QueenZone discussion #1057656
Queenfans, the biggest moaners ever.
| Another Roger (re) 16.11.2007 12:22 |
Whatever Queen does, whatever Queen release, whatever Brian do people moan. Alright, probably this only include a small group of the Queenfans. But still its very annoying hearing the same thing over and over again. Why cant those of you who moan every time Queen do a movement just stop liking Queen ? Buy Zeppelin instead, their releases are supposed to always be so fantastic. Queenfans always used to critizise the old release of Montreal because of the sound. Well, now you slag off the new release because of the picture. I should have guessed it. But why dont we wait for the HD-release? We have to give that a chance I think. And sometimes I wonder how naive the hardcore fans are. Do you think they would release the Rainbow show just for a couple of hardcore fans on DVD? Of course not. Its business. They release what will bring money. And I dont blame them. |
| Serry... 16.11.2007 12:26 |
"Queenfans, the biggest moaners ever" You just have proved that. |
| Another Roger (re) 16.11.2007 12:31 |
Thats at least good, as it was my point. |
| Jay Mantis 16.11.2007 12:41 |
Just so you know, your not the first one to do a rant about this. So basically that makes you a moaner as well. Also, I'm sure Rainbow '74 would sell very well. There are lot's of people who aren't even that much of a Queen fan who would love to see some of their old stuff released. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 16.11.2007 12:51 |
Another Roger, to simplify, there are probably two types of Queen fans: people like you, casual fans who will happily buy anything with Queen involved no questions asked, and people like Benn, Serry and I, who want value and standards. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You see QRM as a flawless gem that we should be happy with ever seeing, others see it as a re-re-re release that if improved, was probably unnecessary. Why is that a surprise? And this is not directed solely at you, but yes, we understand QP is a business, and businesses are supposed to make money. In order for us unwashed who don't understand how businesses operate, we will agree to understand the concept of business if you agree that sometimes good business listen to their customers. I've heard a saying that "the customer is always right." A drug store in America has a TV commercial with the slogan "an informed customer is our best customer." Some businesses actually offer "loss leaders", products that don't make money, but encourage further spending. So, maybe QP could act like other businesses and acknowledge there's a certain customer dissatisfaction with their product, listen to the legitimate complaints, and throw the a bone like Earls Court for all of their support over the past 30 years. |
| John S Stuart 16.11.2007 13:05 |
Boy Thomas Raker wrote: Another Roger, to simplify, there are probably two types of Queen fans: people like you, casual fans who will happily buy anything with Queen involved no questions asked, and people like Benn, Serry and I, who want value and standards. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You see QRM as a flawless gem that we should be happy with ever seeing, others see it as a re-re-re release that if improved, was probably unnecessary. Why is that a surprise? And this is not directed solely at you, but yes, we understand QP is a business, and businesses are supposed to make money. In order for us unwashed who don't understand how businesses operate, we will agree to understand the concept of business if you agree that sometimes good business listen to their customers. I've heard a saying that "the customer is always right." A drug store in America has a TV commercial with the slogan "an informed customer is our best customer." Some businesses actually offer "loss leaders", products that don't make money, but encourage further spending. So, maybe QP could act like other businesses and acknowledge there's a certain customer dissatisfaction with their product, listen to the legitimate complaints, and throw the a bone like Earls Court for all of their support over the past 30 years.Here, here... |
| dsmeer 16.11.2007 14:24 |
Oke for the last time. Other great bands like Metallica really do somethinf for there fans, for example the FAN cans that they release. Or the concerts that they give away as free downloads. Oke it is still business but do they really need to make more and more and more money? |
| Mr Mercury 16.11.2007 14:57 |
dsmeer wrote: Oke it is still business but do they really need to make more and more and more money?Yes they do because that is the nature of their business. Its as simple as that. |
| Another Roger (re) 16.11.2007 17:18 |
"Also, I'm sure Rainbow '74 would sell very well" I would indeed buy such a release. But its naive to think that it would sell well. People that just like Queen a little (the biggest group of buyers) look for We are the champions, We Will Rock You, Bohemian Rhapsody, A Kind of magic etc. They havent even heard of Ogre Battle or Father to Son. I want this release though. But I am sure people would complain anyway :) |
| Another Roger (re) 16.11.2007 17:25 |
"Another Roger, to simplify, there are probably two types of Queen fans: people like you, casual fans who will happily buy anything with Queen involved no questions asked, and people like Benn, Serry and I, who want value and standards. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You see QRM as a flawless gem that we should be happy with ever seeing, others see it as a re-re-re release that if improved, was probably unnecessary. Why is that a surprise?" Hehe. How petronising. I am a Queen fan, and I do not buy everything at all. I buy the releases that I want, but I dont complain if Queen releases something that isnt new to me. And Brian May was right about the pioneer release. The sound was awful. If you dont like the dvd, buy the cd then! New beautiful sound plus The Hero and Flash. They even release this concert in HD and Blue-ray format. Lots of options in other words. But some people only see the cliffs, not the sea. |
| Another Roger (re) 16.11.2007 17:28 |
"and people like Benn, Serry and I, who want value and standards" I assume you have 0 Queen dvds then? Maybe you should get some jobs and do something about it rather than behaving like sulking cyberwarriors :) |
| Zak Royen 16.11.2007 18:04 |
i always find it strange that some Queen fans want everyone to see their idols as businessmen first and foremost. should we REALLY find it normal/okay that Queen bases all its decisions on a money-making principle? is the business nature of a rock group uncritcizable? |
| Boy Thomas Raker 16.11.2007 21:32 |
Excellent point Zak. Queen made their name as sonic innovators, studio geniuses, brlliant musicians and songwriters, and a live act virtually unmatched. I've read alnmost every article on Queen that's been published, and 99.9% of reviews are about their music or live shows. They're musicians. But nobody seems to think of them as that today, they all talk about them as businessmen. Fuck business, they made their names as artists, what's wrong with giving people art? I own no Queen DVD's Another Roger, I bought the 5.1 release for ANATO, loved the sound, but the additional features were absolutely embarassing. Lester, Benn, Serry and myself (along with others) could have put together the definitive collection for the omost important album in the Queen catalogue after an afternoon of exchanging e-mails. Brian thought that the film for Seaside Rendezvous was special, enough said, the entire package for that was a total joke. |
| John S Stuart 16.11.2007 22:14 |
Another Roger (re) wrote: ...But some people only see the cliffs, not the sea.For a drowning act like Queen, to see cliffs would be a god-send... |
| beautifulsoup 16.11.2007 23:36 |
All fandoms have whiners. Queenfans are not unique. |
| Serry... 17.11.2007 01:18 |
Another Roger (re) wrote: "and people like Benn, Serry and I, who want value and standards" I assume you have 0 Queen dvds then? Maybe you should get some jobs and do something about it rather than behaving like sulking cyberwarriors :)I don't know the whole band line-up even. It was Freddie, it was Ringo... No... R... R... Roger, yeah? Roger Sailor or something like that. |
| ANAGRAMER 17.11.2007 04:52 |
There's an element of truth in that - on here Queen fans do like a moan! It's almost always justified though - QRM, for the connissuer fan, is a poor release - virtually identical set to OFATB. Yip, the've beefed-up the sound and picture quality, but pixels do not entertainment make! What serious fans want is to glimpse the genius that made us fans in the first place - perhaps these things don't exist but you do get the feeling of expoitation by QP in our search. It must also be said that the 'extras' on the QRM release are pretty embarrassing - stuff you could easily get on Youtube or elsewhere and probably never look at more than once. No doubt Live in Budapest will be next.... |
| Adam Baboolal 17.11.2007 08:56 |
I can certainly understand that the extreme fans want more, while the mainstay fans here don't get angry for what's not out there. I don't get why people like myself are being called casual fans. Why should I be categorized as such? Am I not just a Queen fan - full-stop?! And no, I don't buy everything either. The moaning is real. My main example would be the MK Bowl release. Before this was released plenty of fans loved that gig and praised it as a great performance and gig in general. After the release, it's belittled on here. That's what this thread is probably pointing at - the sudden turn-arounds that seem to occur when QP try to do something. Sure the 2nd disc wasn't anything to write home about, but, 1) at least it was something and 2) I bought it for the music. I wouldn't mind as much when folk here say they could do a better job, but they don't seem to do anything. The closest I've seen so far about someone doing something, are people like John S Stuart and his articles for Record collector or Sir-GH and his book on Queen. These are great examples. But while the 2005 ANATO release didn't satisfy the "hardcore" fan, I've yet to see a fan-made replacement. Why?? I'm sure there are plenty of people here that could do it. My point is that for all the people here that justify their views - their promises are empty threats when they talk of doing something better. I think it's time for them to show us exactly what they can do. And of course, I'll help if I can, being a video/audio guy. Why don't WE the QZ community do something after the years of bitching about what QP does? Step-up and try. Adam. |
| una999 17.11.2007 09:10 |
Another Roger (re) wrote: Whatever Queen does, whatever Queen release, whatever Brian do people moan. Alright, probably this only include a small group of the Queenfans. But still its very annoying hearing the same thing over and over again. Why cant those of you who moan every time Queen do a movement just stop liking Queen ? Buy Zeppelin instead, their releases are supposed to always be so fantastic. Queenfans always used to critizise the old release of Montreal because of the sound. Well, now you slag off the new release because of the picture. I should have guessed it. But why dont we wait for the HD-release? We have to give that a chance I think. And sometimes I wonder how naive the hardcore fans are. Do you think they would release the Rainbow show just for a couple of hardcore fans on DVD? Of course not. Its business. They release what will bring money. And I dont blame them.I agree i think a lot of people on this site, well maybe its the same few, who love office work obviously - post something in the 'wrong' section (because god said it himself that it was wrong), they have nothing better to do with their time that they try to act as if they are the policemen of this site. When you look back on your life, surely you'd want to have a better account of yourself. |
| Mr Mercury 17.11.2007 09:37 |
Serry<br><font size=1>The FLACer</font> wrote:They had Ryan Bay on guitar I think....Another Roger (re) wrote: "and people like Benn, Serry and I, who want value and standards" I assume you have 0 Queen dvds then? Maybe you should get some jobs and do something about it rather than behaving like sulking cyberwarriors :)I don't know the whole band line-up even. It was Freddie, it was Ringo... No... R... R... Roger, yeah? Roger Sailor or something like that. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 17.11.2007 09:39 |
"Yip, the've beefed-up the sound and picture quality, but pixels do not entertainment make!" "What serious fans want is to glimpse the genius that made us fans in the first place." ANAGRAMER, I wish I had written these words. Brilliant analysis. Adam, I'd hardly consider you a casual fan. Your contributions to the board on most topics are knowledgeable, particularly in matters pertaining to sound. Other people though, and it doesn't make them lesser people, are just casual fans. They don't care about stories on the song, where or how it was recorded, why certain instruments were used, they just buy the release because Roger is cute, or they like Freddie's voice. Nothing wrong with that, but their expectations from QP are zero, and QP delivers to these people every time, while ignoring the people who would like more. As for doing a better job and not doing anything, let's be realistic here. The people who care (including you) about Queen COULD do a better job with extras and overall quality. However, John Stuart appears to be a pariah to certain elements of QP. Lester wrote a better book than anyone from inside the oprganization. Benn and I can't even get a question answered by Brian because they contain "controversial" elements, so I don't know how we'd approach QP if we can't get a question answered about a track to become their creative team for future releases, and I have zero desire to do something that is a fun gig. But I'll tell you this: if the serious fans here exchanged e-mails for a few hours and decided that the extras for ANATO, the crown jewel of Queen's catlogue, would be a little talk from Brian and Roger, some old pictures, shots of Brian playing a toy koto without any context, and archival footage pieced together to create a "film" for Seaside Rendezvous, I'd say "Adam, Serry, Benn, Lester, Sebastian, YV, Boy Thomas Raker, Sir GH, John Stuart, and anyone else I've missed, that is a pathetic effort for a definitive collection, we're all fired. Get me Treaasure Moment and Inu Liger on the phone." Maybe not the last bit ;) It depends on which side of the fence people belong. I once waxed rhapsodic to a friend about the huge drum sound and the odd E-bowed guitars on the song "In a Big Country." My buddy looked at me, said he didn't care, he just liked the beat. Neither of us was right or worng, our fandom was equal, but to bring it back to the Queen moaners situation, he'd be happy with everything, as he likes the songs and that's it. I'd be less satisfied as I'd want more information. QP isn't aiming their stuff at me, but they could do a hell of a lot better than they are, I think they just don't care. |
| John S Stuart 17.11.2007 12:26 |
Another Roger (re) wrote: Whatever Queen does, whatever Queen release, whatever Brian do people moan... Why cant those of you who moan every time Queen do a movement just stop liking Queen ? Buy Zeppelin instead, their releases are supposed to always be so fantastic.The solitary reason “...people moan...” is because they are discontented, and the reason they are discontent is that they KNOW things could be so much BETTER. So generally, the philosophy of discontent does NOT arise from a glass being half-full, but from the SAME glass being perceived as half-empty (or to quote from Led Zeppelin: “What Is And What Should Never Be”). For example, I complain about my broadband service - NOT because I receive a whopping 4,192 Kbps - but because I PAY for and SHOULD receive 8,000 kbs. In other words my discontentment is based on a very real DIFFERENCE of 3808 kbs, and no matter how many ‘third world’ replies I receive telling me that I should “shut-up!” and be “thankful just to receive the internet”, because I KNOW my line is capable of sustaining an 8,000 kbs capacity, this will remain a bone of contention between myself and my ISP. The same is true of all products QPL: shoddy merchandise, inferior packaging and substandard presentation. The only reason QPL escapes financial ruin is they hold the artistic rights monopoly, as apart from that, they have nothing else going for them. Furthermore, as they keep pimping this aging whore, the day is fast approaching when she will be forced to ungracefully retire - for her own good - or face up to the fact that she is suffering from a slow agonising death. Either way, it is the fans who suffer – as we all recognise “What Is And What Should Never Be”. Adam Baboolal wrote: ...Why don't WE the QZ community do something after the years of bitching about what QP does? Step-up and try...I think this question can be answered using the old Hyper-mart vs. Corner shop routine. Simply put, ‘we’ cannot compete with the resources at the disposal of QPL - or in other words, "...one cannot bake without flour...", however, given such limited resources, I think that the Queenzone ‘fan-base’ has consistently trumped QPL over the last few years or so. To name a few: numerous UNRELEASED studio demos of quality have PREMIERED here first. These UNRELEASED demos span from Brian’s first ‘1984’ recordings via his ‘Since You Been Gone’ and ‘Marie’s The Name’ FLAC solo projects - to the ‘latest’46664 un-releases - through to complete ‘untouched and uncensored’ UNRELEASED Flac concerts from Liverpool 1974 – Queen + Paul Rodgers in 2006. As far as video is concerned, we have shared perhaps the best (sonically enhanced) publically available version from ‘Huston ‘77’, along with other UNRELEASED DVD gems such as live Russian, Argentinean and Chilean concerts, and to top it all, ALL of these ‘products’ have appeared with high-quality cover art to boot! Indeed, I think what Queenzone FREELY offers IS a significant insight into the ‘soul of the beast’ or a ‘glimpse of genius’ - WITHOUT the financial mercenaryism or artistic compromises of QPL - and if I can consistently EXPECT such high standards of professionalism from what basically amounts to a group of enthusiastic amateurs, then I clearly think that my discontent in QPL is more than fully justified. In otherwords, for QPL the glass will always be half-empty, because we have witnesses first hand how much BETTER things could be WITHOUT them, and that's before I go on to compare them to the likes of 'Zeppelin', 'The Beatles', David Bowie, Elvis Presley... ad infinitum |
| Michael Allred 17.11.2007 17:18 |
Another Roger (re) wrote: "Also, I'm sure Rainbow '74 would sell very well" I would indeed buy such a release. But its naive to think that it would sell well. People that just like Queen a little (the biggest group of buyers) look for We are the champions, We Will Rock You, Bohemian Rhapsody, A Kind of magic etc. They havent even heard of Ogre Battle or Father to Son.Was it naive to think "News of the World" would have sold well back in '77? Nobody heard of "We Will Rock You" back then either. It's a lame argument that people only want certain songs. The casual fan won't keep buying the same thing over and over again for decades. They WILL tire of it and something *new* will be required to regain their attention. |
| Adam Baboolal 17.11.2007 20:19 |
Michael Allred wrote:No way. You're way off on this. Rainbow is not something that joe bloggs is going to be interested in - especially in this day and age.Another Roger (re) wrote: "Also, I'm sure Rainbow '74 would sell very well" I would indeed buy such a release. But its naive to think that it would sell well. People that just like Queen a little (the biggest group of buyers) look for We are the champions, We Will Rock You, Bohemian Rhapsody, A Kind of magic etc. They havent even heard of Ogre Battle or Father to Son.Was it naive to think "News of the World" would have sold well back in '77? Nobody heard of "We Will Rock You" back then either. It's a lame argument that people only want certain songs. The casual fan won't keep buying the same thing over and over again for decades. They WILL tire of it and something *new* will be required to regain their attention. News of the world was a sought after new album by a great band who previously released "that song" called Bohemian Rhapsody. Guaranteed publicity and sales by eager fans and people interested in their new music. Adam. |
| goinback 17.11.2007 22:20 |
There are plenty of obscure concert DVDs by obscure bands in mainstream stores already, which apparently sell fine enough to be worth the trouble. ANY Queen concert DVD would sell huge amounts, whether people are that familiar with the tracklisting or not. Queen are regularly voted one of the top 5 or 10 bands ever and should have more concert DVDs out...we're not talking about a small indie band. Anything with "Queen" on it is going to sell, as evidenced by the barrage of bootleg documentary DVDs. Teenagers especially are interested in seeing what a great legendary live band was like in the early days, and buy CDs/DVDs out of curiosity whether they know the songs or not...DVDs are so cheap they're usually impulse buys in the first place, half the time people don't even look at the details.... |
| Tero 18.11.2007 05:30 |
Michael Allred wrote: It's a lame argument that people only want certain songs. The casual fan won't keep buying the same thing over and over again for decades. They WILL tire of it and something *new* will be required to regain their attention.Herein pretty much lies the problem were faced with these days. Have you heard of the saying "you can fool some people some time, but you can't fool all the people all the time". They only need to reach a small portion of the casual fans with every release. ;) QP is pretty much going for the lowest common denominator, and trying to capitalise the sales by making sure at least some part of the general public can be enticed to buy the product. The number of Queen fans in the world must be less than 100,000 these days (as the latest limited editions were 10,000 or 20,000 copies), while the number of "casual fans" must be a hundred time larger. QP has a choice of genuinely making an effort to produce quality releases to satisfy the real fans, or a hundred half-arsed compilations and re-re-re-re-re-re-releases to fool a portion of the casual fans. Both of these tactics will give them the same financial profit... I wonder which is happening right now? |
| Tero 18.11.2007 05:34 |
goinback wrote: There are plenty of obscure concert DVDs by obscure bands in mainstream stores already, which apparently sell fine enough to be worth the trouble. ANY Queen concert DVD would sell huge amounts, whether people are that familiar with the tracklisting or not. Queen are regularly voted one of the top 5 or 10 bands ever and should have more concert DVDs out...we're not talking about a small indie band. Anything with "Queen" on it is going to sell, as evidenced by the barrage of bootleg documentary DVDs. Teenagers especially are interested in seeing what a great legendary live band was like in the early days, and buy CDs/DVDs out of curiosity whether they know the songs or not...DVDs are so cheap they're usually impulse buys in the first place, half the time people don't even look at the details....Yes, I can definitely agree with you that a product with Queen name on the cover will do just fine in the charts, regardless of its contents... So what exactly would be QP's motivation to make a genuine effort and release something exciting and new? They can get away (and even make a bigger profit) by releasing the same old crap countless times, so why would they bother? As it has been so eloquently written here, Queen is a business, and as a business they are looking for the maximum profit with minimum effort. |
| Mr Mercury 18.11.2007 10:46 |
I just noticed this in Classic Rock mag (Nov issue). Its actually a review of two books, but I have included the whole bit as the last verse might be interesting to some when you take into account part of the debate re Brian going on here. "Photo finish A book of Queen iconography; a definitely boring biography Classic Queen by Mick Rock Brian May: The Definitive Biography by Laura Jackson One of these books is an insightful look at the mechanics that operate behind the façade of rocks stardom, and the other isn’t. Which is insightful? Eliminate the one with “definitive” in its title. “Definitive” has become publishing shorthand for “unofficial, by someone who wasn’t there”. Photographer Mick Rock most definitely was there, from 1973 to 1975. He understood absolutely what to do with Queen particularly the androgynous, odd beauty of Freddie Mercury and Roger Taylor. He based his famous portrait of Freddie on an image of Marlene Dietrich, a brilliant associative act, and from it came the cover of Queen II and the Bohemian Rhapsody video. Rock may not have been the most consistent of photographers – some of his 250 here are simply snapshots – yet he has produced genuine iconography. Perhaps the most appropriate adjective for Laura Jackson is “prolific”. She has produced The Definitive Biography Of Queen, Mercury: King Of Queen and Queen And I: The Brian May Story plus 11 other books on subjects like Sean Bean and Kiefer Sutherland. She is the only person in history to write two books about Brian May and might possibly be the only one to have read them both, too. She opens the second with the words “Brian May is an intensely private person” and over the next 240 pages fails to penetrate any further. May is a vaguely comedic, anachronistic figure these days, with his mad hair and his clogs and his rightly famous blog in which he responds to perceived slights at great length. The delight some take in winding him up obscures early work with Queen, which was thrilling and influential. Jackson captures none of this, and instead constructs a book that is definitely boring. Classic Queen 7/10 Brian May 4/10 Jon Hotten" The last paragraph, to me at least, suggests that some journo's are doing nothing more than playing a game with Brian and he appears to have taken the bait. I may well wrong. |
| Adam Baboolal 18.11.2007 18:35 |
Sad if that's true. Btw, wasn't it Freddie's idea to do the portrait? Adam. |
| Another Roger (re) 19.11.2007 04:12 |
Adam: "The moaning is real. My main example would be the MK Bowl release. Before this was released plenty of fans loved that gig and praised it as a great performance and gig in general. After the release, it's belittled on here. That's what this thread is probably pointing at - the sudden turn-arounds that seem to occur when QP try to do something" Thats such a good example. Sometimes you get the feeling that some fans have illusions about concerts that are not released properly. The funny thing with human beings is that they tend to prefer the unseen stuff. I always loved alien 1 because we hardly got to see the alien. I got bored with 2,3 and 4 because you could see the aliens all the time. I think this can relate to the phenomona we deal with on the forum Actually. I predict that there will be moaning when Earls Court or Houston get its release. They will probably complain about the picture that isnt as good as Montreal (ironic), and they will slag off Queen productions choice for extras. And some will complain about the bands performance, clothes or hair. |
| Tero 19.11.2007 07:33 |
Another Roger (re) wrote: Adam: "The moaning is real. My main example would be the MK Bowl release. Before this was released plenty of fans loved that gig and praised it as a great performance and gig in general. After the release, it's belittled on here. That's what this thread is probably pointing at - the sudden turn-arounds that seem to occur when QP try to do something" Thats such a good example. Sometimes you get the feeling that some fans have illusions about concerts that are not released properly. The funny thing with human beings is that they tend to prefer the unseen stuff. I always loved alien 1 because we hardly got to see the alien. I got bored with 2,3 and 4 because you could see the aliens all the time. I think this can relate to the phenomona we deal with on the forum Actually. I predict that there will be moaning when Earls Court or Houston get its release. They will probably complain about the picture that isnt as good as Montreal (ironic), and they will slag off Queen productions choice for extras. And some will complain about the bands performance, clothes or hair.Yeah, there was moaning about On Fire At The Bowl... It has a stupid name and the extras could have been better. Yes. Partly the problem is that we know know there could have been more extras. I can admit to that creating a problem, where one wouldn't otherwise exist. But there is a way for QP to remove that problem. ;) So what's the solution QP has ended up with? More stupidly titled dvds, and even less extras than before. Yeah, that's a great way to respond to the critics! Fast forward 25 years to a date when the Houston/Earls Court double bill super-dvd is released... With a title "Queen+Paul Rodgers Rock Montreal At The Bowl, Via Houston and London With Freddie". What we'll have are direct copies of the 50 year-old video tapes, and the only extras will be a 15-minute "behind the scenes of We Will Rock You the musical in Bognor Regis". Brian is still advertising the stupendous extras in his website, and he sounds even more like the senile old man he's become. Do we have a right to complain? Yes. Does Queen Productions have a way to make the release of such quality that the three people left whining sound like complete twats? Yes. Are they ever going to learn from their previous mistakes? Well, the jurys still out, but I think the opinions have been swaying towards a big fat no for the past decade. |
| Michael Allred 19.11.2007 10:06 |
Adam Baboolal wrote:I could use your argument against you Adam. Wouldn't it be just as easy for a Joe Bloggs to look at a new DVD of Rainbow and think "Oy, that the band that did that Rhapsody song ain't they?"Michael Allred wrote:No way. You're way off on this. Rainbow is not something that joe bloggs is going to be interested in - especially in this day and age. News of the world was a sought after new album by a great band who previously released "that song" called Bohemian Rhapsody. Guaranteed publicity and sales by eager fans and people interested in their new music. Adam.Another Roger (re) wrote: "Also, I'm sure Rainbow '74 would sell very well" I would indeed buy such a release. But its naive to think that it would sell well. People that just like Queen a little (the biggest group of buyers) look for We are the champions, We Will Rock You, Bohemian Rhapsody, A Kind of magic etc. They havent even heard of Ogre Battle or Father to Son.Was it naive to think "News of the World" would have sold well back in '77? Nobody heard of "We Will Rock You" back then either. It's a lame argument that people only want certain songs. The casual fan won't keep buying the same thing over and over again for decades. They WILL tire of it and something *new* will be required to regain their attention. One way or another, Queen will run out of 80s shows to release on DVD.....*eventually* something from the 70s will have to come out. I might be old and gray by then but still.... |
| John S Stuart 19.11.2007 11:38 |
Queenfans, the biggest moaners ever? Perhaps a more positive spin would be 'Queen fans - the most discerning ever? |
| Micrówave 19.11.2007 11:53 |
This thread is getting too long. My back hurts today. I need another Queen live DVD. The 32 bootlegs I have are simply not enough. The Red Sox should have never traded Babe Ruth. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 19.11.2007 12:23 |
Agreed John. There's not much of a difference between "moaning" and "discerning." And agreed also Michael, but releasing Rainbow or Earls Court would get Queen away from what they've become, which is a pop based business like the Spice Girls, or Madonna, designed to keep in people's ears and faces, rather than artists who care about their catlaogue and the good work they've done. |
| Benn 19.11.2007 12:26 |
Another Roger, re: >>Actually. I predict that there will be moaning when Earls Court or Houston get its release. They will probably complain about the picture that isnt as good as Montreal (ironic), and they will slag off Queen productions choice for extras. If it's not released in as good a quality as it *COULD BE*, then, surely, we'd have every right to raise our concerns. All of your points are made and made well, however, you *CLEARLY* have no sense of discernment where product is concerned. Let's put it in a much simpler way, shall we? You want to purchase a newly built house after 3 years of trying to find one. You speak to the estate agent / builder and agree terms and a purchase price based on the fact that you know the house is available finally. You move in. After a day or so, you suddenly find small cracks in the walls, uneven floors and gaps between the window frames and the walls. You'd also been told by them that, as part of the deal, they'd put in a fully functional kitchen, microwave and washer-dryer, but when you try to use them, the oven isn't working, the microwave doesn't have a plug on it and the washing machine leaked all over the floor. What do you do? Raise your concern with the estate agent and builder and demand that the issues are resolved or happily sit back in the knowledge that you have the house you wanted? The point here is that just because something becomes available, the fact that you work hard to be able to afford it means that, as a consumer, you have a right to expect certain standards in whatever product it is you buy. Queen product is no different to anything else and those people responsible for the quality of that product appear not to care about the demands of the *DISCERNING* consumer, hence my e-mails to Brian regarding the placement of JR on the CD of QRM and my lack of surprise that there is no answer forthcoming. Perhaps they're trying to make something up that's plausible but are having a bit of trouble in doing so........ I don't know. But, what I *DO* know is that for a brand like Queen that prides itself on the quality of product and the music it contains, since the band's cheif creative brain died, the brand has become severly tarnished through crass carelessness. The decision-makers have also set themselves on a pedestal whereby they will not be held to task *BY ANYONE*, least of all the people that buy product. Zeppelin's mantra over the years has been that less is more where product is concerned. Sure, they could well have flooded the market and the demand would have still been there. But, I can guarantee that their show on December 10 wouldn't have been happening if Peter Grant had still been alive - there's no way he'd have sanctioned replacing John Bonham. As a result, when something does arrive, it's great quality - "How The West Was Won" was a great treat, the TSRTS DVD is fantastic and I'm sure the remastered TSRTS CD set will be as good when it arrives. Jimmy Page appears to take care with what happens and oversees from start to finish. A shame, then, that no member's of Queen have their name anywhere in the credits other than having played. My assumption is that Brian, Roger and John don't care enough to get involved, or, aren't *ALLOWED* to be involved. >>And some will complain about the bands performance, clothes or hair. That would be a pointless. You can only control the controllables. Is that something you'd take issue with? |
| Another Roger (re) 19.11.2007 13:30 |
Alright Benn. First of all. A house is something you order after various specifications. There are standards to follow, and they has to be followed. If those standards arent followed you have rights. To compare this with a dvd is totally out of place. When there is a dvd available you have two choices. You buy it, or you dont buy it. When you have bought the dvd you can probably regret the purchase and get your money back. But you cant demand that they change the contents. If every single customer had the power to change the contents there wouldnt be a dvd. Everybody will never be satisfied. Thats simply not how it works. And how a dvd is constructed has a to do with taste. Many customers are probably thrilled to have Live aid as bonus material. I have the Live Aid concert, so it doesnt attract me. But I dont complain. And even though Earls court, or Hammersmith gets a dvdrelease it doesnt mean perfect picture quality! When are we going to learn that it depends on the source? They can fix the picture a little, but they can not do miracles. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 19.11.2007 14:00 |
"I sometimes wonder (if The Prophet's Song would have been as popular as Bo Rhap were it the lead single from ANATO) this also. It was always so random which song got picked for the leading single from a Queen album. It bothered me sometimes. History can never be reversed ... certain things became ingrained in public consciousness and it will pretty much always be that way. That's why sometimes I wish the Greatest Hits would disappear for a while, and people would have more chance to get back into the original albums with an unprejudiced ear. Still, after GH 1 becoming the biggest album in History in the UK, I guess I ought not grumble!" Brian May, Jan. 2007 And there's the conundrum. The casual fan will never hear the gems of Queen, which is something Brian would like to see happen. But how do you reconcile this with releasing an exclusive greatest hits album to a big box retailer just a few months after this? You can't have it both ways! Queen wants the safe money, no risks involved. That's fine, but when you get skewered for being a pop singles act you can't complain about your catalogue geting ignored, as Brian and Roger both have. As Benn states, Peter Grant looked after Zep's legacy much, much, much better than Jim Beach did with Queen. Jim Beach has done a much, much, much better job of moving product than the Zeppelin management. In November 2007, perhaps the event of the year from a classic rock POV is the digital release of the Led Zeppelin catalogue. For Queen fans, it'll be the inclusion of "One Year of Love" as Track 1 on the Christmas release "Songs to drink Hot Chocolate with." Zep gets the credibility, Queen gets the sales. |
| PieterMC 19.11.2007 14:02 |
Boy Thomas Raker wrote: For Queen fans, it'll be the inclusion of "One Year of Love" as Track 1 on the Christmas release "Songs to drink Hot Chocolate with." Zep gets the credibility, Queen gets the sales.When is that coming out? |
| Benn 19.11.2007 15:16 |
Another Roger: OK - here we go again. >>If those standards arent followed you have rights. To compare this with a dvd is totally out of place. It's not totally out of place. The scenario was used in order for you to have something to compare where I'm coming from in trying to get you (and the many others like you) to understand that not everything released under the Queen banner is acceptable. I'd guess that you fall into the category of people that believe OIQFC has always filled the gap between band and audience. Hmm.... >>When there is a dvd available you have two choices. You buy it, or you dont buy it. Correct, just as you do in the above scenario. >>When you have bought the dvd you can probably regret the purchase and get your money back. Not entirely certain that a shop will take your DVD back after you've opened the package, put your fingers on the "offending" side and just decided you don't like it. Not certain that you can do that with a house either - "I don't like this house, I want my money back please." Perhaps I should take this up with a lawyer friend and see whare you'd stand....... >>But you cant demand that they change the contents. I haven't demanded anything of the sort. I (and others of a similar mind) merely suggest ways that the CD and / or DVD could be improved upon. If Eagle Vision and / or QPL decide that "OUR" case if of sufficient merit, they may decide to recall the products and re-issue it in a *BETTER* fashion. On past experience, I have no doubts at all that we'll be ignored, but you can't always make the deaf hear, can you? This self same thing happened with Polydor and their tratment of The Who's "A Quick One" remaster - they erroneously used inferior mono master tapes to re-issue the disc on CD and, after much persuasion and no little hassle, they managed to "find" the well-known stereo masters which were lodged with Polydor in Germany and issued a full stereo re-master. I even offered to have the tapes shipped to the UK FOC when I worked for TNT; after 3 years, they finally saw the light of day; sadly they didn't deem it necessary to issue the re-re-master with a new catalogue number, so it's almost impossible to identify between the original and the newer. Same with their re-master of the "Face Dances" album. It was put to Polydor that there was a clear mastering error on the bonus track "It's In You" that is not present on any bootleg version of the track. Polydor almost instantly withdrew the re-master and re-issued it fixed. Just goes to show that a sympathetic record company will listen if they have the right mind. It can be done. >>If every single customer had the power to change the contents there wouldnt be a dvd. Then the people issueing the material would HAVE to sit up and listen. People like you that simply accept what's in front of them will never make a difference. >>Everybody will never be satisfied. Correct. >>Thats simply not how it works. It's not, but you go ahead there...... >>And how a dvd is constructed has a to do with taste. And, clearly, those in charge of quality control simply don't have any, so they? >>Many customers are probably thrilled to have Live aid as bonus material. I have the Live Aid concert, so it doesnt attract me. But I dont complain. You can buy the DVD without the Live Aid material as a bonus you know? Perhaps you should give that one a go and see for yourself. |
| Benn 19.11.2007 15:25 |
Boy Thomas Raker, re: >>Jim Beach has done a much, much, much better job of moving product than the Zeppelin management. But that's just it. Led Zeppelin haven't needed to shift "product" in the same way that Queen do - it simply sells itself. The three surviving members of Zep have managed all this time with only 2 releases of *NEW* product in over 25 years. Queen keep trotting out the same old shit under various guises for the sake of a few quid. The trick is to keep demand at such a furious level and the product "SO" good that no one is left in any doubt. >>In November 2007, perhaps the event of the year from a classic rock POV is the digital release of the Led Zeppelin catalogue. I'm not even certain that Peter Grant would have let that happen - there's too much leeway given to the distribution of the music that, in essence, is not in the control of the band or its management; the songs can be downloaded and then pirated afterwards....... >>For Queen fans, it'll be the inclusion of "One Year of Love" as Track 1 on the Christmas release "Songs to drink Hot Chocolate with." Ha ha - that's pretty good! >>Zep gets the credibility, Queen gets the sales. Spot on. Queen will always remain a bit of a circus act amongst serious music listeners. And we, as Queen fans, will remain the butt of their jibes. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 19.11.2007 15:49 |
Yes, Benn, I meant Jim Beach has done a "better" job in the sense that if he wants mass market penetration, he got it. Zep never wanted it, and while I agree with your thoughts on the digital release, I was pointing more to the fact that we're now at least 7 to 10 years into mass mp3 acceptance before Zep did anything, and it's a big deal because of the care they've taken with their catalogue (Puff Daddy nonsense excepted!) |
| Another Roger (re) 19.11.2007 16:45 |
"You can buy the DVD without the Live Aid material as a bonus you know? Perhaps you should give that one a go and see for yourself" Hehe. I am only getting the blue-ray version mate. I dont know if there are bonuses on it, but I assume there are not |
| Benn 20.11.2007 04:39 |
Another Roger, BlueRay eh? That's VERY advanced. Can you do us a favour and post a review of the BlueRay version when you get it? But then again, as you'll have nothing to compare it with (unless you're going to A/B with the VHS), there's not a lot of point. I *KNOW* you'll think it's the very best thing you've ever purchased under the Queen banner. Enjoy it. |
| Another Roger (re) 20.11.2007 05:18 |
"BlueRay eh? That's VERY advanced. Can you do us a favour and post a review of the BlueRay version when you get it? But then again, as you'll have nothing to compare it with (unless you're going to A/B with the VHS), there's not a lot of point." How can you conclude without knowing me at all? I do in fact own the We Will Rock you VHS, We Will Rock You DVD (pioneer), and the second edition of We Will Rock you dvd. You can call me stupid for buying all those. But saying that I cant compare is very arrogant. |
| Benn 20.11.2007 06:48 |
Another Roger, re: >>You can call me stupid for buying all those. I hadn't doneand wasn't going to, but, as you suggested it, I will: "You are stupid". >>But saying that I cant compare is very arrogant. No, it's presumptious. Arrogant is an entirely different thing. I had presumed that you hadn't even seen the new DVD by the manner in which you approached this thread and your subsequent attempts to back yourself up. I was wrong to make that assumption, but entirely correct in questioning you. Hope this helps. |
| Another Roger (re) 20.11.2007 07:13 |
"I was wrong to make that assumption, but entirely correct in questioning you" Finally! So when I get my copy of the blue-ray version I will compare it to the old pioneer version. No problem at all. But as a Queen fan I care most for the music. And the mix is much better on this new dvd. So I am quite sure I will prefer the new release. But music is subjective. You may prefer picture over sound, but it would be very strange as a Queen fan. |
| Benn 20.11.2007 08:23 |
Another Roger, re: >>Finally! Clearly not as you've raised further issues. >>So when I get my copy of the blue-ray version I will compare it to the old pioneer version. No problem at all. With baited breath we wait. >>But as a Queen fan I care most for the music. ....it's all about you........ ';-o >>But music is subjective. Correct, but you certainly can't deny the fact that there are many things that aren't, like the need to have a correct balance between all instruments and *NOT* have the sound of the audience intrude at the expense of the music etc. >>You may prefer picture over sound, but it would be very strange as a Queen fan. I wouldn't consider it strange. There would be plenty of people more interested in seeing the band than hearing them. How about those fans that are deaf? |
| StormtrooperInStilettos 24.11.2007 16:21 |
">>You may prefer picture over sound, but it would be very strange as a Queen fan. I wouldn't consider it strange. There would be plenty of people more interested in seeing the band than hearing them. How about those fans that are deaf?" Or how about the people who enjoy watching them because they put on a good show? Wasn't that what they were renowned for, besides their sound? |
| Barbie Jupiter 25.11.2007 05:20 |
I love the title of the topicXDDD Great idea....XD I really don't understand those who complain about such unimportant things like picture. Sound quality is important, but, on the other hand, what can you expect from live recording. i am just perfectly sure that if i buy Queen music, i won't be disappointed, it will be always an comprehensive, entertaining and educatingXD in a way, great great music. The same for Roger and Brian separate solo. |
| Benn 25.11.2007 06:23 |
Barbir Jupiter, re: >>i am just perfectly sure that if i buy Queen music, i won't be disappointed, it will be always an comprehensive, entertaining and educatingXD in a way, great great music. I assume, then, that you weren't one of the people that invested in the Hollywood Records re-issues when they came out then? >>The same for Roger and Brian separate solo. ....and that you weren't too worried that "Another World" featured 5 songs that had already been released before? |
| Barbie Jupiter 25.11.2007 06:41 |
Well Benn i have to admit you're right... Then if it's like you say, it is what to complain about... Releasing same things is not fairXD |