Re: Kaving in....

["JOANNA M" <feedbackmag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----Original Message-----
From: MARKMAN, PETER <MARKMAN_P@casa.gov.au>
To: 'bomp@xnet2.com' <bomp@xnet2.com>
Date: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 9:48 AM
Subject: RE: Kaving in....


>
>Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 13:49:22 +1100
>From: "JOANNA  M" <feedbackmag@ozemail.com.au>
>Subject: Re: Kave-In
>
>
>>>The Kave-In CD has a different cover because it's essentially a different
>>>release - you'll note that it's actually called "IT'S A KAVE-IN - KING
>SIZE
>>>KOLLECTION". It features seventeen tracks that weren't on the vinyl, and
4
>>>of the LP tracks were ommitted because they've since been (or will be)
>>>comped elsewhere.
>>>Peter M
>
>>If its intended to be different shouldnt they have changed the name
>.completely then?.  Why did they keep the same name?.  I dont understand.
>
>The CD is an expanded version of the original vinyl album. It was felt that
>a straight reissue of the 16 track LP wouldn't have been as good value as
>the 30 track CD we came up with. A different name would have been
deceptive,
>because it is BASED on the LP - AND it's intended as a tribute to the late
>Dean Mittelhauser (Dean's widow, Sue, was paid a licencing fee for allowing
>us to put it out, and she thought it was a nice idea). Incidentally, all
>members of the bands we've been able to locate have received several free
>copies of the CD.
>As for the different cover; well there has been some controversy about
that,
>but it seemed like a reasonable idea at the time.
>Peter M

Thank you for clearing this up for me, I appreciate it Peter.  Stay hip.
>