No. I didn't know that there had been a rerelease.
> >Did anyone hear the new bonus disc on the Tull Christmas Album that
> >was released five years ago?
> >I didn't want to re-purchase the album all over again if it wasn't a
> >big deal. But, if it's excellent, I can live with another copy.
>
> No. I didn't know that there had been a rerelease.
Yes; I got an ad for it on a flyer handed out at the "Ian Anderson plays
the Christmas Jethro Tull" concert.
I don't like this; it punishes those who bought the CD the first time
around.
There seems to a lot of that these days by lots of artists. There's
the regular edition, then the bonus edition with extra tracks, and
then the supreme edition with more tracks and a DVD. It does tend to
make you a bit cynical.
> >> No. I didn't know that there had been a rerelease.
> >
> >Yes; I got an ad for it on a flyer handed out at the "Ian Anderson plays
> >the Christmas Jethro Tull" concert.
> >
> >I don't like this; it punishes those who bought the CD the first time
> >around.
>
> There seems to a lot of that these days by lots of artists. There's
> the regular edition, then the bonus edition with extra tracks, and
> then the supreme edition with more tracks and a DVD. It does tend to
> make you a bit cynical.
Yes; Neil Young is a prime example. However, when all the different
formats are released at once, I can decide what I want to buy, so that's
fine---as long as I can get all I want with one format. (In other
words, I don't want a "bonus track" on the basic edition which isn't on
the deluxe edition.) However, in the case above, the double CD was
released a few years after the original single CD, which I had already
bought.
>In article <hqegj5tu9heo1us6o...@4ax.com>, rwalker
Yes, you're right. That's even worse.