Durrie Parks Smile acetates up for sale for $10,000

[bgas]

I was a bit tired of all this speculation so I thought I'd drop Jeff at Recordmecca an email. I won't print his response in full, but he mentions that Mark Linett has been in touch with him -on behalf of The Beach Boys- since the sale began. Apparently Linett (or another member of the team) contacted Durrie about the acetates when compiling the set (this much we know) but at the time she "didn't have any idea where they were". Is this true? This implies that they were never even auditioned during the box set's compilation. (Actually i've just taken a look at that "alan boyd lecture" thread which seems to contradict this statement. Curiouser & curiouser.)

The acetates' overall condition is listed as "G" - good. In record parlance "good" doesn't really mean "good", it means "just about playable", two steps away from thrashed. Chances are they're beyond salvation in fidelity terms, so would possibly be outside the scope of a reissue, but omygod who wouldn't want to own them...or even just hear them...

I was informed - by a highly reliable source - that the Parks acetates were auditioned by the box compilers/producers and that nothing of any use or importance was discovered. Given the G rating, I'd guess that means they were next to unlistenable.

  I believe you've mentioned this previously; Still, it sure seems to me that RecordMecca is claiming these acetates were never auditioned.  Seems to me the only way we'll get a definitive answer is by a response from Mark or Alan here, in this thread; NOT by telling you or your reliable source, and having it relayed

[rn57]

Looking up and down this thread I don't think anybody's noted the interesting thing about the letter signed by Durrie, confirming authenticity, on the page. It refers only to one disc, the first one listed. If these are being sold as a lot, you'd figure that the letter would mention all of them - put "discs" in plural and so forth.

Easy to miss in a quick reading of the description at RecordMecca, as you evidently did: 
>>A digital transfer of the music is included, as is a letter of authenticity for each disc from Durrie Parks. << 
So obviously the one letter shown was used as an example

What interested me MORE, was DONNYL's post that Durrie has/had Master Tapes for Smile. And if so, what might be on those, and why didn't Alan/Mark get those  for the Smile Sessions? 
[/quote]

I did overlook that part of the description - but the fact that a letter of authenticity was prepared for each of the eight discs suggests that the option of selling them piecemeal was on the mind of Durrie, or somebody, back in January. And for whoever bought them as a lot, the letters would be useful to have if the purchaser decided to turn around and peddle each one by itself on eBay or someplace. I figure your average exec in Tokyo or Dubai or Paris, who is a hardcore BBs fan and drives a Lamborghini or somethin' like that, would be quite willing to pay $7000 or more for a single acetate.

And the value of the records, worn though they are, can only go up. Earlier this year Smile was a legendary album that had won a Grammy in its latterday form; now it's a legendary album that has won a Grammy in its original form, if one overlooks the post-1967 overdubs.  That kind of recognition increases the value of the source materials, whether used or unused for release.

The case of Brian Epstein's Beatles acetates, that wound up with his mum after his death, come to mind. I was reading, in a thread about Durrie's acetates at the Steve Hoffman forum, a post from a fellow who mentioned that he once examined Brian's acetate of Sgt Pepper, which had a different track order than what was finally released. The asking price for it at that time - I would guess he's talking about the early 1990s - was $2500.

Yes, twenty-five hundred dollarinis. I'd figure it that went on the market today it would go for at least 50 grand, not only because of the original owner but because of the alternate tracklist.  Some time back an acetate of Blonde On Blonde went for $30,000 and there was the famous case of the Velvet Underground and Nico acetate that went into six figures on eBay.

[bgas]

Looking up and down this thread I don't think anybody's noted the interesting thing about the letter signed by Durrie, confirming authenticity, on the page. It refers only to one disc, the first one listed. If these are being sold as a lot, you'd figure that the letter would mention all of them - put "discs" in plural and so forth.

Easy to miss in a quick reading of the description at RecordMecca, as you evidently did: 
>>A digital transfer of the music is included, as is a letter of authenticity for each disc from Durrie Parks. << 
So obviously the one letter shown was used as an example

What interested me MORE, was DONNYL's post that Durrie has/had Master Tapes for Smile. And if so, what might be on those, and why didn't Alan/Mark get those  for the Smile Sessions? 

I did overlook that part of the description - but the fact that a letter of authenticity was prepared for each of the eight discs suggests that the option of selling them piecemeal was on the mind of Durrie, or somebody, back in January. And for whoever bought them as a lot, the letters would be useful to have if the purchaser decided to turn around and peddle each one by itself on eBay or someplace. I figure your average exec in Tokyo or Dubai or Paris, who is a hardcore BBs fan and drives a Lamborghini or somethin' like that, would be quite willing to pay $7000 or more for a single acetate.

And the value of the records, worn though they are, can only go up. Earlier this year Smile was a legendary album that had won a Grammy in its latterday form; now it's a legendary album that has won a Grammy in its original form, if one overlooks the post-1967 overdubs.  That kind of recognition increases the value of the source materials, whether used or unused for release.

The case of Brian Epstein's Beatles acetates, that wound up with his mum after his death, come to mind. I was reading, in a thread about Durrie's acetates at the Steve Hoffman forum, a post from a fellow who mentioned that he once examined Brian's acetate of Sgt Pepper, which had a different track order than what was finally released. The asking price for it at that time - I would guess he's talking about the early 1990s - was $2500.

Yes, twenty-five hundred dollarinis. I'd figure it that went on the market today it would go for at least 50 grand, not only because of the original owner but because of the alternate tracklist.  Some time back an acetate of Blonde On Blonde went for $30,000 and there was the famous case of the Velvet Underground and Nico acetate that went into six figures on eBay.
[/quote]

I see your assumption on the letters, but I really couldn't tell that's where you were going with your previous statements; Based on the dating of January 2103, my guess is RecordMecca asked for individual letters, possibly on the chance they'd try to sell them separately. Why they're not doing so, is anyone's guess. 

And as to values, if only this was a good assumption!  I'd say the value will probably rise, but sad fact is, Beach Boys items have always distantly trailed The Beatles, Dylan, others in ascending value.
Personally, I'd love to believe the things I have will take giant positive steps, but odds are( based on past performance) they'll be bringing up the rear. Forever.

[Andrew G. Doe]

And the value of the records, worn though they are, can only go up. Earlier this year Smile was a legendary album that had won a Grammy in its latterday form; now it's a legendary album that has won a Grammy in its original form, if one overlooks the post-1967 overdubs.  That kind of recognition increases the value of the source materials, whether used or unused for release.

No sir, it did not. One track from BWPS won a Grammy, but the album as a whole did not. In fact it wasn't even nominated as an album.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I thought it was nominated for best pop album, only to lose out to Ray Charles...?

[monicker]

I am going to bold things in yellow and spend my life pedantically correcting people with the most insufferable air of self-importance. Sometimes i'll even be wrong about said corrections. Stay tuned. It'll be fun. I am a fun person. People like me. I have friends.

[andy]

I was informed - by a highly reliable source - that the Parks acetates were auditioned by the box compilers/producers and that nothing of any use or importance was discovered. Given the G rating, I'd guess that means they were next to unlistenable.

Well, your source is wrong.

[Andrew G. Doe]

So you're saying that Alan Boyd was being deliberately misleading in his lecture ? (This is not my source, btw).

[andy]

So you're saying  that Alan Boyd was being deliberately misleading in his lecture ?

No, I think you misread/misheard what Alan said.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I thought it was nominated for best pop album, only to lose out to Ray Charles...?

Yes sir, it was. Mea culpa (that's Latin for "I f***ed up").

[Shady]

I doubt Mark Linett would be interested in these acetates if he and Alan had already decided they weren't worth inclusion in the box set

[Andrew G. Doe]

Andy, as an aside from the ongoing debate here, as one who's heard them, what would you say the sound quality of these 'new' acetates is like ? Listenable or borderline ? Historically, an acetate is good for maybe 20-30 spins before bad things start to happen and the recorded history would seem to indicate that Brian played the crap out of them... of course, VDP may not have but as has been pointed out, in the accepted grading terms, G equates to well-used bordering on banged up.

From the Record Collectors Guild site:

    Mint (M)  Absolutely perfect in every way. Certainly never been played, possibly even still sealed.(More on still sealed under "Other Considerations"). Should be used sparingly as a grade, If at all.

    Near Mint (NM or M-)   A nearly perfect record. Many dealers won't give a grade higher than this implying (perhaps correctly)that no record is ever truly perfect.

    The record should show no obvious signs of wear. A 45 RPM or EP sleeve should have no more than the most minor defects, such as almost invisible ring wear or other signs of slight handling.

    An LP cover should have no creases, folds, seam splits or other noticeable similar defects. No cut-out holes, either. And of course, the same should be true of any other inserts, such as posters, lyric sleeves and the like.

    Basically, an LP in near mint condition looks as if you just got it home from a new record store and removed the shrink wrap.

    Near Mint is the highest price listed in all Goldmine price guides. Anything that exceeds this grade, in the opinion of both buyer and seller, is worth significantly more than the highest Goldmine book value.


    Very Good Plus (VG+)  Generally worth 50 percent of the Near Mint value.

    A Very Good Plus record will show some signs that it was played and otherwise handled by a previous owner who took good care of it.

    Record surfaces may show some signs of wear and may have slight scuffs or very light scratches that don't affect one's listening experiences. Slight warps that do not affect the sound are "OK".

    The label may have some ring wear or discoloration, but it should be barely noticeable. The center hole will not have been misshapen by repeated play.

    Picture sleeves and LP inner sleeves will have some slight wear, lightly turned up corners, or a slight seam split. An LP cover may have slight signs of wear also and may be marred by a cut-out hole, indentation or corner indicating it was taken out of print and sold at a discount.

    In general, if not for a couple things wrong with it, this would be Near Mint. All but the most mint-crazy collectors will find a Very Good Plus record highly acceptable.


    Very Good (VG)   Generally worth 25 percent of Near Mint value. Many of the defects found in a VG+ record will be more pronounced in a VG disc. Surface noise will be evident upon playing, especially in soft passages and during a song's intro and fade, but will not overpower the music otherwise. Groove wear will start to be noticeable, as with light scratches (deep enough to feel with a fingernail) that will affect the sound.

    Labels may be marred by writing, or have tape or stickers (or their residue) attached. The same will be true of picture sleeves or LP covers. However, it will not have all of these problems at the same time, only two or three of them.

    Goldmine price guides with more than one price will list Very Good as the lowest price. This, not the Near Mint price, should be your guide when determining how much a record is worth, as that is the price a dealer will normally pay you for a Near Mint record.


   Good (G), Good Plus (G+)  Generally worth 10-15 percent of the Near Mint value. Good does not mean Bad! A record in Good or Good Plus condition can be put onto a turntable and will play through without skipping. But it will have significant surface noise and scratches and visible groove wear (on a styrene record, the groove will be starting to turn white).

    A cover or sleeve will have seam splits, especially at the bottom or on the spine. Tape, writing, ring wear or other defects will start to overwhelm the object.

    It is a common item, you'll probably find another copy in better shape eventually. Pass it up. But, if it's something you have been seeking for years, and the price is right, get it...but keep looking to upgrade.


    Poor (P), Fair (F)   Generally worth 0-5 percent of the Near Mint price. The record is cracked, badly warped, and won't play through without skipping or repeating. The picture sleeve is water damaged, split on all three seams and heavily marred by wear and writing. The LP cover barely keeps the LP inside it. Inner sleeves are fully seam split, crinkled, and written upon.

    Except for impossibly rare records otherwise unattainable, records in this condition should be bought or sold for no more than a few cents each.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Good point about the shape of the acetates...we know how bad of a shape some of the non-Smile acetates from much later on sound,and I doubt they were played nearly as much as this. I may have missed this previously, but how were they stored?

[andy]

^ She mentioned the acetates in the early 2000s, which made the rounds on the internet (i can't find a link right now) and Donny just said in this thread that he talked to her about them in the '90s when he knew her personally. She did not just recently remember that she had them when she was approached for TSS.  

Waiting for Andy to say whatever he's gonna say about these. Is this the Andy from the Smile Shop/the early days of this board?

Yep! Good to see you still around, EM. It's been a while..I feel...older. Here's your link from Durrie: http://troun.tripod.com/durrie.html *EDIT* Donny L beat me to it! That's your interview?! So cool! I remember reading that in 2000, I think, and later referencing that interview for years, repeatedly begging my sources to pass along the message to Durrie that people would pay to dig through her storage and get these.

I wish I could've written more yesterday but the timing isn't great.

Long story short: I had a chance to listen to the acetates back in September. I happily volunteered to listen to them as I'd be able to say whether or not there was revelatory material on them. As you can imagine, it was completely surreal. Even just looking at the acetates was crazy. Here was a group of acetates that hadn't been touched in years, with hand-written labels, made from torn up pieces of paper, scotch-taped to each acetate to identify its contents. I'm sure someone can confirm whose handwriting is on these labels.

We went through the first two or three acetates and nothing was groundbreaking. In general, over half of them sounded like unique mixes of already bootlegged material, but it could've been the result of listening off of an acetate.

Anyway, we get to one of the acetates labeled "H&V". At some point, a completely new version of I'm In Great Shape starts playing. It was radically different from the versions in circulation (of which there is one with harp and saxophone, one with celeste, and one with heavy piano if I remember correctly)! This version of IIGS has more heavy instrumentation, but has the IIGS bassline. There was definitely percussion, maybe snares and other various pieces. It's pretty similar to the false barnyard instrumentation, and my guess is that it's on disc 1 of the link at the beginning of this thread (and is mislabeled, but I guess I can see how the two got confused).

At this point I thought "wow, amazing!", but then something really interesting happened! In two clearly spliced edits (speaking of which, I can't remember if IIGS had the tape distortion effect the earlier takes had, but if it did it was much, much more subtle), IGGS went directly into the harpsichord playing that's underneath "my children were raised, you know they...", from the official H&V single, but with the arrangement from H&V part 1 from the SS/WH twofer that goes into "healthy wealthy and OFTEN wise" (all with no vocals), then directly into the full instrumental arrangement behind "three score and five", and that then played out until the finish of the acetate. I cannot remember if the three score and five vocals were on top of the section or not...it all happened so fast and I was just caught off guard. Either way, it's the first time I'd heard that arrangement of those pieces, and it came straight from the men. So clearly this was the highlight to me.

The second biggest highlight for me came from Do You Like Worms. Maybe this piece is out there so forgive me for not having heard it. One of the mixes of Bicycle Rider on an acetate was the kick drum, and the oooga cha vocals, with very light harpsichord in the mix. It was extremely rhythmic and very punchy. It was nothing mindblowing, like hearing Ribbon of Concrete being sung would have been, but it just sounded amazing.

There is also a completely new/original keenywokapula vocal take on one of the DYLWs with a different mix. Not mindblowingly new, but mindblowingly great to listen to.

Like I said earlier, I think there were several unique mixes of previously heard stuff, but outside of the new IIGS and the edits, I didn't notice anything else that was revelatory.

As to the quality...well, they're old acetates that have been sitting in a storage facility in Arizona for years, along with boxes of clothes, photos, records, etc. They were very crackly and poppy, probably like some of the lower quality CIFOTM acetate recordings that are floating around. I'm no record expert, but maybe someone who is can say whether or not the quality could be improved by a very good cleaning. The acetates were dusty.

I'd tried to reference it in the Alan Boyd lecture thread, but I don't think these new pieces would make an official release due to their quality, and the discrepancy between the amount of work it'd take to get these cleared for a release versus the lack of interest from general Beach Boy fans for these tracks (I say general, but that definitely doesn't apply to people on this site, like me, who'd pay hundreds/thousands to hear any new SMiLE-related fragments).

I really hope these acetates wind up in the hands of the right people, and get catalogue/archived/thrown into the history bin. I think they're extremely valuable pieces and I'm glad they finally came out, 13 or so years later (and really 28 years or longer since AGD asked about them in '85). Even moreso, I hope everyone gets a chance to hear them soon!

Finally, here are a couple of pics I took with my phone..if only I'd gotten audio recordings as well! Notice you'll see the acetate with the warp on it.

*EDIT* You can see much bigger versions of the pictures below directly on flickr..for some reason I can't make them bigger on here.


2012-09-12_13-10-10_461


2012-09-12_13-11-10_461


2012-09-12_13-10-42_183


2012-09-12_13-10-37_66

[Al Jardine: Pick Up Artist]

At this point I thought "wow, amazing!", but then something really interesting happened! In two clearly spliced edits (speaking of which, I can't remember if IIGS had the tape distortion effect the earlier takes had, but if it did it was much, much more subtle), IGGS went directly into the harpsichord playing that's underneath "my children were raised, you know they...", from the official H&V single, but with the arrangement from H&V part 1 from the SS/WH twofer that goes into "healthy wealthy and OFTEN wise" (all with no vocals), then directly into the full instrumental arrangement behind "three score and five", and that then played out until the finish of the acetate.

oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god oh my god

[andy]

Andy, as an aside from the ongoing debate here, as one who's heard them, what would you say the sound quality of these 'new' acetates is like ? Listenable or borderline ? Historically, an acetate is good for maybe 20-30 spins before bad things start to happen and the recorded history would seem to indicate that Brian played the crap out of them... of course, VDP may not have but as has been pointed out, in the accepted grading terms, G equates to well-used bordering on banged up.

I thought they were listenable, but fingers crossed, someone with more expertise (unless the seller frequents this board) can listen to these acetates in the very near future (next week or so) and say what the quality is. My best guess in quality comparison is some of the CIFOTM acetates. Listenable, but not necessarily release-level quality (whatever that term means, because I've heard worse quality stuff on official releases).

FWIW, aeijtzsche and I were roommates while he was working with Alan B. Alan's the first person I called after hearing these acetates, and without revealing who the acetates came from, went into detail about what was on them. This was right before his lecture, and I can't speak for Alan, but my guess is the "more pieces of SMiLE found" quote from that Alan lecture thread is probably referencing these acetates (I heard the acetates just a couple of weeks before that lecture: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,14354.0.html).

[andy]

And who is andy, and how is he hearing these things? 

Just an incredibly lucky BB fan with an "it's a small world" type connection to the acetates and great timing. There are many people who've devoted more time (even lives) to the BB that deserved to hear these before I did.

[mammy blue]

Man oh man, I hope these make it out there somehow. Especially the IIGS mix you've described. I'd love to hear it, even if lower quality.

Was one of the DYLW mixes that you heard anything like this?

http://www.sendspace.com/file/ncpuef

[mammy blue]

My best guess in quality comparison is some of the CIFOTM acetates. Listenable, but not necessarily release-level quality (whatever that term means, because I've heard worse quality stuff on official releases).

Hi Andy, these CITFOTM acetates that you keep referring to... I'm not sure if I'm familiar with them. Do they include any vocals that didn't make it on the box set?

[leggo of my ego]

Long story short: I had a chance to listen to the acetates back in September. I happily volunteered to listen to them as I'd be able to say whether or not there was revelatory material on them.

Well, dang, theres one more play of wear on them 

I do hope yall were using a decent turntable with 1.5 (or less) grams of stylus pressure?? 

I, like  everyone else am very curious and would like to hear the recordings for myself. I have heard at least 3 different cuts of the "hawaii chant": vigotone 3 LP set, UM17, Official and also a couple of mixes of the slide guitar part for that. Have to admit its not my very favorite bit of SMiLE and I was also disillusioned to find out kinneywhakpoola was just "made up".     

The IGGS discs sounds like the only one with something that could be unique.?

And not to belittle anyone, I'm sure we all would agree that with all the many recordings official and bootleg out and about, only someone with a great deal of knowledge and experience of the SMiLE sessions is truly qualified to make the determination by "ear and memory" alone.

As for myself, I know am I am not THAT good. I would have to have at hand a music player with files of all the other known mixes and make a comparative analysis of each track!

As for the snap, crackle and pops - after digitization the transient noise should clean up very well.

I would NOT play these again after that was done. Arizona dry air was probably not the worst storage conditions BUT they should be sealed
in a humidity/ temperature environment.

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

I think he's talking about the existing acetates we have, the ones that have even booted.

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

The thing is guys, just the fact that a version of Great Shape featured somewhere in Heroes and Villians cut BY BRIAN is mind blowing. This is a historic piece of Smile, and it definitely could not have been seen before the box, because no matter what it would've been included in some form.

[Chris Brown]

Can't thank you enough for the detailed posts Andy - one way or the other this stuff needs to be preserved and (ultimately) heard. 

[andy]

Man oh man, I hope these make it out there somehow. Especially the IIGS mix you've described. I'd love to hear it, even if lower quality.

Was one of the DYLW mixes that you heard anything like this?

http://www.sendspace.com/file/ncpuef

Thanks for sharing. It's very similar to that one! The kick drum is just as prominent but the mix is different (very quiet harpsichord) and there was no lead vocal over some/most of it. My guess is that the Durrie acetate mix, then, was made sometime around 1/5/67 because of its similarity to this one.

[andy]

My best guess in quality comparison is some of the CIFOTM acetates. Listenable, but not necessarily release-level quality (whatever that term means, because I've heard worse quality stuff on official releases).

Hi Andy, these CITFOTM acetates that you keep referring to... I'm not sure if I'm familiar with them. Do they include any vocals that didn't make it on the box set?

Like the beginning of this one but with a lot more crackles and pops. ->http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEcP_NH1K8I