Queen Archivist 11.09.2008 10:56 |
I came in to QZ today to see what was being said about Q-Singles-1. The first thing I saw was this... "What the fuck is this ? I can't believe my eyes. This MUST be a bad joke." I guess I'm not surprised to see that. It is, as they say on the golf course, Par for the course. How likely was it that I was going to see something like... "It looks really nice. Great rare sleeves have been chosen rather than the familiar UK ones, and they've made certain all the mixes are identical to those of the original vinyl. AND, it's cheap enough that most people can afford it - whereas £100 or £200+ is way over a lot of people's budgets right now." I saw none of these observations, just predictable bad ones. Most QZ have honed directly into whatever negative aspects can be mentioned, and thus again created the usual anti-climax 'feel' that's so abundant on this site generally. Negative Creep (that's HIS name, not my observation - though the two things tally rather well), wrote... "Pisstake surely? QP really going to fuck the fans over yet again? One would have to wonder what it is Greg Brooks does (besides pointless memorabilia books - who is that actually aimed at by the way?). How is any fucking way is this release a good idea?" I cannot see that any fan has been "fucked over", nor anything like it. Quite simply, it's a very lovely looking item, featuring (part 1 of) all Queen's top 40 hits anywhere and everywhere in the world. No-one will be FORCED to buy it. No-one is being fucked over. This boxed set, as some of you have rightly noted, has changed dramatically since its first concept/form. Yes, originally, what I devised was 12 CDs, and then 10, featuring EVERY single, and B-side and every extended version, remix, edit, radio cut, instrumental, live recital, etc.... EVERYTHING EVER issued by Queen on vinyl or CD singles, with mammoth and comprehensive notes and facts, figures and stats penned over 2 years by Gary Taylor and I. But then the band decided they wanted something different. Queen is THEIR band, not mine, not yours, so naturally we went back to the drawing board and devised something else. NOT something lesser, or poorer, just different. As you can probably imagine, RT, BM and Co are smart people, not the idiots that some of you QZ-ers apparently have them down for. So you can be assured there was good sound sensible logic behind their brief to us for the revised package/s. It wasn't a 5 minute decision. It was a considered, thought-out practical response with various business considerations in the equation, as well as personal choice and preference. You should know by now that the band takes no decision lightly... especially ones related to the very singles that are close to their hearts for many reasons. So... OK, it's not what you expected. It's a smaller set. Originally 156 items over 10 CDs, spanning 9 hours (from memory), and with a colossal book of text that most people would have criticised to hell without even reading. But, had we issued that, as planned (and actually handed in, by the way), you guys would now be saying... "£249 for a box. Are they joking? Who can afford that in these money-tight times? Don't 'they' know the world is on the brink of recession, with more people losing their homes than ever, and more bankrupt people than EVER before? QPL live in a dream world if they think we have ALL THIS money to spend at this time." Whatever we put out would be pulled apart. What we are doing will be in the budget of most people. And, actually, it's a very lovely item to hold in your hand. All the boxes together on the shelf will look great. And all the fans that cannot afford all those rare sleeves, will finally have some kind of version which they CAN afford. That's a good thing. John S Stuart wrote: I already own this - TWICE over. UK 3" CD single collection. Japan 3" box-set single collection. ACTUALLY, this is inaccurate. Unlike the discs JSS mentions, certain of these mixes are identical to the original vinyl cuts. White Queen, Ten Funst, Flick Wrist, etc... all exactly how they should be. NOT the album versions - like those on 3" cd. We took great care to ensure these details. JSS... Exactly WHY would I need another version of the same material? WELL JOHN... you tell us that you purchased "UK 3" CD single collection" and then you ALSO purchased "Japan 3" box-set single collection", knowing fully well that the two items are IDENTICAL in content. So... you bought the second set in ADDITION to the first, even though the second offered you NOTHING that the first set doesn't have. You obviously purchased BOTH identical content boxes because you love Queen, and you, like most of us, collect EVERYTHING, no matter what the exact content is. You need to be consistent, John. To further address your comment (which you contradict).... Exactly WHY would I need another version of the same material? You could apply this to EVERY CD and LP and 7" you have ever purchased, when you already had them in your collection to start with. Did you buy the beautiful Japanese mini card CD albums???? I bet you did. They are beautiful items. But do they offer you or I "another version of the same material"... of course they do. Did you buy the Complete Works vinyl box set??? Or any Greatest Hits CD ot LP? Did you buy Queen Rocks??? Or Live Aid? or Montreal or Live at the Bowl???? Of course you did... several times over, probably.... so why have you singled out Queen Singles (no pun intended) for this particular reason???? I can see the point you make, JSS, and I understand the bigger picture, but don't sit their complaining/asking "Exactly WHY would I need another version of the same material?" when you have just told us that you bought the UK 3" cd boxed set AND the Japanese version... CONTENT IDENTICAL, because I think all it does is show that you're out to stir it up again, rather than make a valid point. YOU clearly buy Queen product, like I do, because you want all these things, to be as thorough as you can, and NOT because their is repitition. If you were so very upset by this phenomenon, you would not have purchased even the UK 3" CDs, much less the Japanese ones too. Why would you buy EITHER of them, if you feel the way you say you do??? To buy both is just ludicrous, based on your logic. JSS. As I said before: "covering sh*t in tin-foil does not make it chocolate". Yes, well that's all very eloquent of you, John, but you've seen the box set 1 now, and if you think it resembles shit in tin-foil, I sympathise with you. That is a very very nasty situation to be in. A rather ugly comparison, but each to his own! |
Queen Archivist 11.09.2008 10:57 |
continued..... Cwazy Little Thing wrote.... I cant help wondering who they think will buy this at all? GB. Many thousands of people who find themselves in a million CD stores around the world, who see all Queen's wonderful singles in a lovely little colourful box, containing great sleeves from Japan, Hungary, France, Spain, UK, etc.... they are the people, MOSTLY, that buy these things. Die-hard long-term Queen fans like you and I, are only a tiny part of the picture. I would liken this to 40 Liverpool football fans abandoning the stadium next Saturday, in protest to something they don't like... while 85,000 other fans swarm past them into the stadium regardless. Liverpool cater for the majority, the masses, not the tiny minority. It is after all, a business. EMI, Liverpool F.C., McDonalds... they're not charities, are they. Cwazy Little Thing wrote....My main interest in the thing was the b-sides, remixes and so forth which gathered together and in decent sound quality presented at least some notion of rarity. I probably would have bought a £40-60 box set containing all those. Anyone who wants the artwork already has it, so all that remains is the tracks themselves, and anyone who wants them already has the albums/greatest hits/rocks - even in the general non-superfan public. With the b-sides being spread out across 4 releases (and this first one only containing one!!!) only people to whom money doesnt really matter will feel they must buy all to get those tracks. GB. This is all fair comment. But like I say, these points are only relevant to a small fraction of the people that will ultimately buy this box. Cwazy Little Thing wrote.... So what is there that more than about 10 people will actually want enough to buy this product? GB. Cwazy, this is a cwazy comment. You cannot assume that all the people who will buy this box, will share your views. Only the tiniest fraction of them might.... and most of them will still buy it. When all said and done, even after complaining, it's likely that even you will hand over your money for this box. 95% of those who will be in HMV or Virgin in December and will see this box, will pop it into their basket and NOT spot any of the things you and I might notice. They will not care what the B-side is, what is or is not extended or remixed. Not at all. As long as they see KILLER QUEEN, BO RHAP, CHAMPIONS, ROCK YOU, FAT BOTS, BIKE RACE, DON'T STOP ME NOW, BEST FRIEND, SEVEN SEAS OF RHYE, etc, and all the great sleeves, and at a reasonable price, they will buy it. It's really as simple as that. I myself have purchased boxes identical to this Queen Box 1, from artists like Marillion, Stranglers, Kate Bush, and recently a FANTASTIC Simon & Garfunkel one. I know next to nothing about these bands/artists. The boxes offered all the tracks I know, and they look great, and they were all under £50, So I bought them. I don't know or care what B-sides or Ext mixes they have, or are missing. But somewhere in the world, no doubt, there will be Simon/Garf fans, Marillion fans, saying, like you,.... "So what is there that more than about 10 people will actually want enough to buy this product?" SOMEONE ELSE wrote... Why don't we complain direct to Brian's or just Boycot / not buying this crappy compilation ? GB" You could do that, of course. But when 10,000 people buy this box within 6 or 8 weeks of release, and EMI is thinking of pressing more, to meet the demand, and then Brian and Roger and Jim get 4 or even 44 emails from unhappy fans, what do you suppose they will think??? "Stop the press! 9,996 people liked Box 1 enough to buy it, but 4 or 44 people on Queenzone don't like it very much, and regard it as sit in foil, we should stop it right now!" This Box 1 is a really nice object to hold. The sleeves are great and Richard has done meticulous work that most of you will not even notice or think to look for. Put aside your premeditated prejudices, forget your automated negative reaction to everything that comes your way, and keep an open mind until you actually have this thing in your hands. It's not what I imagined 2 years ago. It's different. But it's a lovely thing. I don't know about you, but finances are hard for MANY people here in the Uk right now, and elsewhere in Europe and the world, and though that's only a small consideration in the whole picture, it is significant to a lot of the people I spoke with in Montreux over the last weekend - who simply DO NOT HAVE £200 or £100. Before you criticise the next Tim Burton film, and pull it apart for all the usual predictable reasons, from your armchair perspective, go see it first. Go and watch it. Make up your own mind for yourself without being influenced by all the others who have not seen it either. Do the same with Queen Singles Box 1. Hold it in your hands, look at at it. Imagine the full set. At the very least, wait til you have it before you slag it off. It's a very lovely item. |
Micrówave 11.09.2008 11:28 |
Greg I have only one problem with this set. The price. That breaks down to £15.38 per CD. That's more than the new album!! for two songs!! For the record, I thought the Freddie box that I paid $175.00 US for was a hell of a deal! But a question with the number of CDs: 13. Why 13? I ask why because Queen avoided QUEENCD13 when the singles were originally issued, now 13 isn't a big deal anymore. Any thoughts? |
Lester Burnham 11.09.2008 11:40 |
Greg, I personally was looking forward to a singles box, because of all the interesting single versions and edits of every country. For instance, the edits of 'Liar' or 'Teo Torriate', or any of the other singles that weren't necessarily Top 40 material. Does this mean we won't be getting the live edit of 'Love Of My Life' from 1979? Probably not, because it reached #63 in the UK. Yeah, it's great that we're getting some of the B-sides (most of which are going to be available in the subsequent boxes), but I would have liked something a little more comprehensive. Unfortunately, just because it's pretty doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be worth buying. Years ago, Elvis Costello released a three-box set of his singles between 1977 and 1987, which had twelve discs each and contained every known remix, B-side, and live version that was released on a single in any territory. What was cool was that each single was wrapped in a replica sleeve of the original UK release (or US, or whatever territory the single was exclusive to). I imported it into my iTunes, and listened to it periodically, getting all the rare tracks that I wouldn't have gotten otherwise. That's what I was hoping this set would be like for Queen, and while they rarely released any particularly rare non-album things on their singles, I was looking forward to getting great sounding versions of the 1975 'Keep Yourself Alive' US edit, or what have you. I'm not saying it's your fault, because it's not. From the sound of it, you had greater expectations for it, and, as a result, so did we. So can't you see how our initial reactions would be surprise and, yes, even anger that we didn't quite get what we wanted, or even what you had worked on? Sure, we should judge it when we get it, and not before, but considering the only song that we don't have on this set is the single version of 'Flick Of The Wrist', it's pretty easy to judge it already. I'll probably end up buying it, because I'm hoping that there's at least an informative booklet, but if subsequent boxes don't have the extended remixes, then what's the point? Also, where did this arbitrary "Top 40" rule come from? Does that mean we won't be getting 'Calling All Girls' or 'Pain Is So Close To Pleasure'? The former is excusable, I suppose, but because the latter has a unique remix, both the single and extended versions, this would be the perfect place for it. Anyway, all I can say is that don't you think some of the initial criticism is justified, considering what we were led to believe we'd get? Take a look at it from the Queen fans side: this was supposed to be for us, for the completists who have terrible sounding versions of the B-sides or who paid exorbitant amounts for the Japanese edition of 'Teo Torriate' because the last minute was shaved off for a clean edit. Now, that's nowhere to be seen, and instead we get a bit more padded out version of Greatest Hits I. It's a shame that the reaction is this way, but that's because EVERYONE - the fans, you, me, hell, even Queen Productions - knows it could have been so much better. Why should they pander to casual fans who would probably rather shell out $15 for Greatest Hits, or $35 for the Platinum Collection (which has all the hits they need anyway), instead of giving the diehards a little something extra? And the fact that you said "As long as they see Bohemian Rhapsody, Rock You, and Champions on there is enough make them buy it" (paraphrasing) sums up exactly QPL's thinking: if all the hits are on there, then the average schmo will shell out the money for it, and it's automatically a hit. But if all those songs are on there, PLUS 'Teo Torriate', 'Long Away', 'It's Late', 'Mustapha', or 'Pain Is So Close To Pleasure', then you'll still get a hit, plus people who would never have heard those songs before. Just because 10,000 people will buy it doesn't mean it's automatically good. |
Daz85 11.09.2008 11:41 |
Thanks for your words Greg. I would have liked to have seen the "ultimate" boxset you originally envisioned, but I see the logic behind this release. My main gripe is that it's a bit annoying having to change each CD over after only 2 tracks... it would have been much more convienient to have a compilation of tracks on fewer CDs, like the Freddie Solo Singles 1 & 2. Also, will the later boxes contain the 12" extended mixes on the appropriate discs, as well as the regular 7" A and B sides? Thank you. |
Voice of Reason 2018 11.09.2008 12:15 |
Thanks for coming on here and trying to explain the background Greg. I find a lot of what you said and the rationale behind this release shocking. It hasn't changed my mind about it. Thanks. |
TheGame 11.09.2008 12:30 |
Great that you ( Greg) took the way to QZ to give some light over this release. I cant add so much, but i think Lester wrote a very fair and good comment regarding our view. |
pittrek 11.09.2008 12:40 |
We all expected something COMPLETELY different, so don't be surprised that the first reactions are very bad. It may change later when it gets released and first fans will hold it in their hands |
k-m 11.09.2008 13:01 |
Dear Queen Archivist I just came across your post and I thought 'Is this guy really serious?'. I don't understand how a serious person (which I think you are?) can pay so much attention to all these comments on Queenzone? C'mon, that's not what I expect from someone who is looking after Queen's legacy! Freddie wouldn't give a shit about a few negative comments, would he? Regards |
cmsdrums 11.09.2008 13:04 |
Thanks Greg for explaining yours, and the band's thoughts, behind this. Unfortunately most of the reasons given for releasing it just don't stand up: "They will not care what the B-side is, what is or is not extended or remixed. Not at all. As long as they see KILLER QUEEN, BO RHAP, CHAMPIONS, ROCK YOU, FAT BOTS, BIKE RACE, DON'T STOP ME NOW, BEST FRIEND, SEVEN SEAS OF RHYE, etc" CMS: In this case, why bother having the single box released at all, or if so then why have the B sides there at all?? Why not just leave these people to buy one or more of the multitude of Greatest Hits packages already on the market at a much cheaper cost (as cost seems to be one of your main points for this set). "I know next to nothing about these bands/artists. The boxes offered all the tracks I know, and they look great, and they were all under £50, So I bought them. I don't know or care what B-sides or Ext mixes they have, or are missing". CMS: If you were just after songs you know well then you should have bought the greatest hits by these artists - probably available for about a fiver on CD, and saved yourself £40 or so "certain of these mixes are identical to the original vinyl cuts" CMS: Identical?? Does this mean they are the original masters too, as well? If not, they are not as per the original singles, even if the mix is the same. In fact, virtually all of Queen singles (with the odd exception) has always been the same MIX as the album version - perhaps you mean EDIT??? Did you buy Queen Rocks??? Or Live Aid? or Montreal or Live at the Bowl???? CMS: Of course JSS (and the rest of us did): Live Aid? Unique individual performance featuring medleys/live edits not performed any other time available for first time on Live Aid DVD box. Queen Rocks? Completely new version of a song, plus one other new one. Montreal? First time these versions on most songs, is available, plus Flash and The Hero. Live At The Bowl? Live Hot Space tracks never before available. These examples are NOT comparable to the singles box set. "The sleeves are great and Richard has done meticulous work that most of you will not even notice" CMS: What the point then?!!!? "..it is significant to a lot of the people I spoke with in Montreux over the last weekend - who simply DO NOT HAVE £200 or £100" CMS: Any chance then of a £15 set featuring just A Human Body, See What a Fool I've Been, Soul Brother etc.. etc..."?? "Before you criticise the next Tim Burton film, and pull it apart for all the usual predictable reasons, from your armchair perspective, go see it first. . CMS: But even if we know the general outline of a Tim Burton film, we don't know the dialogue, the exact nature of what will happen, how it happens etc... I know for a fact what I would hear by playing these CDs - exactly what I have already on 7" vinyl (which sounds better than CD anyway). "Go and watch it. Make up your own mind for yourself without being influenced by all the others who have not seen it either. Do the same with Queen Singles Box 1. Hold it in your hands, look at at it" CMS: We don't want to look at it - this is, and always has been, about THE MUSIC. We don't care if the rare stuff, 12" mixes, B sides etc...come out stuffed inside a turd, once we HEAR it, that's when the magic happens. I can download a picture of virtually any single cover from anywhere in the world within the next couple of minutes. (and if not I could always buy your book when it finally comes out!!) I do realise Greg that you are not responsible for what is released, but I don't quite know why you feel so duty bound to defend the release using such weak points when you must surely be as disappointed as us. Even those people who say that they hate Q+PR are more likely to buy The Cosmos Rocks than this singles box I'm afraid. A last glimmer of hope is that if the 12" single mixes have been pulled from the set, is the thinking that these will be released seperately on their own set at some point? Cheers Greg - I hope you can see the validity in at least some of my counter-arguments CMSDRUMS |
John S Stuart 11.09.2008 13:09 |
Greg: You miss my point. While it is true that I have many 'doubles' or 'repeats' in my collection, I am not such a mindless slave that I have to purchase EVERYTHING with a Queen label on it. So while it may also be true that I WILL continue to purchase 'new' product - and take in the 'Queen+Paul Rodgers tour' - I will certainly NOT be shelling out any of MY hard earned cash on this proposed collection. Obviously, one's spending priorities change throughout a life-time. Credit crunch's, raised mortgage rates, higher inflation, expensive gas and food bills, children, grandchildren, pets - all take a slice out of the dwindling family budget - so realistically charging me for what I already own (and frankly can download for free anyways) - is NOT high on my priority list, and in these days of competeing financial resources, I do not believe this product offers value for money. (On the other hand - a version of the SCC 24 master is very high on my priority list). Now - I accept that I am talking about ME - for ME, and I allow others the freedom to spend THEIR monies how they wish (and I hope you extend the courtesy to allow me to do likewise), but, I honestly do NOT think I am in the minority this time around. Queen are a business. I have no problem with that. They need to make a profit. I have no problem with that either. But, this time around, I do have a problem with this box-set, and I would be interested to see how well it sells (or vice versa). As once said: "We can fool some of the people some of the time...", and a lack of sales could produce some very interesting consequences... |
Ray D O'Gaga 11.09.2008 13:23 |
I was looking forward to the singles set for the edits, the b-sides, the extended or alternate mixes, and the book, with the little details and various foreign sleeves that I, as a fan, cream over. So that all or most of those things are excised from these releases is disappointing. I wanted to buy something that was pretty AND interesting, instead of something that's just pretty. Also, that the band and its management were presented with a thoroughly researched and reasonably complete product but chose to dumb it down for the sake of the mass market, while commercially understandable, is also disappointing. I understand the desire to break the set down into more reasonably purchasable chunks, but did the completeness of the content and the thoroughness of the information have to suffer? Surely with 13 CDs with 2 songs per disc, there was the opportunity to include more content at the same price point. |
brians wig 11.09.2008 13:29 |
As the person who started the original "What is this shit?" thread, I still maintain that we shouldn't believe the "publicised" tracklisting. Let's wait until QPL themselves tell us what it is. That said, it is true that most Queen fans want the B sides, extended mixes, edits and we are willing to pay for the same old same old just to get these gems thrown in. It's just that by dividing the set into 4 volumes means that volume one will contain either nothing or very little at best of what the fans actually want. Volume One is little more than an expanded Greatest Hits one set with a few extra tracks thrown in but with a greater price tag. What I would like to say is that when I uploaded the first radio broadcast of "C-lebrity" a few weeks ago, 1728 people downloaded it from Queen Zone. If the singles boxset is limited to 10,000 copies only, that equates to 1728 fans who quite possibly won't waste their money or, if you like, a whopping 17.28% of copies produced that won't automatically be snapped up by fans. Go show that to EMI. |
Yara 11.09.2008 13:30 |
Wow, it must be great, I know very, very little, in fact, almost nothing about B-sides and different versions. And I love this kind of thing. Now, problem is that it's funny! It's funny to read you guys talking because these things don't even make their way into my country. :-( Really! Now, I don't understand the ITunes guys. None of the Itunes resources can be used by us - we can't buy music in the Itunes store, we can't buy the Itunes Originals, we can't...damn, do nothing in the Itunes store besides looking at pictures! And Brazil is a good market for music, I don't get it. So, I hope this one will make its way into the country, because I can't find the Freddie Mercury Box Set. You might say I'm kidding. I'm not. I try hard to buy it. I go to the best stores, each month, and it's never there - the usual albums, OK, they're all there, and I bought them all, I bought the wonderful DVD releases, and the Blu-Ray release of Rock Montreal is just mind-boggling, so, I'm pretty much well served of Queen material. There's a lot to listen to. Now, of course, since the Freddie's box has been out for years, I'd love to have it, but guys don't bring it here! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Hahaha. Now...what else, so, I find it exciting, because I love B-Sides, alternative versions, all these things, and I hope it actually makes into our stores, just like the other products in fact - the live DVDs, the Greatest Hits, they're all available here. So, I'd mad if I started complaining because I didn't even have the time to listen to and watch carefully all I have already! I hope I can find it here soon! And the Freddie Box Set too. Take care you all! |
pittrek 11.09.2008 13:34 |
So... OK, it's not what you expected. It's a smaller set. Originally 156 items over 10 CDs, spanning 9 hours (from memory), and with a colossal book of text that most people would have criticised to hell without even reading. But, had we issued that, as planned (and actually handed in, by the way), you guys would now be saying... "£249 for a box. Are they joking? Who can afford that in these money-tight times? Don't 'they' know the world is on the brink of recession, with more people losing their homes than ever, and more bankrupt people than EVER before? QPL live in a dream world if they think we have ALL THIS money to spend at this time."I WOULD buy this version ! It would be fantastic to have something like that ! |
Holly2003 11.09.2008 14:00 |
Yara wrote: Wow, it must be great, I know very, very little, in fact, almost nothing about B-sides and different versions. And I love this kind of thing. Now, problem is that it's funny! It's funny to read you guys talking because these things don't even make their way into my country. :-( Really! Now, I don't understand the ITunes guys. None of the Itunes resources can be used by us - we can't buy music in the Itunes store, we can't buy the Itunes Originals, we can't...damn, do nothing in the Itunes store besides looking at pictures! And Brazil is a good market for music, I don't get it.Maybe it's because of your ongoing monkey problems, as highlighted in The Simpsons a few years back.. |
cmsdrums 11.09.2008 14:05 |
brians wig wrote: What I would like to say is that when I uploaded the first radio broadcast of "C-lebrity" a few weeks ago, 1728 people downloaded it from Queen Zone. If the singles boxset is limited to 10,000 copies only, that equates to 1728 fans who quite possibly won't waste their money or, if you like, a whopping 17.28% of copies produced that won't automatically be snapped up by fans. Go show that to EMI.I think you can probably increase that 17.28% up too - they'll be those Q+PR haters that won't have downloaded C-lebrity, and those who wanted to hold off to buy it. I'd say it's probably 20%+ that may possibly not want to top up with another version of Greatest Hits |
regmarha 11.09.2008 14:55 |
Hi Greg, great to hear your side. Yes, this product could very well please the Greatest Hits audiences wordlwide and I'm happy if the people who don't know much about the band are happy this Christmas. Business well done. My problem here is that QPL produces a maximum of 1 product annually and this year's one is not interesting for us for many reasons (we're not the target group). It would be a very different and happy crowd here if we had a separate product, or at least losless download options with the B sides, remixes, outtakes. |
AlexRocks 11.09.2008 14:57 |
Pittrek that would be REALLY unfortunate if there were a ten c.d. box set that only had NINE hours of music on there. Frankly it would be rather unfortunate if a ten c.d. box set only had TEN hours of music on it. Hopefully a project like that would be maximized as much as possible with the space on discs. |
Ray D O'Gaga 11.09.2008 15:05 |
regmarha wrote: My problem here is that QPL produces a maximum of 1 product annually and this year's one is not interesting for us for many reasons (we're not the target group).It seems we're never the target group - or haven't been since the Freddie box in 2000. Eight years is a long time. |
regmarha 11.09.2008 15:08 |
Ray D O'Gaga wrote:so true it hurts.regmarha wrote: My problem here is that QPL produces a maximum of 1 product annually and this year's one is not interesting for us for many reasons (we're not the target group).It seems we're never the target group - or haven't been since the Freddie box in 2000. Eight years is a long time. we are like junkies, addicted seriously to the music and we cannot get our dose. |
Ray D O'Gaga 11.09.2008 15:21 |
regmarha wrote:Personally I feel like the loyal wife of a sexy cad, who can't be bothered to come home and give it to me regularly because he's off chasing the passing fancy of every two-bit tramp in a miniskirt. When will he realise I need to be satisfied? I need the release provided by his big throbbing boxset - all 10 discs of it.Ray D O'Gaga wrote:so true it hurts. we are like junkies, addicted seriously to the music and we cannot get our dose.regmarha wrote: My problem here is that QPL produces a maximum of 1 product annually and this year's one is not interesting for us for many reasons (we're not the target group).It seems we're never the target group - or haven't been since the Freddie box in 2000. Eight years is a long time. Don't make me beg for it, baby. |
AlexRocks 11.09.2008 15:27 |
I think such a compilation of singles as the proposed 10 c.d. one will come in due time... |
Ray D O'Gaga 11.09.2008 15:40 |
AlexRocks wrote: I think such a compilation of singles as the proposed 10 c.d. one will come in due time...Sadly, I don't. To extend my lascivious metaphor, I think they're shooting their entire singles wad with this and the proposed releases. Maybe Greg can secure permission to release the text that was to accompany the 10 disc set as a PDF file or something someday. |
regmarha 11.09.2008 15:40 |
Ray D O'Gaga wrote:yeah :) or, we are like some sad guy who fell in love with a prostitute and keeps sending flowers and text messages cos he cannot read the signs that this relationship is never ever gonna happen :)regmarha wrote:Personally I feel like the loyal wife of a sexy cad, who can't be bothered to come home and give it to me regularly because he's off chasing the passing fancy of every two-bit tramp in a miniskirt. When will he realise I need to be satisfied? I need the release provided by his big throbbing boxset - all 10 discs of it. Don't make me beg for it, baby.Ray D O'Gaga wrote:so true it hurts. we are like junkies, addicted seriously to the music and we cannot get our dose.regmarha wrote: My problem here is that QPL produces a maximum of 1 product annually and this year's one is not interesting for us for many reasons (we're not the target group).It seems we're never the target group - or haven't been since the Freddie box in 2000. Eight years is a long time. |
Tero 11.09.2008 16:19 |
AlexRocks wrote: I think such a compilation of singles as the proposed 10 c.d. one will come in due time...I just read your message on QOL... Do you expect Queen to release the box set faster than the 16 years it took Rolling Stones between those releases? :P Seriously though, this is what I think is wrong with your hypothesis: You are comparing a 3cd compilation album aimed at the general public with a 10cd luxury box set aimed at the hardcore fans. The Rolling Stones have had a natural progression from individual albums (and subsequent cd re-releases) to compilation albums and box sets with ever diminishing potential audience... Queen already have their basic albums and compilation albums, and this is their top of the line "luxury item". |
Penetration_Guru 11.09.2008 16:35 |
pittrek wrote:Me too. And I don't see how the economic situation is an argument for 4 boxes of 13 2 track CDs containing no new material, however neatly it has been designed. It's an argument for really pushing a collection of Greatest Hits albums, all packed together at a competetive price point.So... OK, it's not what you expected. It's a smaller set. Originally 156 items over 10 CDs, spanning 9 hours (from memory), and with a colossal book of text that most people would have criticised to hell without even reading. But, had we issued that, as planned (and actually handed in, by the way), you guys would now be saying... "£249 for a box. Are they joking? Who can afford that in these money-tight times? Don't 'they' know the world is on the brink of recession, with more people losing their homes than ever, and more bankrupt people than EVER before? QPL live in a dream world if they think we have ALL THIS money to spend at this time."I WOULD buy this version ! It would be fantastic to have something like that ! Oh wait - that's the product they had out during the boom years, when the response to criticism of THAT was "it's for the mass market, it's not aimed at you, your time will come". tick tick tick |
AlexRocks 11.09.2008 17:00 |
It's not like Queen or EMI are taking the Master Recordings and throwing them out after these releases folks! They are going to sell them as well as they can in the best ways possible to maximize profits as much as possible! Good for them! As I said I think demand in the next few years will lead to some more interesting releases or release. |
AlexRocks 11.09.2008 17:03 |
You all realise that there was the whole issue of being able to get what ever tracks on ten c.d.s...right? I think a comprehensive box set will demand something different that will allow more space on it. As it is Queen are still making singles and I dought that they wanted to stop with "No One But You (Only The Good Die Young)" since no matter what you all think of Queen + they DO still have unreleased recordings with Freddie Mercury...so it is not all over yet. |
Pim Derks 11.09.2008 18:04 |
The wonderful world of Queen Productions gets stranger and stranger everyday. Like any casual fan in their right mind would shelf out 40 pounds for 13 cd-singles while they don't know half of the tracks - if the Platinum Collection is next to it for 1/4th of the price and ONLY has tracks they know. What's next - Queen Number Ones? Freddie Mercury + Queen: The Show Must Go On! We Still Rock You: The Best of Queen. |
Whisperer 11.09.2008 18:15 |
Ray D O'Gaga wrote:Well said! I know most people would disagree with me, but I think that Queen owes the fans to release rarities and stuff that is more interesting than the greatest hits packed in different packages or making some mediocore music with some blues singer. After all it's us who made them rich and famous and it's us who keep the legacy of the original and legedary line-up alive.regmarha wrote: My problem here is that QPL produces a maximum of 1 product annually and this year's one is not interesting for us for many reasons (we're not the target group).It seems we're never the target group - or haven't been since the Freddie box in 2000. Eight years is a long time. |
cmsdrums 11.09.2008 18:30 |
Pim Derks wrote: The wonderful world of Queen Productions gets stranger and stranger everyday. Like any casual fan in their right mind would shelf out 40 pounds for 13 cd-singles while they don't know half of the tracks - if the Platinum Collection is next to it for 1/4th of the price and ONLY has tracks they know.Perfect summary Pim Derks. To be honest, it more than a quarter of the price, cos when you factor in that there's going to be 4 sets, each for about £40, which for the casual buyer will just about cover what is in the Platinum Collection - so that's £160 outlay, or £12....mmmm...wonder which I'd choose?!!? |
Pim Derks 11.09.2008 18:43 |
The boxset of course - IT HAS BO RHAP ON IT! |
regmarha 11.09.2008 18:48 |
this box set is produced by the same people who have decided 2 equals 4. what a shame, shame, shame... |
Pim Derks 11.09.2008 18:53 |
Let's face it people. As long as Brian May lives, we will NEVER get an archive box with demo's, alternate takes etc. I bet Roger doesn't care what they release - as long as he can live the happy life with lots of girls, booze and coke ;)
Brian is just waaaaay to perfectionistic to allow a demo of him singing TYMD to be released.
From news.bbc.co.uk
The British rank well down the list. Men come in at 14th in the world table, living to an average age of 75 while women are in 18th place, living on average to 79.9.So that's.... 14 more years of waiting. |
Future Manager 11.09.2008 18:55 |
Queen Archivist wrote: ...you purchased "UK 3" CD single collection" and then you ALSO purchased "Japan 3" box-set single collection", knowing fully well that the two items are IDENTICAL in content.I thought that the Japanese 3" singles box contained the correct stand-alone versions of Funny How Love Is, Tenement Funster and Flick of The Wrist, and the European 3" singles did not (album versions). |
Negative Creep 11.09.2008 19:01 |
Future Manager wrote:Correct.Queen Archivist wrote: you purchased "UK 3" CD single collection" and then you ALSO purchased "Japan 3" box-set single collection", knowing fully well that the two items are IDENTICAL in content.I thought that the Japanese 3" singles box contained the correct stand-alone versions of Funny How Love Is, Tenement Funster and Flick of The Wrist, and the European 3" singles did not (album versions). |
AmeriQueen 11.09.2008 19:05 |
After Queen Rocks! I'd say that nothing surprises me that they'd do for commercial satisfaction. It all started back with Queen's first E.P. and continues today by their unfaithful use of the Queen handle which I say accusingly in response to the non-Queen like Cosmos Rocks tracks I have been hearing. What truly, truly amazes me is how completely insulting it is to us fans for them to figure out another way to release material already accounted for, when anthology boxed sets, live concert classics and further dvd audio album releases beyond the Game and ANATO have been promised, requested or just plain need to be released. If Adam Ant can re-release digitaly remastered albums across his entire catalogue, each accompanied with almost as much material extra that covers the studio sessions from alternate versions to raw recordings to songs that didn't appear, as well as include a bonus mix of such recordings available as box package bonus cd music, not to mention a hits versions mixed with alternate further catalogued works of his career in an ANT BOX entitled 3 disc box set, and write an autobiography all the while only freshly out of the looney bin, then can't Queen impress our archives with a little more than just the Milton Keynes concert and a 3rd Montreal release adding yet another bit of music that should have been complete when it first was released? The time and preperation of this singles box will be for the benefit of rich fans who take the neverending balance tipping weighing the complete salvage of every nickel and dime they can tear away from their fans, over long promised treasures I have long given up hope for outside of some house servant or queen friendly sneak who uploads to the internet more of the leaked material that makes me want to piss on their singles box along with every other re-release of already available content at a price, regardless of it's packaging being the one thing that makes it even news at all. Oh what I'd be willing to pay for just one disc's worth of archive material reflecting the work of Queen II's studio days, back when they were sampling different Prophet Song versions later to finally appear on ANATO, or a couple of White Queen and Black Queen alternate takes, or a song never mentioned that almost made the cut... I'd pay nothing more than ten bucks for a Singles set, if it were all singles released fashionably with b-sides in top digital format and packaged to the point that 10 bucks would already be a cut in profits because of packaging expenses alone being at least that. What fascination does their marketing dept. have with the absurd idea that after all this time someone wants to have a complete song by song disc version of what they have in no less than 1 completely worn out and over played song most likely in line with other tracks forming an album, something actually worth putting in and out of a disc player in the 21st Century. |
Cwazy little thing 11.09.2008 20:56 |
Queen Archivist wrote: continued..... Cwazy Little Thing wrote.... I cant help wondering who they think will buy this at all? GB. Many thousands of people who find themselves in a million CD stores around the world, who see all Queen's wonderful singles in a lovely little colourful box, containing great sleeves from Japan, Hungary, France, Spain, UK, etc.... they are the people, MOSTLY, that buy these things. Die-hard long-term Queen fans like you and I, are only a tiny part of the picture. I would liken this to 40 Liverpool football fans abandoning the stadium next Saturday, in protest to something they don't like... while 85,000 other fans swarm past them into the stadium regardless. Liverpool cater for the majority, the masses, not the tiny minority. It is after all, a business. EMI, Liverpool F.C., McDonalds... they're not charities, are they. Cwazy Little Thing wrote....My main interest in the thing was the b-sides, remixes and so forth which gathered together and in decent sound quality presented at least some notion of rarity. I probably would have bought a £40-60 box set containing all those. Anyone who wants the artwork already has it, so all that remains is the tracks themselves, and anyone who wants them already has the albums/greatest hits/rocks - even in the general non-superfan public. With the b-sides being spread out across 4 releases (and this first one only containing one!!!) only people to whom money doesnt really matter will feel they must buy all to get those tracks. GB. This is all fair comment. But like I say, these points are only relevant to a small fraction of the people that will ultimately buy this box. Cwazy Little Thing wrote.... So what is there that more than about 10 people will actually want enough to buy this product? GB. Cwazy, this is a cwazy comment. You cannot assume that all the people who will buy this box, will share your views. Only the tiniest fraction of them might.... and most of them will still buy it. When all said and done, even after complaining, it's likely that even you will hand over your money for this box. 95% of those who will be in HMV or Virgin in December and will see this box, will pop it into their basket and NOT spot any of the things you and I might notice. They will not care what the B-side is, what is or is not extended or remixed. Not at all. As long as they see KILLER QUEEN, BO RHAP, CHAMPIONS, ROCK YOU, FAT BOTS, BIKE RACE, DON'T STOP ME NOW, BEST FRIEND, SEVEN SEAS OF RHYE, etc, and all the great sleeves, and at a reasonable price, they will buy it. It's really as simple as that. I myself have purchased boxes identical to this Queen Box 1, from artists like Marillion, Stranglers, Kate Bush, and recently a FANTASTIC Simon & Garfunkel one. I know next to nothing about these bands/artists. The boxes offered all the tracks I know, and they look great, and they were all under £50, So I bought them. I don't know or care what B-sides or Ext mixes they have, or are missing. But somewhere in the world, no doubt, there will be Simon/Garf fans, Marillion fans, saying, like you,.... "So what is there that more than about 10 people will actually want enough to buy this product?"Greg, firstly, its always a pleasure talking with you. Unlike some here, on the whole I understand your limits as to what you can tell us, why you take a certain pleasure in winding up some folk here (which is about the easiest thing in the world), and I often think you're quite funny. So it is in the spirit of discussion I am replying, and not just to have a go at you because its cool to do so on QZ. What is a little bit frustrating about this set is the fact that in light of what you are saying, this is a move purely about making more money. The fans like you and me, are ignored, almost completely. Did you look at my profile or something to make the LFC reference? It seemed too convenient a coincidence, hehe. Dont think for a second I think the die hard's views will matter to the 85,000 people who do part with their money - I understand what is going on here. Im just disappointed by it. Yes, money has to be made, but what is annoying is that SURELY a middle ground can be found which will satisfy general public and fans alike? You're right, a lot of people will see this and like the look of it for the hits - those are the general record buying public who arent like you and me. But wait - why would those people buy this set, when they can get all those hits on greatest hits 1,2, and 3 for a fraction of the price? Thats why Im not sure who will buy it- the odd person aside, surely the general public arent interested at all in the pretty packaging and artwork (as great as that may be), but in the tracks, and then mostly the hits. If they can get them cheaper, they aint going to plump for the more expensive item. I get the impression that even you wanted the original concept a little bit more than this package, and thats just it - what all this comes down to is disappointment. Other bands release both stuff which caters for the general public, but also go for archive and rarities releases to please the fans, yet Queen fans have only had this treatment once with the FM box, and its the fact we know there is the potential for more that is frustrating. The original concept got people's hopes up for a really solid release which had some element of rarity and completeness about it to appeal to us die hards, and this product, however nice it might be, is not the same and is a bit disappointing in that respect - dont you agree? You're also right that a part of me would still considering buying - Im a fan, thats what we do, but that doesnt change that its second best to what could have been. Im the sort of fan who is first and foremost about hearing the music, and so it was the B-sides and remixes which I dont own which interested me more than the box/artwork, pretty as they may be. Ultimately I cant justify the spendage (£120) on something which Im not that crazy about, as nice as it may look in my collection. I still have to track down a copy of the FM box I can afford (we spoke about this on here once before), and that is something I really want! (First and foremost for the music - the rare tracks, the things I've never heard, the ability to hear Freddie at work). |
AlexRocks 11.09.2008 22:22 |
These interesting unreleased things will still be released at some point I'm sure of it. It will just be some time longer. Does anyone know if the following three box sets of the singles will be all released next year or one every FIVE years! Lol! |
AlexRocks 11.09.2008 22:23 |
"Freddie Mercury + Queen: The Show Must Go On! We Still Rock You: The Best of Queen." That was PRICELESS Pim Derks! Lol! SO funny! Lol! |
AlexRocks 11.09.2008 22:25 |
I think I was surprised that something like the box set that was proposed would have been released at this point as they are still releasing songs and it would seem something definitively compiling singles would not want to be done yet. Whereas in the next few years certain things from the archives COULD be released...eh? |
Ray D O'Gaga 11.09.2008 22:26 |
Pim Derks wrote: Let's face it people. As long as Brian May lives, we will NEVER get an archive box with demo's, alternate takes etc. I bet Roger doesn't care what they release - as long as he can live the happy life with lots of girls, booze and coke ;) Brian is just waaaaay to perfectionistic to allow a demo of him singing TYMD to be released. From news.bbc.co.ukThat's a pretty ugly thing to say. Way too far. Waaaaaaay too far.The British rank well down the list. Men come in at 14th in the world table, living to an average age of 75 while women are in 18th place, living on average to 79.9.So that's.... 14 more years of waiting. |
Michael Allred 11.09.2008 22:56 |
Ray D O'Gaga wrote:I thought it was pretty funny.....in a dark way.Pim Derks wrote: Let's face it people. As long as Brian May lives, we will NEVER get an archive box with demo's, alternate takes etc. I bet Roger doesn't care what they release - as long as he can live the happy life with lots of girls, booze and coke ;) Brian is just waaaaay to perfectionistic to allow a demo of him singing TYMD to be released. From news.bbc.co.ukThat's a pretty ugly thing to say. Way too far. Waaaaaaay too far.The British rank well down the list. Men come in at 14th in the world table, living to an average age of 75 while women are in 18th place, living on average to 79.9.So that's.... 14 more years of waiting. |
ern2150 11.09.2008 22:59 |
Queen Archivist wrote: So... OK, it's not what you expected. It's a smaller set. Originally 156 items over 10 CDs, spanning 9 hours (from memory), and with a colossal book of text that most people would have criticised to hell without even reading. But, had we issued that, as planned (and actually handed in, by the way), you guys would now be saying...When you say "handed in" there, I'm assuming you mean the text. But my question is -- were all the remixes and edits still remastered, even if they aren't going to be on this release? |
N0_Camping4U 11.09.2008 23:13 |
Despite what Greg may say. I still say: Blah blah, same greatest hits, wrapped up in a new box. It's the same thing, just in a new box, and a new little 30 page booklet, of all the pictures we've seen before, all the info we've read before, and all the quotes from other bands we've red. This box set will generate some money in everyone's pockets, and generate some buzz in Queen again, sure. But how much MORE money, and MORE buzz does QP need before they give what the fans want? Isn't GH1/2/3 selling super well? What are they waiting on? I'll probably succumb and end up buying this, I just wish QP and anyone involved with the releasing of this set would think about the die hard fans. We're getting what....some edit of Flick of the Wrist that we've never heard? Oh man, that warrants a purchase of it. Why can't we get something interesting, new, fresh, that would generate some interest - more so than some GH package re-laced. Even your Miracle book, or whatever you were talking about a month or 2 ago Greg would be more interesting than a rahash of Greatest Hits. Besides, I'm tired of waiting for Hangman, and New York. When will those be out, Greg? How much money is it going to take - I know it's out there. Name a price... It could be between me and you :] |
Pim Derks 12.09.2008 02:28 |
Ray D O'Gaga wrote: That's a pretty ugly thing to say. Way too far. Waaaaaaay too far.It may be ugly, but it's that truth. Why do you think Star Fleet still hasn't been released on CD (yes, it was a b-side to BTTL)? Why was the Brian @ Albert Hall video cancelled? Why were the proposed six live videos in 1998 cancelled? I think it had very little to do with Roger and/or John. |
john bodega 12.09.2008 03:37 |
Ray D O'Gaga wrote: That's a pretty ugly thing to say. Way too far. Waaaaaaay too far.Oh wah wah wah. He's still right, doesn't matter how 'ugly' it sounds. I doubt the Freddie box set would've come out if Freddie hadn't kicked the bucket. Death is a great lubricant to CD releases. It takes care of two important factors: 1). The objections of whoever is on the release... in the case of stuff that was never meant to be heard. 2). It's almost guaranteed to sell a few copies more than it would if the shmuck were still alive. Don't get me wrong though, I'd rather have a living Brian May than a Queen box set. We've probably heard it all already anyhow. |
Benn 12.09.2008 05:55 |
Well, Greg, if your proposed set has been overlooked by the supposed great business minds of Queen, then they really have lost their marbles. As far as justifying this by saying that there are some pretty sleeves housing the CDs, what about the ones that aren't included? Is anyone really bothered about having a card replica sleeve? SURELY, it's the content that it the main driving factor in making the purchase? Sets 2-4 will surely follow regardless if the sales of set one, but it's no co-incidence that because of the lack of sales for The Who's "Singles Box Vol. 1", volume 2 has not followed. Is anyone REALLY bothered by the fact that the set is "nice to hold" when the sensible thing would have been to put out an all-encompassing, comprehensive and complete "nice to hold" set. Best of both as opposed to half a job? Stocking filler as opposed to catalogue enhancement. Your set would have been all-encompassing and a treasure trove of "perviously unavailable on CD" material. |
Pim Derks 12.09.2008 07:48 |
Zebonka12 wrote: He's still right, doesn't matter how 'ugly' it sounds. I doubt the Freddie box set would've come out if Freddie hadn't kicked the bucket.Ofcourse not. Nobody gave a shit about Freddie's solo stuff until after he died. |
Togg 12.09.2008 08:20 |
I know this will be an unpopular view here I have to say I side with Greg on this, the product is pretty much as I expected it to be although I can understand why people are dissappointed. Frankly this box set was never aimed at the serious collecter, as Greg points out it was aimed at the millions of people who wander into stores around the world and like Queen but don't have much in there collection (particularly the new fans after this new album and tour) £40 per set will fly off the shelves, the version you are all talking about would have cost £250 at least and would simply sit there until a member of Queenzone walked in off the street. Whilst I too would love to have seen all the variants released, I am in a tiny minority of people who would shell out for it, and frankly not sure I would. I will not buy this set either, not because it's bad but I just don't need it, however others many other will, I bet it will be one of the best selling products since greatest hits 1 and makes much more commercial sense than a big whooper of a set that only a select few will buy. Sorry but I can see perfectly the sense behind this, I am sure initially Greg was equally dissappointed but I bet he too can see the logic here... |
cmsdrums 12.09.2008 08:36 |
Togg wrote: I know this will be an unpopular view here I have to say I side with Greg on this, the product is pretty much as I expected it to be although I can understand why people are dissappointed. Frankly this box set was never aimed at the serious collecter, as Greg points out it was aimed at the millions of people who wander into stores around the world and like Queen but don't have much in there collection (particularly the new fans after this new album and tour) £40 per set will fly off the shelves, the version you are all talking about would have cost £250 at least and would simply sit there until a member of Queenzone walked in off the street. Whilst I too would love to have seen all the variants released, I am in a tiny minority of people who would shell out for it, and frankly not sure I would. I will not buy this set either, not because it's bad but I just don't need it, however others many other will, I bet it will be one of the best selling products since greatest hits 1 and makes much more commercial sense than a big whooper of a set that only a select few will buy. Sorry but I can see perfectly the sense behind this, I am sure initially Greg was equally dissappointed but I bet he too can see the logic here...I have to politely disagree with you on this one - whatever packaging you dress it up in, it effectively amounts to £160 for The Platinum Collection box! |
Tero 12.09.2008 08:52 |
Togg wrote: Frankly this box set was never aimed at the serious collecter, as Greg points out it was aimed at the millions of people who wander into stores around the world and like Queen but don't have much in there collection (particularly the new fans after this new album and tour) £40 per set will fly off the shelves, the version you are all talking about would have cost £250 at least and would simply sit there until a member of Queenzone walked in off the street.I'm sorry, but you really are talking out of your arse with the first half of your post. 1) A £40 compilation of 28 songs is NOT aimed for the general public, that's what the greatest hits are for. 2) If this was aimed at millions of people, it would be a limited edition of 500,000 copies instead of 10,000. A limited edition of 10,000 means it's aimed at the fans of the band who are willing to pay ahything for a Queen product. 3) A 10 cd box set with huge book does not cost £250 in the stores. If your memory goes back as far as 2000, you'll remember that the Freddie box was under £100. If you want to justify this release, please feel free to do so with facts instead of halftruths. |
Togg 12.09.2008 09:22 |
Tero wrote:RubbishTogg wrote: Frankly this box set was never aimed at the serious collecter, as Greg points out it was aimed at the millions of people who wander into stores around the world and like Queen but don't have much in there collection (particularly the new fans after this new album and tour) £40 per set will fly off the shelves, the version you are all talking about would have cost £250 at least and would simply sit there until a member of Queenzone walked in off the street.I'm sorry, but you really are talking out of your arse with the first half of your post. 1) A £40 compilation of 28 songs is NOT aimed for the general public, that's what the greatest hits are for. 2) If this was aimed at millions of people, it would be a limited edition of 500,000 copies instead of 10,000. A limited edition of 10,000 means it's aimed at the fans of the band who are willing to pay ahything for a Queen product. 3) A 10 cd box set with huge book does not cost £250 in the stores. If your memory goes back as far as 2000, you'll remember that the Freddie box was under £100. If you want to justify this release, please feel free to do so with facts instead of halftruths. Just watch as the 'limited run' gets raised, this will fly off the shelves, just walk into HMV and look at all the similar products on the shelves... do you have any understanding of the purchasing habits of the record buying public? obviously not, because take it from me £40 per set is just the right price point. I have run enough focus groups and seen enough data to know what I am talking about here. They will simply keep pressing them until the demand runs out. £250 too much money.... read Gregs post I just looked back and I think you will see he quoted a similar figure, but hey what do I know! The Freddie solo box was far smaller than what you have been talking about here, his solo career stemmed two albums for gods sake. Not for the general public... What are you talking about? all those millions of homes that bought Greatest Hits 1... guess what they will go and buy now.... any idea.... |
Pim Derks 12.09.2008 09:38 |
Togg wrote:Tero wrote: The Freddie solo box was far smaller than what you have been talking about here, his solo career stemmed two albums for gods sake.The Freddie boxset featured 10 cd's plus 2 dvd's. That's 2 discs more than the proposed Queen singles boxset. And that cost me (I think) 240 guilders in autumn 2000 (around 80/90 pounds). |
Togg 12.09.2008 09:42 |
Pim Derks wrote:Togg wrote:Yes but just look and the volume of material, we are talking Queen rather than a two album solo career, we are talking 2000 and as I said read Gregs post he himself quotes a similar figure, then if you don't beliebve me go down to HMV and look at the box sets, I think you will find a fair number well over the £100 mark.Tero wrote: The Freddie solo box was far smaller than what you have been talking about here, his solo career stemmed two albums for gods sake.The Freddie boxset featured 10 cd's plus 2 dvd's. That's 2 discs more than the proposed Queen singles boxset. And that cost me (I think) 240 guilders in autumn 2000 (around 80/90 pounds). |
Tero 12.09.2008 10:53 |
Togg wrote: Yes but just look and the volume of material, we are talking Queen rather than a two album solo career, we are talking 2000 and as I said read Gregs post he himself quotes a similar figure, then if you don't beliebve me go down to HMV and look at the box sets, I think you will find a fair number well over the £100 mark. check out this as one example Rolling Stones - Bigger Bang: World Tour: 8cd: Box Set: Ltd: Special Packaging CD £243.99So that's your argument? That a new Queen box set would cost the same as eil would charge for a collectible Japanese boxset of Rolling Stones albums? Next you'll probably tell me that the Freddie Mercury box set has a price tag of £400, because that's what it says in the Amazon marketplace. I don't deny that several box sets will cost over £100 (especially if you pick the most expensive store in the city). In fact, I paid more than £100 for the Freddie Mercury box, and it would have been £140 in the most expensive place where I saw it. That is however a long way from £250, and I have never EVER seen any box sets that expensive. Please give me a link to any new 10 cd box with a price tag of £250, or I will never believe that anybody would try to extort that much money out of their audience. |
Togg 12.09.2008 11:11 |
Tero wrote:You've never seen a box set as high as £250??? where do you live?Togg wrote: Yes but just look and the volume of material, we are talking Queen rather than a two album solo career, we are talking 2000 and as I said read Gregs post he himself quotes a similar figure, then if you don't beliebve me go down to HMV and look at the box sets, I think you will find a fair number well over the £100 mark. check out this as one example Rolling Stones - Bigger Bang: World Tour: 8cd: Box Set: Ltd: Special Packaging CD £243.99So that's your argument? That a new Queen box set would cost the same as eil would charge for a collectible Japanese boxset of Rolling Stones albums? Next you'll probably tell me that the Freddie Mercury box set has a price tag of £400, because that's what it says in the Amazon marketplace. I don't deny that several box sets will cost over £100 (especially if you pick the most expensive store in the city). In fact, I paid more than £100 for the Freddie Mercury box, and it would have been £140 in the most expensive place where I saw it. That is however a long way from £250, and I have never EVER seen any box sets that expensive. Please give me a link to any new 10 cd box with a price tag of £250, or I will never believe that anybody would try to extort that much money out of their audience. Here's is one of a dozen links I think you will find there are a fair number going up to over £300+ link Search albums box sets, list by price.... Look, there are plenty out there over £200 walk into any music super store and you will find them, Oxford street in London has hundreds, So ok you might find cheaper versions but that is not the argument, you seem to think they don't excist Check back in November, all the Christmas stuff will be on display and there will be shelves of box sets all retailing at £100 £200 £300+ The Rolling Stone set at £243 just just from that tour, never mind a history of all the singles! There are plenty out there FACT people buy them by the tone FACT The set you hoped Queen would put out would have cost around that much FACT if you don't believe me READ Gregs post at the top of this, it's there in B/W he is absolutly right FACT |
Togg 12.09.2008 11:18 |
A few more examples.. Lewis,Jerry Lee - Mercury Smashes & Rockin Sessions: 10cd: Book: Box Set CD £200.99 Miles Davis - Complete Miles Davis At Montreux: 19cd: Box Set List Price £219.99 Your saving £8.00 CD £211.99 West Indian Rhythm - Calypso Box Set: 1938-1940: 10cd CD £254.99 Top Of The Pops Collection: Box Set: 43cd CD £296.99 Beatles - Complete Box: 16cd: Box Set List Price £319.99 Your saving £1.00 CD £318.99 As you can see they are out there and we have not reached the Christmas market yet |
Benn 12.09.2008 11:47 |
Togg, re: --Frankly this box set was never aimed at the serious collecter, It may not be, but what is or ever HAS been offered to the serious collector? --£40 per set will fly off the shelves, the version you are all talking about would have cost £250 at least No - it would be looked at by numerous groups of people; singles collectors; queen collectors; chart music completists; re-mix collectors It would have been high quality product, representative of the band's unique career as opposed to a budget, half-arsed multi-purchase set. |
Togg 12.09.2008 12:16 |
Benn wrote: Togg, re: --Frankly this box set was never aimed at the serious collecter, It may not be, but what is or ever HAS been offered to the serious collector? --£40 per set will fly off the shelves, the version you are all talking about would have cost £250 at least No - it would be looked at by numerous groups of people; singles collectors; queen collectors; chart music completists; re-mix collectors It would have been high quality product, representative of the band's unique career as opposed to a budget, half-arsed multi-purchase set.Well I think your point about 'What has been aimed at the serious collector' is exactly the issue here. Very few products will be, because they are not particularly commercial, the vast amount of effort that would have to go into anything that a serious collector would go nuts for, out weighs the cost of production. Don't get me wrong I would have loved to see a big box set out there with everything we have discussed included, however, the fact remains that had they done that it would have sat on the shelves and very few would have moved, it would have pleased a few but not many would buy it simply because to make any money it would have to have been pretty costly. Remember the wooden box set of CD's a few years ago? I bet there is a pile of those sitting around somewhere, it was expensive and only the Queen uber fan went for it, certainly not your high street "ooh that looks nice" punter This type of product relies of a high footfall, if you don't have enough peopole walking past it and shopping on a whim it will sit there for months. a £40 box set will slip nicely into a christmas stocking without breaking the bank. |
Tero 12.09.2008 14:39 |
Togg wrote: Look, there are plenty out there over £200 walk into any music super store and you will find them, Oxford street in London has hundreds, So ok you might find cheaper versions but that is not the argument, you seem to think they don't excistThat HMV website lists a whopping 10 box sets at over £200. The most expensive item on the list (Complete Box: 16cd: Box Set by the Beatles, £319) was on the shelf of the most expensive department store of Helsinki for five years with a price tag of 320 EUROS before somebody bought it. That 2 year old collectable £243 Roling Stones boxset is available for less than £150 from dozens of places. The only relatively NEW (therefore possibly not yet collectable items) in that top 10 list of most expensive boxsets are the 43 cd series of Top of the Pops, and the complete works of Pink Floyd on 16 cds (which is availabe brand new for £130 on Amazon... That's quite a save for searching another website as well!). You really are clutching at straws here by comparing the prices of few remaining copies of collectible sets from the most expensive store. That's like saying new cds cost as much as the HMV "list price" (£14), and completely ignoring all the Amazon marketplace sellers who have the same titles for £7. It's not only stupid, but intentionally misleading. |
princetom 12.09.2008 20:43 |
eeerr... guys ? you're talking about the price of a product that doesn't even exist which consists of stuff you don't want to buy... what's the point ? personally i'd like to see some good remastered stuff out there for being "see what a fool i've been" (from the original master tapes found last year (check bri's comments))... the 70's stuff could be taken for real improvement; although i don't see the point in releasing dumb and outdated stereo releases (even if 'queen rocks' was outstanding!)... what i don't understand further is QPs-fragment-politics... they release GVH1 and GVH2 and GVH3 is missing (for containing thus great innuendo-stuff...) they do additional 5.1 mixes of ANATO and theGame but that's it... where is queenII, where ADATR ? don't let them fool you! even IF there WILL be sets 2-4... let the goof on the street spend his money on it... YOU DON'T NEED a fancy cover for songs you already have in numerous copies... Seems to me that they want to reduce the band's legacy to some of their best selling works (while big$ DOES NOT go equal with quality). For those true lovers of wonderful music amongst you every release with fancy covers but republished commercial stuff (i don't dare to say crap because there are SOME goodies between :-D ).. for those such a release is a pain in the ass. seems to me as if the spirit of queen for having progressive ideas is loooong way behind us...(QPR is another story although it makes me puke for intentionally presenting some GH-setlist on their 2ND tour) QP doesn't even dare to open their archives a little bit and release SOME of the circulating demos in enjoyable quality.... Face it: They are part of the INDUSTRY where $$$ counts, and there are enough fools to fill their throats for products no-one really needs. I hope that I'm wrong for holding a wonderful product in my hands at xmas time... but i doubt it. for me GH1,2, the MIH-remasters, QueenRocks and GH3 are quite enough. the world definetly doen not need another bunch of compiled queen songs. i'd rather spend my money on newcomers (such as QPR :-D :-D :-D)... they won't rock you, they throw stones. PissDieWandAn. |
slarty 14.09.2008 06:18 |
While I can understand business considerations for the revised concept,I think that QPL have missed one very important point.Where would Queen be today without the massive support and work done by the fan clubs everywhere especially since 1997.Since John retired there has been only half of Queen(ironically the same half that I first saw in 1969 at imperial college - that gives my age away)and it is our support that has kept everything going and kept Queen high in the public conscienceness.So I put forward an idea that comes from the other side of music(classical)where I worked as a musician for over 25 years. If there is really that great a demand for the original GB project from us(yes I would buy it),then begin a subscription for it. Make a private issue for fans only(members only?) with a deposit to be paid when the minimum number neccessary to make the project feasable is reached.It requires QPL/EMI to decide what that number may be.They must also decide whether to do it as a "break even" issue so as not to cripple us financially,or whether it has to make a nominal profit.Whichever,this would convince all fans of the appreciation in which they are held.By all means keep bringing new issues like the singles collection onto the market for everyone,but before a lot of us get too much older,how about doing something for us.It would finally put this case to rest if a subscription could only raise a few hundred interested die hards, However if there is enough interest in this,running into the thousands then it should be considered. It only takes a question. Who will sign up for it? Me for one Slarty. (PS name address and credit card number supplied on request of subscription announcement |
cmsdrums 14.09.2008 07:10 |
slarty wrote: While I can understand business considerations for the revised concept,I think that QPL have missed one very important point.Where would Queen be today without the massive support and work done by the fan clubs everywhere especially since 1997.Since John retired there has been only half of Queen(ironically the same half that I first saw in 1969 at imperial college - that gives my age away)and it is our support that has kept everything going and kept Queen high in the public conscienceness.So I put forward an idea that comes from the other side of music(classical)where I worked as a musician for over 25 years. If there is really that great a demand for the original GB project from us(yes I would buy it),then begin a subscription for it. Make a private issue for fans only(members only?) with a deposit to be paid when the minimum number neccessary to make the project feasable is reached.It requires QPL/EMI to decide what that number may be.They must also decide whether to do it as a "break even" issue so as not to cripple us financially,or whether it has to make a nominal profit.Whichever,this would convince all fans of the appreciation in which they are held.By all means keep bringing new issues like the singles collection onto the market for everyone,but before a lot of us get too much older,how about doing something for us.It would finally put this case to rest if a subscription could only raise a few hundred interested die hards, However if there is enough interest in this,running into the thousands then it should be considered. It only takes a question. Who will sign up for it? Me for one Slarty. (PS name address and credit card number supplied on request of subscription announcementCount me in - presumably as Greg Brooks has been archiving the stuff for years and even got as far as presenting projects to the band, quite alot of the material is near completion stages so it shouldn't take too long!! |
Mustapha_Ibrahim 14.09.2008 08:44 |
Well, a few days have gone since the announcement. Meanwhile I tried to "digest" it and I still can't believe QP got it all wrong... again. I am not the average Queen "whinner", always beating the dead horse; I express my opinion and that's it. And much less I am that Queen whinner who disses the products but says "it's Queen, I'll buy it anyway". If I don't like the product or I think they got it all wrong, I simply don't buy it. That's why the last Queen product I bought were Milton Keynes and ANATO 30th. So this is my take on this subject: I don't get it. A few years ago, Kes at QOL said that QP usually does exactly the opposite of what the fans want, because they are aiming at the "average buyer", whose mind allegedly thinks on the opposite way of the fans'. Fair enough. However, the fans didn't ask specifically for a "singles boxset". They asked for "the Anthologies", which is a bit different. If I remember correctly, it was GB that came here last year and mentioned a "10 CD singles boxset ala FM Solo Box", which would contain that b-sides, edits and extended version that would be on the "anthologies" and therefore, there would be more room for out-takes on THOSE box-sets. Perfect. Although some people whinned about this (you can't please everyone), I was thrilled about the idea of getting one more box-set, which would be an aperitive for what would come next. Many other people were excited with it until... a few days ago. So what happened? QP thought about a singles box-set because the fans didn't want it, but when the fans liked the idea, they decided to chnge the format?! Is this "no-bones-for-fans policy" for real? A month ago someone opened a topic about this box-set and I posted there my excitement about it. I stated then that I strongly believed that this was QP's chance to redeem themselves and overcome the poor releases of the last few years. I was hoping for the promised box "ala FM Solo Box", maybe with visual extras! Someone said that QP would probably screw this once again. I was wrong, he was right... So, my final word: I won't be buying this. |
Adam Baboolal 14.09.2008 10:35 |
For all I've read on here the last few days, I still don't know what the box actually looks or how it's divided up. So, with that said, for those giving their opinions on it, can you lay down the entire concrete information on the box? I know about how many discs there are and that it'll be £40. Adam. |
Mustapha_Ibrahim 14.09.2008 12:02 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: For all I've read on here the last few days, I still don't know what the box actually looks or how it's divided up. So, with that said, for those giving their opinions on it, can you lay down the entire concrete information on the box? I know about how many discs there are and that it'll be £40. Adam.That's a good point, 13 discs for £40 does seem a good deal. However, they all have 2 tracks (exception to the E.P.) which will make it a pain to listen to the whole thing. But that's what singles are all about, so I would be ok with that. I also have to agree that the collectible value of having all the CD's with corresponding covers is very good. GB points that it was a decision of the band to have the sets this way and I would be ok with that too. But then again, why 4 boxes?! Why not put it all in a massive box with a hardcover book, which would have the all the covers in their original size? We would have to pay £200 for that treat, I can see that, but at least it would be something done right. As for the details of the release, eil.com are the most trustable site I can think of and they even have a cover for the box: link |
Adam Baboolal 14.09.2008 12:17 |
Now I see! Thanks for that. Well, it looks ok, but I'd prefer a complete collection, I guess. However, that said, the price is actually decent for what you're getting. So, in that sense, I can see why they've split it up into 4 separate sets. Kind of interesting, but not that interesting! Hmm...I just hope JSSmith wasn't used to remaster the songs! Otherwise, that's me OUT. Adam. |
Mustapha_Ibrahim 14.09.2008 12:22 |
Why? Didn't you like 30th ANATO? IMO the stereo mastering for the cd was the real treat on that release. You don't have ANATO if you don't have: -the original vinyl (for the artwork) -the DVD-A (for the 5.1 mix) -the 30th Anniv. Edition (for the stereo mix) ...having said that, I don't have ANATO, since I don't have the original vinyl ;-) |
cmsdrums 14.09.2008 15:02 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: Now I see! Thanks for that. Well, it looks ok, but I'd prefer a complete collection, I guess. However, that said, the price is actually decent for what you're getting. So, in that sense, I can see why they've split it up into 4 separate sets. Kind of interesting, but not that interesting! Hmm...I just hope JSSmith wasn't used to remaster the songs! Otherwise, that's me OUT. Adam.I don't think Justin Shirley Smith does any mastering, just engineering and mixing?? Having said that, his live mixing is generally awful (Rock Montreal being an exception). Don't know why they have ditched David Richards, who as well as being great at the technical side, was also quite an input creatively too. |
Penetration_Guru 14.09.2008 16:27 |
Mustapha_Ibrahim wrote: That's a good point, 13 discs for £40 does seem a good deal. However, they all have 2 tracks (exception to the E.P.) which will make it a pain to listen to the whole thing. But that's what singles are all about, so I would be ok with that.£3 each for 2 track CD singles and you think that's a good deal? Most new release CD singles are £1.99 and they've usually got new music on them.... |
Mustapha_Ibrahim 14.09.2008 17:05 |
Well I confess wasn't aware of the price of CD singles. They are not sold here. I was doing the maths for the average price of a CD... In that point of view, the answer is no, not a good deal. Anyway, there are far bigger problems with this release than the "price for CD". Like I stated above, if they had done it right, I would buy it. And my guess is you would buy it too. Even if it was a bit overpriced... Had this release the "extra-value" we were expecting (THAT value that makes you drool when you think of it ;-) ), the fans would find way to buy it anyway. |
slarty 14.09.2008 17:16 |
anyone wanting to see what the cover looks like and the breakdown of the cd's need only look up link - they are already taking preorders. However the artwork is partially there. |
earwig 14.09.2008 18:44 |
Yeah, I don't like Justin Shirley-Smith's live mixes either. Way too boomy on the bottom end!!! This goes back to Live at Brixton Academy through to Montreal (and beyond...!) |
Adam Baboolal 14.09.2008 23:02 |
Generally, his (JSSmith's) stuff is alright. But he did the 2001/4 remasters of Queen's albums and while they're not all bad, plenty of them are bloody awful. Mustapha_Ibrahim, JSSmith DIDN'T remaster the ANATO 30th disc. And yeah, funnily enough, when I heard it I knew it straight away cause it sounded really really good. I was very impressed with it. I think it's easier for me to criticise when it's something I know sounded good before he got his hands on it. I remember someone pointed to MK 82 and Roger's snare sound. On the live recording from the time, it sounded good, but on JSS's remix, it sounds flattened. I agree with that, but I guess this is personal opinion, isn't it. One man's junk is another man's gold as they say. Anyway, end of rant! P_guru, it's not £3 for each cd though because there's the packaging that's been recreated AND a booklet to go along with it all. So, it's not as simple as the cd's costs. That's why I think it's generally worth it. Adam. |
cmsdrums 15.09.2008 07:17 |
So, will C-Lebrity make it onto Volume Four of this set as it hit no 33 in the singles chart, carries the name Queen, and therefore qualifies?? Will the Queen+ stuff also be in these sets? Five Live EP with George Michael, WWRY with Five, new mix of Under Pressure etc...???? |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 07:51 |
cmsdrums wrote: Thanks Greg for explaining yours, and the band's thoughts, behind this. |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 08:02 |
continued... "Go and watch it. Make up your own mind for yourself without being influenced by all the others who have not seen it either. Do the same with Queen Singles Box 1. Hold it in your hands, look at at it" CMS: We don't want to look at it GB; DON'T KEEP TALKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE.... WE WE WE. YOU CLEARLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THOUSANDS OF OTHERS WANT, LIKE, AND WILL BUY AS XMAS/BIRTHDAY GIFTS. SPEAK FOR YOURSELF. I DO UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR OPINION IS SHARED BY OTHER QUEEN FANS, OF COURSE. BUT LIKE I SAY.... YOU ARE IN THE TINY MINORITY CMSDRUMS. - this is, and always has been, about THE MUSIC. GB: YES. TRUE. AND 10,000 MORE PEOPLE WILL HAVE QUEEN MUSIC IN THEIR COLLECTION WHEN THIS GOES ON SALE. MY SISTER, MY COUSIN, MY NEIGHBOUR, THE BLOKE IN THE LOCAL PAPERSHOP... THEY WILL BE THE KINDS OF PEOPLE WHO BUY IT. NOT JUST QUEEN FANS OF OLD. We don't care if the rare stuff, 12" mixes, B sides etc...come out stuffed inside a turd, once we HEAR it, that's when the magic happens. GB; MINORITY. NOT MAJORITY. PUT YOUR 'BUSINESS' CAP ON FOR JUST ONE SECOND. FORGET ABOUT THE WORLD OF QUEEN MUSIC HAVING TO REVOLVE EXCLUSIVELY AROUND DIE-HARD FANS. IT DOESN'T. QPL AND EMI ALSO CATER FOR THE MASS MARKET. QUEEN HAVE SOLD 200 MILLION RECORDS. THAT MEANS JO PUBLIC HAS PURCHASED PROBABLY 180 MILLION DISCS TOO. I can download a picture of virtually any single cover from anywhere in the world within the next couple of minutes. (and if not I could always buy your book when it finally comes out!!) GB; YOU YOU, WE WE WE. I do realise Greg that you are not responsible for what is released, but I don't quite know why you feel so duty bound to defend the release using such weak points when you must surely be as disappointed as us. GB; I AGREE WITH CERTAIN OF YOUR POINTS. BUT UNLIKE YOU I AM NOT AUTOMATICALLY PREPROGRAMMED TO REACT IN THE NEGATIVE AT EVERY ASPECT. THAT IS JUST TIRESOME. YOUR POINT OF VIEW IS SO VERY OUT OF BALANCE. SO IT NIGGLES ME A BIT. WHERE IS YOUR BALANCE AND REALISATION THAT QUEEN SELL RECORDS TO THE MASSES, NOT JUST THE MINORITY. Even those people who say that they hate Q+PR are more likely to buy The Cosmos Rocks than this singles box I'm afraid. GB; THAT'S SIMPLY NOT TRUE. YOU'RE TALKING FOR EVERYONE, BUT WITH NO FOUNDATION OR ACTUAL HARD FACTS TO BASE IT ALL ON. A last glimmer of hope is that if the 12" single mixes have been pulled from the set, is the thinking that these will be released seperately on their own set at some point? GB; MAYBE. Cheers Greg - I hope you can see the validity in at least some of my counter-arguments GB; I CAN... BUT YOU NEED TO REALISE THAT THIS BOX, LIKE IT OR NOT, WILL APPEAL TO MANY MANY PEOPLE. IT WILL SELL. WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO DO A SECOND OR MAYBE EVEN A THIRD PRESSING... SO WHO IS WRONG AND WHO IS RIGHT??? REMEMBER WHAT I SAID ABOUT ME BUYING ALL KINDS OF BOXED SETS OF OTHER ARTISTS.... THERE ARE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE LIKE ME WHO DO THAT.... BECAUSE WE HAVE MINIMAL KNOWLEDGE OF THAT ARTIST'S CATALOGUE.... WE DON'T CARE EITHER. WE JUST WANT THE SONGS THAT WE KNOW OF. NOT THE RARE B-SIDES OR EXT MIXES. AND IN NICE SLEEVES TOO. YOU HAVE TO SEE THE ENTIRE PICTURE, NOT JUST YOUR TINY PART OF IT. THAT'S WHAT SELLING RECORDS IS SURELY ALL ABOUT. CMSDRUMS |
pittrek 15.09.2008 08:20 |
Hi Greg, I won't buy this set but I could be interested in the other volumes. Do you think that the other box sets will inlude : - the 12" mixes - the instrumental mixes - Hollywood Records remixes - You Don't Fool Me remixes - Queen + collaborations - Queen + Paul Rodgers ? If yes, do you know how often will these volumes appear ? Once a year, twice a year, every 2 years ... Thanks a lot |
Holly2003 15.09.2008 08:28 |
GB; MINORITY. NOT MAJORITY. PUT YOUR 'BUSINESS' CAP ON FOR JUST ONE SECOND. FORGET ABOUT THE WORLD OF QUEEN MUSIC HAVING TO REVOLVE EXCLUSIVELY AROUND DIE-HARD FANS. IT DOESN'T. QPL AND EMI ALSO CATER FOR THE MASS MARKET. You make it sound like Queen are catering to BOTH markets when you wel know they are not. They cater only to the lowest common denominator -- the mass market. This point has been made clear to you on numerous previous occasions and is probably the main criticism that people here have about future releases. Yet still you appear not to get it; why is that? |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 08:30 |
John S Stuart wrote: Greg: You miss my point. HELLO JOHN. I'M WRITING IN CAPS JUST COZ IT'S EASIER TO SEE. While it is true that I have many 'doubles' or 'repeats' in my collection, I am not such a mindless slave that I have to purchase EVERYTHING with a Queen label on it. WITH RESPECT, JSSS, THIS ISN'T TRUE. BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION, YOU DO INDEED BUY "EVERYTHING with a Queen label on it." YOU TOLD US THE OTHER DAY THAT YOU PURCHASED BOTH THE UK 3" CD SET, PLUS THE JAPANESE VERSION. BUT BOTH OFFER MORE OR LESS IDENTICAL CONTENT. YOU ACTUALLY HAD NO REASON TO BUY EITHER OF THESE, AND YET YOU PURCHASED BOTH. I DON'T BLAME YOU, BECAUSE THEY'RE BOTH NICE THINGS... DESPITE THEIR SHORTCOMINGS. BUT YOU ARE JUST NOT CONSISTENT IN WHAT YOU SAY AND TELL US. YOU CLEARLY DO BUY "EVERYTHING with a Queen label on it." THAT IS VERY OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WHO KNOWS YOU, OR HAS EVER SPOKEN WITH YOU AT LENGTH. AND DON'T FORGET THAT YOU AND I HAVE CHATTED IN PERSON IN THE PAST. YOU ARE ONE OF THOSE PURISTS, COMPLETISTS, THAT DOES ACTUALLY HAVE MORE OR LESS EVERYTHING. So while it may also be true that I WILL continue to purchase 'new' product - and take in the 'Queen+Paul Rodgers tour' - I will certainly NOT be shelling out any of MY hard earned cash on this proposed collection. GB; AGAIN, WITH RESPECT, I DO NOT BELIEVE YOU. THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU WILL NOT BUY THAT LITTLE PURPLE BOX WITH 13 RATHER NICE CARDBOARD CDS INSIDE. NO WAY. EVERYONE READING THIS KNOWS YOU WILL BUY IT.... YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RESIST. YOU'LL SWALLOW YOUR PRINCIPALS JUST LONG ENOUGH TO HAND OVER THE CASH AND TAKE IT HOME FOR CLOSER SCRUTINY. Obviously, one's spending priorities change throughout a life-time. Credit crunch's, raised mortgage rates, higher inflation, expensive gas and food bills, children, grandchildren, pets - all take a slice out of the dwindling family budget - so realistically charging me for what I already own (and frankly can download for free anyways) GB: A FAIR POINT. AND I'M WATCHING MY PENNIES TOO, LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.... BUT I WILL STILL BUY CD'S I CANNOT REALLY AFFORD, AND YOU, AS SURE AS EGGS ARE EGGS, WILL BUY THIS BOX. - is NOT high on my priority list, I BELIEVE YOU. BUT YOU'LL GRAB IT SOONER OR LATER, AND SIT THEIR READING ALL THE SMALL PRINT, AND COMPARING THESE NEW RENDITIONS OF THE SLEEVES TO THE ORIGINAL 7" VINYL ONES. I KNOW IT. YOU KNOW IT. YOU'LL DO IT, NOT LEAST, JUST THAT YOU KNOW ALL THE INFO AND SUBTLETIES OF WHAT PEOPLE ON QZ WILL BE SAYING ABOUT IT. STOP BEING A FRUITCAKE. and in these days of competeing financial resources, I do not believe this product offers value for money. YOU COULD SAY THAT ABOUT ANY CONCERT YOU GO TO, BUT YOU STILL GO. THAT'S NOT A STRONG CASE JOHN. HALF THE ITEMS IN YOUR HOUSE AND RECORD COLLECTION ARE NOT REALLY VALUE FOR MONEY. SO WHAT. £12 FOR AN ERIC CLAPTON "24 NIGHTS"CD THATACTUALLY COST 80P TO MANUFACTURE.... THAT'S PISS POOR VALUE FOR MONEY, BUT I STILL BOUGHT IT, AND LOVE IT, AND WILL DO THE SAME AGAIN WITH THE NEXT CLAPTON, ELBOW, FLOYD ALBUMS. (On the other hand - a version of the SCC 24 master is very high on my priority list). FAIR POINT. BUT LIKE ME.... YOU WILL END UP WITH BOTH OF THEM. YOU KNOW YOU WILL. Now - I accept that I am talking about ME - for ME, and I allow others the freedom to spend THEIR monies how they wish (and I hope you extend the courtesy to allow me to do likewise), but, I honestly do NOT think I am in the minority this time around. JOHN.... LIKE I WAS SAYING TO CMSDRUMS A MOMENT AGO... THIS BOX IS NOT EXCLUSIVELY AIMED AT YOU THE DIE HARD LONG TERM QUEEN FAN. YOU AND HIM, AND ME TOO, ARE IN THE MINORITY. THE WWRY MUSICAL AND THE QPR TOURS HAVE CREATED MILLIONS OF NEW FANS ALL AROUND THE WORLD. IT IS THEM, PLUS JO PUBLIC IN THEIR TENS OF THOUSANDS, WHO KNOW LITTLE ABOUT THE BAND'S LONG HISTORY OR ALBUMS (OR EVEN FREDDIE MERCURY, QUITE OFTEN), THAT WILL PURCHASE THIS BOX.... JUST LIKE THEY DID GREATEST HITS, FLIX, AND GREATEST HITS DVDS 1 & 2.... LITERALLY MILLIONS OF THEM DID.... MAYBE 1% WERE FANS IN THE LEAGUE OF US 'SERIOUS KNOWLEDGEABLE FANS' HERE AT QZ. but, I honestly do NOT think I am in the minority this time around. SORRY JOHN, BUT WE MOST DEFINITELY ARE. IF, HOWEVER, YOU'RE TALKING SOLELY ABOOUT DIE-HARD QUEENZONE QUEEN FANS... 30 OR 40 OR 400 OF YOU, THEN YES, I AGREE TOTALLY, YOU'D BE IN THE MAJORITY OF THAT TINY FRACTION OF THE WHOLE. BUT IN THE MUCH MUCH MUCH WIDER PERSPECTIVE, YOU/WE 400 ARE A MERE DROP IN THE OCEAN. Queen are a business. I have no problem with that. They need to make a profit. I have no problem with that either. But, this time around, I do have a problem with this box-set, and I would be interested to see how well it sells (or vice versa). JOHN... WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A £100 BET WITH ME THAT THIS BOX SELLS WELL???????????? IT DOESN'T OFFER ALL THAT I WOULD HAVE LOVED IT TO... I ADMIT THAT... BUT IS IT STILL EXTREMELY GOOD AND WELL PRESENTED, AND WILL IT STILL APPEAL TO ALL THE PEOPLE I MENTIONED??????? OF COURSE IT WILL. I HOPE YOU TAKE MY BET. As once said: "We can fool some of the people some of the time...", and a lack of sales could produce some very interesting consequences... NO ONE IS TRYING TO FOOL ANYONE. |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 08:38 |
Ray D O'Gaga wrote:GB.... Hello Ray D O.... apparently my text will be available on the Q site somewhere.AlexRocks wrote: I think such a compilation of singles as the proposed 10 c.d. one will come in due time...Sadly, I don't. To extend my lascivious metaphor, I think they're shooting their entire singles wad with this and the proposed releases. Maybe Greg can secure permission to release the text that was to accompany the 10 disc set as a PDF file or something someday. Actually, the text being used on the various press releases and blurb is part of the text I wrote as the Intro to QSingles (though severely edited). I saw on another thread on QZ... this bit is being used... Welcome to QUEEN: THE SINGLES COLLECTIONS, 4 releases 35 years in the making and spanning no less than sixteen albums; from the debut LP, Queen, in 1973, to the last project with Freddie Mercury, Made In Heaven, in 1995, and beyond. Vol 1, the first of four, kicks off with the first single, 'Keep Yourself Alive', and runs through to 'Don?t Stop Me Now' from 1979. Box 2 will continue the story into the mid 1980s, and so on. Ultimately, the four boxes will offer every one of Queen?s singles to have made the top 40 anywhere in the world (with the exception of 'Keep Yourself Alive' which is included because it was the first ever single). On July 6th 1973, EMI released the first Queen single 'Keep Yourself Alive'. In the UK it is the first and only track to be taken from the band?s debut album Queen. The record attracts some interest in England but gets little airplay, and so fails to appear in the singles chart. EMI?s promotion team are given feedback from the radio programmers that the song doesn?t fit into their play-lists, because, apparently, ?It takes too long to happen? ? presumably referring to its 30-second guitar intro (now widely regarded as one of its most intriguing features!). In crafting the band?s second single, Seven Seas Of Rhye (from Queen II), the band decide to make everything happen in the opening seconds? ?Everything, including the kitchen sink,? as Brian would later quip. Evidently, it works; this time the single picks up immediate airplay and charts in the first week of release: in February 1974 Queen achieve their first UK and worldwide hit. From this moment on, Queen hit singles become a virtual certainty, with the release of each successive album, each one musically a departure from the last, and, significantly, featuring compositions from all four band members. Queen is to date the only group whose members have all written No. 1 hits around the world. These are extracts from a bigger text. I do think it's a shame these boxes don't have the accompanying text we worked 2 years on - Gary Taylor and I, because I'm confident we unearthed a lot of stuff that wasn't known about before... thru access to EMI lists/records, etc. I'm sure we'll use it somewhere. |
cmsdrums 15.09.2008 08:39 |
Greg Thanks for the reply - I'm not going to go over every point and counter-argue just for the sake of it, other than to say that in response to a lot of my original questions you seem to not really have a sound argument (in my opinion)to my points, and so respond by adding an extra argument in that wasn't in your original!! My only real main query is; CMS: Identical?? Does this mean they are the original masters too, as well? If not, they are not as per the original singles, even if the mix is the same. In fact, virtually all of Queen singles (with the odd exception) has always been the same MIX as the album version - perhaps you mean EDIT??? GB: READ WHAT I SAID AGAIN. I THINK IT'S CLEAR ENOUGH IF YOU READ IT CAREFULLY. OK, I have. You said "certain of these mixes are identical to the original vinyl cuts". The use of the word certain very heavily implies, (if not states categorically) that some, (ie NOT all), of the tracks will be as the original vinyl releases. In this case, what reason is there for some of the tracks NOT being reproduced as per the original single mix? And if so, why are they being re-mixed just for this project?? Hope you can provide some info on this, cos different mixes are the kind of thing that some Queen fans are keen on collecting. Thanks |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 08:47 |
Togg wrote: I know this will be an unpopular view here I have to say I side with Greg on this, the product is pretty much as I expected it to be although I can understand why people are dissappointed. Frankly this box set was never aimed at the serious collecter, as Greg points out it was aimed at the millions of people who wander into stores around the world and like Queen but don't have much in there collection (particularly the new fans after this new album and tour) £40 per set will fly off the shelves, the version you are all talking about would have cost £250 at least and would simply sit there until a member of Queenzone walked in off the street. Whilst I too would love to have seen all the variants released, I am in a tiny minority of people who would shell out for it, and frankly not sure I would. I will not buy this set either, not because it's bad but I just don't need it, however others many other will, I bet it will be one of the best selling products since greatest hits 1 and makes much more commercial sense than a big whooper of a set that only a select few will buy. Sorry but I can see perfectly the sense behind this, I am sure initially Greg was equally dissappointed but I bet he too can see the logic here...Togg... You have 'got it'. Spot on. Please pass the word. People don't hear ME when I say exactly the same as you. They refuse to hear ME, because it's..... ME. But if you can impart these elements, and not have people counter you just because of your name, reputation/job, good luck to you. You are totally right in my opinion. |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 08:48 |
AlexRocks wrote: "Freddie Mercury + Queen: The Show Must Go On! We Still Rock You: The Best of Queen." That was PRICELESS Pim Derks! Lol! SO funny! Lol!Yes, and I nearly pissed myself with hysterics to. You should be on the stage Pim old boy. With material like that, Billy Connelly better watch out! |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 08:50 |
cmsdrums wrote:cmsdrums.... you're being deliberately obtuse on this, right!?Togg wrote: I know this will be an unpopular view here I have to say I side with Greg on this, the product is pretty much as I expected it to be although I can understand why people are dissappointed. Frankly this box set was never aimed at the serious collecter, as Greg points out it was aimed at the millions of people who wander into stores around the world and like Queen but don't have much in there collection (particularly the new fans after this new album and tour) £40 per set will fly off the shelves, the version you are all talking about would have cost £250 at least and would simply sit there until a member of Queenzone walked in off the street. Whilst I too would love to have seen all the variants released, I am in a tiny minority of people who would shell out for it, and frankly not sure I would. I will not buy this set either, not because it's bad but I just don't need it, however others many other will, I bet it will be one of the best selling products since greatest hits 1 and makes much more commercial sense than a big whooper of a set that only a select few will buy. Sorry but I can see perfectly the sense behind this, I am sure initially Greg was equally dissappointed but I bet he too can see the logic here...I have to politely disagree with you on this one - whatever packaging you dress it up in, it effectively amounts to £160 for The Platinum Collection box! |
cmsdrums 15.09.2008 08:50 |
Queen Archivist wrote: GB; AGAIN, WITH RESPECT, I DO NOT BELIEVE YOU. THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU WILL NOT BUY THAT LITTLE PURPLE BOX WITH 13 RATHER NICE CARDBOARD CDS INSIDE. NO WAY.Cardboard CDs??? My god, they're really trying to screw us now - they'll knacker up my CD player (if I bought them that is) !!!! On a less flippent note to Greg's reply to JSS - I thinkthe fact that Greg constantly keeps saying that he knows for fact that JSS (and presumably myself and lots of others) WILL buy this set regardless makes it even worse in my opinion; it seems to suggest that Queen know full well that they have a hardcore following of, let's say, 10,00 fans who will buy ANYTHING they release, and so can release anything they like, safe in the knowledge that they will get their return from the likes of these people. Finally, for all the 'pretty packaging' reasons touted, I've STILL yet to see a valid argument for Joe Public buying this £160 set rather than The £10 Platinum Collection, which could easily be re-promoted to appeal to all the WWRY Musical goers and QPR casual fans as this set is going to be. |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 08:54 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: Now I see! Thanks for that. Well, it looks ok, but I'd prefer a complete collection, I guess. However, that said, the price is actually decent for what you're getting. So, in that sense, I can see why they've split it up into 4 separate sets. Kind of interesting, but not that interesting! Hmm...I just hope JSSmith wasn't used to remaster the songs! Otherwise, that's me OUT. Adam.What does your last point about JSS refer to, Adam??????????????????? |
cmsdrums 15.09.2008 08:54 |
Queen Archivist wrote: cmsdrums.... you're being deliberately obtuse on this, right!?Yes...probably. as you're so good at it I thought it was the way to go! :-) |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 09:00 |
earwig wrote: Yeah, I don't like Justin Shirley-Smith's live mixes either. Way too boomy on the bottom end!!! This goes back to Live at Brixton Academy through to Montreal (and beyond...!)Earwig... you do realise that the band listen carefully to Justin's mixes, do you? and that things only get released when they've listened and authorised the final mix - usually after certain changes they've suggested have been actioned? Too boomy on the bass end??????? Can you give a specific example, because I'm intrigued now. This sounds exactly like the kind of comment a person sees in a magazine somewhere, or on a site forum, and then uses themselves without really having a proper foundation. I might well be wrong, so please give me an example of Justin's boomy bottom end mixing. Milton Keynes 82, Montreal 81, Wembley 86??? |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 09:11 |
pittrek wrote: Hi Greg, I won't buy this set but I could be interested in the other volumes. Do you think that the other box sets will inlude : - the 12" mixes GB: THE ORIGINAL PACKAGE DID, BUT THE REVISED FORMAT DOES NOT... AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS. THE BANDS WANTS THIS TO BE JUST THE SINGLES, AS THEY ORIGINALLY WENT OUT. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. I THINK THE EXTENDED MIXES WOULD BE ISSUED ALL TOGETHER IN ONE HIT, AS PART OF A RARITIES/ANTHOLOGY PROJECT. - the instrumental mixes THE U.S. MACHINES INSTRU, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD PROBABLY FEATURE ON THAT RESPECTIVE BOX, RATHER THAN THE UK MACHINES B-SIDE (WHICH WASN'T INSTRU) JUST BECAUSE IT'S MORE INTERESTING. BUT NOT THE GA GA INSTRU, COZ THAT WAS NEVER ON THE ORIGINAL 7" SINGLE. YOU SEE THE PATTERN. - Hollywood Records remixes NO. - You Don't Fool Me remixes AS PER ORIG VINYL/CD.... TO BE CONFIRMED. - Queen + collaborations Q&DB ONLY, AS FAR AS I ONLY. THAT WAS CERTAINLY THE THEME OF THE ORIG 10-CD VERSION. BUT THINGS CAN CHANGE, ACCORDING TO THE BAND. - Queen + Paul Rodgers ? NOT AS FAR AS I KNOW. DITTO ABOVE. If yes, do you know how often will these volumes appear ? Once a year, twice a year, every 2 years ... Thanks a lot |
Yara 15.09.2008 09:13 |
What does "boomy bottom end" means? |
Yara 15.09.2008 09:13 |
Yara wrote: What does "boomy bottom end" mean? |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 09:14 |
Holly2003 wrote: GB; MINORITY. NOT MAJORITY. PUT YOUR 'BUSINESS' CAP ON FOR JUST ONE SECOND. FORGET ABOUT THE WORLD OF QUEEN MUSIC HAVING TO REVOLVE EXCLUSIVELY AROUND DIE-HARD FANS. IT DOESN'T. QPL AND EMI ALSO CATER FOR THE MASS MARKET. You make it sound like Queen are catering to BOTH markets when you wel know they are not. They cater only to the lowest common denominator -- the mass market. This point has been made clear to you on numerous previous occasions and is probably the main criticism that people here have about future releases. Yet still you appear not to get it; why is that?OK... Let me make my personal feelings on this fair comment, very clear. I think.... Hang on. Just a second. There is a strange beast at the window. I need to go investigate, in a completely not being evasive type way............. |
Queen Archivist 15.09.2008 09:29 |
cmsdrums wrote:Queen Archivist wrote: GB; AGAIN, WITH RESPECT, I DO NOT BELIEVE YOU. THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU WILL NOT BUY THAT LITTLE PURPLE BOX WITH 13 RATHER NICE CARDBOARD CDS INSIDE. NO WAY.Cardboard CDs??? My god, they're really trying to screw us now - they'll knacker up my CD player (if I bought them that is) !!!! |
Yara 15.09.2008 10:24 |
Corrected. :-) But, yes, what that means? |
Mustapha_Ibrahim 15.09.2008 10:35 |
Queen Archivist wrote: THE BANDS WANTS THIS TO BE JUST THE SINGLES, AS THEY ORIGINALLY WENT OUT. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. I THINK THE EXTENDED MIXES WOULD BE ISSUED ALL TOGETHER IN ONE HIT, AS PART OF A RARITIES/ANTHOLOGY PROJECT.Oh dear... This is exactly what I meant. This release is therefore pointless. Wasn't this box supposed to have all the extended versions, 12'' remixes , etc "to make more room for out-takes" on the anthologies?! So the only point is really to have the pretty boxes right? Nothing new, no book and 4 separate releases... I'm sure they look very nice but this is not what I was hoping for.(and many other people as I see) I stand my position: I will not buy this. Anyway, what really bugs me is that these 4 boxes mean that the next 4 Xmas releases will be wasted with this... Here was I hoping for new live concert releases (not to mention the anthologies)... |
Tero 15.09.2008 10:39 |
Queen Archivist wrote: HEY.... I THINK IT'S £40 OR THEREABOUTS IN THIS YEAR OF 2008. LET'S WAIT FOR THE NEXT PRICE TAG NEXT YEAR.... A LONG WAY OFF. 2009. IT'S GOOD VALUE FOR MONEY.When the average Joe goes out for Christmas shopping after seeing the show at O2 arena, he isn't going to be thinking about a £40 box with three songs he remembers from the show... He'll go straight past the box sets for the platinum collection with ALL the hits for a third of the price. Come next Christmas and the first part of the 80's singles, and he's already got what he needs without buying the second part. The people these sets are good value for money are sitting at the QP office, and no-one else. Of course there are enough gullible fans to buy a series of 10,000 boxes (that is why that number is chosen?), and the people at QP can congratule each other for another successful product. |
Lester Burnham 15.09.2008 11:14 |
No extended remixes? Ooh. Pass. Sorry Greg, I know you've glossed over some of my points for reasons I don't know -- maybe I'm not loud enough, or not controversial enough -- but, in my opinion, QPL really dropped the ball on this one. The whole point of other bands' singles box sets was to release every rare variation and B-side that would previously not have any outlet -- extended remixes included. That's what I got from the Elvis Costello singles boxes, and I was really happy with that. But to have not only the arbitrary idea that ONLY Top 40 singles be included, but also be only the 7" versions? Hm. I guess you're right, in that QPL have "dumbed" down this release for the everyday, average album buyer. I agree with Tero -- whoever walks away from the O2 show and thinks, "Gosh, that Queen band sure was great" and walks into a record store isn't immediately going to look at this set and think, "Hm, £40 for that. It's so pretty. Never heard of those songs before, though ... Where's A Kind Of Magic? I Want To Break Free? Under Pressure? I Want It All? Wishing Well? Naahhh ... Hmm, look at this set, wrapped all nice in a platinum sleeve. Well, it has everything I want, except for Wishing Well, but this looks nice too." Is it so much to ask for quality AND quantity? I know the set looks purty, but that doesn't automatically mean I'm going to go out and buy it. I need more justification in that, and getting singles that didn't make the Top 40 and different variations / remixes / etc. that were on the 12" and CD versions of the singles would have made me consider shelling out $80 US for that. I look forward to your thoughts, but just keep the personal attacks to a minimum. I'm very fragile. |
Holly2003 15.09.2008 11:15 |
Queen Archivist wrote:Hang on. Just a second. There is a strange beast at the window. I need to go investigate, in a completely not being evasive type way.............It's probably a cash cow ;) |
cmsdrums 15.09.2008 12:21 |
Holly2003 wrote: It's probably a cash cow ;)With seriously sore teats!!! |
Lester Burnham 15.09.2008 12:38 |
Holly2003 wrote: But I appreciate that it's not you who decides what to release and the blame lies with band/management.This, too. It's a shame that Greg is the punching bag for all our complaints, when he has no say in what is released or when it's released. As he stated in one of the other postings, the original concept was much more elaborate and catered more to the hardcore fan (despite its price), but was "watered down" to appeal more to the mainstream market. Not his fault, just QPL's twisted logic on who this set is specifically for. |
Micrówave 15.09.2008 13:09 |
Queen Archivist wrote: THE WWRY MUSICAL HAVE CREATED MILLIONS OF NEW FANS ALL AROUND THE WORLD.I dispute this!!!! In fact, this may have created the Q vs Q+PR wars. |
John S Stuart 15.09.2008 13:17 |
NEWS FLASH Can I categorically state that I will NOT be purchasing this 'pretty box' - simply because it is very low on my priority list, and secondly because I can no longer afford to spend monies needlessly. While it is true that I bought box-sets c20 years ago, today is a very different financial climate and my own personal financial priorities have adapted to suit. Counter arguments are akin to claiming that an ex-smoker will be pleased with the new brand of 'Players' Cigarettes - based on his brand loyalty. I don't know why I need to argue this point - and I do not care who believes me - but like the ex-smoker, my brand loyalty has evaporated, and I see no point in rekindling the habbit. Also: On a purely environmental argument, I find that wasting so much packaging and discs on so few tracks - is not only green unfriendly - but a wreckless wasting of resources from increasingly dwindling supplies of raw materials. Some day, this casual laissez faire attitude will be viewed as crimes against nature, and while the world teeters on the brink of Capitalist recession, the timing of such a release can only be viewed as greedy corporate exploitation. |
Yara 15.09.2008 14:13 |
I'm more humble. I just want to know what "boomy bottom end" means. I just want to know what do "chromatic note", "chromatic note solo" and, above all, "total dissonance", and also the "total dissonance resolved in a chord" mean? Just that. I'm not asking much. |
cmsdrums 15.09.2008 14:46 |
On the subject of Justin Shirley's Smith's mixes, I completely agree with the 'flappy' bottom end comments (not that's not a line from a Carry On film). Return of The Champions sounds awful, muddy and lacking any clarity or distinction, especially the drums and apart from Brian's guitar (mmm, wonder why he employs him then). ps I am an experienced musician/producer/mixer, and have listened through good quality gear so know that it's not simply my ears!! |
Penetration_Guru 15.09.2008 16:53 |
Queen Archivist wrote: GB: YES. TRUE. AND 10,000 MORE PEOPLE WILL HAVE QUEEN MUSIC IN THEIR COLLECTION WHEN THIS GOES ON SALE. MY SISTER, MY COUSIN, MY NEIGHBOUR, THE BLOKE IN THE LOCAL PAPERSHOP... THEY WILL BE THE KINDS OF PEOPLE WHO BUY IT. NOT JUST QUEEN FANS OF OLD.My local HMV has the singles section very separate from the albums, it is equipped with decks so that the youngsters can try the latest mashup 12".... Now, at the risk of being unfair on your neighbours and fellow Telegraph readers, I don't see people buying this spontaneously because I don't think they'll see it. I admit this is based on the assumption that stores will stock this in the singles section. |
Penetration_Guru 15.09.2008 17:16 |
Greg Please don't take any of the criticism on this thread personally - certainly I'm not upset with or critical of yourself (and I can only speak for myself as can we all), merely disappointed that the delivered box differs so markedly from the version you originally developed and delivered. That was a box to which I was greatly looking forward, despite the absence of any new material, despite the adverse effect on my the value of my collection, and BECAUSE of the high standard set by the Freddie Box, to which I saw a Singles Box being a great companion piece. Unfortunately, factors have conspired against us all, including yourself I've no doubt, and we are faced with what is, however well produced and presented, a watered down version. Yes, it may go down well with the general public, but who's to say a well designed "full" (sorry, but you know what I mean) Singles Box wouldn't do equally well or even better? It would, after all, have those widely known hits that EMI is so terrified of NOT including on any release.... I do completely accept that the mass market must be catered for, but would say that I doubt Joe Public will either know or care how rare the reproduction sleeves are. I also think that the Platinum Collection caters perfectly adequately for the mass market. Finally, is the fact that there is negative feedback on this release worthy of being passed to Mr Beach, or are we at the stage where anybody who fails to positive is a "Moanzoner", to be ridiculed or ignored? |
4 x Vision 15.09.2008 17:27 |
I'm sorry Greg... I always buy the new Queen product, and have done so for many many years... but I will not be buying this product... and I totally disagree with you when you say many lesser fans will purchase it. You have absolutely no proof to make such a wild claim either. I'm not just arguing because it's you by the way. The product may look nice, but anything with Queen's picture looks nice to me... doesn't mean I'm going to buy it though these days. As for the music on offer... GHs surely remains a better option if you haven't already got these songs? I can understand that QPL want to sell to a more open market and not just to die hards, makes perfect sense, but can you honestly seeing the lay person off the street walk in to a store and buy this? Whether it's to start up their collection of a band they may not know much about, or even to indulge by buying the music they heard in a musical, surely doesn't mean they'll buy this over the Greatest Hits series. Financially that doesn't make sense! Plus, I actually reckon it IS only die hards that want such big sets of music. A package of many CDs doesn't appeal to me of a group I may know little about. I don't really know much about the Rolling Stones, but I do like a few of their songs. Faced with a similar scenario, I would go straight for their Greatest Hits if given a choice between a 2 cd set at a tenner or a visually impressive 12 cd set at £160... surely that makes sense. Most people as you know are buying digital music nowadays too... so surely it IS the die hard you'd want to focus this set on? They are the folk who'd be interested in having nice rare pics and big packages. (Which sadly doesn't seem the case here on QZ. I, like JSStuart, wont buy this, many others say they wont too. You may be right and many may give in too temptation, but that just goes against your argument that QPL and yourself are NOT aiming at die hards surely too?). Argument aside, thanks for coming and putting up your case and explaining these box sets. I'm sure lots of work went into them, and I hope - as a queen fan - that they do sell... alas, I sense they won't. |
Fenderek 15.09.2008 19:26 |
Not buying. It's not even worth a longer reply. I'd pay 100 pounds for original format. But now... 40 quid... I guess my next holiday will be one day longer... totally worth it... |
slarty 16.09.2008 02:28 |
So having read all of your comments on what the singles collection is'nt - how about we do it ourselves.Coming from the classical side of the industry I know that it is possible to make a high quality CD issue with a subscription of as little as 1000 pieces to make a small profit,or 800 to break even. A private issue open only to MEMBERS of Queenzone and/or fan club.We approach QPL for permission to use the material and then produce ourselves the special edition B-sides/alternatives/rarities/12" ect. We need one person to organize - one to do the mixing - one for the artwork - one for the blurb. All of us decide/vote what should be included in the issue. One of the pressing plants that are used to working with the small classical labels can be given the contract of producing the discs. This ultimately requires us to put some money where our mouths are, - meaning a calculation of 10-11 euros per disc based on a mimimum of 1000 members.While this whole thing depends on the goodwill of QPL and the Band themselves,If there is enough interest out there to do it amongst ourselves in the most professional manner,we can,through the forum/fanclub build up the subscription until it is large enough to proceed.Also it will show QP and EMI just how much interest there really is.Alternatively if the amount of interest is so small,then we can all just shut up and go along with the official issues. However,If QP refuse us permission - then we will know in what esteem we are held by them. This is nothing new on the other side of the musical fence - there are many private societies dedicated to keeping the memories of specific musicians alive by producing private but very professional CD issues.After all how many of us have already made our own private CDR of B-sides ect. anyway - discuss |
cmi 16.09.2008 03:34 |
The idea is quite good, but I'm 100% sure that QZ won't receive any permission from QPL machine 'cause there will be no profit for them. And some other reasons: 1. QPL will lost opportunity to release same thing officialy with the same interest from die-hard fans. 2. Queen and QPL doesn't respect REAL fans and all they need is to make more money. 3. Queen doesn't respect themselves as musicians as they think they wrote about 10 pop hits from 80's which are the main legacy of their backyard group. And only several music lovers are still loves these 10 songs is the CROWD of housewives. It's very pity that BM & RT with a little help from Jim Beach do everything in last years to lay down the respect to them from their die-hard fans. Maybe half of Queen doesn't know about them to exist:) Maybe someone must told them that in 70's Queen were as big as Led Zeppelin and in 80's were the biggest. That their '74-'76 albums are the classic of Rock era. That Queen are one of the most collectible and botlegged rock bands... ...And finally to retire Jim Beach and this marrionette Greg Brooks. It's so funny to read his delighted thoughts that great-looking box is the main reason to buy it after 2 years of his hard work on discarded "Singles Box" we all want. Return to QZ version of "Single Box": 1. I don't think we really need the permission to make it 'cause it's a fan made compilation for private use only. We don't need any permission to make a compilation CDR for playback in a car, right? 2. If we want to make a definitive collection of Singles stuff, we need the best quality material. Main question is the High Quality transfer of rarities from original vinyl. Any thoughts? |
slarty 16.09.2008 05:43 |
If what you say is true then it is a very sad state of affairs for us to be in.There are still a hell of al ot of us fans out there - look at how many dates of the upcoming tour are sold out or almost s.o.So QP want a profit - OK,then give them one.I still don't see why they cannot do both - the main market - singles and such - and second - what most fans seem to want. As I said before It would help persuade QP to do something or forget the idea entirely if it was possible to calculate how much genuine interest there is/or is not. Imagine if 10% of each audience at every upcoming tour event were to preorder a B-side issue - you would have close on 10,000 orders.So this is what a forum is for - discuss ideas and alternatives.I'm not saying my idea is the best or only way,It is just an idea for discussion. As for doing it as CDR - there must be enough of us with the original singles in good enough condition to first transfer them from vinyl. It needs a bunch of us to act together instead of just complaining into thin air. |
Tero 16.09.2008 10:20 |
I would buy that fanmade boxset even if it was direct transfers from vinyl with no artwork whatsoever. All the b-sides, all the extended versions, all the official edits and remixes that were released on singles... (Well, I wouldn't mind if some of the You Don't Fool Me remixes weren't there, but I can live them.) I guess that would be at least 8 discs full of material, and something I would gladly buy for 100€, or even £100. |
Fenderek 16.09.2008 10:36 |
Tero wrote: I guess that would be at least 8 discs full of material, and something I would gladly buy for 100€, or even £100.Ditto |
Holly2003 16.09.2008 11:05 |
Fenderek wrote:None of my money would go to what would be the modern day equivalent of an unofficial mix tape. But...each to his own.Tero wrote: I guess that would be at least 8 discs full of material, and something I would gladly buy for 100€, or even £100.Ditto |
cmi 16.09.2008 11:09 |
I think if it will be interesting project for QZoners, there will be also great artwork and it will be non-commercial project! |
Tero 16.09.2008 11:12 |
Holly2003 wrote:Exactly, each to his own.Fenderek wrote:None of my money would go to what would be the modern day equivalent of an unofficial mix tape. But...each to his own.Tero wrote: I guess that would be at least 8 discs full of material, and something I would gladly buy for 100€, or even £100.Ditto Some people want nice flashy covers with the same old songs, and some people consider the music as the main attraction. If (since?) QP has locked itself on option #1 permanently, it would be only fair to let the fans make the compilation for themselves. Heck, this would even be a nice way for the fanclub to get some money if anybody was interested! |
Holly2003 16.09.2008 11:19 |
Tero wrote:Err.. yes but I have almost all of what has been proposed here, plus I'm not that interested in edits of songs that I already have the full versions of. I'm interested primarily in the music too - either new music by what's left of the band, or official live recordings, or some kind of archive releases, but not this. Good luck to all concerned though.Holly2003 wrote:Exactly, each to his own. Some people want nice flashy covers with the same old songs, and some people consider the music as the main attraction.Fenderek wrote:None of my money would go to what would be the modern day equivalent of an unofficial mix tape. But...each to his own.Tero wrote: I guess that would be at least 8 discs full of material, and something I would gladly buy for 100€, or even £100.Ditto |
Bobby_brown 16.09.2008 11:20 |
Even though i understand Brian's point of view i just don't understand why 156 items means more money when there are less CD's. In the end there will be aprox 52 CD's (4 boxes?). I understand that every track increases the value of the CD, but since this tracks were already used in products before, couldn't they just drop the price considering only the costs of production of the BOX- we're not talking about new songs, were talking about new versions, mixes, edits, etc? Take care |
Tero 16.09.2008 11:21 |
CMI wrote: I think if it will be interesting project for QZoners, there will be also great artwork and it will be non-commercial project!If we go back to your previous suggestion, it doesn't hold legal ground. If we all had the same music we could just print the same booklets and be happy, but that isn't the case... In most countries it's illegal to distribute officially released material (even if it's out of print), and in some countries it's illegal to download that music. QP has the right to deny that kind of a project, and I'm willing to bet they would be a lot more sympathetic towards the project if they got substantial money out of it. (1000 sets x 10 cds x £3 is a nice sum for doing nothing and giving nothing the fans don't already have!) |
oh-ja 16.09.2008 12:48 |
(1000 sets x 10 cds x £3 is a nice sum for doing nothing and giving nothing the fans don't already have!)just to remind you: nobody wants them to do or give "nothing" - but to supply the masters ... |
John S Stuart 16.09.2008 12:52 |
A few years back I bought a few blank Queen+ Pual Rodgers recordable discs. (only Queen could sell a blank CD!) They were officially sold as discs for the live downloadable tour tracks. So why can't other 'Official' blanks be sold - so that people can 'roll their own'? (Secondly: Will there be more official live downloads from the new proposed tour?) |
Tero 16.09.2008 13:07 |
oh-ja wrote:Not strictly true... At least I said I would be willing to pay for direct transfers from vinyl releases, and that doesn't require masters from them.(1000 sets x 10 cds x £3 is a nice sum for doing nothing and giving nothing the fans don't already have!)just to remind you: nobody wants them to do or give "nothing" - but to supply the masters ... If QP are willing to do fuck-all for any release, I'd like to at least be able purchase all the tracks from elsewhere. |
Pim Derks 16.09.2008 13:16 |
John S Stuart wrote: (Secondly: Will there be more official live downloads from the new proposed tour?)Yes. And there'll be a new CD-recordable to go along with it :D |
cmsdrums 16.09.2008 15:10 |
is the statute on copyright currently 50 years?? If it still is, then only another 15 years before we can happily share all the first couple of album stuff, plus any rarities that we can get hold of from then - it'll be before QP ever release it officially, of that I'm sure!!! |
Tero 16.09.2008 15:19 |
Yes, currently that would be the case. I am however willing to bet that will be changed in the next five years before the first Beatles albums would become fair game. ;) |
Cwazy little thing 16.09.2008 19:50 |
Tero wrote: Yes, currently that would be the case. I am however willing to bet that will be changed in the next five years before the first Beatles albums would become fair game. ;)You're right, but probably try the next 1-2 years. The European commission is, as we speak, considering a proposal to make it 90 years or something like that, so I really do doubt that we'll get to do anything in 15 years, and I would hope we get a rarities anthology before the 90 years are up! |
scallyuk 16.09.2008 22:43 |
FFS guys. For once I agree with Greg. Having spent most of the last 20 years in marketing/market research it's been shown that "customer power" does not significantly influence decisions for companies who ALREADY HAVE an ongoing market. Queen , through their back catalogue and status as a classic rock band who are quoted as an influence by so many others, have an almost guaranteed inflow of NEW customers prepared to buy existing product . There is little incentive to issue anything, and let's face it music is a luxury and box sets an expensive one, in the anticipation of low volume sales . Any honest businessman will answer the question "what am I in business for" by saying "To make as much money as possible". Even if Queen are only wanting to make records EMI want to make money ! faced with a choice between 1000x $20 profits and 100000 or 1 million $5 profits there is only one decision that will be made. There is a reason that we aren't getting everything - IT WON'T SELL ENOUGH. Whinge all you want. It won't change anything. |
ern2150 17.09.2008 01:03 |
Y'know, I just came to a realization. The physical media, the "old" media, is always going to try to sustain itself, the same old way it has always done, re-releasing the same old material (granted, amazing, awesome, mind-blowing material, but still "old.") The digital media, your Amazons and your iTunes, deliberately or not, are also buying into a "new" market, what's been called the "long tail." Basically, the point is that since there are no physical costs with each copy, if ANYONE buys the content, the money has been recouped. So am I going to spit and cast aspersions on this release? Or just recognize that it's "old" media, and not targeted at me? In fact, I think it's an even better idea to save my money, and when "new" media is brave enough to release "niche" material (like "A Human Body") in great quality without fear of losing a few gold plated tuxedos, I'll be ready. I guess in the meantime I'll have to keep hoping these rarities leak at conventions and someone dubs out Greg's voice. Because it would be far too scary for me and thousands of my friends to pay money for something that is still... PROPERTY OF QUEEN PRODUCTIONS PROPERTY OF QUEEN PRODUCTIONS PROPERTY OF QUEEN PRODUCTIONS PROPERTY OF QUEEN PRODUCTIONS |
mr_creosote 18.09.2008 08:49 |
It's simple. Nobody *has* to buy this. Your life won't be any worse if you don't own it. If you want it and you think it's good value, then buy it. If you don't want it, think it's a rip off, or your kids will starve because you can't afford to buy this and food, don't buy it. This is a luxury product we can all choose to buy or not. Stop trying to make yourself out to be victims and realise there are more important things in the world to worry about. Queen are a long way down the list of people who cash in on their popularity. In the UK you can buy four Queen compilation albums, some bands have released dozens of weak compilation albums that are only slightly different to others. Just look at the number of Beatles or Elvis Presley albums you can buy (LP's or CD's) and it will put the claims of 'cash-in' in perspective. On another matter, the hostility towards Greg on this site is ridiculous. No matter what he says, people disagree with it, simply because it's him saying it. Greg probably has very little influence over what comes out, it's obvious it's Brian and Roger and their management, plus EMI, who have the final say, but nobody seems to be angry at them. At the end of the day, Greg gets a raw deal because he has the kind of job that most people can only dream of, and everyone is bitter towards him because of that. Some credit is due to him for actually coming here and speaking out about such matters when it is far easier just to keep quiet. |
Togg 18.09.2008 09:33 |
What you say is very true, unfortunately Greg has had a long and rather drawn out battle on Queenzone, and frankly the fault lies on both sides, it's too long to go into here but needless to say it will probably never change much Personnally I find he gets hammered for stuff that as you say he has little control over and when he gives the reason why a decision was made it is usually for sensible commercial reasons which most uber fans just dont get because they have never run a business. This box set is a good example, wouldn't it have been great if it was all the the mega fans wanted, but it was never going to happy really, way too expensive to produce and very few would buy it. |
im_on_the_wembley_dvd 18.09.2008 11:17 |
So let's have an even limited box set with all the stuf we do want separate from this bought only via QOL say or via the fan club subscription deposit order whatever.... they did it before with the box of trix release in 1992 inbetween the GH packages they still sold by the bucket load but the box of trix sold also to the die hard fans and collectors...... TO GREG.. THERE IS ROOM FOR BOTH THE AVERAGE JOE BLOGGS FAN IN THE STREET NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR ETC NICELY PACKAGED MONEY SPINNING RELEASE AND A SMALLER BOX SET BUT WITH 20 TRACKS ON EACH CD FOR THE REST..... BOTH WILL SELL AND QP/EMI ETC WILL MAKE MONEY. Commercially small niche markets can and do still make a profit it just needs to be marketed correctly (note on above, i am in no way having a go at Greg personally) I also agree with many of the comments for and against and laughed my T**TS off at some too. |
Penetration_Guru 18.09.2008 15:49 |
mr_creosote wrote: At the end of the day, Greg gets a raw deal because he has the kind of job that most people can only dream of, and everyone is bitter towards him because of that. Some credit is due to him for actually coming here and speaking out about such matters when it is far easier just to keep quiet.the only time Greg gets any criticism from me is when he ignores the valid questions and goes looking for the arguments. Given how personal the abuse is, I do understand why that grabs his attention, gets the reaction and informs his response. I just wish he'd feel it would be worthwhile spending the time going back looking for the constructive. Were he to feel he had the time & inclination, I think he would get more credit (not that this will be high on his list of concerns!) |
Penetration_Guru 18.09.2008 15:52 |
Togg wrote: This box set is a good example, wouldn't it have been great if it was all the the mega fans wanted, but it was never going to happy really, way too expensive to produce and very few would buy it.The originally announced Singles Box was put together by Greg (amongst others) and would have been approximately the size of the Freddie box. So what's your basis for saying it would have been too expensive & unsellable? Unless Greg is willing to tell us (or even knows) what price point it would have been at, all we can say is - how popular was the Freddie box? |
Queen Archivist 23.09.2008 13:21 |
A lot of you guys keep going on about the cost, and the cost ALONE being the reason that the format was changed, and far fewer tracks released. It wasn't MAINLY due to cost. BM & RT, as I understand it, had other reasons for not wanting to put out close to two thirds (more or less) of the band's album material, as part of a SINGLES collection. When you think about it, releasing a DEFINITIVE Queen singles collection, pretty much means you're putting the entire (or most) Works and Magic albums out there (most tracks having been a single A or B somewhere in the world), and much of Innuendo and Miracle, a whole lot of Jazz and The Game, etc. Not just 2 or 3 tracks from each. They were concerned that this be a SINGLES collection. Yes, I know all the things you could say to that, and offer up as arguments. Of course I do... but so too do the band. They know what they're doing. So far, since 1973, the decisions they have made have been proven to be good and logical ones, don't you think?!?! It WASN'T 99% about cost... as most you have convinced yourself it was. |
Tero 23.09.2008 13:37 |
How about then releasing a b-sides album, a 12" extended versions album, and an edit/remix album as individual titles? No need to put the identical album tracks in there, and the fans get the music which they want... (The Greatest Hits albums are just as good as single collections, when their tracks are selected just as arbitrarily as this "top 40" rule.) Sounds like a win-win situation, doesn't it? Except of course for the tiny little detail that you would have to sell them for £10 per set instead of £40. |
Yara 23.09.2008 13:43 |
Queen Archivist wrote: A lot of you guys keep going on about the cost, and the cost ALONE being the reason that the format was changed, and far fewer tracks released. It wasn't MAINLY due to cost. BM & RT, as I understand it, had other reasons for not wanting to put out close to two thirds (more or less) of the band's album material, as part of a SINGLES collection. When you think about it, releasing a DEFINITIVE Queen singles collection, pretty much means you're putting the entire (or most) Works and Magic albums out there (most tracks having been a single A or B somewhere in the world), and much of Innuendo and Miracle, a whole lot of Jazz and The Game, etc. Not just 2 or 3 tracks from each. They were concerned that this be a SINGLES collection. Yes, I know all the things you could say to that, and offer up as arguments. Of course I do... but so too do the band. They know what they're doing. So far, since 1973, the decisions they have made have been proven to be good and logical ones, don't you think?!?! It WASN'T 99% about cost... as most you have convinced yourself it was.Hi! How are you? May I ask you a question? The singles aren't available here in Brazil. I'm kind of young still and I don't know if they got to be in the past. Nowadays, however, they're not available. The whole Queen catalogue, I mean, the studio and live albums, as well as the DVDs, yes, they're available here and I have 'em all. I'm still enjoying it all. Pitty that it's hard to find the Freddie box set, but guys in a store next to where I study said that they are going to bring some, I think. I hope it's true! So, my question, and I'd be glad and thankful to know that: will the versions, and the sound quality, of the songs in this release of the singles collection be the same as those featured in the full albums? Are there going to be remixes of the songs or only the tracks exactly as they were released as singles? Thanks in advance and take care! |
Lester Burnham 23.09.2008 14:59 |
Queen Archivist wrote: A lot of you guys keep going on about the cost, and the cost ALONE being the reason that the format was changed, and far fewer tracks released. It wasn't MAINLY due to cost. BM & RT, as I understand it, had other reasons for not wanting to put out close to two thirds (more or less) of the band's album material, as part of a SINGLES collection. When you think about it, releasing a DEFINITIVE Queen singles collection, pretty much means you're putting the entire (or most) Works and Magic albums out there (most tracks having been a single A or B somewhere in the world), and much of Innuendo and Miracle, a whole lot of Jazz and The Game, etc. Not just 2 or 3 tracks from each. They were concerned that this be a SINGLES collection. Yes, I know all the things you could say to that, and offer up as arguments. Of course I do... but so too do the band. They know what they're doing. So far, since 1973, the decisions they have made have been proven to be good and logical ones, don't you think?!?! It WASN'T 99% about cost... as most you have convinced yourself it was.OK, so regarding The Works / AKOM singles ... will the extended versions be included? Because it would make logical sense, considering they were released as SINGLES to have those bad boys on there for all to enjoy. And in response to your "since 1973" argument, I have 3 words for you: "Greatest Hits III". |
Penetration_Guru 23.09.2008 17:11 |
Queen Archivist wrote: Originally 156 items over 10 CDs, spanning 9 hours (from memory), and with a colossal book of text that most people would have criticised to hell without even reading. But, had we issued that, as planned (and actually handed in, by the way), you guys would now be saying... "£249 for a box. Are they joking? Who can afford that in these money-tight times? Don't 'they' know the world is on the brink of recession, with more people losing their homes than ever, and more bankrupt people than EVER before? QPL live in a dream world if they think we have ALL THIS money to spend at this time."This is where I got the impression that price was a factor. I understand the other reason as you describe it, although it seems interesting that GH2 also includes "most of AKOM/The Works", and there doesn't seem to be much objection to knocking that out at every opportunity... |
brians wig 23.09.2008 19:28 |
As has been said already, what the "fans" would like are the B Sides, 12" mixes and edits (like Liar, It's Late). That's 4 CDs minimum - 6 if QPL don't want to fill a disc with 75 minutes of music! To have these remastered (and I don't mean all the faders whacked up to 0db like most music is today), I'm sure we'd all happily fork out at least £50. |
silver_salmon 23.09.2008 19:58 |
Hey Greg you are a looser and you know it! What are you doing in Serious Discussion???? |
cmsdrums 24.09.2008 09:02 |
cmsdrums wrote: Greg My only real main query is; CMS: Identical?? Does this mean they are the original masters too, as well? If not, they are not as per the original singles, even if the mix is the same. In fact, virtually all of Queen singles (with the odd exception) has always been the same MIX as the album version - perhaps you mean EDIT??? GB: READ WHAT I SAID AGAIN. I THINK IT'S CLEAR ENOUGH IF YOU READ IT CAREFULLY. OK, I have. You said "certain of these mixes are identical to the original vinyl cuts". The use of the word certain very heavily implies, (if not states categorically) that some, (ie NOT all), of the tracks will be as the original vinyl releases. In this case, what reason is there for some of the tracks NOT being reproduced as per the original single mix? And if so, why are they being re-mixed just for this project?? Hope you can provide some info on this, cos different mixes are the kind of thing that some Queen fans are keen on collecting. ThanksHi Greg Are you able to advise on my above query in reply to your earlier point??? Cheers |
AlexRocks 24.09.2008 11:46 |
I suspect we will see a compilation box set of something like 12 c.d.s or two box sets of eight c.d.s worth of material compiling the songs and not the individual singles in years to come. I imagine that that is a little down the road since this series of sets are happening. This is not as bad some might think. Business wise if you were to release a box set that compiled all of the songs or a series of box sets that compiled the individual singles you would probably do the latter first as I think it would sell better without the other one on the market. Then you can release the one that compiles all of the songs. Once that's done individual releases of double c.d. sets or single long play c.d.s could be done compiling b-sides and whatever rarities. THEN compilations could be done containing any and all of the above... |
Benn 24.09.2008 11:53 |
At the risk of repeating ones self, it gets slightly ridiculous when we have to start pondering the future release of COMPILATIONS of singles sets. haven't we already been here before with GH1, 2 & 3? Adding more pointless product to the shelves does nothing but clutter them and push the devoted into walkign straight past the Queen section. SURELY, releasing the long-awaited Archive box set (s) would surve the purpose of shutting the likes of me up and leaving the way free for QPL top release as much re-packaged / re-issued tripe as they see fit? |
Jamaleni 01.10.2008 09:11 |
Queen Archivist wrote:
pittrek wrote: Hi Greg, I won't buy this set but I could be interested in the other volumes. Do you think that the other box sets will inlude : - the 12" mixes GB: THE ORIGINAL PACKAGE DID, BUT THE REVISED FORMAT DOES NOT... AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS. THE BANDS WANTS THIS TO BE JUST THE SINGLES, AS THEY ORIGINALLY WENT OUT. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. I THINK THE EXTENDED MIXES WOULD BE ISSUED ALL TOGETHER IN ONE HIT, AS PART OF A RARITIES/ANTHOLOGY PROJECT. - the instrumental mixes THE U.S. MACHINES INSTRU, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD PROBABLY FEATURE ON THAT RESPECTIVE BOX, RATHER THAN THE UK MACHINES B-SIDE (WHICH WASN'T INSTRU) JUST BECAUSE IT'S MORE INTERESTING. BUT NOT THE GA GA INSTRU, COZ THAT WAS NEVER ON THE ORIGINAL 7" SINGLE. YOU SEE THE PATTERN. - Hollywood Records remixes NO. - You Don't Fool Me remixes AS PER ORIG VINYL/CD.... TO BE CONFIRMED. - Queen + collaborations Q&DB ONLY, AS FAR AS I ONLY. THAT WAS CERTAINLY THE THEME OF THE ORIG 10-CD VERSION. BUT THINGS CAN CHANGE, ACCORDING TO THE BAND. - Queen + Paul Rodgers ? NOT AS FAR AS I KNOW. DITTO ABOVE. If yes, do you know how often will these volumes appear ? Once a year, twice a year, every 2 years ... Thanks a lot Well, I guess that I got all the info I need. When (but I'm affraid thet it would be IF) THEY decide to release a complete rarities package then I will buy it. This "product" makes no sense... |
Lester Burnham 01.10.2008 10:52 |
Lester Burnham wrote:Queen Archivist wrote: A lot of you guys keep going on about the cost, and the cost ALONE being the reason that the format was changed, and far fewer tracks released. It wasn't MAINLY due to cost. BM & RT, as I understand it, had other reasons for not wanting to put out close to two thirds (more or less) of the band's album material, as part of a SINGLES collection. When you think about it, releasing a DEFINITIVE Queen singles collection, pretty much means you're putting the entire (or most) Works and Magic albums out there (most tracks having been a single A or B somewhere in the world), and much of Innuendo and Miracle, a whole lot of Jazz and The Game, etc. Not just 2 or 3 tracks from each. They were concerned that this be a SINGLES collection. Yes, I know all the things you could say to that, and offer up as arguments. Of course I do... but so too do the band. They know what they're doing. So far, since 1973, the decisions they have made have been proven to be good and logical ones, don't you think?!?! It WASN'T 99% about cost... as most you have convinced yourself it was.OK, so regarding The Works / AKOM singles ... will the extended versions be included? Because it would make logical sense, considering they were released as SINGLES to have those bad boys on there for all to enjoy. And in response to your "since 1973" argument, I have 3 words for you: "Greatest Hits III". Holy formatting, Batman. Anyway, I just saw Greg's response to pittrek's questions about 12" mixes, and that they won't be on there. Good job, QPL, in going for a "style over substance" approach to what could have been an interesting and comprehensive package. It's essentially a glorified Greatest Hits package. I'd be interested in seeing how well this sells. Pass. |
Tero 01.10.2008 11:04 |
Don't you worry, it will be another sold out release to prove that QP are doing a wonderful job, and everybody can pat themselves on their backs. A limited edition of 10,000 (as advertised earlier) is practically guaranteed to sell out, as that's the amount the late 90's "limited edition"solo singles were pressed in. |
KevoM 02.10.2008 07:50 |
Anybody else like me who is past caring about these infamous so called boxsets? Also I never thought I 'd feel the same about possible 70s concerts on DVD, but I do now. I've moved on, i'm way past caring, life's too short.-' I guess it's an age thing. I'm sure there are others and QP have missed the boat on this one. They should have released 'em years ago when they originally intended to |
MusicManDeaconJohn 04.10.2008 07:53 |
QP sucks. I will never spend neither an euro for the... what? The 10th official release of Bohemian Rhapsody or We Will Rock You: I reached the point I hate this songs. Every time I see: Bohmemian Rhapsody: runtime the usual fucked 5.59 mins ever and aver and ever... I would be content if one time I saw: mins: 4.45....Oh here there's the 1978 French edit of the song!!!!!! Where is the Keep Yourself Alive "special" version of the Old Grey Whistle Test? Where is the Seven Seas of Rhye alternate remix for Top of The Pops? Where is God Save the Queen b-side of Keep Yorself Alive released in 1975 in US? Where is the US Liar Single Edit? Where is Teo Torriatte single version? It's Late? And I don't want to think to how QP will behave for what concerns the haundreds of mix and extended versions of the 80's. I don't think the It's a Hard Life Extended Version would interest the "generic music fan" (as Greg Brooks sais), because he has already I't's a Hard Life on the Works, on Greatest Hits II and he wants always more album version (always the same!!!!)... For this, I suppose, QP will release a Greatest Hits IV with a mix of the best songs contained in Greatest Hits I & II. Then Greatest Hits V with a mix of the best of GH II & III then Greatest Hits VI with the best of the best of GH III and IV and so on..... and look out, Bohemian Rhapsody will never change a chord!!!!!! And I don't talk about the demos and the unreleased songs..... What a mess will be for these (if we'll see them one day). I don't want to think of it.... |
cmsdrums 11.10.2008 14:36 |
Interesting to note that Brian says on his site that the singles box sets will also come out on vinyl as well as the CD versions . I wonder if these are available from the start or will be available later on? |
Michael Allred 14.11.2008 15:37 |
for those interested, it seems the box set has been delayed until December 1st. Dunno why. |
Micrówave 14.11.2008 16:00 |
So it all comes down to this. We get this little boxed trinket for Christmas, which is nice. That's about all you get this year. Times are tough. In fact, Terrorists levelled the Twin Towers on 9/11. We launched an all-out Blitzkrieg at the Middle East. Oil prices rose. The cost of gas rose. Then the housing industry crashed. The stock market plummetted and began a roller coaster ride... causing the box set that we really want to be delayed yet again. The terrorists have won. |
KevoM 19.11.2008 17:38 |
Michael Allred wrote: for those interested, it seems the box set has been delayed until December 1st. Dunno why. There must be a good reason for this as it's not like QP to miss out on their favourite month of the year...November, the prime xmas shopping month along with mid Oct. The two months where 99.999999999% of all Queen stuff is released! |
Benn 21.11.2008 05:06 |
This bit on the new press release made me howl: "Now - all the Queen singles you ever wanted." .......as if they've never been available until now. "It's all so fucking hysterical." |
Voice of Reason 2018 21.11.2008 05:06 |
I hope no-one gives it to me for Christmas! |
Darren1977 23.11.2008 13:43 |
As the band have stated on numerous occasions that they DO NOT NEED ANY MORE MONEY why then don't they release an archive set for the fans which they can clearly afford to release at a loss. Fair enough i agree for once with Greg that the box set is aimed at the casual fan as i myself have bought the Blondie/Who/Marillion sets purely to hear the singles but it is getting a bit frustrating when another year has passed and there is no word on the proposed box sets. Looking forward now to xmas 2009 or will it be 2010, the 40th anniversary before we see anything of interest. |
Fmarton 23.11.2008 15:38 |
Benn: """ This bit on the new press release made me howl: "Now - all the Queen singles 'you' ever wanted." """ At least it's clear that 'you' is not for you(and me and many others) |
Adam Baboolal 24.11.2008 17:01 |
Darren, it's one thing to say, we don't need any more money. It's another to say, let's release something that we're guaranteed to lose money on. Are you telling them to release something so that we benefit and they won't at all?? Sorry, but I think that sounds incredibly selfish. And I know I wouldn't want that for them. We all want THE boxsets, but they're getting broken down into items like this. So, we the fans, get to choose what we want and what we really don't give a monkeys about! Hence why lots of people don't want these singles sets, but some do. Should suit everyone...should. But I guess people can't help but find the chance to moan. Even when it's been said before, if you don't want it, don't buy it and don't pay any attention to it. You want to send a message, don't touch the thing! Adam. |
Benn 25.11.2008 05:08 |
Adam, re: >>We all want THE boxsets, but they're getting broken down into items like this. So, we the fans, get to choose what we want and what we really don't give a monkeys about! Hence why lots of people don't want these singles sets, but some do. You really think that QPL have taken this level of consideration? They haven't done so before, so, why, in 2008, would they bother? Queen's catalogue, as I've said many times before, is treated by them as a cash cow and the same material is plundered time and again, year after year, for the same *types* of releases. >>Should suit everyone...should. But I guess people can't help but find the chance to moan. Even when it's been said before, if you don't want it, don't buy it and don't pay any attention to it. You want to send a message, don't touch the thing! Adn this is EXACTLY what won't happen. Too many people will buy it and just have it sitting on the shelf - after all, whose really going to put a CD on and then change it once every 5 or six minutes or so when you can just shove GH1 on and sit back for an hour? I'm kinda looking forward to NOT buying it in actual fact - a strange, perverse trip to HMV is on the cards where I pick it up, look at it and then put it back with a look of disgust on my face and a whisper under my breath (hopefully with other potential buyers around) about how this is the same old material released to take advantage of the real fan. I should get out more. But, salvation will come in new material from Springsteen in January. |
Wilki Amieva 02.12.2008 07:51 |
Greg, I just wanted to point out that the japan CD3s issued in 1990 do NOT have the same content as their UK/European counterparts from 1988. The japanese box was contains revised material, including the actual single versions. That said, I am really looking forward to the SINGLES COLLECTION. I've heard the promo CDs from the release and the 2008 remasters sound excellent! |
Negative Creep 02.12.2008 10:56 |
Do the new "remasters" sound excellent though? To me, they sound more muddy than ever. In fact, I doubt they have truly been remastered... re-transferred perhaps. Taking that into account, I imagine Justin Shirely Smith is behind it (AKA Mr Jack of all trades, master of NONE). |
pittrek 03.12.2008 04:25 |
Did somebody buy it ? I'm curious to see some "customer review" |
Mr Prime Jive 03.12.2008 14:17 |
Here in France it's available nowhere and unknown to anybody. There's NOTHING to promote it. |
Lester Burnham 03.12.2008 15:57 |
pittrek wrote: Did somebody buy it ? I'm curious to see some "customer review" According to someone on QOL, the box features just the 13 CDs and sleeves. No booklet or anything. Pretty much bare bones. Evidently the songs have been remastered, but others have said they sound either the same or worse. |
Benn 04.12.2008 06:48 |
Lester, Shock me....... Perhaps they'll defend the sound quality by saying that the music was transfered directly from original 7" pressings in order to maintain that truly authentic single sound / mix........... Bwa ha ha! |
Adam Baboolal 04.12.2008 11:46 |
NO BOOKLET?! But that was like one of THE saving graces of this set. What's the point of not getting the info behind the releases, just the remastered releases themselves? Now I can't see the point in looking at this at all. Weird... Adam. |
KevoM 04.12.2008 12:19 |
'Remastered? Again? Just how much more sound quality can you squeeze out of a bog standard CD? SACD, DVD-A, Blu Ray Audio....'Now That's What I Call Remastered...71' |
Lester Burnham 04.12.2008 13:36 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: NO BOOKLET?! But that was like one of THE saving graces of this set. What's the point of not getting the info behind the releases, just the remastered releases themselves? Now I can't see the point in looking at this at all. Weird... Adam. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not... |
Penetration_Guru 04.12.2008 13:40 |
Has anyone else perceived a sense of desperation in the marketing of this? I reckon I've had about a dozen emails from QPL telling me about this by now, and although I have neither kept them or read them too thoroughly, I didn't note any particular changes in content. Or maybe I'm reading into it something that suits my agenda. I don't know - anyone else have a view? |
Penetration_Guru 04.12.2008 13:54 |
Adam Baboolal wrote:
P_guru, it's not £3 for each cd though because there's the packaging that's been recreated AND a booklet to go along with it all. So, it's not as simple as the cd's costs. That's why I think it's generally worth it.
Adam.
Still think that? |
Adam Baboolal 04.12.2008 18:11 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: Adam Baboolal wrote: P_guru, it's not £3 for each cd though because there's the packaging that's been recreated AND a booklet to go along with it all. So, it's not as simple as the cd's costs. That's why I think it's generally worth it. Adam. Still think that? Touche salesman..! Seriously though, weren't we told that the collection box would come with a detailed booklet? And yeah, I was being serious. I wasn't really gonna buy it, but I was interested in the singles booklet for information. And from what Lester says, it's just the cd's and nothing else...I don't get that. Adam. |
frank39 05.12.2008 12:36 |
Being a long time Queen fan, today was my first encounter with the new Queen Box. I was in a huge local music store here in Cologne, Germany, where there is a nice decorated desk at the entrance: Among those newies are: the Queen Box, ZZ Top DVD, Genesis DVD and Bruce Springsteen 2DVD+1CD. Not only that the Queen Box had the highest price of all, it somehow looks poor, sorry. I checked the Bruce Springsteen 2DVD+1CD ( half the price of the Queen Box), and what do I read: Bruce Springsteen at the Hammersmith Odeon 1975!! Unreleased. You know what I bought? Not the Queen Box, containing material, i have 3 times more or less on various previous releases. I don't need the same things over and over again. Hammersmith Odeon 1975 Okay, I take the Springsteen Boxset for 22 Euro, instead of the Queen Box, 39 Euro. Wanted to see them perform this Queen location, and I was curious about the picture quality..... And this is my result: Nice show from Bruce, if you like him, but.... pictures are medium, sound okay. But compared to the Hammi Boots we all have QUEEN Hammersmith 1975 DVD would be a blast from the past, but not this poor little Box. |
Negative Creep 05.12.2008 13:39 |
There's definitely no improvement in sound quality. "Digital remastering" doesn't automatically equal improvement, and a lot of these versions sound duller than before. Just looking at the wave form for See What A Fool I've Been and notice that the right channel has gone through a digital hard limiter, whereas the left channel hasn't.... is this how previous versions have been? |
Griffin 05.12.2008 22:38 |
frank39 -- excellent point about the other box sets -- I'm looking at my *Chrome, Smoke, & BBQ* box set from ZZ Top. Keep in mind the little ol' band from Tejas actually does not have an album only of live tunes. Disc 1, 20 tracks, including pre-ZZ Top stuff when Jimi Hendrix was saying Billy Gibbons was going to become a rock legend. Box Set 1 from Queen -- we could even incl Crown Jewels I guess -- no Ibex, no Wreckage, no Smile, etc. Disc 2 ZZ Top -- 24 tracks. Disc 3 -- 20 tracks. Disc 4, 16 tracks, but some of these are mostly unnecessary dance mixes, although one song is a spanish-language version of a popular track. Thus, you have the background, development, and legend of the band in one convenient Clarksdale rib shack. Somehow it's bigger inside than it looks from the outside. Booklets? Not zero, not one, but TWO (technically three). The "Menu" book includes rare photos, interviews with all band members about the meaning or development of each song released as a single, and other bits of rock history about the growth of chin warmers. The "Flipbook" contains photo stills from one of the 80s videos with the fuzzy white guitars, and if you flip the pages, just like on TV, the guitars spin around. And, if you turn the flipbook upside down, and flip the pages from back to front, you see Tres Hombres acting out another scene. Some folks might call the "Flipbook" gimmicky or silly, I'd say it's just fun and different, something extra I didn't expect-- but compared to Queen's box set numero uno, ZZ Top's offering is a literary masterwork. Like Jim Beach is comparing JK Rowling to Dostoyevsky and expecting fans to fall over one another to get inside the store. There is NO MAGIC in Queen Box Set 1. Again, ZZ Top is a band that the label has not yet released a proper 'live album,' but the box set contains several live tracks to whet the appetite. ZZ Top played to crowds of 80,000 in 1973 -- and QSC #1 is the best Queen can do? Embarrasing. I love Queen's music, but I'm just not stepford enough to hold back this time. |
Penetration_Guru 06.12.2008 03:58 |
link |
Benn 08.12.2008 07:49 |
Perhaps, in these economically challenging times, QPL decided not to fork out for the printing of the booklet which was slated to appear with the set, meanig that they could still hit the same price point which included the cost for it. Genius, Jim Beach. Utter, unimaginable GENIUS! Wonder when we'll have Greggy boy popping up here again with a fluffy explanation? Wonder whether we'll really see volumes 2, 3 & 4? Hope not. Polydor saw sense in not issuing volume 2 of The Who's set.......but pushed hard for the eventual release of the Kilburn '78 / Coliseum '69 DVD instead, God love 'em! |
Lester Burnham 08.12.2008 10:06 |
Benn wrote: Wonder whether we'll really see volumes 2, 3 & 4? Hope not. Polydor saw sense in not issuing volume 2 of The Who's set.......but pushed hard for the eventual release of the Kilburn '78 / Coliseum '69 DVD instead, God love 'em! Oh I'm sure we're going to get volumes 2, 3, and 4, then a "collector's edition" box of all four box sets (spread over 52 discs), then a "highlights" box, then... See, Polydor and The Who's management actually give the fans what they want. Kilburn '77 is notorious for being one of their worst gigs, and Coliseum '69 is grainy footage and incomplete ... but it's still a hell of a package. Same could be said of Tommy '89 and Quadrophenia '96. EXCELLENT package. Instead, we're probably going to get Live In Rio, Live In Budapest, and then the re-re-release of Wembley because an extra 3.5 seconds of footage was found. Someone over on QOL said that Greg said that QPL feels that any "non-mustache" show isn't marketable. How ridiculous is that? Just goes to show how clueless and money-driven QPL is. |
Benn 08.12.2008 11:36 |
Hi Lester, So, to take the QPL "comment" a stage further, are they suggesting that any "non-moustache" album isn't marketable as well? Doubt it. You'd "think" that, given the popularity and visibility of the Bo Rhap video *worldwide*, there would be plenty of marketability for mid-late 70s shows, wouldn't you? QOL's as much a disgrace as QPL in many ways, but I suppose you can't really expect anything more, can you after all these years? After all, what do we REALLY expect? Regarding The Who's Kilburn show, where you say it was touted as one of their worst, along with the Woodstock show, this was more to do with Pete and or Roger hating what happened either at the show or events immediately before or after that had THEM telling everyone how bad it was. The Kilburn show's performance is actually pretty good for a band that hadn't played together for a while - it was just Keith not being 100% (he's actually at about 70% which is other drumer's 100%!) and then dying. Woodstock, as we all know (and when it finally arrives next year), was an absolutel BELTER of a performance, it's just that Pete hated what the Woodstock festival became as opposed to what it should have been. Having said all that, it's taken them long enough...... :-) Now for the SERIOUS lobbying of Trinifold / Polydor! |
Lester Burnham 08.12.2008 12:11 |
Oh I agree that Kilburn shows a band on fire – and not necessarily in a "good" way (for instance, Queen at Milton Keynes), but it's obvious that 3/4 of the band are drunk, Moon has physically deteriorated to, as you say, 70% of what he used to be, and Townshend would rather be anywhere else, and he's hating every minute. However, the passion shows through, and an angry Townshend is a passionate Townshend; as a result, Moon feeds off that, and Daltrey feeds off that (Entwistle, of course, was always top notch, regardless of how the others were), and voila: a spotty, raw, and excellent show. The release shows that the band are okay with exposing everything, warts and all, and as a result, the fans are given a nice reward. Remarkably, I saw that the disc went to #1 on the Billboard DVD charts – not bad for a disc that doesn't show the band in the best light! Of course, Queen will never do that, despite the plethora of live shows they could release, all of them pre-'80. (I agree, a "non-mustache" Freddie is a ridiculous argument against releasing anything. I highly doubt the general public would recoil at a release that shows Freddie poncing around a stage without a little patch of hair on his upper lip, though it wouldn't surprise me if QPL honestly thought that way.) But it's time they did something for the fans, because, even as GB has stated in this thread alone, the Singles Collection was designed at getting sales from the average person who has only heard WWRY, BoRhap, WATC, etc. The other set, as he mentioned, would have been lambasted by us; but, as far as I can tell, its construction was similar to the Freddie box set, of which I have seen very, very few complaints, if any at all. So he's wrong in assuming that, really. Unfortunately, not only do the fans have to suffer by having to see Queen being reduced to a hits recognition band only, but the general public have to suffer too by being duped into believing that the Singles Collection is worth buying and, when its placed next to other bands' singles collection box sets, it's clearly not worth it at all. |
Voice of Reason 2018 08.12.2008 12:52 |
I was suprised to see two copies of the singles collection in my local hmv. I haven't mentioned it to any of my friends in the hope they don't get it for me for Christmas! Cheers. |
Lester Burnham 08.12.2008 20:42 |
Voice of Reason 2008 wrote: I was suprised to see two copies of the singles collection in my local hmv. I haven't mentioned it to any of my friends in the hope they don't get it for me for Christmas! Cheers. I would hope your friends don't hate you THAT much! |
cmi 09.12.2008 04:32 |
Some kind of a review from me. Queen: Singles Collection 1 Remastered by Peter Mew in Abbey Road studios Compiled with help by Greg Brooks and Gary Taylor. Audio supervised by Justin Shirley-Smith, Joshua J Macrae, Kris Fredriksson and Martin Lau. Single sleeves taken from Brian May archive. 1. Hudge disapointment for me is the usage of not real stand-alone version of Tenement Funster with no FOTW piano intro in the end of the song as on original UK 7" and on Japanese 3"CD from 1992 but a fake single version as on UK '88 3"CD made from album version using fadeout featuring FOTW intro. 2. Usage of crap single sleeves from around the world instead of classic UK single sleeves is one of the weirdest things (especially for such a classic single as BorRhap). Each single back sleeve has info about the country it was from and 2008 credits. 3. CD label design is the same as box package. Purple label with early Queen logo, tracklist and 'Single Collection 1' stamp. No original vinyl labels were used. For me it's no a shame:) 4. Remastering is very good, See What A Fool I've Been indeed has unequal limiting of channels. 5. So we have here only two rarities for Europe - CD debuts of Flick Of The Wist and I'm In Love With My Car single versions. And no rarities at all for worldwide collectors. All other 'unique' versions (such as 'Lily Of The Valley' and 'White Queen') is possible to create for about 15 seconds in Sound Forge using album versions. 6. If 7" single format will be the main aim in future volumes, we only will see CD debuts of A Human Body, Back Chat (single remix) (???), Blurred Vision, Pain Is So Close To Pleasure (single version) (???) and remasters of B-sides we already have in CD quality. Hope they will change their mind and will include 12" material in future volumes. Rating: 3/10 It's total crap release. P.S.: I have not bought this box and I'm not gonna do this.:) |
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) 09.12.2008 14:25 |
I thought I would chime in as well… Disc 1 Keep Yourself Alive (Album Version) Son And Daughter (Album Version) Not really much you can do with this. I would have preferred the 1975 US re-release as the basis for this, just for the b-sides. US version had KYA (single edit), Lily of the Valley (US edit), and God Save The Queen (Single Version). It does make more sense to have the UK tracklisting though. Disc 2 Seven Seas Of Rhye (Album Version) See What A Fool I’ve Been (B-side) I noticed the “click” (at approx 2:08) that is present on every other version of Seven Seas Of Rhye has been removed. Disc 3 Killer Queen (Album Version) Flick Of The Wrist (UK 7” vinyl edit, also appears on 3” Japan CD) The UK 7” vinyl edit of Flick Of The Wrist was rightly used. The Dutch 7” has a slightly longer opening, making it the true stand-alone version, but this still works well. Disc 4 Now I’m Here (Album Version) Lily Of The Valley (UK 7” edit) The UK 7” edit was rightly used as the B-side. Disc 5 Bohemian Rhapsody (Album Version) I’m In Love With My Car (Single Version) No issues here. Single version of I’m In Love With My Car is correctly included. Disc 8 Tie Your Mother Down (Single Version) You And I (Album Version) Single version of TYMD is rightly used (meaning no introduction as seen on the album). Disc 9 Good Old Fashioned Lover Boy (Album Version) Death On Two Legs (Dedicated To…) (Album Version) Tenement Funster (UK 3” CD Version) White Queen (As It Began) (EP Version) This one is quite annoying and has been mentioned before. Tenement Funster should be the 7” UK/Japan 3” CD version. Instead, the UK 3” CD version has been wrongfully included. White Queen has the same “edit” as on the original EP. Disc 11 Spread Your Wings (Album Version) Sheer Heart Attack (Album Version) The original UK 7” of Spread Your Wings does have a minor fade out edit that makes it different from the album cut. To be technically correct (or anal), it should have been that version that was included. Disc 12 Bicycle Race (Album Version) Fat Bottomed Girls (Single Edit) The Single Edit of FBG is rightfully used. |
cmsdrums 09.12.2008 16:40 |
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) wrote: IDisc 11 Spread Your Wings (Album Version) Sheer Heart Attack (Album Version) The original UK 7” of Spread Your Wings does have a minor fade out edit that makes it different from the album cut. To be technically correct (or anal), it should have been that version that was included. Hi You're not being anal in pointing out about the fade on Spread Your Wings, you're simply being correct, and I agree. Especially when the press release, and then Greg Brooks (although he has contradicted himself with different posts!) have openly advertised, and put great stock in the selling point on this set as being correct and the first time that the single mixes have all been presented correctly. The fact that it's been released at all is bad enough, but the fact that they can't get it right when advertising that they have just about sums it up I'm afraid. |
bigV 09.12.2008 16:45 |
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) wrote: Disc 9 Good Old Fashioned Lover Boy (Album Version) Death On Two Legs (Dedicated To…) (Album Version) Tenement Funster (UK 3” CD Version) White Queen (As It Began) (EP Version) This one is quite annoying and has been mentioned before. Tenement Funster should be the 7” UK/Japan 3” CD version. Instead, the UK 3” CD version has been wrongfully included. White Queen has the same “edit” as on the original EP. The "German Edit" of WQ would've been much more appropriate methinks... V. |
Pim Derks 09.12.2008 18:10 |
Not really much you can do with this. I would have preferred the 1975 US re-release as the basis for this, just for the b-sides. US version had KYA (single edit), Lily of the Valley (US edit), and God Save The Queen (Single Version). It does make more sense to have the UK tracklisting though. I think Marillion used ALL b-sides/edits of a single on 1 disc on their singles collection. So if the UK edition had a different b-side than the German one, BOTH would be included. But hey, we're talking Queen here. Agree about the labels, I was expecting to see EMI labels - which WERE used on the 1998 Japan re-release if i'm not mistaken (to lazy to check my cd's). |
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) 09.12.2008 18:27 |
I know that the EMI labels were used on the 2004 mini vinyl releases. Does anyone know when the 2nd box is supposed to be released? |
Saint Jiub 09.12.2008 22:21 |
Micrówave wrote: So it all comes down to this. We get this little boxed trinket for Christmas, which is nice. That's about all you get this year. Times are tough. In fact, Terrorists levelled the Twin Towers on 9/11. We launched an all-out Blitzkrieg at the Middle East. Oil prices rose. The cost of gas rose. Then the housing industry crashed. The stock market plummetted and began a roller coaster ride... causing the box set that we really want to be delayed yet again. The terrorists have won. I hope you are kidding about this "nice little boxed trinket". ... and the real "terrorist" is Jim Beach's attitude of "not wanting to flood the market. Then again, maybe the delay of box set was caused by the criminal American finance industry. |
Ron 11.12.2008 17:10 |
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) wrote: Disc 9 Good Old Fashioned Lover Boy (Album Version) Death On Two Legs (Dedicated To…) (Album Version) Tenement Funster (UK 3” CD Version) White Queen (As It Began) (EP Version) This one is quite annoying and has been mentioned before. Tenement Funster should be the 7” UK/Japan 3” CD version. Instead, the UK 3” CD version has been wrongfully included. White Queen has the same “edit” as on the original EP. In fact these versions are all correct! This is how they originally appeared on the 7" back in the 70's. I admit that a true stand alone of Tenement Funster! is better, but as said before, this is how they were on the EP back then. |
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) 11.12.2008 23:36 |
I stand corrected :) |
cmi 12.12.2008 03:25 |
RonB wrote: In fact these versions are all correct! This is how they originally appeared on the 7" back in the 70's. I admit that a true stand alone of Tenement Funster! is better, but as said before, this is how they were on the EP back then. Ron, so which release has the real standalone version of Tenemnt Funster? Is it ONLY 1992 Japanese 3"CD from the Singles Box? Can anyone tell me the detailed explanation about the extra bits in the beginning of Flick Of The Wrist on Dutch 7" single in opposition to UK version? As I hear the UK version, it has the complete piano intro. Thanks in advance. Does any release has the true unedited stand-alone version of Lily Of The Valley? |
Ron 12.12.2008 05:59 |
CMI wrote:RonB wrote: In fact these versions are all correct! This is how they originally appeared on the 7" back in the 70's. I admit that a true stand alone of Tenement Funster! is better, but as said before, this is how they were on the EP back then.Ron, so which release has the real standalone version of Tenemnt Funster? Is it ONLY 1992 Japanese 3"CD from the Singles Box? Can anyone tell me the detailed explanation about the extra bits in the beginning of Flick Of The Wrist on Dutch 7" single in opposition to UK version? As I hear the UK version, it has the complete piano intro. Thanks in advance. Does any release has the true unedited stand-alone version of Lily Of The Valley? Just checked the 1988 3" CD-singles and indeed, only the Japanese 1992 3" has the true stand alone of Tenement Funster!. Well unless you count Stuart's SHA acetate which also has this version :) The Dutch FOTW version should have a longer piano intro, but I cannot confirm this at the moment. I am only aware of one true stand alone version of LOTV which can be found on the 7" release and now also on this new Single Collection. The one on the Digital Remaster sampler is not a true stand alone version. |
Ron 12.12.2008 06:01 |
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) wrote: I stand corrected :) Ha! :) So you now better update QueenVault.com with this new revealed information ;) |