| on my way up 27.09.2007 13:42 |
Lynn: Let's go from Mongolia, to Holland, where Robert is, Robert you're through to Brian Robert: Is it true that Queen recorded almost every live show they ever did, and if so, will Queen ever release a definitive live album in the near future, for example, all the cover tracks Queen ever played, like Imagine, for example, but also0 Queen versions? Brian: Very interesting question, how did you know that? Well, yes it's true - we normally did have a tape machine running on the desk. Now the thing is, that records something very dry, and it was really for our own use, in other words, there's no ambience from the room and there's no audience on there, so the things tend to sound kind of sterile. And so we used it to check our own performance and to find out how we were playing together and stuff. They weren't generally held to be intended to be heard by the general public. But it's all locked away somewhere and I suppose it could be looked at. There ARE a lot of bootlegs around. I mean I have around 50 bootlegs from around the world now, and I haven't even tried I know there are hundreds of them out there. So you probably get just about every live show we ever did on bootleg albums - not that I recommend it (laughs I got this from queenonline. this link:link I think this is the reason why fans think there are more recorded shows than the 10% the official archivist talks about. |
| una999 27.09.2007 15:06 |
on my way up wrote: Lynn: Let's go from Mongolia, to Holland, where Robert is, Robert you're through to Brian Robert: Is it true that Queen recorded almost every live show they ever did, and if so, will Queen ever release a definitive live album in the near future, for example, all the cover tracks Queen ever played, like Imagine, for example, but also0 Queen versions? Brian: Very interesting question, how did you know that? Well, yes it's true - we normally did have a tape machine running on the desk. Now the thing is, that records something very dry, and it was really for our own use, in other words, there's no ambience from the room and there's no audience on there, so the things tend to sound kind of sterile. And so we used it to check our own performance and to find out how we were playing together and stuff. They weren't generally held to be intended to be heard by the general public. But it's all locked away somewhere and I suppose it could be looked at. There ARE a lot of bootlegs around. I mean I have around 50 bootlegs from around the world now, and I haven't even tried I know there are hundreds of them out there. So you probably get just about every live show we ever did on bootleg albums - not that I recommend it (laughs I got this from queenonline. this link:link I think this is the reason why fans think there are more recorded shows than the 10% the official archivist talks about.Get a life? I mean who cares...I mean is the material that's out there not enough? In all fairness what do you do with your time...are you in a relationship? |
| Lester Burnham 27.09.2007 15:12 |
una999 wrote: Get a life? I mean who cares...I mean is the material that's out there not enough? In all fairness what do you do with your time...are you in a relationship?What is wrong with you? The OP was just copying and pasting part of an interview with Brian, because it had been rumored in the past that all of Queen's shows had been recorded, so it's nothing more offensive than just a bit of a clarification. |
| cmsdrums 27.09.2007 15:47 |
I think that the comments by Brian are very interesting, and obviously clash with what material Greg Brooks says is in the archives. In Greg's defence, he only mention the ones that are in multitrack format, but I would imagine that the tapes that Brian refers to are, at the very least, decent clean stereo mixes from the soundboard, and not simply a bootleg style tape 'recorder in the air' approach. It would certainly be interesting to hear these - I wonder if they might think to release these in the 'Top 100 Bootlegs' series rather than rehashing 4th generation copies of existing bootlegs that we already have? |
| on my way up 27.09.2007 16:19 |
una999 wrote:I'm really interested in Queen live.It's one of my hobby's and I know there are other people on this forum interested in these kind of things. Lately there's been much discussion about what exists in the archives and I read this article and I thought it was quite interesting....on my way up wrote: Lynn: Let's go from Mongolia, to Holland, where Robert is, Robert you're through to Brian Robert: Is it true that Queen recorded almost every live show they ever did, and if so, will Queen ever release a definitive live album in the near future, for example, all the cover tracks Queen ever played, like Imagine, for example, but also0 Queen versions? Brian: Very interesting question, how did you know that? Well, yes it's true - we normally did have a tape machine running on the desk. Now the thing is, that records something very dry, and it was really for our own use, in other words, there's no ambience from the room and there's no audience on there, so the things tend to sound kind of sterile. And so we used it to check our own performance and to find out how we were playing together and stuff. They weren't generally held to be intended to be heard by the general public. But it's all locked away somewhere and I suppose it could be looked at. There ARE a lot of bootlegs around. I mean I have around 50 bootlegs from around the world now, and I haven't even tried I know there are hundreds of them out there. So you probably get just about every live show we ever did on bootleg albums - not that I recommend it (laughs I got this from queenonline. this link:link I think this is the reason why fans think there are more recorded shows than the 10% the official archivist talks about.Get a life? I mean who cares...I mean is the material that's out there not enough? In all fairness what do you do with your time...are you in a relationship? It took me 5 minutes to read it and to post it here. Maybe I'm just a little bit more active than you( a day counts 24 hours). Actually, I'm quite sure about that. |
| eiricd 27.09.2007 17:31 |
I don't think it clashes with Greg at all. Greg says there are a limited amount of PROPER live recordings something like earls court doesn't qualify as a proper live recording. a proper live recording is something you can release. earls court, even though highly listenable, is not something they can release |
| thunderbolt 31742 27.09.2007 21:29 |
No audience noise, you say? I admit, I enjoy the crowd noise more often than not, but there are some songs from some tours that I wish I had a "clean" version of--Bo Rhap from Wembley is one of the ones I've love to hear sans audience. I don't think this revelation clashes with what Greg's said at all. Greg was asked about the vault--Brian said that even he's not sure where these recordings are. |
| kenny8 27.09.2007 23:54 |
on my way up wrote: It took me 5 minutes to read it and to post it here. Maybe I'm just a little bit more active than you( a day counts 24 hours). Actually, I'm quite sure about that.Don't even bother defending yourself, you have no reason to. Thanks for the info. una999, grow up you are juvenile and petty |
| john bodega 28.09.2007 03:40 |
una999 wrote: Get a life? I mean who cares...I mean is the material that's out there not enough? In all fairness what do you do with your time...are you in a relationship?With every post, you reinvent the meaning of "Stupid". I'd thought you'd finally found the absolute nadir in that field, but here you go again.... |
| on my way up 28.09.2007 04:11 |
cmsdrums wrote: I think that the comments by Brian are very interesting, and obviously clash with what material Greg Brooks says is in the archives. In Greg's defence, he only mention the ones that are in multitrack format, but I would imagine that the tapes that Brian refers to are, at the very least, decent clean stereo mixes from the soundboard, and not simply a bootleg style tape 'recorder in the air' approach. It would certainly be interesting to hear these - I wonder if they might think to release these in the 'Top 100 Bootlegs' series rather than rehashing 4th generation copies of existing bootlegs that we already have?Where does greg say he only mentions multitracks? I always get the impression he talks about ALL live recordings. A stereo or mono recording is a recording aswell and he could have used these for his book for example. He didn't because, as he says, there is so little in the archive. It would be wonderful if we get to hear some more Queen live recordings from the desk but I don't think it will ever happen. I think they fear that once they make these stereo recordings available it will affect the sales of the live releases like wembley, montreal, milton keynes. The only way we will ever find out is the box sets. If we get to hear a great quality version of Imagine or another rarely played song. |
| una999 28.09.2007 09:46 |
Zebonka12 wrote:Don't take your frustrations out on me!una999 wrote: Get a life? I mean who cares...I mean is the material that's out there not enough? In all fairness what do you do with your time...are you in a relationship?With every post, you reinvent the meaning of "Stupid". I'd thought you'd finally found the absolute nadir in that field, but here you go again.... |
| john bodega 28.09.2007 12:14 |
?? Times like this, I wish Jack Rebney would come along and shout at you so I can preserve my throat. |
| una999 28.09.2007 12:44 |
Zebonka12 wrote: ?? Times like this, I wish Jack Rebney would come along and shout at you so I can preserve my throat.It's ok man relax!! Seriously, i mean it's all a bit of fun...i could be shouting abuse at you, i appreciate your point though. |