I asked to Crockford Management about DS unreleased material and they answer me

[Jules]

"the quality is not considered high enough" is something that always makes me laugh, included when Guy says that "unreleased stuff remains unreleased for a good reason".

Guy referred to a song titled "Back in the day" that was supposed to be a bonus track for the DTRW record, in the Kansas diary entry, as "Mark wrote a song about it intended for the last album which remains an unreleased gem"

It is known that from the STP record there are at least another unreleased gem titled "Bonafide" that was good enough to be part of the STP tour rehearsals, together with another unreleased, "Pyroman". It's also known that from the GL sessions there was another unreleased gem titled "Bonfire night", and these are only the ones we know, I'm sure that if I had the chance to listen to all that unreleased songs, I would be able to set up a high quality record to be released immediately...

But the thing is MK only look forward, so his way to do that is forget about all that unreleased stuff and keep releasing new songs.

I guess that if someday he has a writers block, he might take those unreleased songs and release them, but, actually, DTRW has some songs that were left out for other previous records together with new songs, something he had to do because he was working in the record and in the musical at the same time, so he was creatively  more focused in the musical, that was something new he had never done before, than in the record itself.

Despite that, I love DTRW, and I'm sure I would love, and all of you would love, the record that could be done with all that unreleased gems...

One last thing. When you ask Led Zeppelin fans which one is their favourite Zepp record, most of them (including me) would say "Physical Graffiti", a double record made of songs left out of all the previous Zeppelin records. And it includes some of the all time Zepp classics!

I think this is a very "psychological" and human thing... Because leftover doesn't mean it's something bad, often it's the opposite. You're not ready to release that, because it's unfinished, and it's unfinished, because it's complicated or waits for inspiration.

I know that some of them are left out not because they are unfinished or not good, but because the artist always looks for a balance in the record. For example, "Bonfire night" was left out because it was a rocker song than the rest of "get lucky" and already having a blues and a rock song like "Cleaning my gun", it was considered that the repertoire of the record would be too unbalanced...

[PensaGhost]

there's only 1 problem here, MK, there's no fire or damage or anything

[Stanko]

i second thread!
some are ahead of the game some catch up or if you don't have a truffle dog you can't go truffling 

[asouza]

reminds me this on official site:

What happening with the STP Madrid DVD?
This project has not been abandoned, but at the moment there are no plans for it’s release. Like all live recordings, the shows will need mixing and possibly some repair in order to get them to the usual high standards that Mark is known for delivering. Rather than keep everybody hanging on for a speculative release date we’ll let everybody know if it’s going to come out. 

[ds1984]

We should take attention to different factors :

First I will take the Beatles example : they signed a contract with emi and with the exception of Let It Be, 99% of the recording were made inside EMI studio. That mean in this case that the record company physically owned the master tapes. AND EVEN IN THAT CASE THERE ARE LOST BEATLES RECORDING.

Second I will take the ROLLING STONES example : an executive producer is commissioned by record company and the recording is made outside of the record company. That mean in this case that the record company physically DOES NOT own all the master tapes. In the case of the Rolling Stones for the sixties their are in the hand of ABKO (Allan B. Klein Organisation, short time manager manager of the Rolling Stones).

Third "outside recordings".
TV and radio show have been airing multiple concert and again the important point is who is the LEGAL producer because it is him who is doing the live airing and if so recording.
The Pink Top festival is known to be partly lost (presumably erased)...
From what I know a big DS fan got hold of a copy off of the master of Sydney video broadcast but what happened to the  audio tapes?
What happened to the Wembley audio and video  1985 ?
What happened to the Werchter 1981 audio and video tapes?
The 1978 BBC recording seems to be safe?
What happened to the NHB audio and video tapes?
What happened to the Mandella audio and video tapes?
Etc.

The only exception are for recordings made BEFORE the band signed with Polygram but all subsequent recording, they are all owned by private company but can't be published until they get a deal with Polygram as it happened for the BBC tapes and even for three songs from the Pathway Demo EP (whereas Sultan Of Swing demo has been first issued on Oval record).

And last but not least, holding of the master tape in one thing,but  the legal question is another. If only one right holder is in position to say "NO" the thing can't be published.

[JF]

Second I will take the ROLLING STONES example : an executive producer is commissioned by record company and the recording is made outside of the record company. That mean in this case that the record company physically DOES NOT own all the master tapes. In the case of the Rolling Stones for the sixties their are in the hand of ABKO (Allan B. Klein Organisation, short time manager manager of the Rolling Stones).

yes indeed, and that's why Beggars and let it bleed 50th anniversary editions don't have any bonus material

https://textes-blog-rock-n-roll.fr/rolling-stones-let-it-bleed-fete-son-demi-siecle/

https://textes-blog-rock-n-roll.fr/beggars-banquet-des-rolling-stones-fete-son-demi-siecle/

[Fletch]

We should take attention to different factors :

First I will take the Beatles example : they signed a contract with emi and with the exception of Let It Be, 99% of the recording were made inside EMI studio. That mean in this case that the record company physically owned the master tapes. AND EVEN IN THAT CASE THERE ARE LOST BEATLES RECORDING.

Second I will take the ROLLING STONES example : an executive producer is commissioned by record company and the recording is made outside of the record company. That mean in this case that the record company physically DOES NOT own all the master tapes. In the case of the Rolling Stones for the sixties their are in the hand of ABKO (Allan B. Klein Organisation, short time manager manager of the Rolling Stones).

Third "outside recordings".
TV and radio show have been airing multiple concert and again the important point is who is the LEGAL producer because it is him who is doing the live airing and if so recording.
The Pink Top festival is known to be partly lost (presumably erased)...
From what I know a big DS fan got hold of a copy off of the master of Sydney video broadcast but what happened to the  audio tapes?
What happened to the Wembley audio and video  1985 ?
What happened to the Werchter 1981 audio and video tapes?
The 1978 BBC recording seems to be safe?
What happened to the NHB audio and video tapes?
What happened to the Mandella audio and video tapes?
Etc.

The only exception are for recordings made BEFORE the band signed with Polygram but all subsequent recording, they are all owned by private company but can't be published until they get a deal with Polygram as it happened for the BBC tapes and even for three songs from the Pathway Demo EP (whereas Sultan Of Swing demo has been first issued on Oval record).

And last but not least, holding of the master tape in one thing,but  the legal question is another. If only one right holder is in position to say "NO" the thing can't be published.

Where do the Honky Tonk demos fit in this write up?

[ds1984]

We should take attention to different factors :

First I will take the Beatles example : they signed a contract with emi and with the exception of Let It Be, 99% of the recording were made inside EMI studio. That mean in this case that the record company physically owned the master tapes. AND EVEN IN THAT CASE THERE ARE LOST BEATLES RECORDING.

Second I will take the ROLLING STONES example : an executive producer is commissioned by record company and the recording is made outside of the record company. That mean in this case that the record company physically DOES NOT own all the master tapes. In the case of the Rolling Stones for the sixties their are in the hand of ABKO (Allan B. Klein Organisation, short time manager manager of the Rolling Stones).

Third "outside recordings".
TV and radio show have been airing multiple concert and again the important point is who is the LEGAL producer because it is him who is doing the live airing and if so recording.
The Pink Top festival is known to be partly lost (presumably erased)...
From what I know a big DS fan got hold of a copy off of the master of Sydney video broadcast but what happened to the  audio tapes?
What happened to the Wembley audio and video  1985 ?
What happened to the Werchter 1981 audio and video tapes?
The 1978 BBC recording seems to be safe?
What happened to the NHB audio and video tapes?
What happened to the Mandella audio and video tapes?
Etc.

The only exception are for recordings made BEFORE the band signed with Polygram but all subsequent recording, they are all owned by private company but can't be published until they get a deal with Polygram as it happened for the BBC tapes and even for three songs from the Pathway Demo EP (whereas Sultan Of Swing demo has been first issued on Oval record).

And last but not least, holding of the master tape in one thing,but  the legal question is another. If only one right holder is in position to say "NO" the thing can't be published.

Where do the Honky Tonk demos fit in this write up?

Not sure to understand the question but THE HONKY TONK DEMOS = Pathway Demo
And I am wrong in using the word "EP" as it is actually a double SP release.