QueenZone discussion #1121089

teleman wrote: Does this mean 'Take Love' didn't make the cut?

henke1980 wrote: You may call me an idiot but does this mean that the cover will be "schools out" by Alice Cooper?

inu-liger wrote:

henke1980 wrote: You may call me an idiot but does this mean that the cover will be "schools out" by Alice Cooper?

No, it would not be School's Out if the cover HAD been included on the album. The actual cover is "Runaway" by that Shannon dude, I forget his full name.

KingMercury wrote:

inu-liger wrote:

henke1980 wrote: You may call me an idiot but does this mean that the cover will be "schools out" by Alice Cooper?

No, it would not be School's Out if the cover HAD been included on the album. The actual cover is "Runaway" by that Shannon dude, I forget his full name.

"that Shannon dude" was called Del Shannon, and Runaway, wont be included on the album....

Bad Seed wrote: The cover might be Voodoo, a Black Sabbath song with Dio on vocals. Would suit them perfectly. link

Pim Derks wrote: The tracklisting was just confirmed by the Dutch fanclub.

Grantcdn1 wrote: It is possible that the tracklisting is true...

Vali wrote: It will be disappointing to me if the dvd does not include any interview regarding the new album. Why do we need an edited version of Super Live In Japan ?

PieterMC wrote:

Vali wrote: It will be disappointing to me if the dvd does not include any interview regarding the new album. Why do we need an edited version of Super Live In Japan ?

In fairness most people will not own a copy of this.

Tero wrote:

PieterMC wrote:

Vali wrote: It will be disappointing to me if the dvd does not include any interview regarding the new album. Why do we need an edited version of Super Live In Japan ?

In fairness most people will not own a copy of this.

In all fairness it's probably sold as many copies in Japan as ROTC sold throughout the rest of the world. :P What makes it ideal for QP to release is that a) it will be a "unique" release which all the Japanese collectors will be getting anyway, regardless of whether they have Super Live In Japan b) it hasn't been officially released anywhere else in the world, so QP can advertise it as a completely new and exciting footage and deflect any criticism, and most importantly c) it's a finished product which requires less than a day's work from a junior trainee. For every cd+dvd set sold, QP gets double the usual profit with virtually no extra costs.

kingogre wrote: To be honest this isnt different in anyway than what most veteran bands release for their new albums. The Who did about the same thing for Endless Wire, the only difference that they only included 5 songs on the DVD.

kingogre wrote: Also it is f**king expensive to produce documentaries, extra tracks and so on just to use them as extramaterial. Especially when no one buys CDs anymore like today. Deluxe Editions are nothing more than a cash-in to make the hard-core fans pay more money no matter what bands do it, absolutely no reason to get surprised.

kingogre wrote: In all fairness, if they had included one or two extra new songs on it people would be bitching about having to buy the deluxe edition just to get these. Theres simply no way of doing it right for some people.

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote: In all fairness, if they had included one or two extra new songs on it people would be bitching about having to buy the deluxe edition just to get these. Theres simply no way of doing it right for some people.

Of course. That's not the issue though. The problem is that they aren't including NEW SONGS on an album to fool the fans. They are including previously released songs and trying to make it sound like a bargain.

kingogre wrote: Nothing is going to get made unless it is going to make a big profit, thats the way the record industry works like every industry.

kingogre wrote: This is actually a Japan-only release and they cant really forbid people from importing it. So the Live Magic comparison isnt really that valid.

kingogre wrote: There is as always the argument that if you dont want it dont buy it. With the opinions you seem to have about the band Id be very surprised indeed if you shelled out a lot of money buying deluxe and special editions of their album which Im sure you will say is crap anyway.

kingogre wrote: Anyway, that they make a new album is enough for me. This extras bit seems almost more important than the regular material to some people.

kingogre wrote: Queen unqestionably have a much bigger market today than Genesis. Genesis also has more of a dedicated fanbase that will buy anything, that is not the market Queen is aiming for.

kingogre wrote: They also had their farewell tour last year if I remember correctly, while Queen have rather made a comeback in a different incarnation. Phil Collins has even quit the music business. Like has been stated before the Anthologies, which is what I presume you want, is a bookends-project. Therefore right for Genesis and not for Queen. The anthologies are definitely coming as far as Ive heard but other projects has come between.

kingogre wrote: Seriously why should they spend millions, which is what a project of this size costs, to please a few people who still will whine about all thats wrong with the boxset when there are millions of people who gladly buys what they are putting out at the moment?;)

Hitman1965 wrote: "I am looking forward to hearing new material from three of my absolutely favourite musicians and most likely the closest I will ever come to hear a new Queen-album again." - totally agree and well said. Having the opportunity to hear new material from musicians who have been successfully producing new material for so long can only be a good thing. I love the way loads of people here constantly gripe about QPR's new material - its not as good as such and such etc. I can see a time at some point in the future when people will gripe about ohh can you remember when Cosmos Rocks came out - why don't they do some new material. All of this QPR negativity can become very boring after a while. How can any band do anything new if all they read is so called 'fans' banging on about how rubbish everything is from song titles, to lyrics, to singing ability, to DVD extras, to concert tickets etc etc... Please give it a break - reading a lot of postings come across like a big bunch of grumpy old men for god's sake! Nothing wrong with having an opinion but I think people have now well and truely got the point. Here's a general question to consider - do all bands have websites with such a big group of negative fans as QPR? This is starting to come across as the very vocal minority making a big noise when the vast majoirty of QPR fans are extremely pleased with recent plans and developments. I can remember viewing the behind the scenes of ANATO BBC special for the first time where Brian and Roger have a jamming session of sorts. At that moment they kind of looked at each other and you could just tell that something new would eventually make its way on to a new album. Since then we've had one world tour, two successful live DVDs, have a new album with loads of totally new material and another sold out tour to look forward to. How long all of this can go on nobody can tell but I know one thing for sure - as long as QPR keep going I'll still be around to enjoy their work and commitment to their fans.

kingogre wrote:

Hitman1965 wrote: "I am looking forward to hearing new material from three of my absolutely favourite musicians and most likely the closest I will ever come to hear a new Queen-album again." - totally agree and well said. Having the opportunity to hear new material from musicians who have been successfully producing new material for so long can only be a good thing. I love the way loads of people here constantly gripe about QPR's new material - its not as good as such and such etc. I can see a time at some point in the future when people will gripe about ohh can you remember when Cosmos Rocks came out - why don't they do some new material. All of this QPR negativity can become very boring after a while. How can any band do anything new if all they read is so called 'fans' banging on about how rubbish everything is from song titles, to lyrics, to singing ability, to DVD extras, to concert tickets etc etc... Please give it a break - reading a lot of postings come across like a big bunch of grumpy old men for god's sake! Nothing wrong with having an opinion but I think people have now well and truely got the point. Here's a general question to consider - do all bands have websites with such a big group of negative fans as QPR? This is starting to come across as the very vocal minority making a big noise when the vast majoirty of QPR fans are extremely pleased with recent plans and developments. I can remember viewing the behind the scenes of ANATO BBC special for the first time where Brian and Roger have a jamming session of sorts. At that moment they kind of looked at each other and you could just tell that something new would eventually make its way on to a new album. Since then we've had one world tour, two successful live DVDs, have a new album with loads of totally new material and another sold out tour to look forward to. How long all of this can go on nobody can tell but I know one thing for sure - as long as QPR keep going I'll still be around to enjoy their work and commitment to their fans.

Well written. You nail a lot of things there. Seems like it is the same when it comes to many bands. There are some ACDC fans that go on and on about how the band should have quit when Bon died and that everything Brian Johnson does is crap and that he isnt a real member of the band. Bruce Springsteen fans seem to hate Jon Landau and complain endlessly that he plays to many songs from his new albums in concerts. Some people here will complain no matter what. If they released the Anthologies tomorrow they would say theyre crap and that Brian destroyed what could have been.

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote: Queen unqestionably have a much bigger market today than Genesis. Genesis also has more of a dedicated fanbase that will buy anything, that is not the market Queen is aiming for.

That's a bit of a contradiction there, isn't it? It stands to reason that a bigger audience automatically means more dedicated fans as well. Or do you mean that Queen is disposable pop in comparison?

kingogre wrote: They also had their farewell tour last year if I remember correctly, while Queen have rather made a comeback in a different incarnation. Phil Collins has even quit the music business. Like has been stated before the Anthologies, which is what I presume you want, is a bookends-project. Therefore right for Genesis and not for Queen. The anthologies are definitely coming as far as Ive heard but other projects has come between.

The Genesis archive releases (about 7 albums worth including live tracks, bbc sessions, b-sides, remixes and demos) were released in 1998 and 2000 before the band had released their first compilation album, and last year's tour coincided to advertise the SACD+DVD album re-releases... That tells a lot about where their interest lies in comparison to Queen. Since 2000 both Phil Collins and Peter Gabriel have completed two solo albums, not to mention all the albums by the other members which I haven't been keeping track. Just because you release an archive set doesn't mean you have to quit the music business. That's an apologists excuse to why it's alright for QP to release nothing. (Also Phil quitting the music business is a relative thing to say... He also "quit" touring back in 2003 before finishing his final farewell solo tour in the two dozen countries he had never been to before, and before the selection of 50 shows he agreed to do with Genesis.)

kingogre wrote: Seriously why should they spend millions, which is what a project of this size costs, to please a few people who still will whine about all thats wrong with the boxset when there are millions of people who gladly buys what they are putting out at the moment?;)

Yes, were back at the "business" argument. QP has the right to keep releasing as many substandard products as it wants. It's only hurting it's own image and alienating its own fans in the process. What a great business strategy. :P If the members already have tens of millions of pounds, why would they need to make a huge profit on every product? Wouldn't it be alright if every once in a while they only got their investment back and in turn made their fans happy? That sounds pretty reasonable to me. And it seems like some other bands have that same policy.

Hitman1965 wrote: Metallica have gone through a number of line ups and even a death to still survive and evolve and still come out stronger but still be innovative and entertaining to fans. We need to accept the past, more actively engage in the present and hope for even more creative and unique material in the future.

kingogre wrote: Youll get your anthologies, the outtakes arent going anywhere.

Tero wrote:

Hitman1965 wrote: Metallica have gone through a number of line ups and even a death to still survive and evolve and still come out stronger but still be innovative and entertaining to fans. We need to accept the past, more actively engage in the present and hope for even more creative and unique material in the future.

There are some MAJOR difference between Queen and Metallica which you are conveniently ignoring. The original recording line-up of Metallica (which was set in 1981 after Dave Mustaine quit the band) existed only for five years and three albums before Cliff Burton died. Cliff Burton wasn't the figurehead of the band, and they were miles away from major commercial success. Queen on the other hand existed for twenty years with the same recording line-up, released 14 albums of material, were immensely succesful, and Freddie was the figurehead of the band. If we translate Metallica's past into the Queen world, the analogy would be that John had died in 1974 and the band had carried on... It wouldn't be exactly the same as it is today, but it wouldn't have been a huge loss either. If we translate Queen's situation into the Metallica world, it would mean the band had held the same line-up from 1981 to 2001, and then James Hetfield had died and Cliff Burton quit the band... Then Lars and Kirk would have made a string of collaborations with the likes of Jon Bon Jovi and Bryan Adams before embarking on tour with Ozzy Osbourne. Would you still think Metallica was coming out stronger than before, and that we should be happy for the unique music they are making? Or would you think they have sold out, and are cheapening the original image of the band by doing music that has nothing to do with Metallica? :P

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote: Youll get your anthologies, the outtakes arent going anywhere.

No I won't get them, and that's the problem. I'll be long dead before they come out, and I'm not even in my 30's!

kingogre wrote: Interesting what you wrote about Metallica, seems that what it all boils down to for you is that they are touring and recording with Paul Rodgers, incidentially something completely different than what this topic was about in the beginning..

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote: Interesting what you wrote about Metallica, seems that what it all boils down to for you is that they are touring and recording with Paul Rodgers, incidentially something completely different than what this topic was about in the beginning..

You might want to re-read the topic and see who brought out the comparisons to other bands in an effort to silence the discussion about the shortcomings of Queen releases. You'll be surprised. ;) I couldn't care less whether Brian and Roger play with Paul Rodgers (who's a fine singer in his own right). What it boils down for me is that these three people (or any combination of them) are not Queen, and their musical career should not have any bearing on Queen releases.

kingogre wrote:

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote: Interesting what you wrote about Metallica, seems that what it all boils down to for you is that they are touring and recording with Paul Rodgers, incidentially something completely different than what this topic was about in the beginning..

You might want to re-read the topic and see who brought out the comparisons to other bands in an effort to silence the discussion about the shortcomings of Queen releases. You'll be surprised. ;) I couldn't care less whether Brian and Roger play with Paul Rodgers (who's a fine singer in his own right). What it boils down for me is that these three people (or any combination of them) are not Queen, and their musical career should not have any bearing on Queen releases.

The point of my post was not comparisons with other bands, it was that you do not like this project and therefore takes every oportunity to say that it is crap, many times extremely unfairly in my opinion. This isnt John Deacon, Brian May, Roger Taylor and Freddie Mercury but no one believes it is and no one expects it. You can not seriously suggest that what Roger Taylor or Brian May does shouldnt have any bearing on QP. They formed the band and today they run the business. They worked their asses off for 35 years to get were they are so they have every right to do so. The others are either dead or not interested. Hearing and seeing them play actually is a good reminder of what a big part of the Queen sound they were.