Surely the single best question to Queen Archivist EVER????

Queen Archivist 23.12.2008 13:43	Our good chum on QZ, Benn, made the following point on another thread to me. It is so.... errr.... amusing/startling, that I felt it worthy of a new thread. Wait til you turn around and see this... If my mum had seen this first, her reaction would probably have been something like... "Ah, bless him." So, Benn, consider your little self blessed at this rather bless-abundant time of year. REFERRING TO MY 'LAST WORD ON QUEEN SINGLES' THREAD, BENN WROTE.... Greg, All fine and well put and backs up exactly what you told us in the first place. It begs the question though, if you were so convinced that your work on the ORIGINAL set was so good, why on EARTH did you and Gary agree to work on something so far below your collective standards as archivist and hostorian etc? Haven't you completely compromised yourselves here? Didn't you ever turn around to QPL and say "No - this is not what should be released. GB: You simply have to love this question! Seriously. This is among the most startlingly incredible things that's ever been suggested to me. But, being the generous, considerate and generally amiable kind of chap I am, and a bit bored at the moment, let me offer these points in response. Benn: It begs the question though, if you were so convinced that your work on the ORIGINAL set was so good, why on EARTH did you and Gary agree to work on something so far below your collective standards as archivist and hostorian etc? GB: Well, Benjamin, Gary and I considered writing to the band and saying, words to the effect, "Hey Queen band members, our original ideas were/are FAR better than yourn. What are you thinking of; changing the concept from 10-CDs to something lesser? Good Lord chaps, you should listen to us and abandon this folly." But then Gary and I had a chat and Gary thought that approach might be mildly flawed. I agreed after several hours further debate in the office. Our chat continued into the small hours... "Gary," I said, "How about I write to Jim Beach and tell him that we shouldn't really be working on 'something so far below our collective standards as archivist and hostorians etc?'" "Don't be silly, Greg," Gary replied. "Let's just continue to work with the Queen boys and grin and bear it and say nothing and just, kind of, martyr ourselves for this project." "Good plan," replied I. "Yes, this project might be 'so far below our collective standards as archivist and hostorians etc, and all that 'beneath us' type stuff, but we must stick with it - even if the white and purple colour scheme (that 'clear' on QZ will hate) really looks weird." BENN then went on, if you can believe it, to add.... 'Didn't you ever turn around to QPL and say "No - this is not what should be released." GB: Firstly, I seldom feel the need to 'turn around' before I speak. I know that a lot of people in England apparently "turn around" and say things, these days, but I'm not one of them - unless I happen to be in a car going around a roundabout at the time: thus in that instance I might turn around and say something. Generally though, unlike Benn, I don't usually turn around to say things..... oh, unless of course someone is standing behind me when they address me - which is very rare - and then I might turn around to reply. Anyway.... 'Didn't you ever turn around to QPL and say "No - this is not what should be released." Errrrrr..... mmmmmm! It's a difficult one. No. It never occurred to me to turn around and say that. But, let's imagine I had...... "Hello Queen band members. And good morning Jim." "Morning our Archivist." "You look well today GB." "Ta very much Brian." "And you guys all look really well too." [Collective thanks from all present] "So what's so urgent that you needed to call us here to your Cotswold weekend cottage at a moment's notice, Greg?" "Well, Roger, sorry about that, but it's to do with this Queen Singles box set. And it just couldn't wait." "Box 1 of 4, you mean?" "Aye lad, that's the one." "What about it?" "Well, beloved Queen members..... No - this is not what should be released." "Pardon." "I said.... "No - this is not what should be released." "How dare you tell us what should not be released." "Mmmmm. I thought you might say that, members of Queen who employ my services merely on a consultancy level." "Jim, did you here what our archivist just said?" "Yes. He turned around and said... "No - this is not what should be released." "How dare he." "Sorry chaps. I was just thinking ahead to what the Queenzone boys might say." "The who?" "The Queenzone boys." "Boyzone, do you mean? That boy band?" "No, founder Queen member, I mean the fan site.... Queenzone. What if they turn round and say something bad about the project....?" [Brian is curious at this] "You mean that one of them might turn around and say something like.... 'Haven't you completely compromised yourselves here?' and 'Didn't you ever turn around to QPL and say "No - this is not what should be released." "Yes, Brian, that's exactly what I mean." "Ok. I see your point. It's a tricky one. Those QZ boys really do provide great food for thought, so let's not be hasty here. Let's meet back here wednesday week and discuss it again. That's what I'm turning round and suggesting." "Good one, Brian May. I think you turned round and said that in most helpful and understanding fashion. See you then." [Jim intervenes] "I think I might turn around now and tell you to turn around and go back to the archive. Do you follow me?" "Have I spoken out of turn (around)?" Benn.... I don't think what you have suggested was quite the most realistic concept ever put forward, but I have to admire your outright fifth dimension thinking. Good on ya. And bless you.
Fat Lizzy 23.12.2008 13:50	Still need those pictures I worked on 2 days Greg?
Queen Archivist 23.12.2008 13:53	Sorry, what pics are you meaning????
pittrek 23.12.2008 13:59	I'm sorry, I can't resist : /queenzone/1157354.html
on my way up 23.12.2008 14:00	Hi Queen Archivist When will the Hyde Park'76 DVD be released? greetings
on my way up 23.12.2008 14:04	pittrek wrote: I'm sorry, I can't resist : /queenzone/1157354.html :-) Or a Live Killers box with much unseen and unheard stuff(or a Cazy tour set, Hammermsith DVD + an audio gig) In 2009, 30 years since Live Killers was first released... Time for the bigger and better live release you mention in your book, Greg!
Fat Lizzy 23.12.2008 17:49	Queen Archivist wrote: Sorry, what pics are you meaning???? Ffs exactly what I was expecting! I spend 2 days working on pictures for your book, I sent you samples and been polite and stuff... No responce, and you actually forgot. Fantastic!
scottmax 24.12.2008 01:59	Greg, you seem like such a twat
Rick 24.12.2008 04:25	Just one question: What are the band's objections for releasing a 70s product?
Benn 24.12.2008 05:04	Greg - you've missed the point in not reading between the lines, yet again, and avoided the issue - as you so often do. The POINT is that, by questioning the band and / or Jim Beach, they are exposed to thoughts and ideas other than their own. They are not - as they would have you and many others seemingly believe - always right or in the best position to decide what is right. For example. The Who released a re-master of their "A Quick One" album. This was released as being the best quality transfer from the best masters available. What turned up was a complete and UTTER pile of shit where bonus tracks were on the release in far better sound quality than the original album was. Turned out that the producers had simply gone to sub-par copies of the masters which were easily available to hand and mastered the opriginal album from there and had been lazy and complacent. WE knew of the existance of original stereo master tapes and their EXACT location. After QUESTIONING Trinifold, Pete Townshend and the re-issue programme's producer on their logic and quality control processes, we eventually had them 'do it again' and were then given a TRUE stereo release which (although still flawed in terms of the levels the mastering was completed at) was a significant improvement over what was originally released. For example. The Who then released a re-master of the 'Face Dances' album which contained a track called 'It's In You'. Immediately it was apparent that a sub-standard master tape had been used which contained a massive skip in the track. Simple questioning - again - of their quality control processes lead to this being re-done and a BETTER product being made available for all and for the betterment of the band's catalogue. We're now in a position where the band and it's management understand that there is knowledge within the fan base whish is, more often than not, superior to what is within the camp. Therefore, we are getting some really high quality projects under way and, subsequently, high quality product as a result. The Amazing Journey film, the Live at Kilburn film with London Coliseum '69 bonus footage. The fan club-only release of a 2-CD live retrospective set. The POINT is that questioning people who are supposedly in the know opens them up to all kinds of ideas and suggestions. Too many bands / artists / management types (at all levels) are afraid to hear it as it really is and (as evidenced by Brian's ridiculously closed-shop website) are shielded from negativity to the detriment of both their material and other fans. Clearly, you never bothered to back yourselves and your work and stand up against a strategy from QPL / Brian / Roger that you already believed to be flawed. If you and Gary HAD gone in and forced the point, it's just possible that we might have all been able to get the benefit of all the great work you both put in on the original set, just as you did with the FM box. BTW - your conversation scenario was rubbish. One-liners all the way give a bit of an insight into your REAL relationship there. Obviously, they talk to you as opposed to you talking to them and having a two-way thang. "Yes Mr. May, no Mr. Beach, three bags full Mr. Taylor sir!"
Benn 24.12.2008 05:10	GB, also, re: >>GB: Firstly, I seldom feel the need to 'turn around' before I speak. I know that a lot of people in England apparently "turn around" and say things, these days, but I'm not one of them - unless I happen to be in a car going around a roundabout at the time: thus in that instance I might turn around and say something. Generally though, unlike Benn, I don't usually turn around to say things..... oh, unless of course someone is standing behind me when they address me - which is very rare - and then I might turn around to reply. Jumping on that got you stuck didn't it Greggy Boy? You knew exactly what that piece of figurative speech meant and - in focusing on THAT - kept you completely off topic and made you look like a dick. Give yer mum a kiss from me chap. Tell her I'll be round to fix her plumbing later.
onevsion 24.12.2008 06:29	Gerolamo wrote: Queen Archivist wrote: Sorry, what pics are you meaning???? Ffs exactly what I was expecting! I spend 2 days working on pictures for your book, I sent you samples and been polite and stuff... No responce, and you actually forgot. Fantastic! ah gossie... gaat ie?
Josh Henson 24.12.2008 07:00	Until they start realeasing new material or stuff they have yet to release, I don't give a shit anymore.
Benn 24.12.2008 07:07	Hadrian, He won't because he can't. Even though he acknowledges in THIS thread that he's been asked a question, he STILL doesn't answer it. He's never answered questions which call for him to "give something" of himself and he isn't likely to start now. Are ya Greggy Boy?
Fat Lizzy 24.12.2008 08:42	Ducksoup wrote: Gerolamo wrote: Queen Archivist wrote: Sorry, what pics are you meaning???? Ffs exactly what I was expecting! I spend 2 days working on pictures for your book, I sent you samples and been polite and stuff... No responce, and you actually forgot. Fantastic! ah gossie... gaat ie? Ik had geen ander antwoord verwacht eerlijk gezegd... Erg zielig, net als dat het gewoon zielig is dat je voor niets moeite doet voor mensen waar om gevraagd word, en dat je dan gewoon genegeerd word... Zelfs jij moet dat wel begrijpen. Maar laat maar ik ga wel weg, het is duidelijk.
una999 24.12.2008 09:35	Queen Archivist wrote: Our good chum on QZ, Benn, made the following point on another thread to me. It is so.... errr.... amusing/startling, that I felt it worthy of a new thread. Wait til you turn around and see this... If my mum had seen this first, her reaction would probably have been something like... "Ah, bless him." So, Benn, consider your little self blessed at this rather bless-abundant time of year. REFERRING TO MY 'LAST WORD ON QUEEN SINGLES' THREAD, BENN WROTE.... Greg, All fine and well put and backs up exactly what you told us in the first place. It begs the question though, if you were so convinced that your work on the ORIGINAL set was so good, why on EARTH did you and Gary agree to work on something so far below your collective standards as archivist and hostorian etc? Haven't you completely compromised yourselves here? Didn't you ever turn around to QPL and say "No - this is not what should be released. GB: You simply have to love this question! Seriously. This is among the most startlingly incredible things that's ever been suggested to me. But, being the generous, considerate and generally amiable kind of chap I am, and a bit bored at the moment, let me offer these points in response. Benn: It begs the question though, if you were so convinced that your work on the ORIGINAL set was so good, why on EARTH did you and Gary agree to work on something so far below your collective standards as archivist and hostorian etc? GB: Well, Benjamin, Gary and I considered writing to the band and saying, words to the effect, "Hey Queen band members, our original ideas were/are FAR better than yourn. What are you thinking of; changing the concept from 10-CDs to something lesser? Good Lord chaps, you should listen to us and abandon this folly." But then Gary and I had a chat and Gary thought that approach might be mildly flawed. I agreed after several hours further debate in the office. Our chat continued into the small hours... "Gary," I said, "How about I write to Jim Beach and tell him that we shouldn't really be working on 'something so far below our collective standards as archivist and hostorians etc?'" "Don't be silly, Greg," Gary replied. "Let's just continue to work with the Queen boys and grin and bear it and say nothing and just, kind of, martyr ourselves for this project." "Good plan," replied I. "Yes, this project might be 'so far below our collective standards as archivist and hostorians etc, and all that 'beneath us' type stuff, but we must stick with it - even if the white and purple colour scheme (that 'clear' on QZ will hate) really looks weird." BENN then went on, if you can believe it, to add.... 'Didn't you ever turn around to QPL and say "No - this is not what should be released." GB: Firstly, I seldom feel the need to 'turn around' before I speak. I know that a lot of people in England apparently "turn around" and say things, these days, but I'm not one of them - unless I happen to be in a car going around a roundabout at the time: thus in that instance I might turn around and say something. Generally though, unlike Benn, I don't usually turn around to say things..... oh, unless of course someone is standing behind me when they address me - which is very rare - and then I might turn around to reply. Anyway.... 'Didn't you ever turn around to QPL and say "No - this is not what should be released." Errrrrr..... mmmmmm! It's a difficult one. No. It never occurred to me to turn around and say that. But, let's imagine I had...... "Hello Queen band members. And good morning Jim." "Morning our Archivist." "You look well today GB." "Ta very much Brian." "And you guys all look really well too." [Collective thanks from all present] "So what's so urgent that you needed to call us here to your Cotswold weekend cottage at a moment's notice, Greg?" "Well, Roger, sorry about that, but it's to do with this Queen Singles box set. And it just couldn't wait." "Box 1 of 4, you mean?" "Aye lad, that's the one." "What about it?" "Well, beloved Queen members..... No - this is not what should be released." "Pardon." "I said.... "No - this is not what should be released." "How dare you tell us what should not be released." "Mmmmm. I thought you might say that, members of Queen who employ my services merely on a consultancy level." "Jim, did you here what our archivist just said?" "Yes. He turned around and said... "No - this is not what should be released." "How dare he." "Sorry chaps. I was just thinking ahead to what the Queenzone boys might say." "The who?" "The Queenzone boys." "Boyzone, do you mean? That boy band?" "No, founder Queen member, I mean the fan site.... Queenzone. What if they turn round and say something bad about the project....?" [Brian is curious at this] "You mean that one of them might turn around and say something like.... 'Haven't you completely compromised yourselves here?' and 'Didn't you ever turn around to QPL and say "No - this is not what should be released." "Yes, Brian, that's exactly what I mean." "Ok. I see your point. It's a tricky one. Those QZ boys really do provide great food for thought, so let's not be hasty here. Let's meet back here wednesday week and discuss it again. That's what I'm turning round and suggesting." "Good one, Brian May. I think you turned round and said that in most helpful and understanding fashion. See you then." [Jim intervenes] "I think I might turn around now and tell you to turn around and go back to the archive. Do you follow me?" "Have I spoken out of turn (around)?" Benn.... I don't think what you have suggested was quite the most realistic concept ever put forward, but I have to admire your outright fifth dimension thinking. Good on ya. And bless you. from reading the this post - while i agree 95% of ppl on queenzone are complete wankers who act like they own queen (it's nice to see someone anny them) u certainly don't like criticism, u sound like a baby
John S Stuart 24.12.2008 11:16	Greg, I hope you appreciate that I do respect your opinions. I also appreciate all the effort you have put into your projects, and that if I needed to turn to an 'expert' for advice - then you would be the very person as far as Queen goes. Forget personalities, or petty politics or point scoring, I would like to think you know me well enough to say what I mean without censor, and trust that although we do disagree on many things - that we still have latitude for discussion - and in part, that respect (even if begrudgingly) is mutual. (Hopefully built from the basis that we are both big enough and ugly enough to fight our own corner). So from one battle-scarred bruiser to another, I am really sorry to see that you have been neutered and are acting like some sort of lakkie. This is not the Greg that I 'enjoy' sparring with. We both know that this project is flogging a dead horse, and, like one reader observed "is yesterday's news". You are a clever dude, and your work with Queen is essentially over - so why not move on - rather than (by your own admission) prostitute yourself for (excuse the pun) the Queen's shilling? I feel that you are far better than this, so maybe now is the correct time to think about expansion and writing those kiddies stories or yours? I know you will disagree (I expect no less), but I would prefer an off the leash Greg, to one who was cowering to the demands of his master's voice. But then again, that is only my opinion. I wish you and yours a very merry Xmas - and here's hoping that next year will be a personal success.
John S Stuart 24.12.2008 13:14	Sorry to say "I told you so", but: "I told you so!" link It was also stated on the BBC radio news that another fifteen major high street stores face administration in the new year. I think that means - game, set and match to me?
Phoenix501 24.12.2008 14:23
Queen Archivist 24.12.2008 16:24	scottmax wrote: Greg, you seem like such a twat Max, you ARE a complete prick. There's no 'seem' about it.
Queen Archivist 24.12.2008 16:24	on my way up wrote: Hi Queen Archivist When will the Hyde Park'76 DVD be released? greetings March 15th.
Queen Archivist 24.12.2008 16:29	Gerolamo wrote: Queen Archivist wrote: Sorry, what pics are you meaning???? Ffs exactly what I was expecting! I spend 2 days working on pictures for your book, I sent you samples and been polite and stuff... No responce, and you actually forgot. Fantastic! Stop being a nasty git about it, G. Did it ever enter your brain that I did not receive your bloody work????????? I received NO IMAGES. If I had, I would have replied like I did to the MANY others who sent me images. Don't be so fast to be aggressive. How about checking out the details first, privately, and letting me know, so that I can address it without you shouting it all over QZ like a petulant sulking infant. I did not get your images.
Queen Archivist 24.12.2008 16:32	Hadrian wrote: Until they start realeasing new material or stuff they have yet to release, I don't give a shit anymore. You are a rebellious little minx. The way you have stopped giving a shit is a lesson to all. Well done.
pittrek 24.12.2008 16:35	Queen Archivist wrote: on my way up wrote: Hi Queen Archivist When will the Hyde Park'76 DVD be released? greetings March 15th. Is this a joke ? Or a christmas present ? [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img]
Lester Burnham 24.12.2008 16:38	pittrek wrote: Queen Archivist wrote: on my way up wrote: Hi Queen Archivist When will the Hyde Park'76 DVD be released? greetings March 15th. Is this a joke ? Or a christmas present ? [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] He meant to say March 15th, 2376.
Fat Lizzy 24.12.2008 17:05	Queen Archivist wrote: Gerolamo wrote: Queen Archivist wrote: Sorry, what pics are you meaning???? Ffs exactly what I was expecting! I spend 2 days working on pictures for your book, I sent you samples and been polite and stuff... No responce, and you actually forgot. Fantastic! Stop being a nasty git about it, G. Did it ever enter your brain that I did not receive your bloody work????????? I received NO IMAGES. If I had, I would have replied like I did to the MANY others who sent me images. Don't be so fast to be aggressive. How about checking out the details first, privately, and letting me know, so that I can address it without you shouting it all over QZ like a petulant sulking infant. I did not get your images. 1] I don't believe that they haven't arrived. Considering I mailed you a couple of more times after that without reply. 2] I don't like being called names, I'm not calling you any names aint I? If I would I wouldn't mind but... I think you know who's being sad here. 3] I don't even want to contribute anything anymore so you can profit from things I spent 1000's of euro's and a huge amount of time on. PS: I sent 2 mails after the one with the pictures, so don't try to put the blaim on me. Also please note that after those 2 mails (apprx 3 weeks after the mail with the pictures) I replied to a post of you on this same forum letting you know to contact me... Would it be necessary to say that you didn't? I'm not trying to give you a bad name or anything, I think you done that to yourself a long time ago. Now Ducksoup before you start that I haven't left, rest assured, I won't bother you and your friends at QZ anymore, just had to say this.
Queen Archivist 24.12.2008 17:16	Benn wrote: Greg - you've missed the point in not reading between the lines, yet again, and avoided the issue - as you so often do. GB: Sorry Benny Boy. I got waylaid by your Essex-London "turned around and said" nonsense. The POINT is that, by questioning the band and / or Jim Beach, they are exposed to thoughts and ideas other than their own. GB: Oh Benn. OF COURSE we submit masses of ideas. That's precisely what we/I do. I've said that a hundred times on QZ and publicly too. That's NOT news. I/we bring ideas to the Queen table and the band picks the bones out of it all. What emerges.... GVH 1 & 2, Wembley DVD, Milton Keynes, Freddie box, Highlander Immortal Edition, etc, are all examples of the band's ideas mixed with those of the people that work with/for them. It is a team effort. Could you not determine this from the Credits?????????????????????? Benn, I told you all clearly that I proposed a 10-CD box with TONS of ideas therein, and then the band mulled it over. They are not - as they would have you and many others seemingly believe - always right or in the best position to decide what is right. GB: Your 'they would have you and many others believe" (that they're always right) is insulting and WRONG. I never said they were always right (neither did they) or in the best place to decide what is 'right' all the time. You put those words in my mouth. I merely said that Queen was THEIR band, not mine or yours. So the last final important decisions are THEIRS, not mine or yours. For example. The Who released a re-master of their "A Quick One" album. This was released as being the best quality transfer from the best masters available. What turned up was a complete and UTTER pile of shit where bonus tracks were on the release in far better sound quality than the original album was. Turned out that the producers had simply gone to sub-par copies of the masters which were easily available to hand and mastered the opriginal album from there and had been lazy and complacent. WE knew of the existance of original stereo master tapes and their EXACT location. After QUESTIONING Trinifold, Pete Townshend and the re-issue programme's producer on their logic and quality control processes, we eventually had them 'do it again' and were then given a TRUE stereo release which (although still flawed in terms of the levels the mastering was completed at) was a significant improvement over what was originally released. GB: Queen has surrounded itself with good people who know precisely where the right Masters are, how to mix them the best possible way, how to offer the best possible sound, vision, text job. I think more often than not the team does a superb job. Better than The Who, evidently. For example. The Who then released a re-master of the 'Face Dances' album which contained a track called 'It's In You'. Immediately it was apparent that a sub-standard master tape had been used which contained a massive skip in the track. Simple questioning - again - of their quality control processes lead to this being re-done and a BETTER product being made available for all and for the betterment of the band's catalogue. GB: You are preaching to the converted. I couldn't agree more. It seems that Queen is far more aware of what goes on in their name, and with their Masters, than other bands. We're now in a position where the band and it's management understand that there is knowledge within the fan base whish is, more often than not, superior to what is within the camp. GB: The knowledge I have, and Justin, Kris, Richard Gray, etc, mixed with the collective brains of top fans/experts such as Jim Jenkins, Gary Taylor, Andreas Voigts, Paul Bird, plus the vast wealth of fab info on the net now, means that we have EVERYTHING covered. But that doesn't mean that what we put forward to the band will go out. We merely 'suggest'. Therefore, we are getting some really high quality projects under way and, subsequently, high quality product as a result. The Amazing Journey film, the Live at Kilburn film with London Coliseum '69 bonus footage. The fan club-only release of a 2-CD live retrospective set. GB: Fair point. But GVH 1 & 2 and Wembley, On Fire, Montreal, NATO 5.1, Game 5.1, are all high quality products too. I won't mention the most recent project coz we're just go round in circles - and opinions are so subjective. The POINT is that questioning people who are supposedly in the know opens them up to all kinds of ideas and suggestions. GB: You are preaching to the converted. WE KNOW THIS. We actively do this. Too many bands / artists / management types (at all levels) are afraid to hear it as it really is and (as evidenced by Brian's ridiculously closed-shop website) are shielded from negativity to the detriment of both their material and other fans. GB: Jesus!!!! Benn, you really think BM and RT are unaware. You're so wrong. They know more than you and I by a hundred fold. Don't be so naive as to use BM.com as your yardstick. That's just crazy. Clearly, you never bothered to back yourselves and your work and stand up against a strategy from QPL / Brian / Roger that you already believed to be flawed. GB: You are not qualified to make this assumption. You have no idea what goes between the band, Jim, and I. NO IDEA. It's ridiculous you just assuming that. If I said that you never bothered to do such and such with or against your employer, your wife, friend, or whomever, you too would think "what a stupid thing to say - he hasn't got the vaguest clue about how it works in my life." In fact..... the band are very open to the opinions and suggestions we put their way - as they always have been since day one with Mike Stone and RTB. If Justin or I, or Richard, or whomever, suggests that a certain thing might not be right, then they will ponder it. They do listen. Otherwise why have us there and why pay us? God, Benn, you must think these people are ignorant and arrogant, when in fact they are extremely intelligent people with razor sharp business acumen. I don't follow your flawed logic and guess work. Has it not struck you how well they seem to have done over 35 years?????? 140 million record sales, platinum records and No 1's in 20+ countries. I think they might just know what they're doing, don't you??? I think they know more than you and I at the very least. I think you'll find that Jim Beach is no slouch either!!!!! If you and Gary HAD gone in and forced the point, it's just possible that we might have all been able to get the benefit of all the great work you both put in on the original set, just as you did with the FM box. GB: this is absurd. That's why I was so sarcastic with you. The band considered the 10-CD set seriously, thought about it, decided against it, came up with an alternative. It's THAT simple. Why won't/can't you accept this? BTW - your conversation scenario was rubbish. GB: No it wasn't, it was ENORMOUSLY funny, and you know it. One-liners all the way give a bit of an insight into your REAL relationship there. GB: Don't be a tosser about this. Retain your sense of humour. OK. Obviously, they talk to you as opposed to you talking to them and having a two-way thang. "Yes Mr. May, no Mr. Beach, three bags full Mr. Taylor sir!" GB: Don't be a sulking bad-tempered tosser about this. Retain your sense of humour. OK.
Darren1977 24.12.2008 17:55	Greg you are fairly quick to come on this site looking for info for various projects. singles collection, no.1's set, brian mays book etc., but if somebody comes on here and criticises something or other, jesus christ it's like questioning the pope, "how dare you" talk about what we've done, we have put hundreds of hours on said project , singles collection my arse, what a load of bollocks.
Josh Henson 25.12.2008 12:43	Queen Archivist wrote: Hadrian wrote: Until they start realeasing new material or stuff they have yet to release, I don't give a shit anymore. You are a rebellious little minx. The way you have stopped giving a shit is a lesson to all. Well done. Greg, I'm not giving you shit, man. I'm just saying I won't continue to buy Queen product until its actually new stuff or something really worthwhile having (like what you were working on). That's all. I know you weren't the brains behind this project so I am not holding a 'grudge' against you like so many people up here do. I have better stuff to do. Again, I look forward to seeing your hard work come into fruition one day. Have a Merry Christmas. p.s.: I'm a southern boy from North Carolina, so you'll have to excuse me; were you coming on to me when you called me a 'minx'? I don't roll that way, bro. ;) Merry Christmas.
Wiley 25.12.2008 14:02	Reading through several topics with the same issue I'm with Greg on this one. He doesn't have the final word over what gets released. We can believe him or not whether he proposes genius ideas for products to his bosses or not, but the final output is determined by Brian, Roger and Jim. If they want to milk the cow longer, they will do it even if Greg sends them a prototype of the Queen Anthology boxset paid by him and presents them with 1,000 signatures of Queen fans supporting it. Also, I wouldn't be surprised to read that Greg doesn't choose in full liberty what to work on. As far as we know he could even have been told by his bosses: "No box sets until further notice. Don't even bring it up. Work in something else". What I'm genuinely interested in knowing is some of Greg's proposals for releases that didn't come to reality or how the idea evolved. Just like we know that the singles box was going to be 10 CDs with every song version released. For instance, how was the Freddie box initially conceived? Who came up with the idea of the packaging? Who proposed that it should have a book? Did it change drastically along the way like the singles box? What other ideas have been discussed or put on the table and then discarded? BBC full sessions boxed set? ANY live release from the 70's, maybe Live Killers era?, Etc. Greg, if you are in the liberty to comment of some of this, it would be a nice insight to your job for some of us.
Negative Creep 25.12.2008 14:56	Queen has surrounded itself with good people who know precisely where the right Masters are, how to mix them the best possible way, how to offer the best possible sound, vision, text job. I think more often than not the team does a superb job. Why is the picture quality on the GVH DVDs not that good (the difference between the promo DVD with the transition effects and the current DVD release is startling) and erroneously cropped for widescreen? Why was Live At Wembley not re-mixed for clarity/5.1 (as stated by Brian on his website - they created a psuedo-surround sound mix from the existing mix)? It seems that Queen is far more aware of what goes on in their name, and with their Masters, than other bands. Weren't the multitracks sent to the U.S by accident instead of stereo copies? Why do none of the CD remasters sound that good then? Most of the albums do not sound like they are sourced from the true master tapes and more likely from safety copies or eq'd vinyl production masters. And the last re-issue of ANATO which was remastered by someone outside of QP and sounded far better than any previous issues. Regarding the arguments regarding what was proposed and what was released.... if QPL had never agreed to, let alone signed off a 10CD singles boxset, why were fans told such a release was forthcoming?? Why were details (number of discs/packaging... this info was not made up) of a 10CD boxet sent to retailers? Isn't it more likely that it was actually EMI that passed on releasing a 10 cd boxset?
Queen Archivist 26.12.2008 08:17	Hadrian wrote: Queen Archivist wrote: Hadrian wrote: Until they start realeasing new material or stuff they have yet to release, I don't give a shit anymore. You are a rebellious little minx. The way you have stopped giving a shit is a lesson to all. Well done. Greg, I'm not giving you shit, man. I'm just saying I won't continue to buy Queen product until its actually new stuff or something really worthwhile having (like what you were working on). That's all. I know you weren't the brains behind this project so I am not holding a 'grudge' against you like so many people up here do. I have better stuff to do. Again, I look forward to seeing your hard work come into fruition one day. Have a Merry Christmas. p.s.: I'm a southern boy from North Carolina, so you'll have to excuse me; were you coming on to me when you called me a 'minx'? I don't roll that way, bro. ;) Merry Christmas. Stop toying with me, southern boy from North Carolina. I didn't ask for shit, and you're not giving me shit. Very eloquently put by you, I thought! I'm aware of what you're point was. I was exercising a sense of humour. I'm sure you get the drift, where many here do not. Merry Xmas to you too. They're a strange crowd here, don't you think!!!???
Josh Henson 26.12.2008 10:13	Queen Archivist wrote: Hadrian wrote: Queen Archivist wrote: Hadrian wrote: Until they start realeasing new material or stuff they have yet to release, I don't give a shit anymore. You are a rebellious little minx. The way you have stopped giving a shit is a lesson to all. Well done. Greg, I'm not giving you shit, man. I'm just saying I won't continue to buy Queen product until its actually new stuff or something really worthwhile having (like what you were working on). That's all. I know you weren't the brains behind this project so I am not holding a 'grudge' against you like so many people up here do. I have better stuff to do. Again, I look forward to seeing your hard work come into fruition one day. Have a Merry Christmas. p.s.: I'm a southern boy from North Carolina, so you'll have to excuse me; were you coming on to me when you called me a 'minx'? I don't roll that way, bro. ;) Merry Christmas. Stop toying with me, southern boy from North Carolina. I didn't ask for shit, and you're not giving me shit. Very eloquently put by you, I thought! I'm aware of what you're point was. I was exercising a sense of humour. I'm sure you get the drift, where many here do not. Merry Xmas to you too. They're a strange crowd here, don't you think!!!??? Fair enough, and yes there are some strange people up here, just like with any large group of people. Hopefully we can all stop this bickering - it is getting all of us no where and enjoy the holidays.

QueenZone discussion #1157470

Surely the single best question to Queen Archivist EVER????