| John S Stuart 02.09.2007 04:11 |
link
Queen Archivist wrote: ...NO WE DO NOT HAVE THE GOLDERS GREEN CONCERT IN FULL IN THE ARCHIVE, ON A DECENT FORMAT, NOT THAT I CAN RECALL ANYWAY, AND NOT THAT I HAVE SEEN OR HEARD IN RECENT YEARS, BUT YES PLEASE WE WOULD LIKE IT - OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD - BUT NOT IF THERE ARE STRINGS ATTACHED, OR CONDITIONS, OR IN SUPPLYING A COPY WE PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY, AGAIN, FOR ANYONE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT LOST THINGS FROM YEARS AGO WHICH HAVE NO BEARING ON ANYTHING IN 2007, OR TO THE GOLDERS GREEN GIG. YES WE'D LOVE A COPY. YES PLEASE. BRING IT ON...link John S Stuart wrote: ...I have both the (FULL UNEDITED) BBC master AND the LP versions - but as far as I am aware - Queen Productions are already aware of this... If it is truely the case that QP do NOT have a 'master copy', I would certainly offer it up - provided certain caveats were in place.This is the first time I have started a separate thread in a long time, so forgive me if it overlaps with any others - but I thought this merited a separate discussion in its own right. I have no hidden agenda, no cards up my sleeve, no ulterior motives – no reason other than to gauge the public opinion of Queenzone. (I know a poll would have been better, but I am not PC literate enough to design one). If it was possible for Queen Productions to Officially release ‘Golder’s Green’ as a quality audio CD product, would you be interested in buying a copy? Or - am I really that out of touch with 'public' opinion', by insisting that a few caveats should be in place to protect both parties before any such disc could be produced? As I said, no hidden agenda, just a simple question to set my own moral compass by. |
| Zak Royen 02.09.2007 04:27 |
Yes I definitely would. |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2007 04:36 |
That was quick Zak - you caught me mid cut 'n paste there - but thanks for your prompt reply! |
| Freddie May 02.09.2007 04:36 |
Me too |
| Holly2003 02.09.2007 04:50 |
Definitely. There is obviously demand among Queen fans for these things. The "share the music" section of this website proves that, with people willing to spend hours or days downloading files, creating cover art etc. They do this for bootleg concerts that are usually poor quality. Queen could make a fair amount of money (and let's face it, that's ALL they are interested in)by releasing offical soundboard concerts and satisfy fan demand.* Pearl Jam have proved that this can be done sucessfully. * I don't count the "offical" downloads available from Queen Productions -- who in their right mind would pay for poor quality concerts that are available free on fan websites? |
| idscorpion 02.09.2007 05:04 |
The idea is great! I guess we have a chance to make it happen, provided QP/GB will aknoweledge the fact that so far they have been missing the opportunity. Cheers |
| pittrek 02.09.2007 05:21 |
Hello John, can I ask a couple of questions ? 1. When you say you have the unedited BBC master tape, does it mean it is longer that the QDA bootleg "Queen will be crowned" ? 2. Is even on the master tape Freddie's voice sounding so "distant" ? 3. I fully agree that this concert DOES deserve a proper CD release, and I would buy it more happy than the Montreal gig, BUT ... ... what about putting pressure on QP to release ALL BBC sessions ? The 6 studio sessions plus the 2 live "sessions" - Golders Green and Hammy 75 ? Releasing ONLY GG 73 would be ONLY "good", I believe that a 3-4 CD box containing EVERYTHING would achieve much better selling results |
| Darren1977 02.09.2007 06:06 |
Golders Green, why not.I would buy it, has to be better than Montreal. Why not go further and try and get the fabled unreleased/demoes released. |
| on my way up 02.09.2007 06:09 |
pittrek wrote: Hello John, can I ask a couple of questions ? 1. When you say you have the unedited BBC master tape, does it mean it is longer that the QDA bootleg "Queen will be crowned" ? 2. Is even on the master tape Freddie's voice sounding so "distant" ? 3. I fully agree that this concert DOES deserve a proper CD release, and I would buy it more happy than the Montreal gig, BUT ... ... what about putting pressure on QP to release ALL BBC sessions ? The 6 studio sessions plus the 2 live "sessions" - Golders Green and Hammy 75 ? Releasing ONLY GG 73 would be ONLY "good", I believe that a 3-4 CD box containing EVERYTHING would achieve much better selling resultsGreat idea!That would be a wonderful set! |
| YourValentine 02.09.2007 06:27 |
I would certainly buy it. Unless of course it's full of DRM and does not meet audio CD standards. I do not buy such intentionally deteriorated products. |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2007 06:53 |
pittrek wrote: Hello John, can I ask a couple of questions ? 1. When you say you have the unedited BBC master tape, does it mean it is longer that the QDA bootleg "Queen will be crowned" ? 2. Is even on the master tape Freddie's voice sounding so "distant" ? 3. I fully agree that this concert DOES deserve a proper CD release, and I would buy it more happy than the Montreal gig, BUT ... ... what about putting pressure on QP to release ALL BBC sessions ? The 6 studio sessions plus the 2 live "sessions" - Golders Green and Hammy 75 ? Releasing ONLY GG 73 would be ONLY "good", I believe that a 3-4 CD box containing EVERYTHING would achieve much better selling resultsIn order - 1: not musically, but longer intro and commentary, 2: Yes, but the sound quality is far superior even to the 'Queen Will Be Crowned' Bootleg. The reason I focused in on 'Golders Green', (and to a lesser extent 'Hammersmith 1975') is that I OWN those particular 'MASTER' tapes, so I know that they exist in perfect audio quality, and could make excellent CD releases. As for the other concerts you suggest, I do not own those. (Except ofcourse in bootleg for like everyone else). |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2007 07:23 |
As stated at the top of the page, this thread was (genuinely) written to help me recalibrate my own moral compass...
Can I therefore say thank-you to Greg for helping realign this for me.
(Sorry for jumping between pages):
link
John S Stuart wrote:Queen Archivist wrote: Nobody could ever say that you are not always trying... very trying.And genuine fans wonder why collectors do NOT wish to share their treasures with QPL... I always found it unfair that we were the one's accused of hoarding our rarities, when in fact nothing could be further than the truth. At the end of the day, I will still own this 'Master', and while QPL can afford to turn their nose up to this (and the many other rarities I possess) it is a shame because it is the genuine fans who will suffer and lose out because of such pettiness. So while you preach '...pooling of resources in everyone's best interests...', in reality, you (and your employers) do not give a damn. As long as the musical is a success, they can string us along with yet another re-re-release and the hope of a non-materialising anthology. It is all lip-service. If you (by that I mean QPL) do NOT wish fans to contribute, do NOT ask - or if THEY really do wish collector collaboration, then I really think YOU need to attend some public relations courses, as I for one would rather burn my collection than donate it to such a spiteful and indifferent organisation. |
| Pim Derks 02.09.2007 08:09 |
Maybe a strange question - as you legally own the mastertape John, would it be (theoretically) be possible to release this - as long as you pay royaltyies to QP for their songs? The mastertapes of Montreal were also in the hands of someone else than QP and they released it too without official approval of QP I think? |
| pittrek 02.09.2007 08:24 |
Thanks for the answers, John. Pim - VERY interesting idea :-) |
| cmsdrums 02.09.2007 08:41 |
Yes, I would definitely buy such a release. Mmmm, not sure about the issue of JSS being able to release the product as I'm not totally up to date on copyright laws, but from memory, it would seem the case is that: JSS owns the physical tape that the concert is recorded on, and, presuming that it was bought 'legitimately' and isn't to his knowledge stolen, neither QP or EMI can do anything to make him hand it over to them. He could quite easily record over it if he wants - it's his tape to do with whatever he wants regarding the actual 'hardware' of the tape. JSS doesn't however own the sound recording on his tape, and therefore whoever owns this can legally stop JSS releasing the recording. The sound recording may be owned by QP, although as they weren't in existence in 1973/4 this is doubtful. EMI Records could own the sound recording but personally I doubt that is so as they would not have usually spent a great deal of money organising a live concert recording of a relatively unknown artist at their own cost. Interestingly, it may therefore actually be someone like the BBC or Trident who actually owns the sound recording. JSS - is the master labelled to say who owns the sound recording?? In the case that the sound recording isn't owned by QP or EMI, I believe that JSS could potentially come to an agreement with either such company and the gig could officially and quite legally be released without the knowledge or approval of QP or EMI. JSS - is the master tape you hold a multitrack recording (ie could be remixed), or is it already a mixed down final stereo mix?? Perhaps someone with a greater understanding of copyright law could confirm or amend my thoughts above? Cheers |
| Negative Creep 02.09.2007 08:45 |
I would guess that if anyone, including EMI tried to issue this recording the BBC would be asking questions. They would still own the copyright to the recording wouldn't they? Anyway - lets face it... QPL are never going to release anything like this because it doesn't conform to the image of Queen that they have chosen to promote for years and "ONLY" Queen fans would be interested. What a fucking crazy idea... releasing archived material that only fans of the band would want! HA. They won't even release Hammersmith '75 on DVD because it isn't a greatest hits setlist that will appeal to everyone with just a passing interest in the band/songs. cmsdrums - it would be the BBC who owned the copyright and it would be a stereo recording as no multitrack would have ever existed. |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2007 08:48 |
cmsdrums: JSS - is the master tape you hold a multitrack recording (ie could be remixed), or is it already a mixed down final stereo mix?? Mixed down final stereo mix - so a remix would be out of the question, but, don't you find it strange that on one hand QPL 'advertise' for this sort of material, yet on the other show no interest? As for releasing it privately, I could not afford to do that. Besides, once the first copy is made, it too could be easily bootlegged, so I could not afford to take that chance. However, leagally speaking, the tape is over 34 years old, and unless I am mistaken - renewed copyright only lasts for 25 years - is that correct? If that is the case, and I know that the BBC have NOT renewed the copyright, does that mean I can renew or register the copyright under my own name? Unless ofcourse someone in here wanted to buy it? |
| Pim Derks 02.09.2007 09:38 |
I'll give you a fiver :D Anyway - I'm sure that some label would be willing to pay an X-amount of money for this tape. Same thing happened with the Beatles' Hamburg tapes I think? |
| breakthru1989 02.09.2007 09:41 |
yes it should be officially availeble in the shops. i surtainly would buy me a copy. |
| cmsdrums 02.09.2007 10:00 |
Only from memory, I think copyright runs out after 50 years, not 25. I remember something in hte last couple of years about the earliest CLiff Richard recordings becoming out of copyright, and as these were in the 1950's, I think this means that 50 yrs is the time frame involved. Not knowing the logistics of releasing a record on a mass scale, it could be that you may not need to have a lump sum in order to successfully do this. If a company (for example, Pinnacle, or Eagle etc... or one if the companies that specialise in archive material) thought this project was a runner, they may offer you a cash sum to buy the tape, and then they would take all the profits. Alternatively it may be that you could arrange not to take any payment up front, but retain the ownership of the tape, then take a small percentage of the profits once they pay to have it pressed. However, as it's now been confirmed that the BBC own the sound recording, I'm sure that they would be pretty hot on this kind of thing and so would prevent any kind of release whilst they still own it!! I don't know if this is the sort of thing you can contact the BBC about, and negotiate to buy the sound recording as they will obviously never use it, or whether by contacting them they will say 'ah, that's where our tape went, give it back now!' I'll buy the master off you in 16 yrs JSS, and then press a load of CDs up on my home burner!!! |
| Mr. Scully 02.09.2007 10:08 |
I know for sure Queen Productions do have the unedited BBC version of Golders Green - at least on CD-R. I assume you don't have any "better" copy, John? I have no knowledge regarding radio shows but I somehow assume those are not on multitrack tapes or something :) and reel-to-reel tapes have the same quality as the CD-R made from them, right? |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2007 10:31 |
Mr. Scully wrote: I know for sure Queen Productions do have the unedited BBC version of Golders Green - at least on CD-R. I assume you don't have any "better" copy, John? I have no knowledge regarding radio shows but I somehow assume those are not on multitrack tapes or something :) and reel-to-reel tapes have the same quality as the CD-R made from them, right?No Martin, If QPL DO own a copy of this disc (but based on the archivist's above reply they do NOT), I do indeed STILL own a better version: My copy is better than QPL's (alleged) CD-R, because their CD-R is three or four generations REMOVED from the BBC master. Their tape pedigree runs: 7" reel-to-reel Master - to cassette back-up master - to cassette tape copy - to mini disc copy - to CD-R copy. It is from this CD-R (which was later sonically 'enhanced' and EQ'd) which provided the 'master' for the popular silver CD bootleg. My pedigree would run: 7" reel-to-reel Master - to released CD version. Thus improving the quality by at least THREE generations BEFORE any further sonic enhancements were needed or adopted. Now, WE BOTH know this for 100% certainty - as WE BOTH know whom I made my sole copy of the CD-R version for. We BOTH know that this source is close to QPL, but whether he actually cut a copy for QPL or not - I really can not say - as I do not know. But no matter, even if he did, his version was only a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy (You get the picture!) I hope that you appreciate my open and frank reply, and that this more than answers your question for you. |
| Paulos 02.09.2007 11:13 |
John S. Stuart. Thanks for starting this thread. I have a few questions to ask you. Firstly, just out of interest does your master tape differ in the number of songs to that broadcsat from and contained on the one Queen sided Transcription Disc? Secondly, i have a 1973 BBC Transcription Disc of the show. Do you have any idea of the value of the record? Lastly, would anyone be interested in purchasing this disc from me? I have no idea where i could sell it, is there a place on here to do that? Thanks. |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2007 11:46 |
Paulos wrote: ...Firstly, just out of interest does your master tape differ in the number of songs to that broadcsat from and contained on the one Queen sided Transcription Disc? Secondly, i have a 1973 BBC Transcription Disc of the show. Do you have any idea of the value of the record?The BBC UNEDITED MASTER tape is of the full show including the 'Bamalama Bamaloo/Rock 'n Roll medley' etc. Musically, it contains no more than the bootlegged version - but (as from my reply to Martin above) is of vastly superior sound quality and (if I recall correctly) features additional commentary by the compare/host for the evening. I too own a copy of the edited 1973 BBC transcription disc. I say edited because as you know the LP does not feature the 'Rock 'n Roll' medley. Nevertheless, in excellent condition, and on a good day, the disc should be valued between £800 - £1,000. |
| The Real Wizard 02.09.2007 11:54 |
Paulos wrote: Lastly, would anyone be interested in purchasing this disc from me? I have no idea where i could sell it, is there a place on here to do that?Paulos, please send me an email: bob at queenlive.ca Thanks! |
| thomasquinn 32989 02.09.2007 13:12 |
COPYRIGHT: Lasts for the time of the author's life, plus another 50 (European Union) or 70 (USA) years. That's the law, even though I personally think it should be life + 25. As for the songs for which copyright expired: In 1976 the USA adopted the full of the Berne-convention regulating copyright at long last; all works at that time had to be re-copyrighted; everything that wasn't re-registered, but had not yet expired in 1976 would expire, I believe, 50 years after it was first created. |
| eiricd 02.09.2007 13:44 |
interesting thread!! I'd buy it in a heartbeat!!! John; Could you shed some light as to how you got the master tape? I've been following your posts both here and on qol and I am pretty much in awe of your collection and knowledge :) but it would be great to hear how you got your hands on some of these items :) btw; do you have any idea how much money you have spent over the years collecting Queen stuff?? btw2; I think QOL should do an "Ask John Stuart" feature :) |
| brENsKi 02.09.2007 15:17 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: COPYRIGHT: Lasts for the time of the author's life, plus another 50 (European Union) or 70 (USA) years. That's the law, even though I personally think it should be life + 25. As for the songs for which copyright expired: In 1976 the USA adopted the full of the Berne-convention regulating copyright at long last; all works at that time had to be re-copyrighted; everything that wasn't re-registered, but had not yet expired in 1976 would expire, I believe, 50 years after it was first created.Casper - this is spot on -nice answer... this is why the surviving beatles/yoko and Goerge's widow are all shitting themselves over sorting their back catalogues out...the alarm bells for them were the "public domain arrival" of many early r n r records from the 50s |
| brENsKi 02.09.2007 15:20 |
John, i'd buy a copy definitely...this and hammy 75 should be released as a double cd - both gigs complete of course i remember having the basic one-hr version of 75 and the 30mins version of golders for a long long time - on audio cassettes then when i got the missing bits for hammy 75 - albeit in mono originally (in the early 90s) - i was delerious - same applied to getting the missing bits of golders a couple of years back so any move to release these officially would be fantastic - we have had far too much in the way of repetitive "recent" releases |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2007 16:14 |
eiricd wrote: John; Could you shed some light as to how you got the master tape... it would be great to hear how you got your hands on some of these items :) btw; do you have any idea how much money you have spent over the years collecting Queen stuff??eiricd: As you asked the question politely, who am I to refuse? Around 1983, by law, the BBC HAD to destroy all audio recordings over 10 years old due to licensing reasons. Whether this is the same as copyright I am not sure, but, some BBC bosses somewhere made that stupid decision. So all BBC audio transcript discs (LP's), and tapes were ear-marked for physical destruction, and sadly most of this material was historically irreplaceable. Bands like the Beatles, Stones, Hendrix and Queen all found their way to the great BBC furnace of destruction. However, some of the smarter BBC employees rather than burn the stuff asked - and were given permission - to keep such material for their own personal collections. As this effectively removed the material from the public demain, everyone seemed happy. Some time after, some of this material leaked into the collector's market, and I actually bought my tape and LP's through the specialist UK magazine 'Record Collector'. At that time it was still legal to sell and advertise such material. Now, in a quirk of law, although it is still legal to own, it is actually illegal to advertise BBC material, and as such all similar type adverts are banned from 'Record Collector' type magazines (such as 'Goldmine' in the USA). Nothing romantic or special there then. Just lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. As for your second question - I really shudder to think. Enough to buy a small house I would imagine! |
| Queen Archivist 02.09.2007 16:19 |
John. Am I still welcome at your birthday garden party in October? Or should I tear up my invitation? |
| ern2150 02.09.2007 17:21 |
Queen Archivist wrote: John. Am I still welcome at your birthday garden party in October? Or should I tear up my invitation?You are odd, maybe I like you after all. John, I would also buy it, hell, pre-order it as fast as possible. I would do just about anything to send a message to QP regarding 70s Queen live. Perhaps even play the silly game GB has set forth, and smile bemusedly at his attempts to wind you up. Perhaps. |
| Raf 02.09.2007 17:38 |
I'd DEFINITELY buy it. On the other hand, I seriously doubt I'll buy the re-re-re-(...)-release of Montreal'81. |
| Nathan 02.09.2007 18:01 |
I'd certainly buy it. An excellent quality recording of one of history's most famous and well-loved bands in their infancy would be the equivalent of finding the Holy Grail. What songs did they play at this gig John? |
| Jay Mantis 02.09.2007 18:27 |
This is the setlist they played: 01 - Procession 02 - Father To Son 03 - Son and Daughter 04 - See What A Fool I've Been 05 - Ogre Battle 06 - Liar 07 - Jailhouse Rock (Shake Rattle & Roll, Stupid Cupid, Be Bop A Lula) 08 - Big Spender 09 - Bama Lama Loo |
| Nathan 02.09.2007 18:43 |
Thanks Jay. |
| thomasquinn 32989 03.09.2007 09:12 |
Queen Archivist wrote: John. Am I still welcome at your birthday garden party in October? Or should I tear up my invitation?What about a serious, useful response to this serious, useful topic instead? Or should we forward the question to someone at QP who can actually behave like an adult? |
| Glende 04.09.2007 06:53 |
I'd definely buy this. |
| Benn 04.09.2007 07:06 |
JSS, Yes, I'd be interested in buying ANY VINTAGE Queen archival material. However, I have reservations about the size of the market that this would appeal to. Archive releases are, by nature, of interest to a smaller band of followers than the standard GH releases which we all love to hate. The effort producing something like this takes outweighs the return any major label will get back. Thus, QPL / Parlophone would be FAR BETTER outsourcing something like this to a smaller imprint such as Reprise Records etc. Or, follow what The Who / Peter Gabriel / Genesis did and do it via themusic.com as internet-only orderable discs: link There's simply no mileage in ot for them as much as we'd like to see ir. |
| Negative Creep 04.09.2007 07:20 |
Ben - sorry but that's rubbish. Just because it won't sell the same amount as a greatist hits release doesn't mean EMI wouldn't be interested or that it wouldn't make money - EMI have plents of artists who don't sell a fraction of Queen have or do. Of cource it would make money. I doubt there is any possible release featuring all Queen material that would be a loss maker for EMI or QPL. Queen have an extremely large core fan base. |
| FriedChicken 04.09.2007 08:23 |
They do have a huge fan core base. But you forgot that they're not releasing anything for the fans... |
| Griffin 04.09.2007 09:24 |
yes, but only if it's still dripping with that wabisabi goo :P |
| Negative Creep 04.09.2007 12:20 |
FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: They do have a huge fan core base. But you forgot that they're not releasing anything for the fans...Oh, I'm more than aware of that. QPL don't give a fuck about Queen fans... they're only interested in releases that the general public will be interested in. There are so many options for them to release things which they know won't go to number one in some chart somewhere but they don't won't to release anything that isn't already available. Actually... as for re-releases... I wouldn't mind them releasing the promo videos again on DVD... in good quality this time. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 04.09.2007 13:20 |
"Actually... as for re-releases... I wouldn't mind them releasing the promo videos again on DVD... in good quality this time." And as long as there are people calling for rehashed product there will be no need for anything new or vital. |
| Negative Creep 04.09.2007 16:12 |
Boy Thomas Raker wrote: "Actually... as for re-releases... I wouldn't mind them releasing the promo videos again on DVD... in good quality this time." And as long as there are people calling for rehashed product there will be no need for anything new or vital.Well - they majorly fucked those 2 releases up. They shouldn't have cropped for widescreen and they should have got a professional team to remaster the footage not their in house team - and all the video's should have been released together in one package inc. the Innuendo ones. QPL aren't going to let go of anything unreleased anyway - that is more than obvious. They're more interested in hoarding than releasing what they know fans have wanted for years. For instance - they're never going to release a proper 70's gig are they? The best they're ever gonna do is release a compilation of clips. |
| Benn 05.09.2007 09:38 |
Negative Creep. EMI may have a huge roster of atrists, but archival releases arrely go out on the majot labels - they are, 8 times out of 10, pushed on to imprints of EMI or on to specialist labels like Reprise or Caslte who are happy to take the time and effort over packaging etc for little return. |
| Voice of Reason 2018 05.09.2007 10:55 |
Of course I'd buy it John! |
| john bodega 05.09.2007 11:06 |
Oh man.... thanks for bringing up the GVH DVDs. What a fucking joke... putting some of the videos in such absurd rations that no matter of button pushing will make it look normal on my TV. |
| Bobby_brown 05.09.2007 11:06 |
Would i buy this item? - Of course, but then again i´m a Queen FAN-atic! Could this release be of interest to the average Queen fan?- I really don´t know! I think this could be in the BBC box set. Now, that would be very cool! It´s hard to say if this would sell or not, because i can´t strip my cloth of being a fan, but i really think that if Queen released a Box-Set containing all BBC recordings, i´m pretty shure it would sell very good. Take care |
| Leaky Luke 08.09.2007 06:58 |
Bobby_brown wrote: Would i buy this item? - Of course, but then again i´m a Queen FAN-atic! Could this release be of interest to the average Queen fan?- I really don´t know! I think this could be in the BBC box set. Now, that would be very cool! It´s hard to say if this would sell or not, because i can´t strip my cloth of being a fan, but i really think that if Queen released a Box-Set containing all BBC recordings, i´m pretty shure it would sell very good. Take careIt worked for The Who and led Zeppelin.. and looking at the Led Zeppelin release.. it's not that special, since you get 3 versions of Communication Breakdown, 2 of dazed and confused, 2 of I can't quit you baby and 2 of You Shook Me. |