Thread carried from a different posting:
>Like many many many others... A lof of them, >actually...
My whole problem with Greg and his book is his complete and utter lack of attention to detail.
Huge chunks of tours missed out (including some key concerts like Copenhagen '77 which freely circulate as bootlegs), obvious copying and pasting of set lists to save timwe, but which only highlighted that short-cuts were being taken, a complete lack of annotation to photographs along with photos being placed in the narrative which were comepletely out of period. Then, the height of waste with endless useless lists of songs and how many times they were played and repitition of bootleg titles across more than one list.
I remember having the Led Zep Concert File and the same for The Who and was thrilled by them (Zep's especially) - thinking that the Queen volume would hold the same high production values, I was clearly disappointed.
What needs to happen is someone that actually cares about what they are doing, do work with Mr Scully and do the whole thing over again and resign Greg Brooks' token effort to the remainder bins.
Agreed. What else can I say? :)
The setlist are often taken from a thin air, and we are not talking about some obscure nights- we're talking about MAJOR shows like Golders Green, Houston or even Hammersmith'75 (if I remeber well...)... How bad is that???
Benn wrote: Thread carried from a different posting:
>Like many many many others... A lof of them, >actually...
This quote is taken from my posting if someone's interesting :)
Well, book is not so bad as it seems when you're getting more in details of lives... For someone who starts his 'Queen fan' career - that's okay, I think.
Though some facts are disappearing, set-lists are wrong, he calls 'Ogre Battle' forgotten intro as a live snippet (few years later he called it as a real forgotten intro), etc. etc. etc.
We need in book where QueenConcerts would meet with Harry's bootlegs reviews/cover pics (link and link. It would be great!
Oxford soundcheck he called fake, stating that it's a compilation of few shows from that period... Yeah, right...
Maybe we could post all (or as many as we can?) the mistakes here?
On one concert (from 1984, as I remember) he mentions that highlighted tracks in the set-list were shown on TV, but a couple sentences below he writes that these tracks were performed on soundcheck - I'm not sure if it's correct.
He forgot about 'Jailhouse Rock' on Montreal '81 shows.
As I remember there's no any notes about Maradonna appearance on the stage in one of their first Argentinian shows.
It's something what I remember very well, therefore it's not complete.
It's not a bad effort for it's day. Remember it was written before the internet gave us tons of info and downloads of all these shows. I don't imagine many of you could of done a whole lot better than Greg did at the time.
And before he had access to the archive. He will freely admit that he had 50 corrections by the time it was published.
You can criticise Greg (although he'd prefer you to do it to his face) about a few things, but throwing this book at him as inaccruate 10 years after it was published is a bit pathetic really. Wait till the next version comes out and see how it looks AT THAT TIME. If it's shite then, say so.
Penetration_Guru wrote:
You can criticise Greg (although he'd prefer you to do it to his face) about a few things, but throwing this book at him as inaccruate 10 years after it was published is a bit pathetic really.
Absolutely.
What you'll also find is a number of complete arse lickers that will have been trading private e-mails with Greggy-boy in the hope that they will be furnished with news about what he's been up to and what may be getting a release. Sadly, these same people then lose all sense of reason and judgement and find it impossible to hear any criticism of him.
Penetration_Guru wrote: what was inaccurate about Hot Space?
You wrote: "throwing this book at him as inaccruate 10 years after it was published is a bit pathetic really.", so I ask what do you think about guys who criticises and names Hot Space as a shit 20 years after it was released?
If they thought it was shit at the time, fair enough.
If they've only now decided that it's shite with the benefit of hindsight, then they're pathetic too.