• 1,689 replies
    admin
    Joined:
    jq171(document).ready(function (jq171) { var covertArtDownloadMarkup = 'Looking for the digital cover art? You can download it here.'; setTimeout(function() { jq171('#digital_cart').append(covertArtDownloadMarkup); }, 500); });

    What's Inside:
    •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...

Comments

sort by
Recent
Reset
  • wjonjd
    Default Avatar
    Joined:
    Fourwinds
    Hi four winds, Sorry, what compression??? There is no compression of any kind in a 16/44.1 file. I'm not sure what you are referring to. But that is literal. There is NO compression of ANY kind in a 16/44.1 file. These are not mp3's. A few (maybe more than a few) posts down, posted several links that explains the scientific basis behind digital audio files (not compressed digital audio files). I can't make you do this, but did you bother reading them at all? Several of these links make Reference to the scientific reasons there is no audible difference (LITERALLY) between 16/44.1 and 24/96 or 24/192. Except that in some not too common cases the higher "resolution" files actually can be inferior because the ultrasonic inaudible frequencies they can contain can in some cases cause audible and distortion in the audible range, although in all scientific studies to date no one can hear any difference at all. The 44.1 files don't have this problem, as they don't contain frequencies above 22khz - frequencies above human hearing level. Forgive me, I really do not mean to be insulting or condescending, but the nature of your statement referring to any kind of compression difference between standard def and hi def audio files leads me to believe you haven't bothered to look into how digital audio works and are buying into the most common fallacies. The statement literally makes no sense as there is no difference in compression level of any kind between so called standard definition and so called high resolution audio files. Standard def files are smaller because they use 16-bits to encode each volume level sample and take use 44,100 samples per second as opposed to using 24-bits and say 192,000 samples per second. The science and mathematics both state as fact, not opinion, that 44,100 samples per second is sufficient to encode and reproduce any frequencies up to half that number, 22,050hz which is well above your hearing level, and 16-bits is sufficient to encode the dynamic range of any recording you currently and are likely to own unless you envision at some point buying a recording with enough dynamic range to make your ears bleed if you had equipment that could reproduce it. Did you know that each of the "samples" taken either once every 44,100 times or 96,000 or 192,000 times a second, and stored in either a 16-bit or 24-bit binary number, contains a volume measurement AND NOTHING ELSE?? How can nothing but a stream of volume measurements of music represent the actual music??? Read and find out. If your ears are being fatigued by 16/44.1 files they will have the EXACT DUPLICATE experience with 24/192 files. Again, these are not MP3 or other lossy format. The ONLY difference between the 16/44.1 and the 24/96 files is the dynamic range and frequency range they contain, and the links I posted explain why 16 bits and 44.1khz files already hold all the dynamic range the music being recorded has, and already contains all the frequencies you can hear. You already understand how LP's work. Don't you think it would be a good idea to learn how digital audio works before you start paying more for files that all the science (not to mention the society of audio engineers) have no difference (literally) to what comes out of your speakers? We're not talking about MP3 or any other compression technology here. We're talking about the COMPLETETELU UNCOMPRESSED 16/44.1 and 24/192 files that will both produce identical sound waves out of your speakers even if you were to compare them visually with sound wave analysis software. Since I take it that you DO experience ear fatigue from E72 releases, I am sorry to tell you that this must be from how the masters sound that they are using to create the CD's and downloads. Getting 24/96 or 24/192 will do NOTHING to mitigate this, and will not help you connect on a deeper emotional level with it unless it is via placebo effect. The sound waves being represented by BOTH 16/44.1 and 24/192, being identical in all audible frequencies, both reproduce sound waves so far closer to being identical to what was input to create them compared to an analog medium that it's staggering if you haven't looked into it. These are not compressed files where if you were to look at them visually they hardly even resemble the originals. The sound waves produced by either 16/44.1 or 24/192 are BOTH virtually perfect representations of the sound that went in. The science of looking at in what ways they may be different from what went in is dealing with differences so much smaller than with previous music reproduction methods that it's like comparing molehills and mountains. Hi Res files are NOT being offered because they are in any way superior to your ears. They are being offered because there is a demand for them. And, there is a demand for them because people believe all sorts of things like 16/44.1 is somehow more compressed than 24/192 (it's not), or that greater bit-depth means greater music depth (it does not - it ONLY and ENIRELY determines the difference between the loudest and softest sounds that be contained, and 16-bits can go from a light bulb to a jackhammer), that higher sampling rate yields a smoother sound wave (it doesn't - that's not how digital audio works - when it's converted back to an analog wave it is as smooth as the wave the went in - and 44.1 samples per second can reproduce any frequencies of 22.05khz and below with literally 100% accuracy because of the mathematics behind how it works). The demand is there because many (most?) people do not know much about digital audio files, and there is a lot of money to be made by many people who are exploiting then (and in many cases don't know any more about how digital audio works and believe it themselves.) Truly scientifically done listening tests (not to mention visual analysis of the sound waves) will tell you what you need to know about so called "hi resolution" audio files. But, go ahead and buy the "hi resolution" files if they become available. It's not my money. But, it really is worth scrolling down and checking out those links (and the discussion up to this point) before you spend that money.
  • fourwindsblow
    Joined:
    In the end
    What you really want in the end is a recording that is non ear fatiguing so that you can listen for hours and connect on a deeper emotional level. Compressed files do not give you this option. E72 I can't listen at a nice volume level without ear fatigue. We really need those 24/96 files released.
  • wjonjd
    Default Avatar
    Joined:
    If you're serious
    Hi Unkle Sam, If you're serious you can easily hear the difference in fidelity between LP and CD at a modest cost by purchasing a modern excellent classical orchestral recording where you can get both the CD and LP. I would suggest using Raphael Kubelick's recording of Dvorak's New World symphony because the LP should still be relatively available and the CD digital transfer is highly acclaimed by audiophiles. It isn't an accident that the first genre of music to start using digital technology for recording was classical orchestral recording; they generally require the higher dynamic range than other genres, and the classical musicians and their engineers were more keenly aware than others of the technical inability of LP technology to record this music without large dynamic range compression. Once CD tech had matured (it really didn't take very long), it was quickly clear that digital had overcome the limitations that had plagued the classical recording industry since its inception. Even though I love the "warm" sound of LP, and on much music the technical requirements are smaller than for classical, so LP technical deficiencies are outweighed by the "warmth" distortion, for classical which was losing so much more through LP's limitations, digital was a huge difference. Unlike the hi def vs standard def digital debate, you will IMMEDIATELY hear the difference when you compare that orchestral recording on CD with no dynamic range compression to the LP. I don't know how much further down the thread you read, but do not mistake my explaining how digital CD format is technically superior to analog, with the idea that I support so called "high resolution" digital because I dont. I posted several links that explains how digital audio works and why there is no real benefit to the listener using more than the stanard 16-bits and 44.1khz sampling rate. However, The superiority of CD is very often compromised, especially in rock, pop and hip-hop and other very popular radio music because for quite a few years they have been purposely compressing the dynamic range on the CD's so they will sound louder at a given volume setting on the radio, and so everything from the softest to the loudest sounds can be more easily heard in a noisy environment like a car. This willful lowering of the quality of the recorded music has no relation to the capabilities of the CD format; it is an intentional lowering of the quality to bring the dynamic range down, sometimes way down. This isn't universally the case though, obviously. I think it is unlikely, for instance, that the GD team uses this practice.
  • kemo
    Joined:
    Congratulations!
    on your Grammy nomination. Well deserved, as is the award itself. Still lovin My # 5000.
  • unkle sam
    Joined:
    wajonjd
    wow, that's a lot of technical stuff to write down, thanks for the explanation of how it's all suppose to work. Now, if I could just get my ears to hear it.
  • wjonjd
    Default Avatar
    Joined:
    Definitely not great from the get go
    I agree, the early problems were a combination of both the early digital technology and its application by engineers steeped in the completely mature and largely perfected analog technology. These early efforts at digital audio helped sour many on the technology permanently (which is silly). Furtwangler, a conductor, and Huberman, a violinist, two of the most unique and revered musicians of their time both made so very few recordings compared to their peers because the early attempts to record them in the teens and twenties convinced them tha record disks were so bad they avoided the recording studio from then on, even though by the fifties the analog revording techniques had improved so much they were really quite excellent. History repeats itself.
  • One Man
    Joined:
    Hate to Argue (Not Really), But...
    I wouldn't say "not from any inherent problems in the technology itself." (!) From the very same article you quoted, there is this: "It is true that the very first generation of digital recorders, like the Sony F1 and early DAT machines, didn’t sound as good as the state-of-the-art analog machines. However, the low cost and ease-of-use of the new digital machines guaranteed their success. Luckily, pro audio and audiophile users pushed manufacturers to create better sounding converters and better tools to process the sound (now known as plugins)." And if I am not mistaken, you said yourself that some early AD-DA converters were an issue. So let's not paint digital audio as great from the get-go. It was deservedly reviled by many at first, partially due to technological issues.
  • wjonjd
    Default Avatar
    Joined:
    Early digital recording
    Hi Marye, Yes, early digital recording was not very good, but not from any inherent problems in the technology itself. Here's a blurb from the following link: http://recordinghacks.com/2013/01/26/analog-tape-vs-digital/ "It is my belief that much of the pain of switching over to digital recording was due to the tools that engineers had mastered for analog recording. For instance, applying EQ and compression (or no compression) to tape to make up for the color that the tape added didn’t sound so great when recording to digital. Bright FET microphones and harsh transistor preamp tones became rounded off in a pleasing way on tape, and by the 100th mix pass, the high-end was rolled off and the transients smeared so much that the final mix sounded phat, warm and fuzzy. It took experienced engineers a minute (or years) to gather their thoughts, re-examine their tools and learn how to take advantage of the clarity, quiet, and unforgiving purity of digital recording." My problem with what Neil is doing is that the marketing accompanying the Pono to which he has lent his name is propagating some of the most common misunderstandings and misconceptions about what is being termed hi res audio. Regardless of how the debate ultimately turns out (I think it's already pretty much decided), there is no getting around the simple flat out falsehoods being stated. They take advantage of people not understanding digital audio in its most fundamental basics. For instance, if you ask most folks to describe what a single "sample" consists of in digital audio, what one sample of 16-bit or 24-bit audio contains, how many would answer that the only thing it contains is an amplitude (volume) level and nothing more. That each sample is just one single volume level. How many would then go on to try to find out how a whole series of such "volume" measurements can fully encode music? The Pono folks take advantage of this lack of technical knowledge to propagate ridiculous and false concepts like "smoother" sound with more samples. In fact, based on the difference between reality and what is in those marketing materials, and given my respect for Neil in general, I find it unlikely he has actually looked into the scientific mechanisms underlying how digital audio works, maybe because the idea that if 16-bit at 41,100 times per second is good then 24-bit at 192,000 times per second must be better seems so much like just common sense that he never saw the need to look into it farther beyond questioning why files at this resolution are not being made available (and making it his mission to do so), especially because I am sure he is aware that it is these higher resolution files that comprise the original recordings that the professionals use to mix/master his music. Why look further, when the common sense is so compelling?
  • marye
    Joined:
    Neil
    Back in the day, he came to a tech conference I'm involved with to show off Lionel trains, for which he'd hired a friend of mine to go around the country recording different trains so the various Lionel models would have the right noises. Having seen Neil in rock star mode many times, I loved seeing him just geek out and have fun with a technically sophisticated bunch. As a result of this, we did an interview. In which he veered off at some length to deride the then-current state of digital recording (this circa 1994). This stuff's been on his mind for quite a while!
  • boblopes
    Joined:
    Congrats on the Grammy Nomination for the sweet packaging
    Congrats on the Grammy Nomination for the sweet packaging. I know you guys and gals worked hard on it, nice to be recognized for material from 24 years ago!!!
user picture

Member for

17 years
jq171(document).ready(function (jq171) { var covertArtDownloadMarkup = 'Looking for the digital cover art? You can download it here.'; setTimeout(function() { jq171('#digital_cart').append(covertArtDownloadMarkup); }, 500); });

What's Inside:
•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...

user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

Got my order in.awesome.
user picture

Member for

10 years 7 months
Permalink

I hope it sounds better than the first box. If I take the plunge send me copy #1990 or #9000 , I always wondered who gets those ?
user picture

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

This is going to be nice. The music will play. I'm happy with this release, I'm sure it will sound awesome. I am surprised that another 1990 was released so soon. Deadheads were talking about the 80's so much that I believed it would be 80's. I'm sure some heads will be disappointed. i'm always glad just to get anything. 24 year old shows will entertaining for sure. I passed on the print, it's nice but just not for me. I bet it sales out in a few weeks at the most, 9000 copies is not really that many. Looking for hints on DP11. Peace
user picture

Member for

11 years 11 months
Permalink

I like the Brandford show.....but I have a copy. As a 70's fan, will I listen to the rest enough to warrant buying this? Need some honest advice from the 80's and 90's guys (or the 70's guys) to help me make up my mind. I'm asking VERY sincerely and NOT trying to start up an ugly war of words! Just want HONEST feedback please. Peace.
user picture

Member for

13 years 2 months
Permalink

*
user picture

Member for

14 years 4 months
Permalink

Recorded by long-time Grateful Dead audio engineer John CutlerMixed from the master 24-track analog tapes by Jeffrey Norman at Bob Weir's TRI Studios Mastered to HDCD specs by David Glasser
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

10 years 6 months
Permalink

If you have the first box, I would say that's all you need. With the exception of 3/29/90, the better shows are on there. If you missed the first one, you might want to look into getting this one. The shows are well-played, but lack the power of the 6 from the first box.
user picture

Member for

16 years 8 months
Permalink

.....nice to see you. Nice release BTW....Hopefully Spacebro will be pleased, but probably not...
user picture

Member for

12 years 7 months
Permalink

$240 for 3-29-90 and the other shows that aren't as good as the first box? C'mon now...
user picture

Member for

14 years 7 months
Permalink

Before I met a wonderful woman and got married and had a wonderful child I could have afforded this! I had to pass on the first Spring90 box and have to pass on this one too. The only show I knew I loved on the first box was 3/22, but this has two I love: 3/25 and (of course) 3/29! Sob...I desperately hope that in a year or so GDM will issue the Spring90 shows individually like they did with the E72 shows. I will jump on about half of them! Ooooh I want this!
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

I'm in the same place. Got & love the BM show & really like the 80's & 90's too. This is kinda steep for me at the moment but will see if I can dig up the cash. Always dug Myland & the Drums & Space from this era so most likely........Good luck & good rocking! Ken
user picture

Member for

15 years 7 months
Permalink

a whopping € 41, sigh... I guess a completist's gotta do what a completist's gotta do, even if it means skipping eating out for a month. Anyway, apart from the 3/29 Marsalis set there is enough to savour. It may not be the years Spacebrother wants released, but at least the later years are not ignored. @Thursday's child: I'm basically a pre-hiatus fan, but especially if you missed out on 1990/the first one, you'll need this. Great playing, Brent & Jerry in top shape, some nice rearrangements (Death don't have no mercy, Loose Lucy) and, as far as I'm concerned, nice warm sound. It works whether you play it loudly or just as background music. Now for some October/November 72 or some 67 or some 70?
user picture

Member for

16 years 8 months
Permalink

....price is right. I'm probably on board. I too enjoy the Drumz/Space from this era....
user picture

Member for

11 years 5 months
Permalink

Just purchase the 3/29 show by itself. Save the remainder of your money or pick up a few road trip shows from the 70s. Easy decision.
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

looks like the branford show will be a sep. release (check rollingstone, amazon pre-orders, etc.)
user picture

Member for

16 years 4 months
Permalink

My sincere appreciation to TPTB for releasing the Branford show on it's own. The box looks fantastic but with a wife and two busy teenagers I just can't afford the big bucks on a 1990 release. I would LOVE to buy a couple of these shows a la carte, much the way the Europe '72 shows have been offered.Personally, I'd like to see more boxes in the $100 range but that's not meant to be a complaint, just input. There's a ton of great music in this box and cheers to those of you placing your orders; I'm getting a bit of a vicarious thrill knowing how much you will all enjoy it!
user picture

Member for

12 years 5 months
Permalink

....but at $30 a show its quite pricy. i guess we're getting a keith show for dave's picks 11. : (
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

I think on this one the quality of the recordings made this the reason for the box. I would much rather see a lot of other spring tours (such as 76) but the recording quality and vault availability are probably challenges. If you love this era, then congratulations and enjoy! I got the first box (no regrets) but I'd be lying if I said it gets a lot of rotation on my IPOD.
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

11 years 6 months
Permalink

We were making DATs and Minidisc not T6 on this tour. Of course I will order and continue to wonder why Barton Hall is held Ransom when things go out at about $270,000 for the remaster and boxing per show. Anyways back to work on West High 6/21.
user picture

Member for

10 years 2 months
Permalink

Could not agree with you more, well put... also two teenagers, one going into his sophomore year at college... $100.00 would be more manageable... but, nice box nonetheless "Thank You My sincere appreciation to TPTB for releasing the Branford show on it's own. The box looks fantastic but with a wife and two busy teenagers I just can't afford the big bucks on a 1990 release. I would LOVE to buy a couple of these shows a la carte, much the way the Europe '72 shows have been offered. Personally, I'd like to see more boxes in the $100 range but that's not meant to be a complaint, just input."
user picture

Member for

13 years 4 months
Permalink

Will these be released on digital or CD only? A lot of us don't use CDs.
user picture

Member for

14 years 7 months
Permalink

"My sincere appreciation to TPTB for releasing the Branford show on it's own. The box looks fantastic but ... I just can't afford the big bucks... I would LOVE to buy a couple of these shows a la carte, much the way the Europe '72 shows have been offered.Personally, I'd like to see more boxes in the $100 range but that's not meant to be a complaint, just input." Thank you RDevil, that comment was just exactly perfect!
user picture

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

Shipping to the Netherlands is $41.99 (not €41.99). This works out to €30.88 at the current exchange rate. The $239.98 for the box itself is €176.51. Box + shipping together is €207.39.
user picture

Member for

15 years 2 months
Permalink

Wow, $239.98, ok roughly $10 a disc, not bad, $14.95 for shipping? Really? $22.94 for sales tax? $277.87, man. How to come up with the fund to pay the credit card bill now, how much is blood going for these days? Can't wait, love this tour, these are all solid shows with lots of highlights. And Branford, ooh yeah!
user picture

Member for

16 years 4 months
Permalink

I have the first two years of Dave's Picks sealed with the bonus discs for anyone who might want to exchange a copy of this for those. PM me if interested.
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

13 years 4 months
Permalink

Just when I had convinced myself I didn't need anymore GD box sets I go and press buy!! Hefty postage tho' at $41.99!!! Ouch!!
user picture

Member for

14 years 4 months
Permalink

Click on the RollingStone link and read the article.
user picture

Member for

15 years 2 months
Permalink

I'd love to see them go back to more reasonably priced box sets. Not that I don't love these massive sets, but even a music only edition without all the boxes and trinkets (never look at 'em twice!) for us poorer folk would be nice.
user picture

Member for

12 years 7 months
Permalink

now for all the people who complain about the Dave's Picks all being from the 70's..."settle down easy" (~);}
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

14 years
Permalink

Mixed from the 24-track tapes to full Normanized Glory. Thank You. Thank You.
user picture

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

Don't forget that the customs will also take their cut before it gets to you. Ouch again!!
user picture

Member for

16 years 8 months
Permalink

....Where the hell have you been? Thought you were Dead. (Head)....
user picture

Member for

15 years 7 months
Permalink

@Simonrob: I stand corrected. It did not deter me from ordering it anyway. But at € 26/show plus book (plus the box & ticket stubs that I do not really need), it works out OK I guess.
user picture

Member for

15 years 2 months
Permalink

Coworker of mine is ordering the box, shipping price jumped $10 for each delivery option. Weird!
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

13 years 4 months
Permalink

Already thought of that probably another £34 ($58) OUCH again but what's a guy gonna do. Once you start collecting/listening to these things when do you stop.What if the best show/song I've aver heard is out there and I just haven't actually heard it yet!!!
user picture

Member for

11 years 7 months
Permalink

Confirm order Check. My wife's gonna kill me oh well got till September to cool her down.
user picture

Member for

10 years 7 months
Permalink

:0)
user picture

Member for

14 years 6 months
Permalink

Saved me a lot of money. I push "buy" on almost everything here but not 250$ for more 90's shows. Dodged a bullet.
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

Blood isn't bringing much these days... you might want to consider selling an organ or two....!
user picture

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

I love all Dead eras, with my favorite probably being the pre-hiatus time along with '77.But I could not pull the trigger on this fast enough! I loved the first '90 box and I am sure I will love this one also. To me, this is the last great tour and I cannot have too much of that. Order soon as it will disappear quickly I suspect. Rock on
user picture

Member for

11 years 10 months
Permalink

Just what we need: another over-packaged behemoth. Seriously kids, just give us the music at a lower price and we'd still be happy. Does anybody really spend time fondling their "replica ticket stubs and backstage passes" while listening to 'Loser' from 3/24/90? (And I don't want to know if you do ...). I picked up the first one and truth be told, ditched the actual box once the discs found their new home on my shelf. As for the ephemera, it's out there . . . somewhere.
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

16 years 6 months
Permalink

My first thought was, "oh, shit. My wife will kill me, but I have to get 3/29." Then I saw that it's available by itself. Thanks to TPTB for having the vision to put that out by itself.
user picture

Member for

16 years 10 months
Permalink

this is great!
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

13 years 1 month
Permalink

While Spring 1990 is great GD, I think that the GD legacy would be better served by a box set from an altogether different time period. Having said that, I'll still enjoy it. How long did it take the first Spring 90 box to sell out in? $$$ are tight at the moment.
user picture
Default Avatar

Member for

14 years
Permalink

According to the Rolling Stone article, an HD Download option will be available the same time as the official release date. Thanks for the tip Bolo.
user picture

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

check your PM and email me back at my address
user picture

Member for

16 years 9 months
Permalink

Check you PM and email me back at my address.(Sorry about the incorrect post earlier) I need to slow down! Too excited right now!
product sku
081227958688