| Queen Archivist 08.08.2009 20:58 |
Listen you lot... stop being so silly, with far too many very boring, dull and unimaginative threads here - covering things already covered a hundred times before - and all too few interesting or intriguing or controversial threads. Please will someone write something truly startling that will ROCK the Queen world to its very foundations. Go on! Someone!! ANYONE!!!!!! Is that too much to ask? I've been having a look on this site this past 3 nights and am yet to find anything even remotely worth the time to read it. Frankly, re-filling next door's cat litter tray would be more entertaining!!! Please, everyone.... TRY HARDER!!!! Especially Togg and dear old dreary Darren1977, gawd bless ya both! Come on now..... put some decent threads up and give me at least a fighting chance of keeping my eyelids open. Currently, 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999% of the supposed 'serious' threads on here are duller than the wallpaper scheme in Togg's house. Now come on!!!!! |
| Queen Archivist 08.08.2009 20:59 |
|
| Queen Archivist 08.08.2009 20:59 |
|
| Queen Archivist 08.08.2009 21:00 |
|
| thunderbolt 31742 08.08.2009 21:11 |
Where's my Queen Anthology? |
| Raf 08.08.2009 21:25 |
I'm waiting for an interesting Queen release that will truly ROCK the Queen world to its foundations. |
| steven 35638 08.08.2009 21:34 |
After reading the title of this thread I immediately knew it was you, Greg. But at any rate, I do agree with you. There hasn't been much to read about here on Queenzone -- but in the absence of any interesting releases (with the exception of Hammersmith 1975) it doesn't surprise me. |
| Josh Henson 08.08.2009 22:28 |
I agree with them, Greg. There is nothing exciting to write about regarding Queen. [listu] [li]They released more crappy product with the butchered live in Ukraine concert - listen to Brian's dubbed HTF solo. Something later on in the tour would have been better. [li]No USA tour [li]Singles Collection 2 - no one wants it or needs it (Is there even a booklet with the damned thing?). Regardless if it is selling, that is just blind Queen fans buying whatever they throw at them. Is it selling? [li]Greatest Hits version 19 is coming out - again, no one wants it [li]And what is up with the HORRIBLE art direction with the album covers??? Return of the Champions, Live in Ukraine, Cosmos Rocks, Stone Cold Classics, Singles sets, Rock Motreal, Wembley release with its colored in black and white photo, etc etc and now the 'new' "Greatest Bestest Hits That Everyone Owns Already On At Least 5 Other Queen Greatest Hits Albums". When i look at older album covers I wonder if this is the same band. Where is the creativity? And I'm not talking music, just art and presentation. Don't get me started about music after listening to Cosmos Rocks..... [/listu] Not to sound bitchy or complaining, but there is nothing to write about. I want to get excited about Hammy 75 but Brian didn't even make it out to seem that it would actually be released on DVD. I think he only mentioned something about a tv special with a possible release? Are you kidding me???!!!!! Hopefully I read that wrong. Greg, I like you. But lets get something straight. Until Queen actually releases something worthwhile, or does something worthwhile - and the past year or so hasn't shown that - then there really is nothing exciting or earth-shattering to talk about. I am holding my breath over a REAL anthology set that isn't half-assed like the singles collections, or rare material or some 1970 concert on dvd/cd. We'll see, but I bet we'll get another 1981/2 or 1986 concert, again, before that ever happens. Henson, out. |
| sundar 09.08.2009 00:44 |
Creative criticism no doubt. All in good time. It takes time for a good egg to hatch, but garbage is produced instantly. I am sure, there is no lack of talent or ability, and their works speak for themselves, so I'm not complaining. I thought rock was about builiding foundations not rocking them. When I hear that rock and roll real rock and roll it gets down to my soul, real rock and roll. |
| pittrek 09.08.2009 03:19 |
I have to agree with Greg completely, this forum is not what it used to be a couple of years ago. But it's a bit surprising that this thread is started by a person who usually comes here to 1) insult other people 2) make fun of other people 3) very rarely seriously discuss Queen-related stuff But anyway, I have to agree |
| pittrek 09.08.2009 03:44 |
But if you want a serious discussion .... Some months ago you wrote here some list. Some list of some concerts. What was it ? Because we originally expected a list of all videos in the archives, but according to some of later coments it looks like some live audio recordings were listed there ? Could you please definitively confirm WHAT was actually on that list ? In the case you don't remember it, it looked like this : Argentina 81 Brazil 81 Budapest 86 Earls Court 77 Hammy Odeon 79 Hyde Park 76 Houston 77 Japan Seibu 82 Japan Tokyo 85 Japan 79 (bits) Knebworth 86 Live Aid 85 Maine Road 86 Mannheim 86 Milton Keynes 82 Montreal 81 Munich 79 Newcastle 86 Paris 79 Rainbow 74 (March) plus some of the Nov gig Rio 85 Slane Castle 86 Wembley 86 x 2. Paris 97 – Queen & Elton The original thread is here link |
| tcc 09.08.2009 04:35 |
I suggest that Queen Archivist start one good thread as an example of what is considered interesting. |
| Holly2003 09.08.2009 05:12 |
Queen Archivist wrote: Listen you lot... stop being so silly, with far too many very boring, dull and unimaginative threads here - covering things already covered a hundred times before - and all too few interesting or intriguing or controversial threads. Please will someone write something truly startling that will ROCK the Queen world to its very foundations. Go on! Someone!! ANYONE!!!!!!Is that too much to ask? I've been having a look on this site this past 3 nights and am yet to find anything even remotely worth the time to read it. Frankly, re-filling next door's cat litter tray would be more entertaining!!! Please, everyone.... TRY HARDER!!!! Especially Togg and dear old dreary Darren1977, gawd bless ya both! Come on now..... put some decent threads up and give me at least a fighting chance of keeping my eyelids open. Currently, 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999% of the supposed 'serious' threads on here are duller than the wallpaper scheme in Togg's house. Now come on!!!!! You could try starting an interesting topic yourself -- that would be a first. You strike me as the type of person who thinks you are interesting or important because of your proximity to interesting or important people. Think again... |
| john bodega 09.08.2009 05:43 |
Greg my old buddy! Look at it this way ... if this were, say ... Elvis Zone, the only threads we'd be able to post would be "Elvis; still dead as of 9/8/2009". It's the same with Queen. We can hardly write an interesting post about the cadaver until it twitches and something interesting falls out. |
| BKempster 09.08.2009 05:49 |
And the same old pattern is repeated - multiple threads created by our esteemed Archivist, asking for something but giving nothing. Why are you so bothered about what happens here when you so clearly hate those who criticise QPL? Get something interesting out to market ans we'll create some interesting threads on the back of it. In the meantime, it's back to the "Why does Brian wear clogs?" and "How many cats did Freddie have?" threads. |
| Rick 09.08.2009 05:58 |
I reckon you rank your 'counter-topics' higher than those topics made by other members who merely criticise your ability concerning the job being Queen's archivist? |
| Negative Creep 09.08.2009 06:39 |
EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME |
| Darren1977 09.08.2009 07:03 |
Hello Greg, How are you keeping? Have you any news of what is coming down the pipeline besides endless compilations? |
| The Fairy King 09.08.2009 07:18 |
link |
| ok.computer 09.08.2009 09:35 |
Couldn't agree more with Greg. Quite sad how this place has gone downhill over the past ten years. That's not the fault of the site or owner. It's down to the contributors. Us lot. But with a site subject that is increasingly irrelevant as each year goes by, it's only to be expected. |
| Penetration_Guru 09.08.2009 10:53 |
I thought this place was an ignorant bunch of whining tossers? Greg's either a WUM, or being inconsistent. On the off chance that it's neither, here's a sensible answer: If EMI/QPL produce anything interesting, so will we. If they keep regurgitating the same material oever and over again, why berate us for matching their lack of innovation? Discuss... |
| Rick 09.08.2009 11:04 |
Speaking of regurgitating, maybe we should discuss something which will appeal to Greg, f.e. the FM Solo boxset, which the man himself put so splendidly together. Look Greg, I just gave you another virtual pat on the back. |
| Josh Henson 09.08.2009 14:28 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: I thought this place was an ignorant bunch of whining tossers? Greg's either a WUM, or being inconsistent. On the off chance that it's neither, here's a sensible answer: If EMI/QPL produce anything interesting, so will we. If they keep regurgitating the same material oever and over again, why berate us for matching their lack of innovation? Discuss... Great paraphrase of what I said. Nicely done |
| cmsdrums 09.08.2009 15:29 |
Hadrian wrote:Penetration_Guru wrote: I thought this place was an ignorant bunch of whining tossers? Greg's either a WUM, or being inconsistent. On the off chance that it's neither, here's a sensible answer: If EMI/QPL produce anything interesting, so will we. If they keep regurgitating the same material oever and over again, why berate us for matching their lack of innovation? Discuss...Great paraphrase of what I said. Nicely done Agreed. I think however that that we (the 'zoners) are the hornet's nest to Greg's (born out of boredom) stirring. |
| cmsdrums 09.08.2009 15:42 |
OK Greg - serious questions which is absolutely something you should be able to tell us, and should be absolutely something that is your responsibility for cataloguing and archiving in your work with the band:- Can you respond to my questions which have been debated and put to you many times across several threads, about the mix of Wembley '86 that was released on vinyl, stickered as 'remixed and mastered by Roger Taylor'? Is this a mix the appeared solely on the second batch of original vinyl releases only? If so, why was it not used on later CD/vinyl/cassette versions of the album? I can't see the benefit of an individual mix for the release of a limited vinyl run only without it being used for later reissues, but this is what seems happened. Could you advise please on what seems to be a genuine discrepancy in the record keeping of different versions of releases - nobody to date can definitely give the history of the Wembley 86 releases to incorporate this 'Roger version'? Cheers |
| Mr Mercury 09.08.2009 15:52 |
BKempster wrote: And the same old pattern is repeated - multiple threads created by our esteemed Archivist, asking for something but giving nothing. Why are you so bothered about what happens here when you so clearly hate those who criticise QPL? Get something interesting out to market ans we'll create some interesting threads on the back of it. In the meantime, it's back to the "Why does Brian wear clogs?" and "How many cats did Freddie have?" threads. Dont forget the "How big was Freddie's willy" and was he the "postman or the letterbox?" threads...... those were classics.......... |
| Sebastian 10.08.2009 09:18 |
Zebonka12 wrote: Greg my old buddy! Look at it this way ... if this were, say ... Elvis Zone, the only threads we'd be able to post would be "Elvis; still dead as of 9/8/2009". It's the same with Queen. We can hardly write an interesting post about the cadaver until it twitches and something interesting falls out. I disagree here: there are loads of great debates about Beethoven or Shakespeare (dunno if on-line but you get the point) even though they've been dead for centuries (1.82 centuries is still valid for plural btw). New stuff can be discovered in their works, new analyses, new connexions with current events or personalities, new ways to teach through them, etc. 'Queen II' or 'A Night at the Opera' could still spawn some wonderful debates if people (me included) were up to it, but the thing is that some of the best topics have already been discussed (e.g. songwriters, which for loads is a 'who cares?' but for others, including me of course, is interesting) and others are somehow ruined by some idiotic posters. During the last months there have been some interesting debates indeed (IMO), like the one about whether a non-guitarist can write for guitar (which had nothing to do with current events or releases), the one about 'Flash' being a true album or not (fuelled by Dr May's comments), the one about a different guitar being used for The Hero (actually a Flash's Theme variation, also originated by Bri's claim), even what's been said about Michael Jackson had some informative details and worked (for me at least) as a way to deal with the very sad moment we were going through. Of course, those are a handful of good topics amongst scores of stupid ones, but there's still hope and the problem is not (only) the fact there's no new material. Again, only 'A Night at the Opera' could still produce loads of interesting and healthy threads if only people (me included) were diligent enough. Off the top of my head, and only regarding that particular album, we could discuss the studios (what happened with them, what was done where), specific playing and singing techniques, which song has the most voices and/or guitars, contemporaries or influences (e.g. 10cc), who sings what (e.g. in Two Legs's broad harmonies), connexions between Good Company and jazz arrangements (comparative method), mistakes in the 'Making of' DVD... and none of them requires Maylor to issue a new album or start off a new tour. The recent thread about Brian and the songwriting credits had a couple of messages that could have, at the very least, taught something new to some posters (e.g. about IWIA credit). Sure, those messages are buried amongst all the imbecility, but if only those wankers (GB included, IMO) could be ignored, QZ could become a (more) interesting place. But most of us (me included) have only complained or 'moved out' rather than sought a change. |
| Togg 10.08.2009 10:37 |
Oh Greggy I'll have you know my wallpaper is plush velvet and I spend most weekends combing it to make sure it's all facing the right direction, so no worries my friend I am positively at the height of good taste. So what's up with you? long time no see, although I did note you must have thrown the singles collection up in the air in horror and when it landed in a pile on the floor Jim must have looked at the mess and had an epiphany about creating an all-new Greatist hits package! well done sir, you must be in for a stonking bonus! Anything genuinely exciting happening? Did you see the tracks listed in Mick Rocks book from QII? 'Fly By Night', Brian's 'Deep Ridge' and Freddie's 'Surrender to the City' Have you found them or was the dear chap on a touch too much of the lemonaid at the time of writing? |
| queenfanbg 11.08.2009 09:15 |
Gregg who ? |
| Togg 11.08.2009 09:39 |
That's what both Brian and Roger said! |
| cacatua 11.08.2009 17:32 |
Zebonka12 wrote: Greg my old buddy!Look at it this way ... if this were, say ... Elvis Zone, the only threads we'd be able to post would be "Elvis; still dead as of 9/8/2009". It's the same with Queen. We can hardly write an interesting post about the cadaver until it twitches and something interesting falls out. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Perhaps Queen Productions should release the next set in a coffin-shaped box then. Jim Morrison said that the press were vultures and they would have cameras inside the coffin interviewing the worms! So there you go! There's a job for you - go for it! Come back and tell us how that worked out. Just what did the worms in the corpse have to say? Pretty exciting stuff no doubt! |
