| Janner 08.09.2007 05:22 |
Can anyone recommend the best version Hangman that is availible. I have a couple of versions, but I am sure there are more. What are your thoughts? |
| Leaky Luke 08.09.2007 05:45 |
Japan 1975 is probably the best one.. Unless you get your hands on JSS acetate. |
| Janner 08.09.2007 05:56 |
Thanks for you help. Not much chance of getting the acetate I supose |
| Michael Allred 08.09.2007 10:18 |
Are we talking best in terms of sound quality or how well they played the song? I'd love to hear that Japan performance. |
| Leaky Luke 08.09.2007 10:44 |
Michael Allred wrote: Are we talking best in terms of sound quality or how well they played the song? I'd love to hear that Japan performance.You can download it in the announce forum "Shizuoka 1975" |
| Snefru 08.09.2007 19:35 |
So far, best quality are on YOUNG NOBLES OF ROCK (2cd) bootleg) I don't think there are any acetate disc made of that song in any take. Rehearsals tape, or other takes on TAPE might be in the Queen archive, or Brian's private archive. But that's all. link |
| onevsion 09.09.2007 00:50 |
Long John Silver wrote: So far, best quality are on YOUNG NOBLES OF ROCK (2cd) bootleg) I don't think there are any acetate disc made of that song in any take. Rehearsals tape, or other takes on TAPE might be in the Queen archive, or Brian's private archive. But that's all. linkWhy not? I think JSS has an acetate with a Hangman studio version. If he says he has, I have no reason to doubt that. |
| Negative Creep 09.09.2007 06:45 |
Long John Silver wrote: So far, best quality are on YOUNG NOBLES OF ROCK (2cd) bootleg) I don't think there are any acetate disc made of that song in any take. Rehearsals tape, or other takes on TAPE might be in the Queen archive, or Brian's private archive. But that's all. linkIf an acetate does indeed exist, then the likelyhood of the multitracks and any stereo mixdowns being wiped or since lost is zilch. |
| Mr Faron Hyte 10.09.2007 02:23 |
Negative Creep wrote:I think anything is possible in 30+ years.Long John Silver wrote: So far, best quality are on YOUNG NOBLES OF ROCK (2cd) bootleg) I don't think there are any acetate disc made of that song in any take. Rehearsals tape, or other takes on TAPE might be in the Queen archive, or Brian's private archive. But that's all. linkIf an acetate does indeed exist, then the likelyhood of the multitracks and any stereo mixdowns being wiped or since lost is zilch. |
| shadysenator 10.09.2007 04:47 |
Well can't we ask JSS to upload just a snippet, eg. about 10 sec or so to prove he has it...And can he or someone also explain why Hangman is pressed as an accetate, because mostly only single releases were pressed on a accetate ? What do you think about that ? |
| pittrek 10.09.2007 04:59 |
shadysenator wrote: Well can't we ask JSS to upload just a snippet, eg. about 10 sec or so to prove he has it...And can he or someone also explain why Hangman is pressed as an accetate, because mostly only single releases were pressed on a accetate ? What do you think about that ?Well I guess you're new here, so I'll be polite 1.) If JSS tells us he HAS it, then he HAS it. He does not NEED to prove us ANYTHING. 2.) He has the acetate, he didn't transfer it into any digital format 3.) He will NOT share it |
| Leaky Luke 10.09.2007 05:12 |
shadysenator wrote: Well can't we ask JSS to upload just a snippet, eg. about 10 sec or so to prove he has it...And can he or someone also explain why Hangman is pressed as an accetate, because mostly only single releases were pressed on a accetate ? What do you think about that ?What's the use of a 10 second snippet? That's like 2 guitar strokes. Might as well upload 10 seconds of brighton rock saying it's the Blag demo. |
| willem-jan 8923 10.09.2007 07:10 |
Leaky Luke wrote:And apart from that, as soon as snippets are shared on this web-site, people demand the full track. It happened before, and it will happen again.shadysenator wrote: Well can't we ask JSS to upload just a snippet, eg. about 10 sec or so to prove he has it...And can he or someone also explain why Hangman is pressed as an accetate, because mostly only single releases were pressed on a accetate ? What do you think about that ?What's the use of a 10 second snippet? That's like 2 guitar strokes. Might as well upload 10 seconds of brighton rock saying it's the Blag demo. If John decides not to share this track, it's his choice. He paid a lot of money for it, and once QP starts to show interest, he'll be able to sell it for a lot of money as well. Sharing it for free would be nonsense (IMO). |
| shadysenator 10.09.2007 08:14 |
Okay I get the point, forget that you see JSS as God .... But then my 2nd question, why is there a acetate of this song isn't it that acetate are only made from songs which are going to be released as a single.... sounds a little strange to me that a non single track will be acetated .... give me your thoughts on this one please... Therefore i doubt that the hangman acetate excists...otherwise JSS give us the logical reason for a Hangman acetate. And can Greg Brooks our queen archivist add some information about this one ? |
| Jeroen 10.09.2007 08:47 |
Sheep |
| buderhin 10.09.2007 09:20 |
Hangman is on Queen I You only have to convert Seven Seas Of Rhye from Flac to MP3. Then you must listen to it backwards and you hear a complete Studio version of Hangman xDD lol |
| FriedChicken 10.09.2007 09:36 |
lol :D In that version you can also hear Freddie say "November 24.....24.......dead" if you filter off the frequencies below 12 khz |
| buderhin 10.09.2007 10:03 |
FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: lol :D In that version you can also hear Freddie say "November 24.....24.......dead" if you filter off the frequencies below 12 khzNo thats not correct! If you filter it below 12khz you hear freddie say: I Shot John Lennon |
| shadysenator 10.09.2007 10:33 |
Stick to the topic anyone ? Okay I get the point, forget that you see JSS as God .... But then my 2nd question, why is there a acetate of this song isn't it that acetate are only made from songs which are going to be released as a single.... sounds a little strange to me that a non single track will be acetated .... give me your thoughts on this one please... Therefore i doubt that the hangman acetate excists...otherwise JSS give us the logical reason for a Hangman acetate. And can Greg Brooks our queen archivist add some information about this one ? |
| Penetration_Guru 10.09.2007 12:36 |
1. Acetates could be made for other reasons - hearing a rough mix at home, could even be used as a demo tape. 2. The existence of an acetate doesn't preclude the subsequent wiping (or reusing) of the tapes concerned. 3. Have you tried asking Greg yourself? He's an approachable chap. |
| The Real Wizard 11.09.2007 11:23 |
FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: In that version you can also hear Freddie say "November 24.....24.......dead" if you filter off the frequencies below 12 khzBut it can only be done during a full moon. |
| Micrówave 11.09.2007 11:46 |
shadysenator wrote: forget that you see JSS as God ....Kinda hard to do that. I did see him walk on water once. That's not something you forget. |
| Negative Creep 11.09.2007 14:56 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: 2. The existence of an acetate doesn't preclude the subsequent wiping (or reusing) of the tapes concerned.There is very little chance of both the multitrack and any stereo mixdowns being wiped if they had gone to the trouble of pressing acetates of it. And losing both multitrack and stereo mixdowns is unlikely aswell. If JSS does have an acetate, it's most likely QP already have the tapes of it anyway. Greg has said he isn't permitted to talk in detail about the studio archive - they probably want to keep something like this as a surprise when/if any rarities boxset arrives. |
| Penetration_Guru 11.09.2007 18:00 |
But Greg HAS said that there is no Hangman on any tape he's heard (and that must include all of them by this point). |
| willem-jan 8923 12.09.2007 02:53 |
Negative Creep wrote:You think John would care about that? He (as the rest of us) will be dead for years once the box-set is released.Penetration_Guru wrote: 2. The existence of an acetate doesn't preclude the subsequent wiping (or reusing) of the tapes concerned.Greg has said he isn't permitted to talk in detail about the studio archive - they probably want to keep something like this as a surprise when/if any rarities boxset arrives. |
| Jeroen 12.09.2007 04:48 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: But Greg HAS said that there is no Hangman on any tape he's heard (and that must include all of them by this point).In 1993 Brian was still convinced they never even recorded it in the studio... |
| shadysenator 12.09.2007 05:01 |
Well jeroen if brian said so then why can JSS claim he has a acetate ? I'm wondering who's wrong here, BM his memory or JSS has made a mistake. So can we ask for a snippet of the recording again ? Just to prove it is out there and can shock the Queen prductions again or just whipe out a rumour... JSS your reaction please.... |
| Jeroen 12.09.2007 06:01 |
shadysenator wrote: Well jeroen if brian said so then why can JSS claim he has a acetate ? I'm wondering who's wrong here, BM his memory or JSS has made a mistake. So can we ask for a snippet of the recording again ? Just to prove it is out there and can shock the Queen prductions again or just whipe out a rumour... JSS your reaction please....I don't know, shady. The only thing I know (and the only thing the whole world seems to know about this) is just the fact that JSS says he has it. Brian stated they never recorded it (but indeed we all know about his fading memory - on the other hand, when dit his brain start deterriorating? As early as 1993 - the time that I first specifically spoke to and corresponded with him about this song?? He DID remember who wrote it for instance!), Greg has never heard it (read: it is not in the archives?), and none of the producers Queen worked with at the time of recording Queen I/Queen II remember. A lot of QZ'ers take everthing JSS says immediately for truth. I'm not saying we/you/I should NOT trust him. But on the other hand I've never seen anything that put him that high on the ladder that I DO take every word he says without hesitation. Keep in mind that the Queenworld is more then full of people with huge imaginations. It has always been like that, so if you have been here for many years -like me- every normal, healthy mind will grow some scepticism. I'm a person that believes something when he has seen (heard) it or get it from a source that has repeatedly proved to be trustworthy. The only person I would blindly believe by just his/her word is my mum! It has been asked many times that JSS uploads a snippet, but he doesn't want to. His choice and that's fine with me. But untill then there is no proof whatsoever that this song ever was recorded in the studio. |
| Negative Creep 12.09.2007 06:46 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: But Greg HAS said that there is no Hangman on any tape he's heard (and that must include all of them by this point).Hold the front page - band official denies existance of unreleased recording! It's an easy way (or should be) to stop people constantly asking about something. I don't think he has actually 100% said it isn't in the archives anyway - he just said he had no recollection didn't he? Zeppelin stated that numerous footage didn't ever exist and has now been released or is available on bootlegs. |
| Benn 12.09.2007 08:36 |
Brian has *CONSISTENTLY* shown that his memory is somewhat lacking in certain aspects of Queen's history. It's likely that he was more concerned about moving on to the next album over and above caring whether they had retained ant tapes for unused songs. After all, who was to know that the re-issue market would grow so large and that "binned" songs would have any interest to fans? JSS has a huge amount of credibility both on here, with the Queen fan-base beyond these paramaters and also within QPL and their associates. There is absolutely no reason for JSS to claim that he has something when he doesn't. There's no *GAIN* for him by doing that. I'd hope that his pronouncements regarding what he retains would prick the interest of official channels to the extent that they would be politely ringing his bell in order to obtain the necessary material to make any re-issue / archival project as full and complete as possible. |
| shadysenator 12.09.2007 09:09 |
I do think that BM does recall any ong that is recorded, because it is a time taking proces...And musicians are mostly proud of their work. Especially in the period of the first albums all mst be very exciting. But yes I don;t know who is wrong... JSScould you reply to this topic ? |
| Adam Baboolal 12.09.2007 09:17 |
Benn, I think you miss the point about the skepticism around JSS's claims. And I also feel your comment about Brian and the tape thing is misguided. As a musician, I certainly don't remember everything I've recorded. From a musician's point of view, I have loved archiving my tracks and discovering them. There was a time I'd listen to some every few months. And the way Brian has talked about these things (i.e. music discoveries, etc.) on his soapbox has always given me the impression that he feels the same. I think it's a musician's way of thinking. Not for everyone, true, but definitely with someone like Brian. But then, Brian doesn't really get the chance to wander the archive and just play stuff to remind himself about old songs, does he. Now, you must understand that just because JSS says he has something, doesn't mean we can all turn around and say, "I believe you!" No. I don't know him, so how can I blindly believe it's true. And if someone vouches for him on here, guess what, I don't know them either! It's very difficult to believe everything you read here. And it's true that there have been some instances over the years of people embellishing stories about things here. So, it's not surprising that there are people here asking for some kind of proof to what's been said. It's natural. Just don't think they're ignorant about JSS and his reputation. There are plenty that are fully aware of his reputation, but don't really know him or anything about what he has - Only the lists he puts up here. And again, that's where people's skeptic responses come in. Adam. |
| Bobby_brown 12.09.2007 11:05 |
JSS doesn´t have to prove if he has the song to me. BUT, if QueenProductions asks for a deal, and he refuses to, or even refuses to prove to them that the song exists, after stating that he was open to it, then i think i will know what to think! If he doesn´t want to deal with them it´s OK, but he should guive them prove that the studio version really exists. Let´s hope they´ll get to somewhere! Take care |
| Leaky Luke 12.09.2007 11:19 |
shadysenator wrote: I do think that BM does recall any ong that is recorded, because it is a time taking proces...And musicians are mostly proud of their work. Especially in the period of the first albums all mst be very exciting. But yes I don;t know who is wrong... JSScould you reply to this topic ?That explains how he forgot about Silver Salmon then. |
| ok.computer 12.09.2007 19:08 |
You'll have to pardon my stupidity on this one. Isn't an acetate record a rather fragile item? Doesn't it lose its high frequency end in terms of sound if played too much? I ask this, only because I was observing that if John had recorded snippets as often as everyone asked, the damn thing would be near enough worn through by now. Just a thought. |
| Mr Mercury 12.09.2007 19:27 |
ok.computer wrote: You'll have to pardon my stupidity on this one. Isn't an acetate record a rather fragile item? Doesn't it lose its high frequency end in terms of sound if played too much? I ask this, only because I was observing that if John had recorded snippets as often as everyone asked, the damn thing would be near enough worn through by now. Just a thought.I believe you are quite correct. The discs themselves are very fragile with a tendency to dry out (increasing surface noise) and can only be played a limited number of times before high frequency roll-off becomes apparent. |
| Jeroen 13.09.2007 04:32 |
Actually it does not 'dry out', it's more a matter of the grooves wearing out. Acetates are made from a very soft material and is intented to be played only a minimal amount of times. Every play 'scratches' out pieces of wax which reduces music. In general one could say that after about 4 or 5 plays the music deteriorates. That's also why in general acetates are always sold accompanied by a (nowadays digital) transfer of the content. If JSS does not have a cd-r transfer he should immediately make one the very first time he plays te record. But I honestly assume that a collector like JSS knows this and DOES have a transfer. |
| john bodega 13.09.2007 06:32 |
Jeroen wrote: Actually it does not 'dry out', it's more a matter of the grooves wearing out. Acetates are made from a very soft material and is intented to be played only a minimal amount of times. Every play 'scratches' out pieces of wax which reduces music. In general one could say that after about 4 or 5 plays the music deteriorates. That's also why in general acetates are always sold accompanied by a (nowadays digital) transfer of the content. If JSS does not have a cd-r transfer he should immediately make one the very first time he plays te record. But I honestly assume that a collector like JSS knows this and DOES have a transfer.(JSS looks embarrassed and runs off to get some CDs). |
| Adam Baboolal 13.09.2007 08:30 |
Zebonka12 wrote:You may not be far from the truth there Zeb!Jeroen wrote: ...If JSS does not have a cd-r transfer he should immediately make one the very first time he plays te record. But I honestly assume that a collector like JSS knows this and DOES have a transfer.(JSS looks embarrassed and runs off to get some CDs). |
| pittrek 13.09.2007 08:38 |
Brian is a pensioner who has behind him 30 years of drugs and alcohol. Why do you think he can be sure about what did 30 years ago ? |
| Jeroen 13.09.2007 09:36 |
Adam Baboolal wrote:So he either already ruined the record before making a back-up -in that case we lost Hangman forever- or he has not even ever played the record! God knows what's on it. ;-)))Zebonka12 wrote:You may not be far from the truth there Zeb!Jeroen wrote: ...If JSS does not have a cd-r transfer he should immediately make one the very first time he plays te record. But I honestly assume that a collector like JSS knows this and DOES have a transfer.(JSS looks embarrassed and runs off to get some CDs). |
| Sebastian 13.09.2007 12:42 |
> Kinda hard to do that. I did see him walk on water once. That's not something you forget. He resurrected Pavarotti as well, and sent him to live with Elvis and Hitler somewhere in the Isle of Man. > He (as the rest of us) will be dead for years once the box-set is released. So will Brian, Roger and Greg. Queen will be Paul Rodgers + Ringo Starr by then, and of course, they'll tour as Queen + Beatles. > In 1993 Brian was still convinced they never even recorded it in the studio... And Brian also said 'My Fairy King' was on 'Queen II', 'Masterstroke' in the 'Opera' / 'Races' era, and so on. > Zeppelin stated that numerous footage didn't ever exist and has now been released or is available on bootlegs. Hadn't Roger and Brian denied the 'Smile' album at first too? > I do think that BM does recall any ong that is recorded, because it is a time taking proces...And musicians are mostly proud of their work. Yes, and he was proud of 'My Fairy King', just not enough to know which album was it on... > Especially in the period of the first albums all mst be very exciting. But likewise it's possible they did loads of "wasted" sessions, which didn't end up issued. Especially if they were using downtime... |
| John S Stuart 13.09.2007 17:26 |
shadysenator: To answer you frankly - No, I am not the Messiah. (I am just a very naughty boy!) Nor have I desired Queenzone disciples, or asked that anything I say to be consumed as gospel. In this sense I am just another Queenzone 'journalist' reporting the 'unfolding story' of Queen as I see it. whether I am believed - or not - is immaterial - that does nothing to either prove or disprove the existence of a 'Hangman' acetate. However, what certainly CAN be demonstrated are certain contributory factors: One: It is true - I do INDEED claim to own an EMI 'Hangman' 10" acetate. Two: All of my 3231 posts since I first registered (Wednesday, July 25, 2001) are open to public scrutiny. Three: I believe, to paraphrase the 'real' Messiah, 'by their fruits ye shall know them'. Therefore - to find out how many 'lies' I have told in the past, trawl through these posts - and if I am a Queenzone journalist of repute - of good reputation, then you will see why my voice is reliable, and why I am a trusted member of this community. But - if you find that all my other posts are lacking credibility, that I am indeed a journalist of bad reputation - then I agree perhaps I should be shunned for bringing this forum into shame or disrepute. Either way - I am certainly offering NO snippets or samples to prove anything, and if my word is NOT good enough for you, then that is fine. Life still goes on. As to WHY the disc was cut, I think you confuse promo discs with acetates. I know collectors in here who own the works album as seperate 7" acetates. I know other collectors who own for example 'Ogre Battle' as an acetate, and this was not released as a single either. An acetate can be cut by a sound engineer just to feel how a track would sound on disc, to testing the equipment, or to a band member wishing to keep a record of the evening's performance. Truth is, I do not know WHY it was cut. I only know it exists. |
| John S Stuart 13.09.2007 17:31 |
Adam Baboolal wrote:Adam - a cheap shot, and uncalled for, I would have expected better.Zebonka12 wrote:You may not be far from the truth there Zeb!Jeroen wrote: ...If JSS does not have a cd-r transfer he should immediately make one the very first time he plays te record. But I honestly assume that a collector like JSS knows this and DOES have a transfer.(JSS looks embarrassed and runs off to get some CDs). |
| John S Stuart 13.09.2007 17:34 |
Bobby_brown wrote: JSS doesn´t have to prove if he has the song to me. BUT, if QueenProductions asks for a deal, and he refuses to, or even refuses to prove to them that the song exists, after stating that he was open to it, then i think i will know what to think! If he doesn´t want to deal with them it´s OK, but he should guive them prove that the studio version really exists. Let´s hope they´ll get to somewhere! Take careI believe a conduit has opened between Queen Productions and myself. However, this still does NOT guarantee that the disc will ever be released! |
| John S Stuart 13.09.2007 17:43 |
willem-jan wrote:Actually, over the many years I have been VERY generous to the wider Queen community - both openly and covert.Negative Creep wrote:You think John would care about that? He (as the rest of us) will be dead for years once the box-set is released.Penetration_Guru wrote: 2. The existence of an acetate doesn't preclude the subsequent wiping (or reusing) of the tapes concerned.Greg has said he isn't permitted to talk in detail about the studio archive - they probably want to keep something like this as a surprise when/if any rarities boxset arrives. I have given almost all I have to give, and still I am harranged for more. What I hold in my collection are but a few grains of sand against the vast Beach of QPL (yes the pun was intended). It is they you need to harrang - not I. For they too will be all dead and gone soon (in fact their most creative member already has - while another has quietly slipped into retirement)before any of THEIR rarities look likely to be exposed - if ever. Besides, even if QPL was to secure the disc, do you really believe it would bring it any closer to the public domain. If you do, you certainly have far more faith in QPL than I do! |
| Penetration_Guru 13.09.2007 18:29 |
John S Stuart wrote: Besides, even if QPL was to secure the disc, do you really believe it would bring it any closer to the public domain. If you do, you certainly have far more faith in QPL than I do!Exactly. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 13.09.2007 19:56 |
For what it's worth John, I totally believe in you. As for Adam's cheap shot, as a long time poster here, there's a weird history between you two, and playing amateur psycholgist, I'd say Adam is a classic passive/aggressive personality. Takes subtle digs at people, gets upset when called on it, then runs. Someone called him out on it the other day on the Fan Mix forum for always criticising but never posting his own stuff, but I think he missed the point. Shame, he's extremely knowledgeable on many things. |
| willem-jan 8923 14.09.2007 03:32 |
John S Stuart wrote:John, I actually was aiming at QPL concerning a possible release in the future, not at you at all! I do fully respect your policy on this actual track.willem-jan wrote:Actually, over the many years I have been VERY generous to the wider Queen community - both openly and covert. I have given almost all I have to give, and still I am harranged for more. What I hold in my collection are but a few grains of sand against the vast Beach of QPL (yes the pun was intended). It is they you need to harrang - not I. For they too will be all dead and gone soon (in fact their most creative member already has - while another has quietly slipped into retirement)before any of THEIR rarities look likely to be exposed - if ever. Besides, even if QPL was to secure the disc, do you really believe it would bring it any closer to the public domain. If you do, you certainly have far more faith in QPL than I do!Negative Creep wrote:You think John would care about that? He (as the rest of us) will be dead for years once the box-set is released.Penetration_Guru wrote: 2. The existence of an acetate doesn't preclude the subsequent wiping (or reusing) of the tapes concerned.Greg has said he isn't permitted to talk in detail about the studio archive - they probably want to keep something like this as a surprise when/if any rarities boxset arrives. Just out of curiosity, do you have any info on the acetate you have, for instance, day of recording etc.? And how does the song compare to the live versions we have (different lyrics, speed etc.)? |
| John S Stuart 14.09.2007 08:52 |
willem-jan: I know nothing about the disc other than it came as part of a set of other 10" one-sided discs. As to dates etc... I am completely ignorant. Forgive me, but there is little more point guessing at the things I do not know. (I am neither being rude or evasive here - just perfectly honest - sorry!) The studio version does differ from the 'Young Nobles Of Rock' version in that it has a more heavier Led Zep/Black Sabbath 'feel'. (Think De Lane Lea 'Jesus', 'Liar' or 'Silver Salmon'). I also think that in the 'Young Nobles...' version the lyrics have been 'fleshed out' - but that may well be down to the fact that one is a live version - while the other is not - so the live one may be more improvised on the night. Otherwise, struture, content and ideas are pretty much the same. |
| willem-jan 8923 14.09.2007 09:05 |
Thanks for the reply, interesting read! So if this acetate version is the same as the young nobles version (lyric wise) it should be recorded around the time of that particular show. Since if i remember correctly, older versions have other lyrics (it's been ages since I've listened to these other shows, so I could be wrong). |
| Negative Creep 14.09.2007 10:16 |
Wouldn't it make sense then to send a low quality version (mono, heavily compressed, low bitrate) to Brians PA or something to prove it's existance? If they seriously don't have any versions of Hangman themselves, surely they'd be chasing you for this? |
| Adam Baboolal 14.09.2007 11:04 |
John S Stuart wrote:No, John, no! It wasn't any kind of a "cheap shot".Adam Baboolal wrote:Adam - a cheap shot, and uncalled for, I would have expected better.Zebonka12 wrote:You may not be far from the truth there Zeb!Jeroen wrote: ...If JSS does not have a cd-r transfer he should immediately make one the very first time he plays te record. But I honestly assume that a collector like JSS knows this and DOES have a transfer.(JSS looks embarrassed and runs off to get some CDs). Anyway, onto BTR's comment. link Hey..look. It's me! lol - yeah right. Sorry BTRaker, but you're way-off on your assessment of me. And when I've been "upset", as you say, have I ever run off? Far from it, I say. I don't remember being called out on the Fan-mix forum the other day. Where did you get that? *Checks forum* I have what you might have been referring to. The exact quote was, "btw adam, did you ever finish that 'don't stop me now' cover that you annouced a while back? in fact, have you ever released any mixes on this forum?" - I chose to answer it straight, rather than take it any other way. Though, I get the feeling it was supposed to be calling me out, like you say. I don't rise to such things. Just because I choose to share what -I- want, when -I- want, seems to concern that user. Sad really cause the way I see his post is that he feels, if someone doesn't contribute a mix, how can one have an opinion about them! Which, I'm sure you'll agree, is laughable! In fact, I've shared that song (DSMN) with friends, but haven't posted it here. But no worries, I do plan on getting it to QZ once I've completed the recording work. I've just been incredibly busy with things in recent months. In fact, there are a few covers in the off-ing for QZ - all because of the WWRY show I did this year. Anyway, John, there was no subtext to my comment. It was 100% meant as it looks, i.e. John probably HASN'T had it properly backed up. I had meant that I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't been properly transfered for archival. Well, maybe a mindisc backup as he does have minidisc backups in his lists. But I suppose, it's an acetate, so maybe he hasn't touched it at all! I remember acetates well. Used to get them free with the old record mags in town. Ah...I miss those! Anyway, yes, unfortunately there was a brief history with myself and John. I never wanted that. I hope he doesn't either. Adam. |
| John S Stuart 14.09.2007 11:58 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: ...I remember acetates well. Used to get them free with the old record mags in town. Ah...I miss those! Adam.NO - those were NOT acetates Adam. Those were flexi-discs. Acetates are very, very heavy, as they have a metal based (usually alluminium) centre. It is this which makes them very brittle and very dry. They also went out of fashion around mid 1980's - as DAT and other digital media have since made them redundant. |
| Maz 14.09.2007 12:04 |
Negative Creep wrote: Wouldn't it make sense then to send a low quality version (mono, heavily compressed, low bitrate) to Brians PA or something to prove it's existance? If they seriously don't have any versions of Hangman themselves, surely they'd be chasing you for this?If so heavily compressed and of poor quality, couldn't that also be confused for just another live version from some random early gig? |
| Adam Baboolal 14.09.2007 13:32 |
Oh right. Gotcha. In that case, I think I've only ever seen one real acetate ages ago. Kind of like a record, but it was weird on one side. Adam. |
| wstüssyb 14.09.2007 23:25 |
JJS-A simple Question, So does this Hangman sound like how they played it live, or is it really a complete studio song? |