| All my life 28.07.2011 02:57 |
Let' s face it ! Do u really think that there are so many "amazing" unreleased tracks??? It' s been 16 years from the last studio album, done anyway with 2 songs of Fred"Mr Bad Guy" ! What I have to espect?..a box set with 2 remix of I want to break free, or a "Headbangers" version of Hammer to fall?...honestly...who cares!!!!! Anyway..saying this I think that all these "unreleades tracks" are just a dream made by us...and it ll never see the light! It' s the 40 anniversary of the band?....ok, the 5 of September QP could send out a box with the first and the last recorded concert!..Golden Green & Knebworth ! Audio.....that will be fresh, great with a selection of beautiful picture, description of the events, memorabilia ..etc.. |
| Vali 28.07.2011 06:37 |
This is the neverending debate .... and what I think about this issue is what I said many times before. First of all, we have to separate what QPL is doing with the stuff they have (wich is crap, from our "diehard fan" POV) from the proper stuff as it sits in the vaults. Given that, you have the classic comparison: If we got a good bunch of totally unreleased, unknown demos and alternate versions from just 2 solo albums (Mr. Bad Guy and Barcelona) and a couple of additional recording sessions from a very concrete time period, how can you think there are no tons of similar material from a band that spent almost 20 years working in the studio for 15 albums? The Made In Heaven argument is not valid to me, I'm sorry. It's been stated many times that album purchased a concept theme, wich is love. Should the guys have thrown in there Silver Salmon? or maybe Polar Bear? or maybe Feeling Feelings Take 10? or perhaps any other tune(s) that have never leaked anywhere? The tracklisting on Made In Heaven as we know it has never generated any doubt on me regarding what's left in the vaults. They chose the tracks they thought fitted better and that's it. Simple as that. The argument "don't fool yourselves - there's anything in the vaults worth of an Anthology" has been always circulating and then, oh surprise, something completely new has always leaked / been released (recently you can call it "Affairs", "Feelings Feelings Take 10", "A Kind Of Vision", "Grand Dame", etc etc etc). Don't know if you're playing (or have ever played) in a band. I do. And I know many other Queenzoners are also musicians. You would be amazed of the amount of discarded songs, alternate versions, acoustic demos etc etc an amateur or semi-professional band can have in the vaults. Do you really think QUEEN will be different? they're no Springsteen for sure, who has (well, at this stage, *had*) complete albums recorded and unreleased, but I'm totally convinced they have an amount of rare stuff well worth of a boxset that would wet our pants. If such boxset is released someday .. well, that's another story. |
| rhyeking 28.07.2011 08:01 |
I agree with Vali. |
| dsmeer 28.07.2011 13:00 |
agree |
| qrock 28.07.2011 13:37 |
The Made in Heaven album was a release that didn't sound disjointed and all of the songs kind of related to each other. If you were to put in some songs like Silver Salmon and Too Much Love Will Kill You into a posthumus release, the album would sound disjointed. Is There Queen Material out there ready to be put onto a New Album or something like that: - Yes. So let's take a look at some of the stuff available: Mad the Swine (1972), Silver Salmon (1972), Polar Bear (1972), Hangman (1972), See What a Fool I've Been, Let Me Live (1976), Feelings, Feelings (1977), Sandbox (1980), A Human Body (1980), Soul Brother (1981), My Boy (1982), Let Me In Your Heart Again (1984), Killing Time (1984), Love Kills (1984), Man Made Paradise (1984), New York, New York (1986), Love Makin Love (1986), Stealin (1989), Hijack My Heart (1989), Lost Oppurtunity (1991), Self Made Man (1991), My Secret Fantasy (1991) and Queen + MJ tracks Victory, There Must Be More to Life Than This and State of Shock. I would imagine that there is unkown material available in the vaults or perhaps the band could work on some solo stuff and make Queen versions like they did with Made in Heaven. Perhaps we might have to wait till their 50th Anniversary for such luck. Currently I think we could have a Deep Cuts 4 or another Queen album with a collection of previously unreleased tracks: My Album: 1. See What a Fool I've Been (1973) 2. Soul Brother (1982) 3. New York, New York (1986) 4. Self Made Man (1991) 5. A Human Body (1980) 6. State of Shock (2011) 7. Let Me In Your Heart Again (1984) 8. Hangman (1972) 9. Stealin (1989) 10. Lost Oppurtunity (1991) 11. Hijack My Heart (1989) 12. Mad the Swine (1972) 13. Feelings, Feelings (1977) 14. Silver Salmon (1972) 15. There Must Be More to Life Than This (2011) 16. Victory (2011) 17. No One But You (1998) |
| rhyeking 28.07.2011 14:01 |
"New York, New York" isn't a recording of the complete song. What you hear in the movie is all there is: a verse and the chorus. Maybe 45 seconds? It's understandable that Queen don't want to do anything with it because they only recorded it because Russell Mulcahy insisted, it's only a short clip and probably more importantly because it's not their song. Yes, yes, I know they recorded and released "Runaway" and all the live covers, but those were songs they actually liked. I get the sense they never cared for doing that and it took some arm twisting of Freddie to get him to consider it (something about Mulcahy saying, "Well, Liza Minelli did it!") |
| shamar 29.07.2011 05:44 |
qrock wrote: Currently I think we could have a Deep Cuts 4 or another Queen album with a collection of previously unreleased tracks: My Album: 1. See What a Fool I've Been (1973) 2. Soul Brother (1982) 5. A Human Body (1980) 9. Stealin (1989) 10. Lost Oppurtunity (1991) 11. Hijack My Heart (1989) 12. Mad the Swine (1972) 13. Feelings, Feelings (1977) 17. No One But You (1998) Are U sure that these tracks are unreleased ? |
| bluesbreakersLORD 29.07.2011 07:59 |
Anthology is word which QPL doesn't know. Managers of group The Beatles must to show QPL what is this word "anthology". |
| rhyeking 29.07.2011 10:22 |
I'm at the point where I'd love Queen to release something, anything, with outtakes and demos just to put an end to the comments about how much they suck because they haven't done it yet. What I don't understand is the progression from rational debate and encouragement to release what may or may not be in the vault, to the griping because they never got to it. From where I sit, such moaning and wailing is doing nothing to help the process. What anyone from QPL probably sees on this forum is a a small group of level-headed, patient fans surrounded by very vocal critics screaming, "Give us what we want! We earned it! We deserve it! Fans of other artists are getting better stuff than we are! You don't love us anymore!" Hell, *I* wouldn't want to reward such an attitude. Then, most tellingly, these fans make it about the money. "Oh, Roger and Brian only want to squeeze out more money by releasing one thing we want surrounded by stuff we've got. Screw'em!" Every release does not revolve around the seasoned fan who has everything. I'm not sure these fans even care to try to understand why different releases occur in different territories at different times, why there are periodic new remasters, and the occasional new hits collection. The complex nature of international distribution deals means nothing in the face of "what have they done for me lately?" Finally come the threats, "I'm done with Queen, the money-grubbing, ignorant jerks. They've disappointed me for the last time!" Here they rationalize their disdain with seemingly noble position that Queen have destroyed their legacy. These fans claim to be tired of the state of rack and ruin QPL find themselves and that these fans are so care-worn being the voice of reason against the what they consider pointless releases. Yet, it all seems to come back to the fact that Queen do not operate on the fans' terms. Queen operate on their own terms, as it should be (they're the creative force here, not a dancing monkey for our amusement). The fans inalienable right is to not buy what they don't like. However, when it devolves into character assassination towards the very people the fans want to see "respect" from, I feel strongly that they're shooting themselves in the foot. This is not a "Stop complaining on the forums" rant. Complain all you want, but consider that it may be harming the very cause your fighting for. |
| Djdownsy 29.07.2011 14:08 |
rhyeking wrote: I'm at the point where I'd love Queen to release something, anything, with outtakes and demos just to put an end to the comments about how much they suck because they haven't done it yet. What I don't understand is the progression from rational debate and encouragement to release what may or may not be in the vault, to the griping because they never got to it. From where I sit, such moaning and wailing is doing nothing to help the process. What anyone from QPL probably sees on this forum is a a small group of level-headed, patient fans surrounded by very vocal critics screaming, "Give us what we want! We earned it! We deserve it! Fans of other artists are getting better stuff than we are! You don't love us anymore!" Hell, *I* wouldn't want to reward such an attitude. Then, most tellingly, these fans make it about the money. "Oh, Roger and Brian only want to squeeze out more money by releasing one thing we want surrounded by stuff we've got. Screw'em!" Every release does not revolve around the seasoned fan who has everything. I'm not sure these fans even care to try to understand why different releases occur in different territories at different times, why there are periodic new remasters, and the occasional new hits collection. The complex nature of international distribution deals means nothing in the face of "what have they done for me lately?" Finally come the threats, "I'm done with Queen, the money-grubbing, ignorant jerks. They've disappointed me for the last time!" Here they rationalize their disdain with seemingly noble position that Queen have destroyed their legacy. These fans claim to be tired of the state of rack and ruin QPL find themselves and that these fans are so care-worn being the voice of reason against the what they consider pointless releases. Yet, it all seems to come back to the fact that Queen do not operate on the fans' terms. Queen operate on their own terms, as it should be (they're the creative force here, not a dancing monkey for our amusement). The fans inalienable right is to not buy what they don't like. However, when it devolves into character assassination towards the very people the fans want to see "respect" from, I feel strongly that they're shooting themselves in the foot. This is not a "Stop complaining on the forums" rant. Complain all you want, but consider that it may be harming the very cause your fighting for. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rhyeking, did I ever tell you i love your posts. :D |
| rhyeking 29.07.2011 15:07 |
Thank you! :-) |
| brENsKi 29.07.2011 16:04 |
yes i do fuckign bucketloads of tapes Brian is a hoarder...fact is, i think he's a bit precious as to who gets to hear and see stuff |
| GT 29.07.2011 23:46 |
Hi rhyeking, Can you email me, as I can't seem to send you a PM? |
| dysan 30.07.2011 03:44 |
I think the fact is, home demos and rehearsal recordings in the 70 and to an extent the 80's just wouldn't be of a releasable sonic quality. I should imagine there are basically two spikes of proper studio material - from the early days when Trident got them in the studio for free, and then in the 80s when they bought their own studio. I think that's borne out by material we hear on bootleg. |
| Kamenliter 30.07.2011 07:59 |
dysan wrote: I think the fact is, home demos and rehearsal recordings in the 70 and to an extent the 80's just wouldn't be of a releasable sonic quality. I should imagine there are basically two spikes of proper studio material - from the early days when Trident got them in the studio for free, and then in the 80s when they bought their own studio. I think that's borne out by material we hear on bootleg. For Queen's standards, yes, but The Beatles released stuff that was of dubious quality, recorded in the late 1950's and early 60's on very primitive equipment...and Bob Dylan and others have released multiple sets of stuff that include home demo recordings, also from the 60's and that stuff sounds pretty good. I'm sure Queen have tapes from the 70's and 80's of studio and home demos that would sound just fine, especially after given a 2011 sonic upgrade. |
| dysan 30.07.2011 08:19 |
Yes, that's what I'm saying. Many bands realise the 'archival' nature of this stuff but I thing Queen are happier not letting those come out. Which is fine for me, it's their call. Which makes it even more wonderful that the 'Queen 1' acetate got released. It might be a different tale if it only existed on a cassette for example. Bowie has issued 70's audience recordings on official releases which was a stunning and very welcome move. Also whilst we're on the subject - the needle going on the record idea is nice, however a lie as a track mastered digitally from an acetate would be recorded from it backwards to ensure a stronger signal. Unless what we hear is actually the needle coming off the record in reverse. |
| dowens 30.07.2011 13:08 |
I just got the incredible "Freddie Mercury Solo Collection" and think it's amazing. I find it interesting in the reading there are remarks about a forthcoming Queen anthology. 11 years later there's still no anthology. I wonder if the plans were scratched for the time being because of the joint effort with Paul Rodgers? I mean, they started doing stuff 4-5 years after the FM Solo Collection was released. I don't think QPL would be that careless to put in writing a forthcoming anthology and then not do it. I wonder what stalled? For some reason I think an anthology will be released in the next couple of years. I think 2012 will see a bunch of live stuff come out, remastered, etc. Maybe 2013 will see the first volume of a Queen anthology? It is time!!! I am so sick of going to stores and seeing The Beatles and Rolling Stones have tons of crap out there and wishing I really cared about those bands (I do like both) enough and jealous because I'm a Queen fan. No wonder people are surprised when I tell them Queen has sold more albums that both of those groups. And if anyone important reads this stuff...try releasing the same day in North America. I can't help it if I were born in the US! :-) |
| dowens 30.07.2011 13:14 |
Sorry to add another post, but I'd be interested in seeing people's ideas for a format for an anthology. Releasing 3 volumes, much like they did with the remasters, would be wonderful. I've always appreciated Queen's "regal" approach to their marketing strategy. Do it just like the FM Solo Collection (but not as expensive please!) CD of B-sides CD of demos, outakes, etc. CD of instrumentals CD of extended versions, 12" versions, etc. (probably on the last volume) CD of possible interviews CD of definitive live versions of tracks from the greatest hits of the period I'm sure I'm missing something, any other ideas? OH...and think about this, while 1971 is the 40th anniversary of Queen, 1973 is the 40th anniversary of their first album...so 2013 would be a perfect year for an anthology!!!!! |
| bluesbreakersLORD 30.07.2011 13:15 |
We want and we are waiting for the studio rarities, which for some reason did not get in the studio reissues of 2011. Anthology to us promise long time ago , but they promises are not fulfilled. |
| dysan 30.07.2011 13:51 |
How did the FM Solo collection do? I remember picking up a couple of copies on sale in HMV (£20 I seem to remember!) suggesting they couldn't shift them. Lovely items, of course, but really really messy. Sure the demo material was nice, but I find not place for endless new instrumentals and poor quality audio interviews while the actual previously issued stuff was incomplete. That said, I'd love a Queen one. For a band that has 15 albums out, the same format with themed discs just wouldn't work. A simple chronology from 1971 (or the Smile stuff, of course) through 4 discs until 1991 would be fine. Hits can be present in 12" versions, intrumental, rare international edits or in demo versions for example - non album tracks and whatever other demo material they deem fit to give us. See Bowie's original 1989 Sound & Vision set for a basic prototype to follow. Of course The Beatles Anthology 6 disc set would be idea. And they do always cite the Beatles as an influence. The live stuff should be a seperate project - clutters up the studio stuff far too much. |
| brENsKi 30.07.2011 16:29 |
dysan wrote: I think the fact is, home demos and rehearsal recordings in the 70 and to an extent the 80's just wouldn't be of a releasable sonic quality. I should imagine there are basically two spikes of proper studio material - from the early days when Trident got them in the studio for free, and then in the 80s when they bought their own studio. I think that's borne out by material we hear on bootleg. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ i've been listening to some rehearsals, outtakes, and home demos from: macca, springsteen, bowie, lizzy, rainbow tell you what...they are all good enough...so can't see why queen would be any different only reason they dont see official release by Queen? QPL not interested in anyting unless it can make shedloads....and these thinsg have limited marketability....fans and collectors only |
| dysan 30.07.2011 16:34 |
True. Just out of interest, what Bowie stuff? |
| brENsKi 04.08.2011 16:27 |
there's lots of great sites out there and at risk of getting told off this one has some great stuff from Bowie, Aerosmith, Beatles, Floyd and Springsteen link |
| dowens 07.08.2011 18:50 |
I wonder how the FM box set did in sales? If it didn't sell well, maybe that prompted Queen to not issue their anthology? Just wondering. I mean, the FM Solo Collection is very expensive. If an Anthology of Queen is more than $150 USD, I would have a hard time buying it... |