I.R.S. lnstrumental discussion (NO LINKS, REQUESTS

[WARose]

Has it been confirmed that the short TWAT wasn't some fan-made hack-job?

I don't think it's fan made...

yeah... if i remember correctly the ending is different to the long version...  i should give it a listen again.

[dave-gnfnr2k]

Has it been confirmed that the short TWAT wasn't some fan-made hack-job?

I don't think it's fan made...

Its not fan made. The short outro is finck, the longer one is BH

[judgesmf]

This sounds so cool , shame I missed out !!!!!

[DunkinDave]

Has it been confirmed that the short TWAT wasn't some fan-made hack-job?

I don't think it's fan made...

Its not fan made. The short outro is finck, the longer one is BH

What the poster was implying was that someone might have just edited out Buckethead's solo and that's what we received as the "shorter version".

[pilferk]

And you know what I think of yours.

So drop it. You have your opinion, I have mine. Your opinion is no more relevant than mine. So don't expect me to agree with your "100% confirmation" without better proof.

Again, we've covered how relevant your opinion on the subject is. I have proof, you have zippo. Nothing. Nada.? So, in essence, it is more relevant.

These leaks have followed the exact layout of the CD that was leaked out before, potentially. Instrumentals and vocal tracks, and no more than the maximum possible (not confirmed, but possible) number of tracks on that CD. One person who I believe IS in contact with the SOURCE said there's no further new non-instrumental tracks available.

Trunk confirmed something to you, but we've never seen a quote from you, just an ask Jarmo. Why? What's in his quote that you can't post it on here?

The leaks following the same pattern is cirucumstantial, at best.? It's not even anything one could loosely called "proof".? All it proves is material exists in the same format. So what?? Again, you find THAT more compelling than the words of somoeone who actually heard the CD?? Again, conspiracty theory over proof.

I have given you his quote: "No, it wasn't".? What I won't provide is the text of my email, or the email itself, because it contains personal information that I dont wish to share with the forums.? Therefore, I sent the email to two people I trust for verification: jarmo and madison.? You can confirm with them, since I think everyone would agree they're trustworthy intermediaries.

When I see a quote from Trunk that says "I am certain beyond a resonable doubt that this was not on the CD", or one that states the number of tracks without Trunk saying "I think", I'll rule out the possibility.

But there are NO public comments that rule it out yet, regardless of your opinion, or a private conversation that you refuse to share or even paraphrase.

You have seen the quote.? What you want is a more verbose version of it because you wish to stubbornly cling to your fantasy.?

When someone you're talking to asks you a question, and you were certain of the answer, how would you respond?? I'd bet "No, it wasn't" would be a hell of a lot more likely (and reasonable) than "I am certain beyond a reasonable doubt blah blah blah blah".? Who the fuck talks like that in everyday conversation??

I did share what he said, verbatim.? So, you have a quote from an email who's authenticity has been verified by 2 different, trustworthy, moderators.? Vs what have you provided again? Ah yes...nothing.

And I have both shared the quote and paraphrased it.? Read my posts again.

Key word - not alone. Axl is not in the studio at all times. Do you think he personally oversees everyone's work? And you didn't even answer the question of where you heard instrumental tracks were played at clubs.

What possible point do you have that Axl is not working alone.?Or proof, for that matter??You're speculating, as am I. I said the instrumentals were for Axl. Directly or indirectly, they are.? And I think any reasonable person knows he would have to authorize them to be created...thus, again, "for Axl" (as in, at his direction) and thus he must "like having them" else he would have not directed anyone to create them.

And I did answer your question.? Again, you just didn't read it.

[jameslofton29]

Question to Pilferk, Kyrie, and a few others: Why do you keep saying the exact same thing? You dont even variate from your script. When responding to one another, why dont you just quote one of your previous posts as your response?





Not meaning this as an insult. Its just an observation after reading the past few pages of this thread.

[darknemus]

I'll try to lay this out as succintly as possible without blowing anyone's cover. 

A. The Trunk disc had IRS, Prostitute, and one other track + Instrumental versions of all 3.  (I don't know the title of the other track, except that is was NOT "Better"

B. Trunk isn't the only one that received the disc, apparently.  He's just the only one who had a clue what he had.

C. The recent leaks (excluding CITR, I'll get to that in a minute) came from the disc that Wes had and provided those rips to Saint_Seiya, amongst other people.  Wes's story is that the disc came from a stripper.  However, with further prodding, he also claimed that his cousin had the disc as well as someone that owns a music store.  (I'm guessing in Michigan, where Wes is from)

D. CITR appears to have been from yet ANOTHER source.  No idea if its from a CD or Tape, but the initial hiss present at least suggests Analog tape. 

Now, my PURE SPECULATION on this stuff is that its been "in the wild" for a while.  We just haven't been the beneficiaries of it as we haven't been running in those circles.  I've heard alot of talk of studio guys and the like trading tapes / CDs back & forth for years now.  I'm honestly surprised its taken so long to trickle down to us.

Please remember, as with everything in GNR world.  For everything we know, there's always 8,000% more that we don't.  You always need to keep that in mind when trying to hash this stuff out.  All we can do is take the info we have and formulate theories based upon it.  There's no guarantee we're correct - and I doubt you're going to get Merck to come out and say "Yes, Prostitute was on the trunk CD"

-darknemus

[pilferk]

Regardless of how you interpret the "rest of the CD" comment - him saying "I think" is like the fine print on a contract.

Regardless of how you interpret the "I think" comments, he has consistently said 6 tracks. ?And has also now said Better wasn't there. ?It's amusing you'll take one set of words, semantically disect them to interpret what doesn't really need interpretation, but won't believe a categoric statement from the man.

I believe what he has said over time gets less and less reliable as more time passes. Does that not seem rational to you?

Not really, no. ?We're not talking 30 years, here. ?It seems like a convenient excuse to cling to your "theory".

It seems rational to believe an eyewitness over someone with a conspiracy theory that has no evidence to support it.

It seems rational to me that someone who heard the CD, and was able to compare it to the current leak, would suddenly be much clearer on, at the very least ,the details of the contents of the CD. ?And even that's assuming he wasn't clear to begin with.

You're assertion that a guy who lives the life of a DJ, playing, listening, and learning about music (because Trunk is pretty much the "uber-DJ" in the radio world), ?day after day, can't remember if a song is contained on a CD that was a pretty high profile (and they knew it) career moment for him is what's not rational. ?This is a guy who can pull archaic music and album information out of his brain at a moments notice on air...on music that was released 20 years ago by a one hit wonder. You're practically attacking his professional credibility.

Refer to what I said earlier. The later it gets, the less trustworthy his memory is. He was saying "I think" from day one.

When the best you can say is "nana you live in a fantasy land" - that's a flame. I'm not responding to it because it isn't worth my time. It's schoolyard childishness.

Again, reading into something rather than reading it. ?That's seems to be a common thread in your replies. ?I didn't say "nana you live in fantasy land". ?I said all you have on this subject is a fantasy. ?A theory. No proof. ?No evidence. Nothing. Nada. Zero. And you 've yet to provide anything to contradict that assertion. ?So what would you prefer we call it? ?

And how about you address the fact you have no proof?

If Trunk replies to me, I will be upfront with that info. There won't be any "e-mail Jarmo". I've asked him to clarify both the tracks issue, the better issue, or if he's 100% sure or not.

The fact is, Eddie Trunk has consistently been inconsistent in every statement he's made publically on the issue. And yeah, that's a silly statement to make. But you see my point. He has said "I think" and that his memory is foggy in both main interviews he did on the subject. He said right from day one he only got a quick listen in the car. Unless you wish to post/paraphrase what he said - I've asked you this already and you declined - or we get further word, OR another track leaks, there's absolutely no reason there isn't one single source. Unless you have more info. You still haven't answered where you got the idea instrumentals were played at that club from, unless I missed it.

And in every quote he has qualified his answers when he's unclear...but didn't do so in the email to me? ?Strange, no?

Have you ever heard Eddie talk? ?He tends to say "I think" a lot.....

And, once again, you're interepreting and not reading.? He didn't say "he got a quick listen in his car".? He simply said he listened to them in his car on the way home.? How long his commute is, or how closely he listened, you have no earthly idea.  He lives in Jersey, according to his bio...and broadcasts out of NYC.

The FACT is Eddie has categorically denied "Better" was on the CD.? That's neither inconsistent nor vague.

I have posted and paraphrased, over and over, what he said. ?You're just not reading it. In addition, I don't ever remember you asking for a quote or paraphrase...you wouldn't really have to since my posts are littered with them (both the quote and paraphrases of it).?Oh, and I never, ever, ever declined to post what he said. I declined to post the email, in full, or forward it to anyone but jarmo and madison. ?In fact, I did post his quote right from the get go. ?In fact, I think I posted it in the ORIGINAL thread started on the issue (go ahead, use the search function) when I got the email, and again in the "Better instrumental discussion" thead.? Here, one more time, for your pleasure:? "No, it wasn't."

And I did answer your question. ?But again, you didn't read it. ?Another common theme, so far, in this discussion.

[killingvector]

Ok, I am a bit more convinced. Sometimes it takes an explanation of what people know rather than blanket statments to dispel ignorance.

I appreciate the response and patience in this thread in helping many of us figure out what is going on.