QueenZone discussion #1451411

Queen Archivist wrote: Goodbye Kuijpy. Your lack of interest will be a crushing blow to us, from which I doubt I personally will ever recover.

Queen Archivist wrote: I will make contact and see what they have.

Queen Archivist wrote: As you probably know by now, we're working on a product focussing on Queen on the radio through the years. Many thanks Greg Brooks (Queen Archivist)

Nitroboy wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote: As you probably know by now, we're working on a product focussing on Queen on the radio through the years. Many thanks Greg Brooks (Queen Archivist)

No, we didn't know that, because NOBODY at Queen or Queen Productions ever communicate with their fanbase/customers - except of course the very rare occasion where you, Greg Brooks, come here pleading us to help you guys out because your archive is ever so empty... A load of BS. Whatever release Queen put out this year, it better not be half-assed like the 2 previous releases.

Kevinrm15 wrote: Allow me to clear this up on Greg's behalf. Hyde Park WILL be released, but not this year.

musicland munich wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote: I will make contact and see what they have.

From the personal memorys of Mr. Herrmann " He ( Freddie) was in the station for an interview. He comes into my office, shakes my hand and was looking at my records" He had long Hair and a slim face" ^ implies an interview in the 70's for obvious reasons Fred Kogel joined the Station in 1981 as far as I know.

Val Lurex wrote: Greg is doing his job. Why all the questions? He's not entitled to give such information until the time is right. Everything will come, be patient.

brENsKi wrote:

Val Lurex wrote: Greg is doing his job. Why all the questions? He's not entitled to give such information until the time is right. Everything will come, be patient.

how long have you been here? because you appear to have extremely over-optimistic expectations of QPL....stick around 10 years and the "Queen machine" will kick that out of you

ianlasseter wrote: Why oh why does everyone moan here when they don't get something they want.OK I as a Queen fan of numerous years,would love to see Hyde Park released this year,but if it is not possible then so be it.We have to believe that the restoration work may need to take longer than planned.The Hammersmith release was I agree dissapointing,but the Rainbow was excellent.Looking back on it,it was the 2 obvious concerts to start with,and as I see it,the BBC recordings are the start of the next phase.Remember Queen are perfectionists and I hope would like to see any product put out to the best possible standards,and if Hyde Park is not that then we must accept it.There is no point in having a go at Greg,I suspect his hands are tied to what he can or cannot say.Sure QPL must take some of the blame,but as the saying goes patience is a virtue posses it if you can.Hopefully we will get 2 releases this year,so let's be happy with that (As long as there are no more Greatest Hits compilations

ianlasseter wrote:Remember Queen are perfectionists ...

Kevinrm15 wrote: Allow me to clear this up on Greg's behalf. Hyde Park WILL be released, but not this year.

que.123 wrote:

Kevinrm15 wrote: Allow me to clear this up on Greg's behalf. Hyde Park WILL be released, but not this year.

If not this year then when, do you have any more info on this Kevinrm15? For those who say be patient I think waiting forty years IS being patient in anybody's book! A release in 2076 to celebrate the 100th anniversary is not going to be much use to most people on this board!

Doga wrote: Why the negativism? The Queen Archivist is an employee, his bosses asked him to look info to release the BBC Sessions. Is not up to him what is released and what not. Is always good news to hear new live material will be released, and those BBC recordings are almost unknown outside the hardcore fanbase. As a personal preference i'd like to see Earl's Court and Hammersmith '79 released, but that's something for the chiefs of Queen Productions.

rocknrolllover wrote: If you hate Greg Brooks what a hell you're asking something him?

splicksplack wrote:

rocknrolllover wrote: If you hate Greg Brooks what a hell you're asking something him?

... and in English?

splicksplack wrote: OK, I assume you're using some kind of cheap sat nav translator. or Google. I translate as "If you hate Greg Brooks so much, why the hell are you asking him for something?" Answer: I'm not. Please point out where I underwent a lobotomy and deemed it a good idea to ask for any accurate information from Greg Brooks? Your translating service may better understand as: Snot. I went to Acapulco in my dreams and the curate motioned me to the brook.

rocknrolllover wrote:

splicksplack wrote: OK, I assume you're using some kind of cheap sat nav translator. or Google. I translate as "If you hate Greg Brooks so much, why the hell are you asking him for something?" Answer: I'm not. Please point out where I underwent a lobotomy and deemed it a good idea to ask for any accurate information from Greg Brooks? Your translating service may better understand as: Snot. I went to Acapulco in my dreams and the curate motioned me to the brook.

I didn't talk  about you specifically, but about others.

cmsdrums wrote:
I was rather annoyed too at the message saying "as you probably know by now..."

The title of the thread: We're looking for photographs of Queen in a radio situation
His first line: CAN YOU HELP? We're looking for photographs of Queen in a radio situation.
Name of person: "Queen Archivist"
So yes, you probably would have known by then that they were working on a radio album. lol He dropped enough hints right there. That's what he meant.

Killer_queenIII wrote: Just help the man find what he needs. He's just doing his job, and Who knows, this new project could be worthwhile. We'll get our Hyde Park, just have some patience.

Kevinrm15 wrote:

que.123 wrote:

Kevinrm15 wrote: Allow me to clear this up on Greg's behalf. Hyde Park WILL be released, but not this year.

If not this year then when, do you have any more info on this Kevinrm15? For those who say be patient I think waiting forty years IS being patient in anybody's book! A release in 2076 to celebrate the 100th anniversary is not going to be much use to most people on this board!

I don't know when, but will be released one day

jondickens1 wrote: Well we've had Queen on fire, next Queen on air. I suppose we'll have Queen on Earth and water at some point then?!

brENsKi wrote: ok. once he offers to come to my place of work and help me with my job

ianlasseter wrote: Well said.I have never been on such a site where there is so much bitching and back biting going on.These grown up Queen fans should know better.

que.123 wrote: Surely it has to be Hyde Park this year, anything else is going to be a major disappointment for me (especially after the You're My Best Friend snippet from the recent From Rags To Rhapsody documentary looked and sounded great). If for some reason the concert is deemed not good enough for a full official release it would be an excellent PR gesture on their part to share what they have via queenonline as a "thank you" to everybody for sticking with them over the last 40 years - seeing as the show was free in 1976 to thank the fans it would have a nice sense of symmetry! (I know I'm pushing my luck on this one, I would be more than happy to buy it)!

Mr.QueenFan wrote: Many fans out there - including me - were waiting for this type of product for a very long time ! This is great news indeed. Well, i don't have anything related to Gregs request in the first post but i wish him and QP luck in finding what they're looking for. There is great interest for this kind of project from me and many other fans, so i really wish that the end product will be wonderfull. I'm very excited that Greg mentions pictures until 1995. Can we expect a limited Box-set of Queen on the radio through the years (interviews) to go along with the performances that will obviously be released for the general public? I love Freddie's interviews contained in the Box-set and this "Queen on air" project releases more space for a future Queen box-set in the future to focus in what really matters - music. So far, so good! I'm excited about this project. And by the way Greg, i'm really looking forward to the Freddie solo release this year :-) I love "Mr.Bad Guy" and i hope you guys are doing something with it this year for the 70 birthday. All the best!

brENsKi wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote: Goodbye Kuijpy. Your lack of interest will be a crushing blow to us, from which I doubt I personally will ever recover.

you still don't get it do you?

GB: Yes I do get it. if people want to say negative insulting things to me here, in airing their heartfelt views, which they're fully entitled to do, and I fully respect that, then equally I should be able to do the same (no more or less) and express my heartfelt feelings and views too. And that, brENsKi, should be respected too.

people 'round here help you time and time and bloody time again...yet one person asks you a simple question about Hyde Park - and you ignore it with an arrogant contempt...almost as if the question is irrelevant.

GB: brENsKi… it's YOU who still doesn't get it.  Try to understand, it is not by my business to come on Queenzone, or anywhere else, and tell you all exactly where we are at with Hyde Park or Earl's Court or anything else. It simply is not my place to do that. It is Brian, Roger or John who may choose to enlighten us all on what's happening. Not me.  Why is that so very hard for you to comprehend? 

 Look, brENsKi, I want you to tell me private details about the company YOU work for. Tell us all, here and now, what your bosses are working on. Spill the beans, tell us the details, like you want me to tell you about the company I work for. That's fair. Perhaps you work for Ford cars.  So tell us what the new car will be. Tell us secret details about its fuel consumption. How much will it cost. How much money have Ford poured into it. WHEN WILL IT BE AVAILABLE?  Tell me now, or I'll get as irritated and frustrated as you are. You work for them, you must know, so you can tell us. You should tell us, you owe it to us.  How does that sit with you?  It sounds bloody ridiculous and outrageous and Unreasonable, doesn't it. Yes. Because it is.

well it may be irrelevant to you, but to queen fans Hyde Park is important - especially in it's 40th anniversary - but you (being an archivist of such dubious ability) probably weren't even aware of the significance.

GB:  You are a nasty twat!  think about it Greg - you're the archivist and time over, you tell us that "you don't have this" or "such and such is definitely NOT in the archives" - but you're (usually) wrong.

GB: If you're referring to Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke on the Rainbow concert… I did NOT know it was on the tapes until we all sat and listened to the tapes for the first time in 40 years.

Did you think of that?   Yes, I was wrong about that.   Have YOU never been wrong about anything brENsKi?

you could do with being a little more personable in your dealings with fans.

GB. Yes, and if obnoxious chaps like you didn't write things such as "being an archivist of such dubious ability" perhaps you'd get a bit more out of me, like you did in the early days.It is people like you that led to me to conclude that saying nothing at all here on QZ was best. People exactly like YOU!

without fans there is NO queen, and queen has paid you substantially down the years - without us, you're an unemployed librarian.

Killer_queenIII wrote: So I'm guessing the photographs would be for a possible booklet for the proposed Queen On Air project? Unfortunately, I don't have anything to offer for this project, but I gotta ask this: Is it possible that Ratty might have some photos lying around of either John or Freddie in a radio station? Just a thought, since he's John and Fred's roadie I'm guessing he may have accompanied either one of them for those radio interviews, and perhaps had a photo or two taken. Also, will the future product be similar to The Beatles' Live at the BBC albums, like we'll have interviews along with the performances? Anyway, wish you luck in this new project! I look forward to its release.

Chief Mouse wrote:

Nitroboy wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote: As you probably know by now, we're working on a product focussing on Queen on the radio through the years. Many thanks Greg Brooks (Queen Archivist)

No, we didn't know that, because NOBODY at Queen or Queen Productions ever communicate with their fanbase/customers - except of course the very rare occasion where you, Greg Brooks, come here pleading us to help you guys out because your archive is ever so empty... A load of BS. Whatever release Queen put out this year, it better not be half-assed like the 2 previous releases.

http://www.queenconcerts.com/queenzone/1450748.html .

Kevinrm15 wrote: Allow me to clear this up on Greg's behalf. Hyde Park WILL be released, but not this year.

rocknrolllover wrote: You have no right to ask release Hyde Park, if they can't do it. No need to complain. You're acting like woman

Queen Archivist wrote:

Kevinrm15 wrote: Allow me to clear this up on Greg's behalf. Hyde Park WILL be released, but not this year.

GB: Well said Kevin. It will, yes. This year, no.

musicland munich wrote:

musicland munich wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote: I will make contact and see what they have.

From the personal memorys of Mr. Herrmann " He ( Freddie) was in the station for an interview. He comes into my office, shakes my hand and was looking at my records" He had long Hair and a slim face" ^ implies an interview in the 70's for obvious reasons Fred Kogel joined the Station in 1981 as far as I know.

As for Fred Kogel There is an interview with Mr. Kogel where he speaks about his work back then. it's in german language btw. http://www.sueddeutsche.de/leben/fred-kogel-ueber-musik-1.2588295 Who was your "best" interview partner ? Kogel: Freddie Mercury. Usually you can speak with artists exclusevly about their Music. That's kind of "Boris Becker Syndrom" A Tennis professional likes to chat about Tennis. But Freddie was different. He was into politics and was able to talk about Thatcher's regency and the Munich Night Club Scene"... and he( Kogel) out's himself as a fan...:)

musicland munich wrote:

musicland munich wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote: I will make contact and see what they have.

From the personal memorys of Mr. Herrmann " He ( Freddie) was in the station for an interview. He comes into my office, shakes my hand and was looking at my records" He had long Hair and a slim face" ^ implies an interview in the 70's for obvious reasons Fred Kogel joined the Station in 1981 as far as I know.

As for Fred Kogel There is an interview with Mr. Kogel where he speaks about his work back then. it's in german language btw. http://www.sueddeutsche.de/leben/fred-kogel-ueber-musik-1.2588295 Who was your "best" interview partner ? Kogel: Freddie Mercury. Usually you can speak with artists exclusevly about their Music. That's kind of "Boris Becker Syndrom" A Tennis professional likes to chat about Tennis. But Freddie was different. He was into politics and was able to talk about Thatcher's regency and the Munich Night Club Scene"... and he( Kogel) out's himself as a fan...:)

Queen Archivist wrote:

rocknrolllover wrote: You have no right to ask release Hyde Park, if they can't do it. No need to complain. You're acting like woman

GB: Yes, this is true. Many people here are acting like women.  Especially the women.  When are certain of the Men going to begin acting like Men and stop being so winey, whingy, moanzoney, more grizzly than new born babes   ?  :-)

on my way up wrote: Queen archivist: is there going to be a live release this year (not the "on air" project but an actual live concert)?

Nitroboy wrote:

ianlasseter wrote:Remember Queen are perfectionists ...

No. They stopped being perfectionists years ago.

Queen Archivist wrote:

Nitroboy wrote:

ianlasseter wrote:Remember Queen are perfectionists ...

No. They stopped being perfectionists years ago.

GB: Purely out of interest, Nitroboy, why are you here on this Queen fan's forum?  You're clearly disappointed, disillusioned with Queen, so I'm wondering why you are here. Why would you contribute to a site such as this if you truly believe Queen "stopped being perfectionists years ago." I felt a very similar way about all Phil Collins solo albums after No Jacket Required, so…. I stopped buying them. I went away from the source of my irritation. That made good sense to me, rather than continuing to go there and being upset all the time.

musicland munich wrote: I don't know if you are aware of this one. It's labeled with 1981 Don't think it's useful as it also contains f+cking Prenter :)

splicksplack wrote: I have a friend who's brother worked at the BBC in the late 70's. I have pics of the band arriving and setting up for NOTW sessions. I think T Vance first broadcast them, then J Peel. Can't tell the location and I haven't scanned them. However, I will NEVER share with G Brookes because he is a fucking joke of an archivist and a total fucking liar re a song written "about" him by Tori Amos. Details available should anyone require them.

Jimmy Dean wrote:

cmsdrums wrote: I was rather annoyed too at the message saying "as you probably know by now..."

The title of the thread: We're looking for photographs of Queen in a radio situation His first line: CAN YOU HELP? We're looking for photographs of Queen in a radio situation. Name of person: "Queen Archivist" So yes, you probably would have known by then that they were working on a radio album. lol He dropped enough hints right there. That's what he meant.

GB:  For goodness sake Jimmy, I wrote "as you probably know by now..." because I didn't want to assume you all DID know. I assumed some might not know, hence "as you PROBABLY know".

I naturally thought that you Queen fans would have been interested enough to follow what Brian imparts about brand new products on other forums. You'd know what I was referring to at the very least - and indeed was the case. If I had written " AS YOU ALL KNOW"  or "AS NONE OF YOU WILL KNOW YET"… you would have complained about that too, saying I'm presumptuous and arrogant.  I took the middle ground, and you say it annoyed you.   You get a little inkling of what I'm up against here, Jimmy Dean, which does not happen anywhere else - it's a uniquely QZ syndrome - and perhaps an idea of why I'm never in a rush to comment here. "as you probably know by now"… is about as innocuous as it's possible to be, but even that got up your sensitive anti-GB by default nose.   SO…. You tell me what I should have written in order to get you lovely friendly QZ-ers to warmly respond???  

Queen Archivist wrote:

Nitroboy wrote:

ianlasseter wrote:Remember Queen are perfectionists ...

No. They stopped being perfectionists years ago.

GB: Purely out of interest, Nitroboy, why are you here on this Queen fan's forum?  You're clearly disappointed, disillusioned with Queen, so I'm wondering why you are here. Why would you contribute to a site such as this if you truly believe Queen "stopped being perfectionists years ago." I felt a very similar way about all Phil Collins solo albums after No Jacket Required, so…. I stopped buying them. I went away from the source of my irritation. That made good sense to me, rather than continuing to go there and being upset all the time.

maths15 wrote: Good god, have I missed something but is Gregs Brooks the head so ISIS? There seems to be a lot of hate for this poor guy. I don't know him, and I am guessing none of the people on this site trolling him do either, but he's doing a job he's employed to do. Whilst I have no doubt he can suggest projects I would be very surprised if he rubber stamps them. He's employed by Queen Productions, or whatever they call themselves, to do a job. Some of you should be ashamed with the amount of hate on here. Anyway, I would assume you don't want any pictures of radio One DJs from the 70s.

Queen Archivist wrote:

maths15 wrote: Good god, have I missed something but is Gregs Brooks the head so ISIS? There seems to be a lot of hate for this poor guy. I don't know him, and I am guessing none of the people on this site trolling him do either, but he's doing a job he's employed to do. Whilst I have no doubt he can suggest projects I would be very surprised if he rubber stamps them. He's employed by Queen Productions, or whatever they call themselves, to do a job. Some of you should be ashamed with the amount of hate on here. Anyway, I would assume you don't want any pictures of radio One DJs from the 70s.

GB: Hi Maths15.  I am attempting to seek photographs of Queen in any radio related situation, 1970-1995.  I am not attempting to murder anyone's dog or roast anyone's beloved pets, nor kidnap children, which you mind think by looking at most of the tedious replies. I am simply endeavouring to make the very best Queen product it is possible to achieve, with help from friendly warm lovely adorable Queen fans. So far, two people have responded to this genuine request with something useful, and 46 people have thrown the same tired predictable insults once again. That's the easy thing to do, but it progresses the Queen product not one ounce. It's just a big yawn. This I knew all this when I posted the thread, of course, it is the usual thing for Moanzone, but it's worth the process even if it proffers just 1 or 2 previously unseen images. Regards GB

Queen Archivist wrote:

maths15 wrote: Good god, have I missed something but is Gregs Brooks the head so ISIS? There seems to be a lot of hate for this poor guy. I don't know him, and I am guessing none of the people on this site trolling him do either, but he's doing a job he's employed to do. Whilst I have no doubt he can suggest projects I would be very surprised if he rubber stamps them. He's employed by Queen Productions, or whatever they call themselves, to do a job. Some of you should be ashamed with the amount of hate on here. Anyway, I would assume you don't want any pictures of radio One DJs from the 70s.

GB: Hi Maths15.  I am attempting to seek photographs of Queen in any radio related situation, 1970-1995.  I am not attempting to murder anyone's dog or roast anyone's beloved pets, nor kidnap children, which you mind think by looking at most of the tedious replies. I am simply endeavouring to make the very best Queen product it is possible to achieve, with help from friendly warm lovely adorable Queen fans. So far, two people have responded to this genuine request with something useful, and 46 people have thrown the same tired predictable insults once again. That's the easy thing to do, but it progresses the Queen product not one ounce. It's just a big yawn. This I knew all this when I posted the thread, of course, it is the usual thing for Moanzone, but it's worth the process even if it proffers just 1 or 2 previously unseen images. Regards GB

on my way up wrote: Queen archivist: is there going to be a live release this year (not the "on air" project but an actual live concert)?

musicland munich wrote: ^Excuse me Greg I think you get this wrong on Chief Mouse...he was quoting Nitroboy I think

Queen Archivist wrote:

Nitroboy wrote:

ianlasseter wrote:Remember Queen are perfectionists ...

No. They stopped being perfectionists years ago.

GB: Purely out of interest, Nitroboy, why are you here on this Queen fan's forum?  You're clearly disappointed, disillusioned with Queen, so I'm wondering why you are here. Why would you contribute to a site such as this if you truly believe Queen "stopped being perfectionists years ago." I felt a very similar way about all Phil Collins solo albums after No Jacket Required, so…. I stopped buying them. I went away from the source of my irritation. That made good sense to me, rather than continuing to go there and being upset all the time.

Nitroboy wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote:

Nitroboy wrote:

ianlasseter wrote:Remember Queen are perfectionists ...

No. They stopped being perfectionists years ago.

GB: Purely out of interest, Nitroboy, why are you here on this Queen fan's forum?  You're clearly disappointed, disillusioned with Queen, so I'm wondering why you are here. Why would you contribute to a site such as this if you truly believe Queen "stopped being perfectionists years ago." I felt a very similar way about all Phil Collins solo albums after No Jacket Required, so…. I stopped buying them. I went away from the source of my irritation. That made good sense to me, rather than continuing to go there and being upset all the time.

A better question is why are YOU here? We're all obviously just a bunch of filthy not-big-enough-of-a-fan to ever be told the tiniest bit of truth about the state of the "Queen archive". As for why I don't post on the official forum: The moderators have given that place a very bad reputation. Plus the design is terrible and gives me eye strain. Queenzone is very basic as well, but at least it doesn't make me wish I was blind. Queen are no longer perfectionists. You want to know why? If Brian and Roger truly cared about their music, their art, their legacy - the legacy of John Deacon and Freddie Mercury as well - they wouldn't allow it to be autotuned. They wouldn't allow their catalogue to be butchered by muddy "re-masters", only for it to be compressed beyond hell. They wouldn't put out the Deluxe Edition of Hammersmith 1975, for it to include a fucking re-print of one of the balloons from the show - that's a fucking joke? Granted, the soundcheck snippet was nice and more than any of us hoped for - but why only 1 song? Why on vinyl??? Why do it half-assed every single time they put out a new product? I appreciate what they have done throughout their careers, I admire them for what they've done. But I'm not a mindless slave. I applaud them when they do things right, and support them with my money - but I damn well reserve the right to hold my money, and criticise them when they put out half-assed products. As should everyone. As for you and the archive. I've heard stories of people lending rare and obscure content, only for you to mysteriously lose it.

Nitroboy wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote:

Nitroboy wrote:

ianlasseter wrote:Remember Queen are perfectionists ...

No. They stopped being perfectionists years ago.

GB: Purely out of interest, Nitroboy, why are you here on this Queen fan's forum?  You're clearly disappointed, disillusioned with Queen, so I'm wondering why you are here. Why would you contribute to a site such as this if you truly believe Queen "stopped being perfectionists years ago." I felt a very similar way about all Phil Collins solo albums after No Jacket Required, so…. I stopped buying them. I went away from the source of my irritation. That made good sense to me, rather than continuing to go there and being upset all the time.

A better question is why are YOU here? We're all obviously just a bunch of filthy not-big-enough-of-a-fan to ever be told the tiniest bit of truth about the state of the "Queen archive". As for why I don't post on the official forum: The moderators have given that place a very bad reputation. Plus the design is terrible and gives me eye strain. Queenzone is very basic as well, but at least it doesn't make me wish I was blind. Queen are no longer perfectionists. You want to know why? If Brian and Roger truly cared about their music, their art, their legacy - the legacy of John Deacon and Freddie Mercury as well - they wouldn't allow it to be autotuned. They wouldn't allow their catalogue to be butchered by muddy "re-masters", only for it to be compressed beyond hell. They wouldn't put out the Deluxe Edition of Hammersmith 1975, for it to include a fucking re-print of one of the balloons from the show - that's a fucking joke? Granted, the soundcheck snippet was nice and more than any of us hoped for - but why only 1 song? Why on vinyl??? Why do it half-assed every single time they put out a new product? I appreciate what they have done throughout their careers, I admire them for what they've done. But I'm not a mindless slave. I applaud them when they do things right, and support them with my money - but I damn well reserve the right to hold my money, and criticise them when they put out half-assed products. As should everyone. As for you and the archive. I've heard stories of people lending rare and obscure content, only for you to mysteriously lose it.

gooddrills wrote: I was pleasantly surprised to see Greg come back and reply, especially after being bombarded with the usual, predictable, small minded comments. I for one find it very exciting when he does post on here and interact. I don't doubt for one minute he would have made more regular appearances if it were not for the abuse he gets. I know certain abusers 'justify' their outbursts but that just doesn't wash with me. The sense of entitlement displayed by some people on here really is laughable. Don't get me wrong, I do scratch my head at some of the things Queen Productions release or the way they release them, but that is what it is and it's certainly not Gregs doing. I don't know Greg and I don't believe he is a messenger from God who can do no wrong. At the same time I have no reason to think he's an arsehole and hurl the toys from my pram at him when he wont tell me exactly what I want to know. 90% of the posts on Queenzone are of little or no interest to me, no disrespect intended to the posters, I'm just not into favourite song polls etc. Any interaction with Greg is something I am interested in though, as a fan. He can't spill all but we have had the odd interesting snippet from time to time, a morsel here and there, and that gets the imagination going, which is exciting. I loved the Rainbow release, I wasn't overly impressed with Hammersmith, but I am looking forward to this BBC release. If it's not great I'll say so after I've heard/seen it, rather than make assumptions and pan it now just because I can.

Greg, please keep in mind that there are some people who would like you to continue posting here so please continue to do so. Cheers. Will

Queen Archivist wrote:

on my way up wrote: Queen archivist: is there going to be a live release this year (not the "on air" project but an actual live concert)?

GB: You'll say I'm evasive and annoying.  But I cannot answer that.  I'm not allowed to divulge that kind of detail ahead of release.  I hope you understand my position, because so many other people here on QZ do not. If I could impart that info, I would. I'd love to, because exciting things are in the pipeline…. but I can't.

Nitroboy wrote:

 

A better question is why are YOU here? We're all obviously just a bunch of filthy not-big-enough-of-a-fan to ever be told the tiniest bit of truth about the state of the "Queen archive". As for why I don't post on the official forum: The moderators have given that place a very bad reputation. Plus the design is terrible and gives me eye strain. Queenzone is very basic as well, but at least it doesn't make me wish I was blind. Queen are no longer perfectionists. You want to know why? If Brian and Roger truly cared about their music, their art, their legacy - the legacy of John Deacon and Freddie Mercury as well - they wouldn't allow it to be autotuned. They wouldn't allow their catalogue to be butchered by muddy "re-masters", only for it to be compressed beyond hell. They wouldn't put out the Deluxe Edition of Hammersmith 1975, for it to include a fucking re-print of one of the balloons from the show - that's a fucking joke? Granted, the soundcheck snippet was nice and more than any of us hoped for - but why only 1 song? Why on vinyl??? Why do it half-assed every single time they put out a new product? I appreciate what they have done throughout their careers, I admire them for what they've done. But I'm not a mindless slave. I applaud them when they do things right, and support them with my money - but I damn well reserve the right to hold my money, and criticise them when they put out half-assed products. As should everyone. As for you and the archive. I've heard stories of people lending rare and obscure content, only for you to mysteriously lose it.

Nitroboy wrote: Aaaaand there's the reason why people always respond negatively when you post here. You're arrogant beyond comprehension, and fail to be able to communicate politely with those who disagree the slightest with you. Kindly fuck off and leave us alone.

Nitroboy wrote: Also: When it comes to intelligible posts, Greg Brooks, I must say you are really bad at them. Instead of actually answering simple questions, you delve into ad hominem, like only an 8-year old would.

Queen Archivist wrote:

on my way up wrote: Queen archivist: is there going to be a live release this year (not the "on air" project but an actual live concert)?

GB: You'll say I'm evasive and annoying.  But I cannot answer that.  I'm not allowed to divulge that kind of detail ahead of release.  I hope you understand my position, because so many other people here on QZ do not. If I could impart that info, I would. I'd love to, because exciting things are in the pipeline…. but I can't.

pittrek wrote:

Insulting people (like you used to do so many, MANY times here even without any real reason) will make people even more angry.

Panchgani wrote:

pittrek wrote:

Insulting people (like you used to do so many, MANY times here even without any real reason) will make people even more angry.

... When did Greg stop insulting people?  It must have been very brief ... if at all.

Queen Archivist wrote:

que.123 wrote: Surely it has to be Hyde Park this year, anything else is going to be a major disappointment for me (especially after the You're My Best Friend snippet from the recent From Rags To Rhapsody documentary looked and sounded great). If for some reason the concert is deemed not good enough for a full official release it would be an excellent PR gesture on their part to share what they have via queenonline as a "thank you" to everybody for sticking with them over the last 40 years - seeing as the show was free in 1976 to thank the fans it would have a nice sense of symmetry! (I know I'm pushing my luck on this one, I would be more than happy to buy it)!

Hello Que 123, It's not that we deem Hyde Park as not good enough. That's not been ascertained yet. It needs to be fully investigated, and it is being. That takes time and we can only do six things at once, and we are!! Yes, we could have done Hyde Park for 2016, the 40th anniversary, and we did indeed do exactly that with Rainbow 74 in 2014 and Hammy Odeon 75 in 2015…. but surely that cannot be the main driving criteria for putting out a project. That also, in the minds of many, commits you to slavishly doing NOTW in 2017, Jazz in 2018, Live Killer 2019, The Game 2020, etc etc etc, without really thinking about it, and that's not something anyone wants to do. There has to other better reasons to break the predictable expected patterns sometimes. The band thinks so, and those that work for them think so too. Queen have never ever followed predictable trends, so why start now. So…. Queen On Air has come up this year, plus some Freddie surprises. Not predictable, unexpected, fresh and imaginative. That has to be welcome too, doesn't it?

Queen Archivist wrote: GB: I am a fan, you  silly boy - first and foremost.  I've spent more money on Queen records than you ever will. Spend more hours listening to and writing about this band than you ever could. I saw Queen in concert more times than you no doubt did, I feel certain, and you stating the blatantly obvious, again, just endorses what an irritating annoying twat - who's apparently never wrong - you are.  This will all have been said to you before I'm sure, by many people.

Biggus Dickus wrote: "Queen are no longer perfectionists. You want to know why? If Brian and Roger truly cared about their music, their art, their legacy - the legacy of John Deacon and Freddie Mercury as well - they wouldn't allow it to be autotuned. They wouldn't allow their catalogue to be butchered by muddy "re-masters", only for it to be compressed beyond hell. They wouldn't put out the Deluxe Edition of Hammersmith 1975, for it to include a fucking re-print of one of the balloons from the show - that's a fucking joke? Granted, the soundcheck snippet was nice and more than any of us hoped for - but why only 1 song? Why on vinyl??? Why do it half-assed every single time they put out a new product?" Perfectly reasonable criticism right there but the response by GB was childish, rude and didn't touch on the topics mentioned at all. Weak.

Queen Archivist wrote: (...) So…. Queen On Air has come up this year, plus some Freddie surprises. Not predictable, unexpected, fresh and imaginative. That has to be welcome too, doesn't it?

Nitroboy wrote: Also: When it comes to intelligible posts, Greg Brooks, I must say you are really bad at them. Instead of actually answering simple questions, you delve into ad hominem, like only an 8-year old would.

gooddrills wrote: I was pleasantly surprised to see Greg come back and reply, especially after being bombarded with the usual, predictable, small minded comments. I for one find it very exciting when he does post on here and interact. I don't doubt for one minute he would have made more regular appearances if it were not for the abuse he gets. I know certain abusers 'justify' their outbursts but that just doesn't wash with me. The sense of entitlement displayed by some people on here really is laughable. Don't get me wrong, I do scratch my head at some of the things Queen Productions release or the way they release them, but that is what it is and it's certainly not Gregs doing. I don't know Greg and I don't believe he is a messenger from God who can do no wrong. At the same time I have no reason to think he's an arsehole and hurl the toys from my pram at him when he wont tell me exactly what I want to know. 90% of the posts on Queenzone are of little or no interest to me, no disrespect intended to the posters, I'm just not into favourite song polls etc. Any interaction with Greg is something I am interested in though, as a fan. He can't spill all but we have had the odd interesting snippet from time to time, a morsel here and there, and that gets the imagination going, which is exciting. I loved the Rainbow release, I wasn't overly impressed with Hammersmith, but I am looking forward to this BBC release. If it's not great I'll say so after I've heard/seen it, rather than make assumptions and pan it now just because I can. Greg, please keep in mind that there are some people who would like you to continue posting here so please continue to do so. Cheers. Will

brENsKi wrote: it's testament to the man himself - GB, that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help.

que.123 wrote: Hi Greg, thank you very much for your reply. I am not sure if you are aware but all six BBC sessions were shared freely over five years ago in excellent pre-FM quality plus the guitar feedback intro to Ogre Battle which was missing from the official "At the Beeb" album. I guess it may be a source of frustration to some to learn of an official BBC sessions release when we basically already have them, it probably accounts for the generally frosty reception. You could argue that we already have Hyde Park but the video and audio are not very good, an official release would have been a substantial upgrade whereas the BBC sessions not so much. I am looking forward to the "Freddie surprises" and seeing exactly what the new "On Air" release contains but I can't deny that I'm more than a little disappointed that it's not going to be Hyde Park - rumour had it this was the year! Just my two cents worth, thanks again for your reply it was unexpected but much appreciated.

Queen Archivist wrote:

brENsKi wrote: it's testament to the man himself - GB, that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help.

GB: We've had over 60 useful replies so far. 4 from QZ, the rest from elsewhere. It's testament to a few people on Queenzone - LIKE YOU - that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help. It says a lot about you.

Nitroboy wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote:

brENsKi wrote: it's testament to the man himself - GB, that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help.

GB: We've had over 60 useful replies so far. 4 from QZ, the rest from elsewhere. It's testament to a few people on Queenzone - LIKE YOU - that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help. It says a lot about you.

You seriously wonder why people dislike you, with your rotten attitude and abusive behaviour towards people? What a looney

Queen Archivist wrote:

que.123 wrote: Hi Greg, thank you very much for your reply. I am not sure if you are aware but all six BBC sessions were shared freely over five years ago in excellent pre-FM quality plus the guitar feedback intro to Ogre Battle which was missing from the official "At the Beeb" album. I guess it may be a source of frustration to some to learn of an official BBC sessions release when we basically already have them, it probably accounts for the generally frosty reception. You could argue that we already have Hyde Park but the video and audio are not very good, an official release would have been a substantial upgrade whereas the BBC sessions not so much. I am looking forward to the "Freddie surprises" and seeing exactly what the new "On Air" release contains but I can't deny that I'm more than a little disappointed that it's not going to be Hyde Park - rumour had it this was the year! Just my two cents worth, thanks again for your reply it was unexpected but much appreciated.

GB: This is good and useful info, thank you very much. It is nearly always the case that serious Queen fans will invariably have a proportion of the material we put out as official product: Hammersmith 75, Rainbow 74, and when we get to them, Earls Court 77, Hammersmith 79 and BBC sessions too, etc. We do realise this, but the thing is that most products are principally aimed at the mass market; people that won't have those kinds of things. If you take 5 million of the people who bought Greatest Hits, for example, a tiny percentage of them will have sought out Queen bootlegs and unofficial recordings. Yes it's true that a lot of fans already have this material, but the masses (as it were) do not. We do try to include stuff that the fans don't have as well. I hope that will be the case with Queen On Air, for example.

Queen Archivist wrote:

brENsKi wrote: it's testament to the man himself - GB, that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help.

GB: We've had over 60 useful replies so far. 4 from QZ, the rest from elsewhere. It's testament to a few people on Queenzone - LIKE YOU - that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help. It says a lot about you.

mcgroom wrote: Hi Greg, You mention that possibility of Earls Court 77 and Hammersmith 79 in the future. Does that mean that you have the multi tracks of those gigs in your archives and they could be released one day? I know those gigs in particular have been rumored to have had problems with the multi tracks or the multi tracks lost. Thanks!

splicksplack wrote: I have a friend who's brother worked at the BBC in the late 70's. I have pics of the band arriving and setting up for NOTW sessions. I think T Vance first broadcast them, then J Peel. Can't tell the location and I haven't scanned them. However, I will NEVER share with G Brookes

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

Biggus Dickus wrote: Perfectly reasonable criticism right there but the response by GB was childish, rude and didn't touch on the topics mentioned at all. Weak.

He doesn't have to!

Queen Archivist wrote:

brENsKi wrote: it's testament to the man himself - GB, that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help.

GB: We've had over 60 useful replies so far. 4 from QZ, the rest from elsewhere. It's testament to a few people on Queenzone - LIKE YOU - that only a minute handful of people have offered any kind of help. It says a lot about you.

cmsdrums wrote: This is probably a good place to revisit a Record Collector article from June 2001 about the BBC sessions, by our own friendly archivist; here's the scans:

cmsdrums wrote: Here's the missing page 20 - thanks for the prompt!

Queen Archivist wrote:

que.123 wrote: Hi Greg, thank you very much for your reply. I am not sure if you are aware but all six BBC sessions were shared freely over five years ago in excellent pre-FM quality plus the guitar feedback intro to Ogre Battle which was missing from the official "At the Beeb" album. I guess it may be a source of frustration to some to learn of an official BBC sessions release when we basically already have them, it probably accounts for the generally frosty reception. You could argue that we already have Hyde Park but the video and audio are not very good, an official release would have been a substantial upgrade whereas the BBC sessions not so much. I am looking forward to the "Freddie surprises" and seeing exactly what the new "On Air" release contains but I can't deny that I'm more than a little disappointed that it's not going to be Hyde Park - rumour had it this was the year! Just my two cents worth, thanks again for your reply it was unexpected but much appreciated.

GB: This is good and useful info, thank you very much. It is nearly always the case that serious Queen fans will invariably have a proportion of the material we put out as official product: Hammersmith 75, Rainbow 74, and when we get to them, Earls Court 77, Hammersmith 79 and BBC sessions too, etc. We do realise this, but the thing is that most products are principally aimed at the mass market; people that won't have those kinds of things. If you take 5 million of the people who bought Greatest Hits, for example, a tiny percentage of them will have sought out Queen bootlegs and unofficial recordings. Yes it's true that a lot of fans already have this material, but the masses (as it were) do not. We do try to include stuff that the fans don't have as well. I hope that will be the case with Queen On Air, for example.

Penetration_Guru wrote: Given that I have material that was never considered for the Rainbow release because nobody knew I had it, because nobody asked, I'm not going to criticise anyone for asking this time.... I am amused on a number of levels by whoever posted the results of a Google search.

gooddrills wrote: I was pleasantly surprised to see Greg come back and reply, especially after being bombarded with the usual, predictable, small minded comments. I for one find it very exciting when he does post on here and interact. I don't doubt for one minute he would have made more regular appearances if it were not for the abuse he gets. I know certain abusers 'justify' their outbursts but that just doesn't wash with me. The sense of entitlement displayed by some people on here really is laughable. Don't get me wrong, I do scratch my head at some of the things Queen Productions release or the way they release them, but that is what it is and it's certainly not Gregs doing. I don't know Greg and I don't believe he is a messenger from God who can do no wrong. At the same time I have no reason to think he's an arsehole and hurl the toys from my pram at him when he wont tell me exactly what I want to know. 90% of the posts on Queenzone are of little or no interest to me, no disrespect intended to the posters, I'm just not into favourite song polls etc. Any interaction with Greg is something I am interested in though, as a fan. He can't spill all but we have had the odd interesting snippet from time to time, a morsel here and there, and that gets the imagination going, which is exciting. I loved the Rainbow release, I wasn't overly impressed with Hammersmith, but I am looking forward to this BBC release. If it's not great I'll say so after I've heard/seen it, rather than make assumptions and pan it now just because I can. Greg, please keep in mind that there are some people who would like you to continue posting here so please continue to do so. Cheers. Will

rocknrolllover wrote: Greg does his hard pretty work, but you don't understand this. Easy judge, easy moan, easy be Like a bitch. You used to live so. You think you're right when say something against Greg. But I don't think so. Do you think release something what you want so easy so fast? Oh, don't be fun. Queen is the best band of the world. Queen is not the band who release products in bad quality . Greg fuck'em all!!!

Biggus Dickus wrote:

rocknrolllover wrote: Greg does his hard pretty work, but you don't understand this. Easy judge, easy moan, easy be Like a bitch. You used to live so. You think you're right when say something against Greg. But I don't think so. Do you think release something what you want so easy so fast? Oh, don't be fun. Queen is the best band of the world. Queen is not the band who release products in bad quality . Greg fuck'em all!!!

Over-compressing the audio and autotuning Freddie's vocals equal bad quality to me. Also, to quote the late great Frank Zappa: "Nobody looks good with brown lipstick on."

BETA215 wrote: ^ It would be great if Penetration_Guru shows us the light to, at least, have the knowledge about missing footage from Rainbow or maybe Hammersmith. Sending it to QPL (for release and treatment) or uploading it (with Chief's treatment) would be great, but it totally depends on Pene's wishes.

rocknrolllover wrote:[/b

Biggus Dickus wrote:

rocknrolllover wrote: Greg does his hard pretty work, but you don't understand this. Easy judge, easy moan, easy be Like a bitch. You used to live so. You think you're right when say something against Greg. But I don't think so. Do you think release something what you want so easy so fast? Oh, don't be fun. Queen is the best band of the world. Queen is not the band who release products in bad quality . Greg fuck'em all!!!

Over-compressing the audio and autotuning Freddie's vocals equal bad quality to me. Also, to quote the late great Frank Zappa: "Nobody looks good with brown lipstick on."

No over-compressing. Change your muzakfake machine

rocknrolllover wrote: Liars. You're liars wonkers. I am not a troll

rocknrolllover wrote: Liars. You're liars wonkers. I am not a troll