QueenZone discussion #1189905

Freya is quietly judging you. wrote: He's... He's a bit late isn't he? Most Queen fans, (and I imagine Jacko fans?) have had these songs for years.

Sebastian wrote:

  Freya is quietly judging you. wrote: He's... He's a bit late isn't he? Most Queen fans, (and I imagine Jacko fans?) have had these songs for years.

Indeed. Some people even think the existence of those songs was unknown until Bri posted his obituary for Michael.

MadeInMadhouse wrote: So we listened to these Singles THEY ARE GREAT! so they will release these one when both of the singer were DEAD come on.. check this out is a forum of Michael: link

Sebastian wrote: And by the way, the whole AOBtD being for 'Off the Wall' is a very old and very widespread rumour, which is also as fake as Paul's death or the 180 voices in Bohemian Rhapsody.

smilingeorge wrote: I think Brian should chill, he exploided Freddie more than anybody else by releasing GH albums 900 times and doing this moronic Paul Rodgers thing.

I think Brian should chill, he exploited Freddie more than anybody else by releasing GH albums 900 times and doing this moronic Paul Rodgers thing.

buffypython wrote: Neither Brian nor Roger have control over re-releases of albums. If the record company wanted to release another Greatest Hits or concert DVD, they might be able to help with it, but not much else.

Negative Creep wrote:

buffypython wrote: Neither Brian nor Roger have control over re-releases of albums. If the record company wanted to release another Greatest Hits or concert DVD, they might be able to help with it, but not much else.

Wrong. Brian and Roger, along with Jim Beach etc have total control of the re-release albums as they own the material, which is licensed to EMI for release. EMI are unable to release anything against the wishes of the band.

emrabt wrote: This is also the reason you get Christmas compilations, the record companies can put anything together and release it for a quick buck.

emrabt wrote: I think you have this wrong, buffypython has it right. I’m not 100% sure about Queen, but I know there are quite a few artists who hate it when compilation albums get released. Billy Joel is one of them.

Negative Creep wrote:

emrabt wrote: I think you have this wrong, buffypython has it right. I’m not 100% sure about Queen, but I know there are quite a few artists who hate it when compilation albums get released. Billy Joel is one of them.

Well, erm... I'm right! EMI are unable to release anything against their wishes, ditto The Beatles etc and anyone who owns their own back catalogue. Record companies can only release things against artists wishes if they own the rights to the sound recordings - EMI don't own the rights to Queen's back catalogue.

rschoorl wrote: He does say that the "music thieves" are at it again...

ParisNair wrote:

rschoorl wrote: He does say that the "music thieves" are at it again...

Interesting how "music theives" change into "detectives" overnight.

Holly2003 wrote:

emrabt wrote: This is also the reason you get Christmas compilations, the record companies can put anything together and release it for a quick buck.

SSShhhhhhhhhhh! You'll give Queen Productions/EMI ideas...

miasmicmatt wrote:

Holly2003 wrote:

emrabt wrote: This is also the reason you get Christmas compilations, the record companies can put anything together and release it for a quick buck.

SSShhhhhhhhhhh! You'll give Queen Productions/EMI ideas...

you mean,.....like a "THANK GOD IT'S CHRISTMAS REMIX ALBUM!!!"!!!! [img=/images/smiley/msn/omg_smile.gif][/img] AWESOME! 1) TGIXMAS - Moby Remix 2) TGIXMAS - Souljaboy Remix 3) TGIXMAS - Dj Frost Remix ? wow...the possibilities are ENDLESS!!.... what gay stonk disco muzak could they mash it up with now?!!! ;)

Sir GH wrote: As I said in another thread... recording a public performance is much different from leaking tracks that were never meant to be heard by the public.

ParisNair wrote:

Sir GH wrote: As I said in another thread... recording a public performance is much different from leaking tracks that were never meant to be heard by the public.

Sure they are both different, but different forms of stealing. Rock concert performances are not free for recording for the public are they? And that's why they have security checks and they confiscate recording material at the venues? In the particular case of Hammersmith '75, it is said that there was one professional camera still rolling while all the other cameras had stopped. So if someone (other than the BBC or whoever the camera belonged to) now comes out with never before seen footage captured from this particular camera, would you call him a thief or a detective?

Holly2003 wrote: I would call him a thief-tective.

ParisNair wrote: Rock concert performances are not free for recording for the public are they?

And that's why they have security checks and they confiscate recording material at the venues?

In the particular case of Hammersmith '75, it is said that there was one professional camera still rolling while all the other cameras had stopped. So if someone (other than the BBC or whoever the camera belonged to) now comes out with never before seen footage captured from this particular camera, would you call him a thief or a detective?

  Sebastian wrote: Now that IS true: Killer Queen's official Greatest Flix VHS video (AFAIR) has those bands as his picks. Freddie did mention Michael as one of his favourite singers many times, and also did people close to him (e.g. his driver and his PA). It was also mentioned by Freddie that he liked Paul Young, Aretha Franklin, Liza Minelli, Montserrat Caballe, Robert Plant and George Michael; by pre-Queen mates that his record collection included The Who, Bowie, Beatles, Zeppelin, Aretha and Liza; by his driver that he liked Pink Floyd; by his PA that he liked Prince and Pavarotti; by Roger (in late 70's) that he was into Michael Jackson. But do you know who was never mentioned in those top-favourite singers' groups? Paul Rodgers. Until, of course, 2004.

Sir GH wrote: Detective, unless they sold the recording for profit, which these days counts for far less than 1% of the circulation of underground recordings.

Just imagine how little would be known about the golden era of rock concerts in the 1970s if it weren't for people taping the shows from the audience or seeking existing underground recordings.  Recordings like these have no doubt kept hundreds of thousands of fans interested in their favourite bands who would have otherwise moved on after tiring of the official releases.  For some, the joy of seeing/hearing a new recording, effectively filling in another piece of the puzzle, is as great a joy as seeing a new concert officially released on DVD.  And if Brian's call to the masses works out, both of these joys will be combined into one delicious package.

Sebastian wrote: Think about this: - 1973 to 1989: Freddie, even not liking interviews, still got about 10 per year, which means 160 interviews in his life. Off those, he could've been asked about his favourite singer(s) about fifty times... sometimes he mentioned Robert Plant, or Liza, Aretha, Michael, Paul Young, George Michael... but not even once he mentioned Paul. - 1973 to mid-2004: Roger and Brian were at least occasionally asked about Freddie's favourite singers (especially after he died). Their answers varied, but usually they mentioned Aretha and (indeed) Michael Jackson. Not even once they mentioned Paul. - 1991 onwards: Loads of interviews to people who knew Freddie (his driver, his boyfriend, his PA, his sister) and loads of people come as his idols: Elvis, Lennon, Prince... but not even once is Paul Rodgers mentioned. - Suddenly, Brian and Roger decide to have a project with Paul. From then on, they both start claiming he was his favourite or his idol or one of his favourites... suspicious, isn't it? Now, I don't mean Fred didn't like or admire Paul (I can't know that anyway), but it IS pretty obvious that they were, if not 'making that up' per se, stretching things a lot in order to gain sympathy and/or support. That part is crystal clear IMO.

ParisNair wrote: I was just pointing out how Brian looked differently at two group of people, who in my opinion belong to the same "larger family", as per his convinience. But that's probably just human nature [img=/images/smiley/msn/regular_smile.gif][/img] .

Sebastian wrote: Think about this: - 1973 to 1989: Freddie, even not liking interviews, still got about 10 per year, which means 160 interviews in his life. Off those, he could've been asked about his favourite singer(s) about fifty times... sometimes he mentioned Robert Plant, or Liza, Aretha, Michael, Paul Young, George Michael... but not even once he mentioned Paul. - 1973 to mid-2004: Roger and Brian were at least occasionally asked about Freddie's favourite singers (especially after he died). Their answers varied, but usually they mentioned Aretha and (indeed) Michael Jackson. Not even once they mentioned Paul. - 1991 onwards: Loads of interviews to people who knew Freddie (his driver, his boyfriend, his PA, his sister) and loads of people come as his idols: Elvis, Lennon, Prince... but not even once is Paul Rodgers mentioned. - Suddenly, Brian and Roger decide to have a project with Paul. From then on, they both start claiming he was his favourite or his idol or one of his favourites... suspicious, isn't it? Now, I don't mean Fred didn't like or admire Paul (I can't know that anyway), but it IS pretty obvious that they were, if not 'making that up' per se, stretching things a lot in order to gain sympathy and/or support. That part is crystal clear IMO.