| Hutchence 30.03.2010 08:28 |
Could someone please write down what's been happening over the past weekend at the Queen Convention- the Greg Brooks part & other bits and pieces... Thank you ! |
| gordonl 30.03.2010 13:18 |
Don't post much on Queen Zone for a reason . . . If you've a genuine interest, PLEASE join the fan club - we get access to a site where the usual QZ trolls don't bother us and people and kind and helpful. It's rather liberating. The convention was fabulous - go if you have the chance, some real special moments. Greg once again proved in person that he is actually a nice chap - and the 'Archivist' that pops up here (if it is even Greg) is just him having fun with the trolls - the stuff he showed us at the convention was truly magnificent. |
| Penetration_Guru 30.03.2010 14:39 |
Blimey, that's a turn around - the last time I went his stuff was increasingly banal (understandable after 10 years playing stuff that the well of "yes, you can play that" material may well have run dry, so this is not a criticism of Greg). |
| Penetration_Guru 30.03.2010 14:46 |
Oh, and I don't go to the conventions because 1. Far less of the people I used to associate with still go. 1b. The people who DO go, with whom I'd happily associate, are significantly younger than me and less inclined to reciprocate. 2. The standard of the accommodation declined past the point at which I was willing to accept i even for the short periods I was in said accommodation. However, I did go to 20 first, so if it's OK with you can I take an interest in any new information that came to light over the weekend without being called a troll? For fuck's sake, the OP wasn't asking for an upload of HD video of all convention activity, it was just a general "what went on?" You could have used it as an oportunity to sell the brilliance of the convention experience using examples, instead of coming across as patronising and snooty. If you want to have a discussion about the merits of being in the fan club, I'm happy to have that with you too. However you seem unlikely to want to do that here, and I doubt if you'd get both sides of the argument on the OIQFC forum (understandably - not a criticism). |
| kosimodo 30.03.2010 17:29 |
I dont care if one is going or not... i am interested in what was shown.. and what we can expect... It is now 2 years after the release of the multitracks, i am looking forward to something new. So.... What was so gr8 overthere?? |
| gordonl 30.03.2010 18:57 |
I'm always cautious about posting here, since it seems to turn to agro, but as you're being nice :) I also didn't want to spill too many beans as I wasn't sure what was hush/just non-film-able. Jacky's posted some stuff on the fan club site now. To answer the questions most of you would want: We had some rushes/out-takes/alternates whatever of early vids (Liar/KYA if i recall) and some great stuff from vid shoots (Game mostly) - some great stuff of Fred, mix of tearful and hilarious, sweet. Greg and co have been transferring film from the archive to digital and there is apparently a decent amount of stuff - no mention of a release though, but the bits we saw (half hour or so) would be great for DVD extras. I got the feeling that most Queen product is on hold till the new/renewed EMI contract is sorted. Greg was honest that he didn't know/couldn't say much about release - he does the archives, but he is definitely a fan. Live stuff - there were more knowledgeable people in the audience who will no doubt post in near future about what was said (quality, what is there/lost), but nothing alarmingly exciting. Only new things this year not yet announced would be probably Hammy 75 and the I Want It All book from what I heard. Rog has been working hard too, so I think we'll see more this year. Both Bri and Rog talked about various Foo's at length. No specifics apart from the Kerry Ellis stuff. Great atmosphere at the convention, and the Vauxhall park was quite good really, I'll definitely do again. Good bit of emotion from Kash Cooke, who was charming, and Phoebe was on top form as usual, and a pleasure to chat too. I got the feeling that either the fan club is back on top form or we were getting special treatment for the 25th - Bri and Rog's messages over the weekend must have run to two hours or so. And yes, its worth joining the fan club! I thought it might wane post-internet, but its still going strong and it' s worth being a member for advance warning, tours, news and specials like the convention - for the cash its a bargain I think. The forums are great as well, as I've alluded to - and we're not all 'geek' uber-fans - I'm more a live music fan/collector for instance. In sum - join the fan club and go to conventions - you won't regret it! A good spread of ages - some who've been to all conventions to kids. It was packed. Happy to chat more, but I don't want to release anything startling that Jacky hasn't written or anything that hasn't popped up on net (QOL have more detail) because I don't want to get QP's backs up - I know we were privileged to see what we got at the convention, and I'd like to get the same next year! So I'm not being narky, just cautious, hope that's ok. |
| gordonl 30.03.2010 19:13 |
Oh and Queen Kings (German tribute) were spectacular, did a great set of mainly 70's stuff, so not your usual Wembley fare. Highlight was a Barcelona mini-set with a fabulous opera singer (whose name I can't remember) - spectacular and really emotional. Barcelona/Guide Me Home/Golden Boy were magnificent live and a shame we never got them out of Fred. If you get the chance - go see them - they dwarf other tribute bands. |
| PrincessofTaylor 30.03.2010 20:11 |
Thanks gordoni. Did you get a chance to hear RT's new song? I'm curious to hear it and wondering when he'll officially release something. Kathleen |
| theCro 30.03.2010 20:13 |
nice! did they play any NEW (unheard for general public) alternative/demo extracts or something like that? |
| gordonl 31.03.2010 02:35 |
Yes, there was a new Roger song. It's probably called 'Smile' at a guess, and though I'd had too much 'convention water', I remember it being sounding a bit like 'Happiness', quite slow yet with a good vibe to it, classic Rog. Not in the same style as 'Everything is Broken'. I'll try and think more about the song - but it was a packed weekend! It is a good one, though - will be great. I think Rog, taking everything he said together, will probably try and release a solo 'greatest hits' with a few new tracks; however he seems to have the bug back, and with the Foo collaboration seemingly being so strong, I wouldn't rule out an original album either - possibly this year. He did talk about 'box sets', including video, but I don't think there is much hope in the foreseeable. Regards new Queen stuff - other than what is available on boots round the bazaars, everything that Greg played was videos played to backing studio tracks I think, no new stuff, though there were hints of an 'unknown' live show - nothing more. Rog or Brian, can't remember which or if it was both, were asked about more 'Made In Heaven' style remakes of unreleased Fred tracks, but I got the impression there is nothing more, or what is left is too short/poor to 'Queen' up - ie there is more padding to do than say on Let Me Live. Kerry Ellis' album of course features lots of Brian (and Rog/Taylor H/Rufus), and there is lots of new guitar - check out the EPK if you have not (via QOL) - Bri was very complimentary of Rufus! |
| Hutchence 31.03.2010 09:06 |
Thanks, gordonl...! |
| on my way up 31.03.2010 10:22 |
Gordon "though there were hints of an unknown live show" Do you know some more about that? Audio or video? What era? What kind of hints were there then? Thanks for the report! |
| gordonl 31.03.2010 12:51 |
No, nothing more. Greg was very cagey. Based on the other stuff we saw, I'd guess a 70's show that was filmed (as opposed to for TV). It was a surprise to him that it existed, so I can only imagine it is not one of the 'known' filmed shows. I'd guess a Crazy show, possibly Day at the Races or News of the World - but wouldn't put money on it! The Houston stuff I've seen is quite bad quality (in the DVD world), so I doubt it's that. Of note the quality of the filmed (as in celluloid) stuff was stunning, bright and clean with glowing colours - magnificent for the Bluray I think. It was mentioned that there are few shows worthy of HD due to the filming quality (Montreal/Budapest?), with shows like Wembley being as good as they could be on DVD already - but that's my reading between the lines of Greg's words, not quoting him. Nothing more than that I'm afraid. |
| Penetration_Guru 31.03.2010 14:54 |
Thanks for the extra detail. |
| Pim Derks 31.03.2010 16:26 |
Wow, I wonder what the recently found filmed concert is. On the Dutch Queenforum a Dutch fan who visited the convention was talking about a fall/late 1976 gig... But as far as I know there were only 2 or 3 rehearsalgigs for Hyde Park, seems very unlikely that one of those was filmed....? |
| Snefru 31.03.2010 16:49 |
Hi Greg told us that the next DVD will probably be Hammersmith 75. The BBC removed 2 songs on the broadcast. These will be put back for DVD release, but he couldn't confirm any releaseing date/time. Budapest 86 will might be released, since they can do a blue ray release, but some camera takes need to be collected. Q prod. work with it, but again no releaseing time. Might take a time (some years) with thisone. Have in mind that Greg work in the archives, NOT in Q. Prod group who makes final decision what's the next release will be. So stop complain him for things not are released yet. |
| gordonl 31.03.2010 17:10 |
I don't think it will be a Hyde Park show - as I believe these exist in the archive and wouldn't be a surprise to Greg. The Queen Kings Barcelona mini-set I mentioned as being fab - Guide Me Home is on youtube now http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U669rkD5rCo gives you an idea of what it sounded like! |
| neokaden 01.04.2010 01:34 |
It could be a crazy concert tour? as I have understood that recorded clip Save Me for professional cameras, and perfectly able to have recorded the entire concert (liverpool?, Newcastle?, Bristol?) Although it is only speculation, but can not find another concert that can be released on bluray (Hammersmith 1979 has terrible audio quality, and to say Houston 1977 Earls Court 1977) PS: If so, would explain the "Carry On" by Freddie in bohemian rhapsody at the Newcastle concert |
| pittrek 01.04.2010 01:53 |
Long John Silver wrote: BBC removed 2 songs on the broadcast. These will be put back for DVD releaseReally ? That's the direct opposite of what brian's wig wrote ? COMING BACK ON TOPIC.....!!!! Greg Brooks confirmed at convention this weekend that it was "imminent". It was delayed because of plans to include a documentary which has since fallen through. He also confirmed that there is NO video footage recorded by the BBC after transmission ceased :( |
| gordonl 01.04.2010 03:02 |
I'm no pro on the live show detail - but I believe that the BBC cut two songs (Ogre Battle and I think White or Black Queen) before transmissions - these are the ones going back in. As is known, the encore (7 Seas/See What A Fool) was not filmed, which is probably what the poster refers to. |
| pittrek 01.04.2010 03:38 |
gordonl wrote: I'm no pro on the live show detail - but I believe that the BBC cut two songs (Ogre Battle and I think White or Black Queen) before transmissions - these are the ones going back in. As is known, the encore (7 Seas/See What A Fool) was not filmed, which is probably what the poster refers to. Oh thanks, this makes sense. I thought he was talking about the encores :-) |
| AlexRocks 01.04.2010 12:06 |
Wow sure in some ways there are some really exciting songs played at Hammersmith but then again where are many that could have been done? For example why is there only one song from "A Night At The Opera" ("Bohemian Rhapsody")? If only, if only... |
| Snefru 01.04.2010 13:28 |
gordonl wrote: I'm no pro on the live show detail - but I believe that the BBC cut two songs (Ogre Battle and I think White or Black Queen) before transmissions - these are the ones going back in. As is known, the encore (7 Seas/See What A Fool) was not filmed, which is probably what the poster refers to. Yes, this was what Greg told about. He couldn't remember which tracks. He guess Q.Prod. will make a DVD of it in not to far future. Probably next DVD release, and with a cd includeing FULL show with 2nd. encore which wasn't filmed. |
| The Real Wizard 01.04.2010 15:10 |
AlexRocks wrote: Wow sure in some ways there are some really exciting songs played at Hammersmith but then again where are many that could have been done? For example why is there only one song from "A Night At The Opera" ("Bohemian Rhapsody")? If only, if only... Because they had to cut back the setlist for a 60 minute live TV broadcast. Most of the new songs were dropped because they probably wanted to play things that people would recognize, not new songs off an album that had been released only a month earlier. |
| AlexRocks 02.04.2010 11:51 |
They should definitely add Hammersmith 1979 to this set as well...don't you all think? |
| Hutchence 02.04.2010 15:25 |
AlexRocks wrote: They should definitely add Hammersmith 1979 to this set as well...don't you all think? Perhaps Tokyo '75 would be more appropriate as a bonus... |
| Penetration_Guru 03.04.2010 13:36 |
Sir GH wrote: Because they had to cut back the setlist for a 60 minute live TV broadcast. Most of the new songs were dropped because they probably wanted to play things that people would recognize, not new songs off an album that had been released only a month earlier. I agree with your thinking, but with ANATO being number 1 by then, there's a fair chance that people would recognise MORE of that than KYA/Liar/Son&Daughter from the obscure first album. |
| Darko 03.04.2010 17:03 |
gordonl wrote: No, nothing more. Greg was very cagey. Based on the other stuff we saw, I'd guess a 70's show that was filmed (as opposed to for TV). It was a surprise to him that it existed, so I can only imagine it is not one of the 'known' filmed shows. I'd guess a Crazy show, possibly Day at the Races or News of the World - but wouldn't put money on it! The Houston stuff I've seen is quite bad quality (in the DVD world), so I doubt it's that. Thanks for the info Gordon! Were there any plans or hints of releasing Hammersmith 1979 on DVD in the near future? This is undoubtedly Queen's and especially Freddie's best live performance, even better than Newcastle 1979. I think it would be a real shame if QP were not to release this magnificent show on DVD. The sound quality cannot be the issue, because other bands have released far worse material on DVD. I think that the main issue is that Brian doesn't seem to understand that Hammersmith 1979 is Queen's best live performance and that they actually have this one on video. |
| Negative Creep 03.04.2010 17:09 |
gordonl wrote: It was mentioned that there are few shows worthy of HD due to the filming quality (Montreal/Budapest?), with shows like Wembley being as good as they could be on DVD already It wouldn't surprise me if he's said that - but plenty of so called "standard definition" video would hugely benefit from a bluray release. Just for starters - you're guaranteed a proper lossless audio track. Then there's the fact that the Wembley DVD in particular is nowhere even near full DVD quality as the bit rate is so low. Basically any analogue sourced video would benefit from blu-ray - as long as the producers go back to the master and transfer at the higher rate. |
| AlexRocks 04.04.2010 12:13 |
Was Tokyo 1975 filmed? If so how well? I thought that this show was not filmed. |
| Hutchence 05.04.2010 01:39 |
AlexRocks wrote: Was Tokyo 1975 filmed? If so how well? I thought that this show was not filmed. From queenconcerts.com: Apparently recorded by a local TV station, full recording might be somewhere in the archives. 3 songs are widely available (and wrongly marked as 19.04.1975) - Now I'm Here, Killer Queen and In The Lap Of The Gods... revisited. Other commonly available Japanese footage from 1975 includes: Queen arriving at the Haneda airport from Honolulu (JAL 61, April 17), press conference with Queen in the Tokyo Prince hotel (April 18) and tea ceremony + some promo video shooting for the Star Senichiya TV programme (April 20). It was not the same tour as the Hammy concert- Tokyo (Sheer Heart Attack Tour), Hammersmith (A Night At The Oper Tour), but at least it's from the same year...:) |
| queenside 05.04.2010 07:09 |
i'd like to see hammy '75 concert officially released even if it's with no dvd extras. at least it would be the best a/v version of that fantastic concert. but there will be some interviews with brian and roger by bob harris (brian said it on his site) and maybe audio commentary like on rock montreal dvd |
| Adam Baboolal 05.04.2010 17:41 |
Negative Creep wrote:It wouldn't surprise me if he's said that - but plenty of so called "standard definition" video would hugely benefit from a bluray release. Just for starters - you're guaranteed a proper lossless audio track. Then there's the fact that the Wembley DVD in particular is nowhere even near full DVD quality as the bit rate is so low. Basically any analogue sourced video would benefit from blu-ray - as long as the producers go back to the master and transfer at the higher rate. ====================== What do you mean, "a proper lossless audio track"? Dvd can handle an uncompressed PCM track, you know. Also, the producers DON'T need to go back to the master video and transfer at a higher rate. They will have already transferred the video at the best possible quality available at the time. Think about it - would it make sense to transfer a video at a decent rate for dvd, but not for anything better in the future? No. And as we all know, Wembley is stuck at a much lower video based rate anyway, so it can't be pushed higher without looking bad.When transferring anything, it's almost always going to be at the best possible quality available unless it's restricted by something. The Bond series of films is a good example. They had all the bond films scanned digitally at a rate of 4k around 6-7 years ago. That's well above the current 1920x1080 "HD" video resolution! Future proofing where possible. I don't doubt that a higher bitrate will bring it up a bit, but it won't improve it by much, so why bother? So much effort for little return, quality-wise. Adam.gordonl wrote: It was mentioned that there are few shows worthy of HD due to the filming quality (Montreal/Budapest?), with shows like Wembley being as good as they could be on DVD already |
| neokaden 05.04.2010 23:42 |
see the quality available there concert at the Hammersmith Odeon 1979 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uqD3QX0QXQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82sFRw1NDPs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_NeqJlrINc If only ... |
| Negative Creep 06.04.2010 10:18 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: What do you mean, "a proper lossless audio track"? Dvd can handle an uncompressed PCM track, you know. Also, the producers DON'T need to go back to the master video and transfer at a higher rate. They will have already transferred the video at the best possible quality available at the time. Think about it - would it make sense to transfer a video at a decent rate for dvd, but not for anything better in the future? No. And as we all know, Wembley is stuck at a much lower video based rate anyway, so it can't be pushed higher without looking bad.When transferring anything, it's almost always going to be at the best possible quality available unless it's restricted by something. The Bond series of films is a good example. They had all the bond films scanned digitally at a rate of 4k around 6-7 years ago. That's well above the current 1920x1080 "HD" video resolution! Future proofing where possible. I don't doubt that a higher bitrate will bring it up a bit, but it won't improve it by much, so why bother? So much effort for little return, quality-wise. Well, I meant exactly what I wrote. Most DVDs don't have a lossless audio soundtrack. Even DVD singles rarely had PCM despite there being more than enough room. And producers WOULD need to go back to masters to do new transfers - it's a bit naive to think everything that's ever been released on DVD is sitting somewhere in a digitally superior state than DVD at it's highest resolution. Very few DVDs operate at the level they can do, becuse the aim with most DVD has been to put as much on them as possible regardless of the impact on the quality. Re: Wembley - the pixelization on it is hilarious - I'd just LOVE to watch that on a big TV. I've no idea what you mean by Wembley "being stuck at a much lower video based rate" - the bit rate of the DVD as it stands is probably less than what DVD can actually offer. It was recorded on analogue - the current DVD doesn't do it justice on a normal sized TV, let alone a bigger one. |
| inu-liger 06.04.2010 13:03 |
Negative Creep wrote:Adam Baboolal wrote: What do you mean, "a proper lossless audio track"? Dvd can handle an uncompressed PCM track, you know. Also, the producers DON'T need to go back to the master video and transfer at a higher rate. They will have already transferred the video at the best possible quality available at the time. Think about it - would it make sense to transfer a video at a decent rate for dvd, but not for anything better in the future? No. And as we all know, Wembley is stuck at a much lower video based rate anyway, so it can't be pushed higher without looking bad.When transferring anything, it's almost always going to be at the best possible quality available unless it's restricted by something. The Bond series of films is a good example. They had all the bond films scanned digitally at a rate of 4k around 6-7 years ago. That's well above the current 1920x1080 "HD" video resolution! Future proofing where possible. I don't doubt that a higher bitrate will bring it up a bit, but it won't improve it by much, so why bother? So much effort for little return, quality-wise. Well, I meant exactly what I wrote. Most DVDs don't have a lossless audio soundtrack. Even DVD singles rarely had PCM despite there being more than enough room. And producers WOULD need to go back to masters to do new transfers - it's a bit naive to think everything that's ever been released on DVD is sitting somewhere in a digitally superior state than DVD at it's highest resolution. Very few DVDs operate at the level they can do, becuse the aim with most DVD has been to put as much on them as possible regardless of the impact on the quality. Re: Wembley - the pixelization on it is hilarious - I'd just LOVE to watch that on a big TV. I've no idea what you mean by Wembley "being stuck at a much lower video based rate" - the bit rate of the DVD as it stands is probably less than what DVD can actually offer. It was recorded on analogue - the current DVD doesn't do it justice on a normal sized TV, let alone a bigger one. --------------- They COULD have increased the average bitrate of the video by dropping the DTS track, since it was upmixed anyways - do QPL seriously not realize there are a TON of audio receivers out there that can process a fake surround sound upmix?? And DTS has the same bitrate as PCM at best (although I believe there is a 718kbps option as well...), so that was a complete waste of disc space at the expense of PQ. And yes, it has major block hell going on, no matter what people say otherwise! Seriously, QPL are lazy ass bastards - they can't be arsed to transfer the multitracks and create a true 5.1 mix for the DVD, YET two years later they go through them anyways to extract Freddie's isolated microphone and piano tracks for the Q+PR 2005-06 tours! |
| Adam Baboolal 06.04.2010 19:13 |
NC, my observation is not a naive opinion at all. Just ask yourself about the expense and time of getting something transferred more than once. And of course the main reason to transfer something like this is to retain the quality where and when possible. With video, you don't want to keep playing back that material as each time it's played back, it gets worse. That's why when we film a show, we always transfer our tapes FIRST and then archive them where, It's (hopefully) never touched again. Its only played one time after recording and that's because we want the least amount of wear on the tape. So then have the best quality copy and the tape is treated as a backup of the material where it's only used again when absolutely necessary.In fact, I remember transferring a particular film on a Hi-8 tape. The first time was through a fairly low compression codec on a consumer pc card, but the sizes were enormous for 2001, so it was altered and ultimately not kept in its correct state. Then 5 years later it was transferred again to get the best possible quality from it. This was done on a much more expensive and high end system. However, the quality by then was shown to be grainier than previously realised and not much, if any improvement was gained. Now I understand it's maybe not the best comparison, but here's my point. 1, the more expensive transfer showed up more grain. And 2, didn't really improve the quality or detail. Also, it's worth noting that the resolution of both transfers were identical. Ultimately, it's a mixed bag on whether it should be done. If it is done, the results are semi-predictable. As I have shown above. Our tape gained little to none over the previous copy we had. With the Wembley video, the same could be said for that being transferred again. And you don't need me to tell you that bog standard video like Wembley doesn't get much better as it's upscaled either. And finally, what's the point in re-transferring it, re-editing it and remixing/syncing it all for a re-release? Btw, on the liner notes for the Wembley Dvd, it says the default track is PCM stereo. So, it does have PCM after-all. Adam. P.s. Inu, where did you hear that the audio was upmixed 5.1? I hadn't heard that before. |
| inu-liger 06.04.2010 23:18 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: P.s. Inu, where did you hear that the audio was upmixed 5.1? I hadn't heard that before. I read it here on QZ. I think QPL said themselves it was upmixed rather than truly re-mixed. Caused a lot of controversy here at the time. Notice on the packaging it doesn't have the DTS 96/24 logo that the other DVD's with the real 5.1 mixes have, but rather just the regular logo? |
| AlexRocks 15.04.2010 11:05 |
So what I was saying was that I think that it would make sense to release both Hammersmith shows since they are obviously the same venue and the tracklisting is different and the latter would give more appeal to the public which I always understood was the concern with the first. At least in comparison to latter shows...I also think it would help expand the running time and make the release just all around more significant. There is no reason why EVERY SINGLE show has to be unto itself... |