to my eyes....
Jerry would have loved this.
He really would have.
Listening to disc 1, song 1 as I type... *sigh*
can't wait til I get to the shows I was at.
This is so nice.
THANK YOU DAVE LEMIEUX.
Now what we need is Fillmore West '69 and Europe '72 available in HD FLAC.
If they would have had them listen to 24/96 flies on a good system for a period of say a week or so and then switched back to 16/44 files then I think they would have heard a difference.
Just a note about the lossless downloads. Since the ALAC files are lossless, this means they can be easily converted to wav and flac (and back again) with zero change in sound quality. So you can create your own flacs from alac.
Now, since the flacs are listed as "HD FLAC" I,m going to assume that they will probably be 24bit 96khz files as opposed to 16bit 44.1khz (cd quality) or at least something over what they are encoding for the alac files.
However, (and what I'm about to discuss frequently upsets audiophiles), I urge you to google studies concerning people's ability to distinguish 24bit 96khz from 16bit 44.1khz recordings. There have been several from top universities, and their results and methodology have been extensively scrutinized. These are all scientifically designed studies, some using surprisingly large sample sizes.
Most of these studies are fairly similar to each other. Double blind - no one participating in each listening session knows at the time which recordings are hd (24) or sd (16). They used multiple audio systems ranging from top end systems and speakers designed by audiophiles, down to basic systems. They used professional headphones down to basic equipment. They chose many different types of music. They checked to make sure that hd recordings were from the same source/mix as the sd recordings. That is frequently not the case, by the way, and is one reason many people are sure they can tell the difference. They usually chose large numbers of participants who self identify as audiophiles or not, musicians or not, a large range of ages, backgrounds, etc.
The results of all studies recognized as scientific (that I am aware of) have been basically the same. The rate at which each user can correctly pick which recordings are sd or hd is about 50%. A coin toss. Audiophiles fared no better than others, with highest percentages being around 52%, and some studies then when back to people like that and found that the more music samples they tried the closer the success rate approaches 50%.
Some of the write ups go into great detail into methodology of the studies, and if you read them you will begin to see how hard it is to try to duplicate doing tests like this at home (although it can be done). Some of the things that can bias results are NOT obvious.
Many will always disagree, but so far as I know NO study has found ANYONE, who can, under their controlled environment, distinguish 16 bit recordings from 24 bit recordings from the same source at anything significantly over 50% (same as guessing).
Btw, this doesn't mean things like SACD don't sound better than their cd counterparts. But they use more playback tracks than stereo (like 5.1), are almost always special mixes, etc. it's not apples to apples, and these studies indicate the great improvement is not due to just the difference between 24 bit and 16 bit or 96khz and 44.1khz.
Just something to think about before you spend extra for hd when the source is identical.
Jump on it man! Less than 1500 as of yesterday. Better to grab it while ya can than regret it down the road...
I told myself (and my wife) that I didn't need this box
especially after I saw the price...
then I heard some of the music and saw the spoiler video...
Can I let it go?
It's going to be a tough decision. Don't have much 1990 in the collection...
But it sounds so good!
does anyone know if spring vol one downloads are going to be the 24 track or 2 track
1. We believe the technical issues with the downloads are now fixed. Please speak up if you experience an alternative reality.
2. Apple Lossless, CD quality audio are available now. The HD FLAC files will be along soon.
3. Cover art is now available on the download page.
Sorry for the issues, but hope all is good now. Thanks and happy downloading!
I am sure you will get it , even if there is a hiccup right now. I'm one of those (have to have it just in case people) I bought the box but it will be transferred to my pc and burnt for the car or whatever. I just don't have the pc power to trust myself not losing it. I hope you get it the way you want. I know customer service must be inundated with problems right now. But they are good people.
No, you're right. I'm just asking if, when they appear, they can be in that format (if they aren't already).
I just read my mistake.
If I'm not mistaken I read they would not be ready until the end of the month...?
I don't know how to get a suggestion to David, so I'm going to post it here and hope that someone relevant sees it.
Regarding the downloads.... since most people probably don't burn their lossless downloads to CD, is it possible to have the second sets made seamless for the downloads? I understand the fade-ins and fade-outs at the end of the discs, but if the files aren't being burned to disc it would be nice to have Drums>Space seamless, instead of "Drums>Space fade-out" followed by "Drums fade-in>Space". Just a thought!
Aside from that... keep doing that awesome thing that you do!
I'd like to buy this spectacular box. I'd like to touch and smell all the things inside this box and of course listen these HDCDs, but I live in a country named Brazil. Some people in Europe don't like to pay U$50 -U$100 in import taxes and fees. It would be a dream to me pay this. Do you believe that in my country I would pay over U$240,00 only in import taxes + fees? I'm not kidding! 100%! It's our goverment....The highest taxes and no hospitals, no schools... ok some new and beatiful soccer stadiums. Does anyone know a place on earth where the import taxes and fees are so high? I have U$ 240,00 but I don't have U$ 520,00 ( 240 - box + 40 - shipping to Brazil + 240 or more from import taxes and fees). Hey you from USA, buy it! Think in my case. The price is not so high. I need to move to USA, Europe or maybe the sunny Australia. It's sad to be a Dead head in Brazil...