>I still have my doubts about this "new" date. After all, Jay is the one who swears
>that 2/13/70 early show is actually 2/12/70.
It also seems more than coincidental that the sound check and the actual show have
appeared on the same tape for years. I guess someone could have "cut" it that way
TED]
Subject: Re: "2/22/74" soundcheck
> this is a re-dating, then, not a new tape, because this tape has been in
> circulation for years & years labeled "2/22/74".
>
--
>>this is a re-dating, then, not a new tape, because this tape has been in
>>circulation for years & years labeled "2/22/74".
>
>Yes, that's what I thought I was saying.
You did, and you did it well.
David
>this is a re-dating, then, not a new tape, because this tape has been in
>circulation for years & years labeled "2/22/74".
Yes, that's what I thought I was saying.
-Jeff Lester
Why don't we ask David Lemioux (SP?)?
cm
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:28:50 -0800 (PST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: "2/22/74" soundcheck
> Up on gdlive.com recently appeared the 2/24/74 soundcheck, from
this is a re-dating, then, not a new tape, because this tape has been in
circulation for years & years labeled "2/22/74".
Up on gdlive.com recently appeared the 2/24/74 soundcheck, from Jay Serafin of
Serafin Studios. I asked Jay why he was listing it as 2/24/74 and not the
commonly held 2/22/74 (as seen in DeadBase and every other source I've
ever come across). He assured me that his vault connection verified that
t
