| PieterMC 18.11.2005 14:50 |
link Wow what amazing seaside footage *yawn* Good Company footage = "Can't believe I am paying for this" |
| Erin 18.11.2005 15:01 |
How'd you like that sexy pic of John lying on the ground on the LOASA clip? ;-D |
| on my way up 18.11.2005 15:31 |
I got my copy of this new release and watched it and it isn't that bad.The audio-commentary is interesting and the clips with archivefootage are nice to watch aswell IMHO.The package is really beautiful,as is the booklet.The soundquality is fantastic!As brian says:best produced ANATO ever. |
| Maz 18.11.2005 15:33 |
Audio commentary? Has that been previously announced or am I just too blind to read? |
| Lord Fickle 18.11.2005 15:56 |
on my way up wrote: As brian says:best produced ANATO ever....until the next one. |
| FriedChicken 18.11.2005 15:56 |
Damn what a Piece of Crap. Death on Two Legs is OK, The idea is alright, but some pieces just don't match. When Brian is playing certain bits it doesn't match with the music Lazing is just rediculous. In love with my Car is Cool, but again the live playing doesn't match the music You're my Best Friend is the original clip, and it's great '39 is very good! It mixes bits from ROTC and original Queen performances with Freddie. Sweet Lady, same as DOTL Seaside Rendezvous. Just footage of sea's, crowds and other bits of crap. Damn what are they thinking! Prophets Song. A photo collage. So it sucks. Love of my Life, a badly edited live video Good Company, a clip with black and white footage of families and kids Borhap, the original clip Comments: What a waste of money, If you don't like the Picture Gallery on previous dvd's you really don't want to spend money on this piece of crap. What are the guys thinking, are they really getting old and demented? Don't get me wrong, I like Queen and I love their music. But recent idea's of releases (this DVD, live dvd without any extra's, Platinum Collections, strange collaboratiosn with boybands, teenstars) are just strange. Why can't we just get cool stuff |
| Bohardy 18.11.2005 15:58 |
Both Zeni. Both. |
| Lord Fickle 18.11.2005 16:01 |
FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: Why can't we just get cool stuffI have to agree. There must be enough 'cool stuff' in the can which could be released. This is just a blatant cash in (what? QPL?? Never!), and is a piss take to real fans who collect all releases. |
| Maz 18.11.2005 16:08 |
Shhhh, Bohardy, let's just keep that between the two of us. I have an imagine to uphold. |
| Lester Burnham 18.11.2005 16:39 |
What a pile of shit. Everyone over at QOL is creaming their jeans, but this... this must be one of the most pointless releases ever. Obviously, some of the clips aren't gonna line up with each other, but this seems like a really terrible DoRo cut-and-paste job, especially on 'Death' and 'Car'. Terrible, terrible, terrible. I know I won't be wasting $25 or however much it costs to purchase this pile of crap. Fuck Queen Productions. |
| Roy ® 18.11.2005 17:19 |
I have to say, the video quality of Hyde Park, Earls Court and Houston is really good in my opinion. Let the release that instead of a photo collage and some black and white footage what has nothing to do with Queen. |
| Gordie Howe 18.11.2005 17:47 |
Shit im gonna pick that up |
| kdj2hot 18.11.2005 17:54 |
Well you guys cant make me feel bad fpr wanting to buy this. If I can afford putting the money aside in my budget I'll get it. I don't have the other dvd-a a night at the opera. |
| Mercuryworks 18.11.2005 21:35 |
What a pile of shit. First of all this is ANOTHER Doro piece of shit cut and paste which even most Queenzoners can do a better job on. Second what UNORIGINAL ideas for the videos I mean black and white bullshit. Come on. QPL are laughing their asses off and rubbing the Queen name right in the dirt by giving this project to the "amazing" Torpedo twins. I mean when I was ten years old I could cut and paste like that. This is shit and I last week order the FUCKIN thing. If I was in charge of this project It would be a DVD-A as Disc 1. Disc 2 shouldve had demos, it should have had 10 takes of fucking Bo Rhap and 10 of others to. And they also should have released a "A Night At The Opera" concert (video, cause you know they have one) with all the old ANATO videos as special features with the band talking in a audio commentary. I mean that is my idea. You very well know Greg is laughing cause he is the only one with access to the Queen vaults. That is very fucking selfish and reading some of his old posts he is. But it is all good, because at least I am a Beatles fans and their treats pays for Queen's shit. And by the way, an excellent video for DoTL couldve been Greg in his underwear and socks playing with all the Queen stuff and close ups on his mouth laughing or maybe not Greg everyone at QPL including Brian Roger and John who are each fucking us so hard in the ass that we bleed. Freddie must be red hot pissed right now. |
| Ray D O'Gaga 18.11.2005 21:59 |
Mercuryworks wrote: And by the way, an excellent video for DoTL couldve been Greg in his underwear and socks playing with all the Queen stuff and close ups on his mouth laughing or maybe not Greg everyone at QPL including Brian Roger and John who are each fucking us so hard in the ass that we bleed. Freddie must be red hot pissed right now.Abso-fucking-lutely hilarious. |
| motbq 19.11.2005 01:20 |
This band has turned to shit ever since freddie died. It's sad what has happened to this great band. Freddie where are you?...cos the queen machine are lost without you. |
| Lord Fickle 19.11.2005 06:13 |
I tend to agree that the band should have finished after Freddie died, with the execption of NOBY, which, in an ideal world, should have been included on the MIH album. My opinion is that all the time the band is still limping on, all we are going to get are these shitty rip-off releases, which QPL know we are all mugs enough to keep buying. Why turn out two DVD-As of the same bloody album, when there are still all the other albums to remix for 5.1? |
| Penetration_Guru 19.11.2005 06:20 |
I actually think that the cut & pasting of mixed footage has improved a great deal since DoRo stopped doing it, but if you want to use inaccurate informatin to criticise this, go ahead... |
| Serry... 19.11.2005 07:04 |
ROTC bits? Most annoying thing for me is these ROTC bits... I'm not a kinda BPP guy, but WTF? What a need to mix NATO with these current Q+PR things?! I hated when they've put the musical name on any new release and now there's the same story with Q+PR. |
| teddybear 19.11.2005 07:24 |
Serry... wrote: ROTC bits? Most annoying thing for me is these ROTC bits... I'm not a kinda BPP guy, but WTF? What a need to mix NATO with these current Q+PR things?! I hated when they've put the musical name on any new release and now there's the same story with Q+PR.I have not seen the new DVD yet - but have ordered it. But if this is true that ROTC stuff is on it, I feel it does NOT belong on there as ANATO is a QUEEN (as in Freddie, Rog, Bri & John collaboration) - NOT Paul Rogers. New footage does NOT belong on this ,unless it is with the REAL QUEEN FULL BAND members surely?????? |
| The Fairy King 19.11.2005 08:46 |
Looks like crap. Not gonna buy it! |
| Daz85 19.11.2005 08:47 |
Calm down... the only footage of ROTC is Brian singing '39. Crikey guys, you lot act like it's life or death...! |
| Daz85 19.11.2005 08:54 |
Got my copy in the post today, and have watched the videos... it's a decent job for what it is, and the surround mixes are excellent (which I'd never heard any previous version before). The menu on the DVD is fantastic! For all those people having heart-attacks I think you need to just sit down and relax a minute... okay, it *would* be nice to have out-takes demos etc, but they are for the Anthologies... it *would* be nice to have Hammy Odeon '75 as an audio or video extra, but as Kes has said many times, the BBC own rights etc so don't expect that immediately. We get the CD in the best possible version, we get the album in fabulous surround sound with visuals to add, we get audio commentary... and we get nice packaging with booklet. Considering EMI were only going to re-release the old album on it's own, I would say this is the best release situation at the moment. |
| Serry... 19.11.2005 09:22 |
Darren Robins wrote: Calm down... the only footage of ROTC is Brian singing '39. Crikey guys, you lot act like it's life or death...!When Brian put live version of FBG from ROTC on that his air guitar compilation CDs, when footages of recently released DVD are on collector's edition of album which was released 30 years ago, etc. etc. etc. - it's ridiculous! There's no need to promote ROTC DVD in collector's edition of NATO, IMHO! Audio commentary and package? Sorry, but if you name this release as COLLECTOR edition, then you need to make something more than just good package and audio commentaries. It's an anniversary re-release of NATO, nothing more. |
| bohemian 11513 19.11.2005 09:38 |
As Fred once said: "Whatever you do darling, do it as bad as you can!" ...or did he say "...do it with style"? I´m so confused... Fred where are you? It´s only one more year to go until the "30th Anniversary of A Day at the Races"... ...so better "get your ass down here again" as soon as possible!!! :-))) |
| Jjeroen 19.11.2005 09:40 |
No, I'm not comlaining about the lack of bonus material in this one. A (very) critical review of this release as it is: Picked up my copy yesterday. Took it off the shelve, turned it around and went... "Oh shit, all that crap again!" First title, DOTL, they forgot to close the brackets of (dedicated to... Unbelievable! There is a dot instead of a bracket! Can't they be just a little bit more precise?? I realy don't understand that nobody notices these kind of mistakes and type-errors on a sleeve... Second though: it's a nice package in all! Then on to playing the DVD... The surround mix sounds indeed very clear and it is a very creative one. BUT! I personally don't agree on some elements of the mix. Probably because it is so clear, there is a repetitive dynamics problem. There are not enougs 'balls' in it. In the quieter songs and segments it sounds awesome. But when the band should sound like they ROCK - it just sounds flat. Also I found some choises in the mix just wrong. Yes it is nice to hear things you never heard before. But the balance between auiable and non-audiable as on the ORIGINAL, is wrong. Lots of times essensial elements of the music (a voice, a guitar lick etc...) that is clearly audiable on the original is now way down in the mix and in some cases even inaudiable. Though some parts that are inaudiable on the original are nog way up in the mix, making some songs just sound wrong. I miss things! That one voice in the higher region that gives me goosebums every time I hear the original. Or some little detail that I always notice on the original that gave a certain song just that little bit extra. Again: I love to hear things that I never heard before, but letting sounds fall out of the mix just changes the character of some songs too much. The menu is just great! The video's... Mixed feelings. I think the tracks with the live-footage DO work. It's impossible to make a studio version mime exactly what you see in a live version. All in all, considering the fact that Queen changed temp and structure of songs a LOT live, they did a pretty decent job in editing. There are images of Houston, Hyde Park, Earls Court and even Hammersmith 79 running through one another. I expected to get a 'Rare Live'-kinda annoying cut n past feeling - but I did not. Nice to see some unseen footage and pictures in there. And as a matter of fact I even DO like the ROTC images in '39. The song is about time-travelling and yes I do see the artistic choise in that as very nice. Though I have to say that I expected a bit more of the newly recorded images of Brian and his acoustic, the koto and the harp. The only thing you see is his fingertips and the only thing that points out that this in fact IS Brian May we're watching, is that we can recognise his fingernails. :-) BUT... The image quality of YMBF video is bad. Way too grainy. Seaside Rendezvous and Good Company - sure they are creative enough and artistically decent as a film, but same as with some video's on Queen Rocks totally irrelevant as a QUEEN-video. I would even have preferred a picture gallary as on LOASA. The audio commentary overal is very nice. Though to hear Brian say "when you listen to My Fairy King on the Queen II album", made me sigh - of course I forgive him for making a mistake, and I realy don;t make a big deal out of this. But it is just very typical, regarding all the other sloppy mistakes. Is there more to complain? There just HAD to be... The vinyl version... Great stuff - very nice item. BUT - once again the same mistakes on the sleeve! In other words: they did not even take the effort to do a seperate design - they just copy-pasted both the cd and vinyl sleeves from the same piece of computertext. Or is the guy that designed everything THAT sloppy that he makes the same mistake twice? Though I bought it still sealed, and I compared a couple of copies - they all had the same thing: the vinyl |
| Lemmy 19.11.2005 09:45 |
WOW!!! this goes straight with... Metallica's St Anger The Queen toilet roll and Britney Spears wanting to meet me!!! I understand times are hard, but come on, this is realy digging the dirt from the bottom of the barrell... |
| YourValentine 19.11.2005 10:20 |
Jeroen - does the DVD have a new surround mix, i.e. does it have a 5 channel mix instead of the 4 channels in the old DVD-Audio? I just watched the clips on QOL and I feel really bad when I see the excellent quality footage of Houston, Earls Court, Hyde Park and Hammersmith Odeon. We are shown all the great stuff but we cannot buy it. This is what I would love to spend money for: original unreleased Queen material. I agree about the ROTC stuff, it does not belong on the ANATO edition, it's like re-writing history. Same with Brian on the roof - and we even have this already on DVD. They should look at the Bruce Springsteen Born To Run edition, it's time too re-learn how a good package is produced. |
| Bobby_brown 19.11.2005 10:24 |
I haven't listened to it yet, but Brian Would never put out something that bad (Soundwise speacking). In the past, we at Queenzone discussed all the mistakes of production in a NATO, now that they've fixed it, we say that those mistakes gave the album that extra flavour, etc. Sometimes we suck, and it must be difficult for them to please us, because we don't really know what we want. TAke care |
| Daz85 19.11.2005 10:42 |
"They should look at the Bruce Springsteen Born To Run edition, it's time too re-learn how a good package is produced." Well, there arn't any out-takes on that set either, and I've heard the concert DVD is poorly lit. Allegedly, the CD itself sounds no different to the previous Born To Run releases. But i neither have or am a fan of Bruce to know for myself :-P "I agree about the ROTC stuff, it does not belong on the ANATO edition, it's like re-writing history. Same with Brian on the roof - and we even have this already on DVD." Since Paul Rodgers is no-where to be seen, it doesn't really matter if they've used Brian-only footage from ROTC, since they used other footage from periods later than the time of ANATO release anyway (Housten, Earls Court '77, Hammersmith '79 etc). I thought Brian singing '39 from ROTC worked well because the song is about time travel. |
| Rick 19.11.2005 11:19 |
I just hate QP. They don't give us what we want. |
| DragonOnMyBack 19.11.2005 11:24 |
I guess the reason they used the ROTC footage for '39 is that it was Freddie who used to sing it live prior to QPR. It would have been a bit strange seeing footage of Freddie sync'd to Brian's voice. The alternative I guess could have been a clip from one of Brian's Solo Tours or more space clips. Anyway I can't comment too much as I have only seen the sampler. The copy I ordered from play.com months ago DID arrive this morning. But when I opened it to have a look at the DVD there was only 1 disc in it the CD. Doh!! Nevermine a missing dot and bracket, I want my DVD. After all I did pay for both a CD+DVD. Looks like I will have to wait another week or so for play to sort out sending me a new copy. I will resevre judgement on the actual content until I can watch it. |
| Jjeroen 19.11.2005 12:10 |
YourValentine wrote: Jeroen - does the DVD have a new surround mix, i.e. does it have a 5 channel mix instead of the 4 channels in the old DVD-Audio? .Yes, it has. It is a new mix and very different to both the 'white border' and the 'blue border' DTS DVD-A's. and Bobby: I'm not saying it is 'THAT bad'! But I'm sure that If Brian listened to this carefully he WOULD have told people to lift some voices more up in the mix. For that matter the old DVD-A, which Brian personally supervised, is much better. Even the opera-section of Bo Rhap: It's not the best example, but listen to 'scaramouch-scaramouch' and 'magnificoooo'. They sound 'out'. They are both in the rear only, so people are probably going to say that I should adjust my rear-level. Possible, but in doing so you make them sound more 'isolated' and you're out of balance for all the other tracks. You don't want to hear the band play behind you, right?! And again: I'm picky! I'm very much an audiophiliac - but the people who create these mixes are supposed to be as well. They even get paid to be picky. |
| AlexRocks 19.11.2005 12:31 |
Don't worry! Hopefully in the next couple of years the fifteen studio l.p.s will be re-released on blue-ray d.v.d.s with loads of the stuff we want and without the stuff that we don't want. |
| GreatKingSam 19.11.2005 12:31 |
For those discussing the inclusion of the Sheffield 2005 clips of Bri singing '39... ...Brian has been quoted, recently, as saying that - since the song was about time travel - it would be nice to have old clips of him/Queen performing the song as well as new clips of him/Queen performing the song, as he feels it aids the theme of the song. So I wouldn't exactly say that it's there to promote ROTC (well, maybe a TINY TINY little bit, what could we expect?). BTW, please tell me this ANATO package doesn't come with a leaflet advertising cheap We Will Rock You tickets too? |
| Jjeroen 19.11.2005 12:39 |
LOL! Nope - no promotional tools for other product whatsoever. :-) I don't agree on people suggesting the ROTC images are in there to promote the dvd. Normally I am right there up front to complain when they try to sneek in some promotional things. (I was very annoyed by the WWRY Musical-references in early QPR shows). But in this case only the big fans will know those images come from a recently released DVD. A non-Queen-expert would never notice, because there is no other reference to that DVD as just an image of Brian playing guitar. (Not even sleeve notes or credits). |
| Serry... 19.11.2005 12:47 |
I don't want to start a new discussion about 'real' Queen, but I think we all would agree that Queen in 1975 and Queen in 2005 - are different bands with different line-ups - it's absolutely different story (they even formed new company for the current tour - Queen Touring Ltd.)... They could use any other footages, maybe something like in One Vision opening style (starting footages from Bo Rhap 1975 goes into One Vision's Queen 1985), they could made another photo collage, they could use some footages from Freddie's tribute where '39 was performed (just remove George and here it is, like they did with Annie Lenox in new video for Under Pressure), they could, they could... Damned, who are the directors - me or DoRo? :) If they wanted to use footages from the recent tour - okay, but why can not they used video from other shows from this tour? It'd be a nice surprise since we didn't get bonus stuff on ROTC. DoRo used some rare footages for other videos and then we got bits from currently released DVD. It's more than a tiny bit of promotion as well as FBG on Air Guitar compilation ;) It's my own stupid opinion anyway... To jeroen: open link and read 'tracklisting' - there's note about Sheffield show actually. And non-Queen experts would not buy this collector's edition. It's more for Queen fans, than ROTC even ;) |
| Sebastian 19.11.2005 13:05 |
Can you tell me something more about the audio commentary? what did they say? |
| Jjeroen 19.11.2005 13:09 |
It's nice - not too much in there that we already heard somewhere before. They talk about a lot of things - the album in general, what it meant to Queen's career, about the recording process, about the title, about writing. But also about the songs in particular. For instance, Roger tells us all about Jonathan Harris :-) |
| Jjeroen 19.11.2005 13:11 |
Serry... wrote: I To jeroen: open link and read 'tracklisting' - there's note about Sheffield show actually. And non-Queen experts would not buy this collector's edition. It's more for Queen fans, than ROTC even ;)LOL! I see your finger slipped? ;-))) Well, you're right, you got me there :-) Btw: it's in the pressrelease as well. (Also I just wanted to say something nice. Stick up for the boys at least in one way :-) But you turn out to be right; they are sneaky bastards afterall ;-) |
| Daz85 19.11.2005 13:25 |
"For instance, Roger tells us all about Jonathan Harris :-)" The man who was always cleaning his car :-D |
| Queenman!! 19.11.2005 13:49 |
I didn't saw the contents of the DVD untill now and I thought by reading the reviews i could expect something special. Now, I'm very dissapointed. What a useless crap of video's. This one is worser than 'Rare Live'. Really a money making thing. Brian was filmed an hour with his koto.Put in on DVD:WOW!, what a breathtaking job. Also, Brian said: after all these years we finally found the mastertape of God Save the Queen and make it okay for 5.1 surround. What has Greg Brooks done in all those years. And at last: What the hell is Greg Brooks doing with this old videocrap he put on the DVD. I saw this stuff also 25 years ago on various videos. I want something NEW.Let the guy for goddammed do his work for one time properly. Or is he scared to show some material we haven't seen before. I had expected the guy knew what was going arround in the bootleg market. A shame, it could be very special but....No! |
| ARMANDO MARTINEZ 19.11.2005 15:07 |
I've just seen the 30 seconds of the "Sweet lady" video from NATO preview and the Hyde park footage they used looks in great quality.I think it was on "Queen concerts" where I read this: "Video recording 80 minutes, professional recording. Unfortunately, the quality of the master tape is not that good so it's unlikely this will ever be released officially. There's also a silent footage (9 min.) with pre-concert shots (from a helicopter)." I think that is good enough for an official release, what do you think about this? A.M. |
| Rien 19.11.2005 15:30 |
I think the videos with the live footage are great and much better than DoRo have ever produced before. Take a look at Roger’s drumming… practically in sync with the sound. It’s a combination of different footage, just to give a live atmosphere to the songs. Overall they’re very well mixed. I really like the two Freddie’s at the beginning of Death On Two Legs, as the voices do overlap. And the picture-collage, well there seems to be some unseen stuff in there. And so are the archive films they used. Just as they did in the original Keep Yourself Alive and Heaven For Everyone promo’s. I would’ve liked it more when only material of that era was used but by using recent video-footage, one might consider it a statement that after 30 years Queen is still alive and kicking. The sound of the cd (I don’t have DTS so I cannot judge the DVD on that) is great I think. Very clear. I must admit that on the DVD in The Prophet’s Song and if I’m not mistaken Bohemian Rhapsody some of the voices are a bit too soft, as mentioned in another post. It’s nice to hear also John and Freddie commenting on the DVD. Overall a very nice package, in my view. Certainly no need to hammer it down like some of you do. |
| Haystacks Calhoun 19.11.2005 16:13 |
This whole, entire opreation is CRINGEWORTHY..... If QP thinks that a die-hard Queen fan is gonna pay for this drivel, they are sorely mistaken. |
| s.m. 19.11.2005 17:14 |
motbq wrote: This band has turned to shit ever since freddie died. It's sad what has happened to this great band. Freddie where are you?...cos the queen machine are lost without you.agree they could do much more give to the fans so much more, but they are either dumb or not tryng too hard either way, shame on them |
| Libor2 19.11.2005 19:14 |
May I ask, if somebody, who has it got already, could tell me, what kind of discs are in? It should be set with CD+DVD (as advertised). I was very curious, how could 5.1 sound be on CD (I though about hybrid SACD, but it seemed to me strange). So, my question is: is there really audio CD in it, or there are two DVDs (one DVD-A probably and one standard DVD). Enlighten me somebody, please. I always thought that old remasters should have a new (ie. better) remastering and I hoped, this could be the case. I do have DVD-A capable player (and DVD-A ANATO), but audio CD with the new remaster would be great for me. On the other side, that DVD with videos is nothing much interest for me. And if the second disc is DVD-A, I ask myself, if I need two (even probably with different sound) copies of the same record on DVD-A. Thanks. |
| ibanez122 19.11.2005 22:57 |
During "Love Of My Life", they show a live clip that to me looks like its from the Crazy Tour (Hammy I presume?) |
| Saint Jiub 19.11.2005 23:29 |
Well, at least I am saving $60 by not buying the latest 3 uninspired releases. I have a vision of a clueless Jim Beach announcing next year that the poor sales of the latest 3 releases was the sole result of flooding the market, and that nothing will be released in 2006 in order to compensate for the flooding. |
| bitesthedust 20.11.2005 05:02 |
I have pre-ordered said cd/dvd from Amazon.co.uk, and judging by comments here I now couldn't give a stuff that I will receive it later than the release date... As someone else said we've had this album released on CD and DVD-A many times...can anyone add to this list ? Original UK CD release (unsure of date) 1994 UK digital remaster 1991 USA hollywood records remaster (I have this) DVD-A (unsure of date) 2001/4 Japanese Mini Vinyl 2005 30th Anniversary |
| Serry... 20.11.2005 05:06 |
It's old, but maybe there's something useful for you: link |
| bitesthedust 20.11.2005 05:08 |
Serry<h6>Inventer of terrible English wrote: It's old, but maybe there's something useful for you: linkthank you Serry...who always has the answer !! |
| Adam Baboolal 20.11.2005 10:09 |
Can someone post a track, so we can compare the new remastering sound? That's the part I'm interested in. Weird to hear that the dvd-a sound has changed, i.e. remixed. Does anyone know that it completely differs from the previous two dvd-a versions of ANATO? Remember, there was a version released before Brian's involvement, then Brian changed things up and we got a much improved version. Can someone post that info? Peace, Adam. |
| Jjeroen 20.11.2005 10:20 |
I already did ;-) Yes, it's different to both the old DVD-A's. |
| Bobby_brown 20.11.2005 11:02 |
OK, so far judging by the posts of Queenzoners there are conclusions of NATO (i haven't listned yet): 1- The videos are out of sync; 2- The videos are in sync; 3- The production is good; 4- The production sucks and this isn't certainly the best NATO ever released; 5- The videos are very well conceived; 6- The videos sucks; 7- It's worth the money; 8- Save the money for more inspired material. I just want to say two things: 1- What makes you think that Greg Brooks has something to do with this? Do you really thing he has that power? I mean, you all read the press release, and they said that Queen have ideas and the directors followed them and add some of their own. Probably the only thing Greg did was guiving them the videos they've asked and guive opinions about it, nothing more. 2- It'S not their frault that we own things that should never be in owr hands. The tapes belong to Queenproductions and we only saw them and heard Demos, etc, because someone stole them from were they belong. So what are you complaining about? How many Queen fans you think own the Houston and Earls Court? very few compared to the amount of fans they have. For a regular fan (not a fanatic like us -and i'm talking against me too because i have those videos ) this is a great release and it should be very entertaining. Tell me one re-release of an album you think beats this NATO, so i can see were you guys come from. Because sometimes i see criticism just for the sake of it, and even though some i might agree, i don't think that criticize everything (and i mean everything) Queen do nowadays is going to elevate your status as Queen fans. In my opinion i laugh that some of you even consider yourselves as fans. Even if they release Demos you're gonna say it sucks because you already own them, like it's their fault, get the point? Take care |
| Lester Burnham 20.11.2005 11:18 |
Bobby_brown wrote: Tell me one re-release of an album you think beats this NATO, so i can see were you guys come from. Because sometimes i see criticism just for the sake of it, and even though some i might agree, i don't think that criticize everything (and i mean everything) Queen do nowadays is going to elevate your status as Queen fans. In my opinion i laugh that some of you even consider yourselves as fans.- The Who: My Generation - The Who: Who's Next - The Who: Tommy - Elvis Costello: My Aim Is True - Elvis Costello: This Year's Model - Elvis Costello: Armed Forces - Elvis Costello: Get Happy!! - Elvis Costello: Almost Blue - Elvis Costello: Trust - Elvis Costello: Imperial Bedroom - Elvis Costello: Punch The Clock - Elvis Costello: Goodbye Cruel World - Elvis Costello: King Of America - Elvis Costello: Blood & Chocolate - Elvis Costello: Spike - Elvis Costello: Mighty Like A Rose - Elvis Costello: Brutal Youth - Elvis Costello: All This Useless Beauty - Pavement: Slanted & Enchanted - Pavement: Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain - Bruce Springsteen: Born To Run And don't even start that "you're not a Queen fan because you don't automatically love everything they put out" bullshit. The band wrote a fucking song called 'I Want It All', so we're now not allowed to want it all? I only criticize because I know they can do better, I know they can put a product out there that can really blow the masses away, and they fucking blew it. Get a grip on yourself and reality and quit seeing things through rose-tinted glasses; Queen aren't infallible. They aren't gods. Queen Productions are putting out the most mediocre material at the most cost-effective price, and proving the belief that if they dressed up a "product" - because that's all this really is - nicely enough, they really CAN sell a piece of shit and everyone will buy it. |
| Libor2 20.11.2005 11:45 |
Could anybody answer my question? Are there AUDIO CD + DVD or are there two DVDs (DVD-A + DVD)? Thanks. |
| Saint Jiub 20.11.2005 11:47 |
Amen Lester |
| Serry... 20.11.2005 12:14 |
Critisize everything what they're doing? No. I can't criticize FM Box - because it was more than just fine (although of some omissions etc.!), I can't criticize Japanese and HR rereleases. I can't criticize wonderful live and promo compilation DVDs. I can't criticize MIH, because they made what they could made. But when they release something useless or too much simple, cannot I criticize them? To be honest, I don't care about these Surround mixes (shame on me!), remasters, new sound, new of new sound, newest of newer of new sound remasters - how many NATO albums do I have to keep in my collection because of new remastering technologies?! I need previously unseen stuff, I need previously unreleased stuff, I need REAL reasons why should I buy this COLLECTOR'S EDITION! |
| Jjeroen 20.11.2005 12:24 |
Libor2 wrote: Could anybody answer my question? Are there AUDIO CD + DVD or are there two DVDs (DVD-A + DVD)? Thanks.One regular audio-cd, one DVD. |
| Jjeroen 20.11.2005 12:28 |
Bobby_brown wrote: 2- It'S not their frault that we own things that should never be in owr hands. The tapes belong to Queenproductions and we only saw them and heard Demos, etc, because someone stole them from were they belong. So what are you complaining about?Only very few tapes have been stolen. In fact most of them 'leaked' by people INSIDE! |
| Maz 20.11.2005 12:47 |
Bobby_brown wrote: Because sometimes i see criticism just for the sake of it, and even though some i might agree, i don't think that criticize everything (and i mean everything) Queen do nowadays is going to elevate your status as Queen fans. In my opinion i laugh that some of you even consider yourselves as fans.Just to re-iterate Lester's point a bit more, look back at all of the threads when some of the various Queen DVDs came out. I remember nothing but glowing admiration for GVH1 and, most especially, Live at Wembley. We recognize that the chances of getting brand new stuff from QP is limited, but they are still capable of releasing a quality product. I personally think that LAW is the gold standard they need to follow for their DVDs. We criticize because Queen and Queen Productions have set certain standards for releases, and when they themselves fail to meet those standards, we complain. (Hello, 100 Greatest Bootlegs) |
| Libor2 20.11.2005 14:10 |
jeroen wrote: One regular audio-cd, one DVD.Thanks Jeroen for your answer. Hope that the audio CD isn't provided with some infamous CD protection (I mean Cactus or similar). Anyway, thanks again for your answer, you helped me a lot. Libor. |
| Penetration_Guru 20.11.2005 16:25 |
Actually, we whined like buggery about the aspect ratio on GVH1, and the loss of the centre channel, but I agree that most comment was positive about both the GVH & Live DVDs. |
| Adam Baboolal 20.11.2005 16:50 |
I can't believe that people continue to talk about this release. Over the last 3 months from when details of this release were leaked, people started bitching. Fair enough, cause it's really a pretty crumby release. But to go on about it? It's like all of us continually going on and on about how Freddie is so much better than Robbie Williams. We know already! What's done is done. The release, to be honest, stinks for what it could have been. And we could've all done it better. Shame... Now the mourning is over, let's talk about some of the important issues, like the newly remastered cd. It's a pretty important thing to find out, isn't it! If someone can get us a track to listen to, that alone will sell it for me. I could care less about the other stuff. And Serry, remasterings are usualy bullshit. True. And the last one was a major cockup from my own personal point of view. So, from what I heard, it was being redone by someone else. I'm interested in hearing it. Peace, Adam. |
| Bobby_brown 21.11.2005 10:29 |
Lester Burnham wrote: - The Who: My Generation - The Who: Who's Next - The Who: Tommy - Elvis Costello: My Aim Is True - Elvis Costello: This Year's Model - Elvis Costello: Armed Forces - Elvis Costello: Get Happy!! - Elvis Costello: Almost Blue - Elvis Costello: Trust - Elvis Costello: Imperial Bedroom - Elvis Costello: Punch The Clock - Elvis Costello: Goodbye Cruel World - Elvis Costello: King Of America - Elvis Costello: Blood & Chocolate - Elvis Costello: Spike - Elvis Costello: Mighty Like A Rose - Elvis Costello: Brutal Youth - Elvis Costello: All This Useless Beauty - Pavement: Slanted & Enchanted - Pavement: Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain - Bruce Springsteen: Born To RunWith the list you presented me, you're not even worhty of a proper reply. Let me ask you something, why do you think the Who re-releases are better then this NATO. (let's not talk about Elvis Costello, because those albums shouldn't be released in the first place). By the way, have you hever thought be a politician. You do talk like one! Take care |
| Bobby_brown 21.11.2005 10:39 |
Zeni wrote:Instead of writing something like this, you should read the topics concern to Queen DVD's to see the "glowing admiration" Queenzoners have showed for this products.Bobby_brown wrote: Because sometimes i see criticism just for the sake of it, and even though some i might agree, i don't think that criticize everything (and i mean everything) Queen do nowadays is going to elevate your status as Queen fans. In my opinion i laugh that some of you even consider yourselves as fans.Just to re-iterate Lester's point a bit more, look back at all of the threads when some of the various Queen DVDs came out. I remember nothing but glowing admiration for GVH1 and, most especially, Live at Wembley. We recognize that the chances of getting brand new stuff from QP is limited, but they are still capable of releasing a quality product. I personally think that LAW is the gold standard they need to follow for their DVDs. We criticize because Queen and Queen Productions have set certain standards for releases, and when they themselves fail to meet those standards, we complain. (Hello, 100 Greatest Bootlegs) You you talk about Queenproductions standards, explain to me what are those standards, because in Queenzone those standards are shit!! Don't you get it?- You guys are never pleased with anything (and when i say something like this i don't mention any names but for some reason i get some furious replys). Take care |
| Lester Burnham 21.11.2005 10:57 |
Bobby_brown wrote:Sorry, but just because you don't like Elvis Costello doesn't mean that makes my point any less valid. The point is that he has released all of his albums with a bonus disc of demos, rarities, and outtakes, and has expansive liner notes written exclusively by him.Lester Burnham wrote: - The Who: My Generation - The Who: Who's Next - The Who: Tommy - Elvis Costello: My Aim Is True - Elvis Costello: This Year's Model - Elvis Costello: Armed Forces - Elvis Costello: Get Happy!! - Elvis Costello: Almost Blue - Elvis Costello: Trust - Elvis Costello: Imperial Bedroom - Elvis Costello: Punch The Clock - Elvis Costello: Goodbye Cruel World - Elvis Costello: King Of America - Elvis Costello: Blood & Chocolate - Elvis Costello: Spike - Elvis Costello: Mighty Like A Rose - Elvis Costello: Brutal Youth - Elvis Costello: All This Useless Beauty - Pavement: Slanted & Enchanted - Pavement: Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain - Bruce Springsteen: Born To RunWith the list you presented me, you're not even worhty of a proper reply. Let me ask you something, why do you think the Who re-releases are better then this NATO. (let's not talk about Elvis Costello, because those albums shouldn't be released in the first place). By the way, have you hever thought be a politician. You do talk like one! Take care And in no way did I say those albums were better than ANATO. The Who's releases feature the same treatment: on My Generation, we get a bonus disc of the master tapes from their first album sessions. On Who's Next, we get a bonus disc of a nearly complete contemporary concert from 1971 with previously unreleased material. On Tommy, we get the whole album in SACD 5.1 (if that's your thing; it's not mine) with a bonus disc of outtakes, rarities, and demos. That is the standard. Queen issued all of their albums with bonus tracks, and yet, incidentally, there isn't a single bonus track on this reissue. Nearly a decade of trawling through the archives and they have the perfect opportunity to put some of those rarities and outtakes on a reissue, and nothing. The thing I find interesting about Queenzone is that, while we're more critical about the band, we also have our heads more firmly planted in reality, whereas the QOLers - especially that lovely moderator Kes - like to praise the band's every move, fart, and sneeze. I also don't understand, Mr. brown, why you can't be more open to criticism. I love this band about as much as anyone else on this board - their recent DVD releases have been great: On Fire, Live At Wembley, and GVH1 & 2. I don't care about aspect ratios or surround sound or whatever - I just want the fucking DVDs. And they have provided me with the DVDs, as well as some very nice bonus features and rarities. So why should that be any different for this release? I realize, of course, that this is a CD release, and not a DVD release, so that may be the problem. But why can the same standard set for the DVD releases not carry over to the CD reissues? This is NOT the best possible release of the album; why do we need another 5.1 mix - slightly tweaked! - of an album that was already released on DVD-A two years ago? As Adam said above, though, there's no point in arguing about this, really. I have my opinions, you have your opinions, but you will notice not once in my replies to you that I ever questioned your devotion to this band, whereas you have the fucking audacity to do so to me. I have tried to remain neutral with you and not become personal, because hurling insults - especially at someone on the Internet - is regressive. So, as you say, "take care". |
| Serry... 21.11.2005 10:59 |
I don't mention any names but for the guy who asked to ban me from QZ I'm gonna quote my reply again: "Critisize everything what they're doing? No. I can't criticize FM Box - because it was more than just fine (although of some omissions etc.!), I can't criticize Japanese and HR rereleases. I can't criticize wonderful live and promo compilation DVDs. I can't criticize MIH, because they made what they could made." |
| Boy Thomas Raker 21.11.2005 11:00 |
For the sheep who are defending this release, and saying get over it or move on, this is where the anger stems from. ANATO is UNARGUABLY the definitive Queen release. It contains the song of the century. It was the most expensive album ever recorded at the time. It's production values were cutting edge. It is the jewel of the Queen catalogue. There was one chance to give this album the treatment it deserves, and they've blown it. I personally don't care about anything but the audio aspect of the album (which sounds iffy from early reviews), but please, cut and paste videos? It's rank amateur stuff. Brian, Roger and Freddie bitched non-stop about the lack of respect they got from the music press throughout their career. Now, when they have a chance to do the definitive exploration they spend an afternoon taping Brian playing old instruments and whipping together photo montages and saying "here's a new video." For me, this is the release I've been waiting for for the last 30 years. I don't post on sports, politics, religion or entertainment boards, so I invest a lot of money (and time and energy) liking music and Queen music in particular. When you get a half assed effort it's truly sad, so please let those of us who remembered when Queen were a band, not a brand, to mourn for the days when they actually cared about music and quality, not the almighty dollar. |
| PieterMC 21.11.2005 11:05 |
From what I've seen (or not seen really) it's getting no advertising in the US. It's realitvly expensive aswell. The cheapest I have seen it is $19.99. |
| Mustapha_Ibrahim 21.11.2005 13:16 |
I've just watched the clips and have one simple thing to say: I'm really happy NOT for THIS release, but for the fact that at last the myth as been broken! THERE ARE excelent sources of concerts like Houston, Hyde Park, Earls Court and Hammersmith '79. This means that hopefuly someday, we will see them on the shelves! As for this release... no surprises, QP at their normal |
| Q-Nick 21.11.2005 15:16 |
Darren Robins wrote: "They should look at the Bruce Springsteen Born To Run edition, it's time too re-learn how a good package is produced." Well, there arn't any out-takes on that set either, and I've heard the concert DVD is poorly lit. Allegedly, the CD itself sounds no different to the previous Born To Run releases. But i neither have or am a fan of Bruce to know for myself :-PANATO 30 is lame compared to BTR 30. The album is as fresh as ever, and the two DVD's are super. Value for money- god yes. Shame on Queen Productions. I'm sorry, but thats what I feel. |
| I_LoveRogerT 21.11.2005 15:43 |
#1 who gives a fiddler's crap about Elvis Costello on here?? This a Queen site not Elvis Costello, if you want him go to his site. Im not complaining. I love the older stuff. And the videos I have never seen. I cant believe people are complaining about ANATO anniversary edition. Some peeps on here are never satisfied. |
| I_LoveRogerT 21.11.2005 15:46 |
you know what is sad? That the fans on this site and Queenonline are constantly complaining. First there is the complaint about Paul Rodgers singing with Queen, and then its Brian and Roger shouldnt use the name Queen. Well Queen is made up of 4 members.. Brian and Roger own the name, Why not use it? Then theres this complaint about ANATO. What the hell you want from the band Blood? They dont have to release anything anymore. But they do for the love of the music and they want to get stuff out to the fans. I wish you peeps on here would stop complaing. It just does you no good! |
| Lester Burnham 21.11.2005 15:49 |
#1, this is a discussion about A Night At The Opera, not about Queen and Paul Rodgers. This release reeks of capitalism and the pursuit of the almighty dollar, not of artistic integrity and beauty. Some people are just too easily pleased. It's like Mike Judge asked in "Office Space": "What do you think of someone who does the bare minimum?" Well, this is what I think: it sucks. |
| PieterMC 21.11.2005 15:52 |
I_LoveRogerT wrote: But they do for the love of the music and they want to get stuff out to the fans.Really, what exactly are they getting out to the fans with this release? Seaside Footage?? The only thing of any interest on this set to me is the interview material. |
| Serry... 21.11.2005 16:04 |
I_LoveRogerT wrote: And the videos I have never seen.Yeah! I've spent last 20 years in researches for these wonderful footages of someone's kids with snow, of old ladies on beach! But I'm sure there are still a lot of such footages in Queen Archive and on one day they'll release DVD Box Set with all these previously unseen shootings of this kind! |
| Bobby_brown 21.11.2005 16:11 |
Lester Burnham wrote: Sorry, but just because you don't like Elvis Costello doesn't mean that makes my point any less valid. The point is that he has released all of his albums with a bonus disc of demos, rarities, and outtakes, and has expansive liner notes written exclusively by him. And in no way did I say those albums were better than ANATO. The Who's releases feature the same treatment: on My Generation, we get a bonus disc of the master tapes from their first album sessions. On Who's Next, we get a bonus disc of a nearly complete contemporary concert from 1971 with previously unreleased material. On Tommy, we get the whole album in SACD 5.1 (if that's your thing; it's not mine) with a bonus disc of outtakes, rarities, and demos. That is the standard. Queen issued all of their albums with bonus tracks, and yet, incidentally, there isn't a single bonus track on this reissue. Nearly a decade of trawling through the archives and they have the perfect opportunity to put some of those rarities and outtakes on a reissue, and nothing. The thing I find interesting about Queenzone is that, while we're more critical about the band, we also have our heads more firmly planted in reality, whereas the QOLers - especially that lovely moderator Kes - like to praise the band's every move, fart, and sneeze. I also don't understand, Mr. brown, why you can't be more open to criticism. I love this band about as much as anyone else on this board - their recent DVD releases have been great: On Fire, Live At Wembley, and GVH1 & 2. I don't care about aspect ratios or surround sound or whatever - I just want the fucking DVDs. And they have provided me with the DVDs, as well as some very nice bonus features and rarities. So why should that be any different for this release? I realize, of course, that this is a CD release, and not a DVD release, so that may be the problem. But why can the same standard set for the DVD releases not carry over to the CD reissues? This is NOT the best possible release of the album; why do we need another 5.1 mix - slightly tweaked! - of an album that was already released on DVD-A two years ago? As Adam said above, though, there's no point in arguing about this, really. I have my opinions, you have your opinions, but you will notice not once in my replies to you that I ever questioned your devotion to this band, whereas you have the fucking audacity to do so to me. I have tried to remain neutral with you and not become personal, because hurling insults - especially at someone on the Internet - is regressive. So, as you say, "take care".Ok, let me clarify: 1- I never questined your love to the band. If you read again my first topic you'll notice that when i say that i laugh that some of you even considered themselves Queen fans this is said in a sarcastic way. Of course you are Queen fans, otherwise you wouldn't be in this board! 2- Even though i understand your standards for this release of NATO, you're assuming that the Who and Elvis Costello, etc, released the albums the way it should be (CD+ live material , demos, unreleased tracks). Why do you think this is the best way? - For what you guys said before you have in this NATO the CD+ audio from Brian and Roger+ DVD with a videoclip for eatch song+ 5.1 remix for DVD-audio. I think this is pretty impressive, don't you??- If the WHO fans compare the two releases what do you think their gonna feel about this? 3- The DVD-audio released two years ago wasn't avaiable for the masses. As you may know you can't find that DVD outside England (probably not even in England), only at the Internet, but even if you find them they weren't produced for mass consuption simply because you don't have a market that big for these kind of release. If you remember , Brian asked the fans if they could find these release in shops near them. Of course the answer was no. Brian even thought about releasing the Tribute Concert |
| Bobby_brown 21.11.2005 16:19 |
Serry<h6>Inventer of terrible English wrote: I don't mention any names but for the guy who asked to ban me from QZ I'm gonna quote my reply again: "Critisize everything what they're doing? No. I can't criticize FM Box - because it was more than just fine (although of some omissions etc.!), I can't criticize Japanese and HR rereleases. I can't criticize wonderful live and promo compilation DVDs. I can't criticize MIH, because they made what they could made."1- You're allways bringuing that subject on, you haven't accept my apologises? 2- You can criticise what you want, but as you remember, this as been a year of great criticism. I don't remember a single live DVD that wasn't been criticized at Queenzone, and it was allways with the same repply: " We want Houstoun 77, and Earls Court,etc,etc". And believe it or not, it's the same reason to ban NATO. If Queenproductions doesn't guive you guys the Earls Court DVD, Houston 77, you're allways gonna dislike what they have to offer. (Again, i'm not talking just to you, but it's the impression i have from the Queenzoners.) Take care |
| Serry... 21.11.2005 16:24 |
Bobby_brown wrote: If Queenproductions doesn't guive you guys the Earls Court DVD, Houston 77, you're allways gonna dislike what they have to offer. (Again, i'm not talking just to you, but it's the impression i have from the Queenzoners.)So maybe it would be more easy to give us what we've asked for many years? And what they've promised to give us (how many times they "wanted" to release Earls Court?)? It's like go to the shop and say "I want to buy the coat!" and salesman replies "Oh, here is your hat you've asked for, take it!". |
| Lester Burnham 21.11.2005 16:40 |
Bobby_brown wrote: Ok, let me clarify: 1- I never questined your love to the band. If you read again my first topic you'll notice that when i say that i laugh that some of you even considered themselves Queen fans this is said in a sarcastic way. Of course you are Queen fans, otherwise you wouldn't be in this board!Fair enough. 2- Even though i understand your standards for this release of NATO, you're assuming that the Who and Elvis Costello, etc, released the albums the way it should be (CD+ live material , demos, unreleased tracks). Why do you think this is the best way? - For what you guys said before you have in this NATO the CD+ audio from Brian and Roger+ DVD with a videoclip for eatch song+ 5.1 remix for DVD-audio. I think this is pretty impressive, don't you??- If the WHO fans compare the two releases what do you think their gonna feel about this?I only used those examples as they are the albums that I had on my CD rack at the time. A cursory glance was that result. However, there have been lots and lots of other reissues that contain bonus material and has now become the set standard for reissues: take, for instance, any Deluxe Edition of, say, Cream. Or The Velvet Underground. That's the way it is and that's the way it should be; that's why The Rolling Stones's reissues from three years ago are such a disappointment: no previously unreleased material. 3- The DVD-audio released two years ago wasn't avaiable for the masses.Yes it was. As you may know you can't find that DVD outside England (probably not even in England), only at the Internet, but even if you find them they weren't produced for mass consuption simply because you don't have a market that big for these kind of release.Three years ago, DVD-A and SACD were competing with each other over who would become the bigger seller. I can still go into any record shop in the area and see multiple copies of ANATO and The Game on DVD-A, but it is fast becoming a dwindling medium that no one's interested anymore. If you remember , Brian asked the fans if they could find these release in shops near them. Of course the answer was no. Brian even thought about releasing the Tribute Concert in DVD-audio but he was told at the time that there wasn't a market for it.If Brian asked the fans if they could find the releases in the shops and the answer was no, he should have done something about that, really. Sorry, but if he cares about the fans that much, he'll go the extra step to make sure that the DVD-A's are widely available. 4- I accept criticism, and even i don't like everything they do, but to rate this product as bad, it's your opinion, not mine!! And if i say that i don't think the Demos should be on this release?- Let me explain: As you know, this is their masterpiece, and it's one of those albums that shows Queen at their explendour even for non Queen fans. Do you think that as a bonus for these they should put something less than great (demos) where you could see songs striped down of it's glory. In my opinion i'm glad they didn't because in the future you're gonna have them anyway in the Box-set (now, if they're gonna release them or not, it's another issue).In a word: yes. I would find it extremely fascinating to have demos of all the songs on ANATO as well as outtakes, stripped away of all its excess, so that I could hear the painstaking process the band went to to achieve the ultimate result. The finished product is the birth of the album; what I find interesting is the wedding night, the conception, and the nine month gestation period from that little egg to a fully-conceived baby. To put it in other terms, listening to the demos or unpolished outtakes wouldn't detract at all from the listening experience; it would enhance it for me. However, if the band didn't want to do that, and I can understand wh |
| Boy Thomas Raker 21.11.2005 16:47 |
Except, Serry, the salesman would give you a hat, and it'd be the shittiest hat imaginable. Bobby Brown, when you say that "Like it or not, the bonus stuff is better than nothing, and how many bands guive their fans such a threat", your defence is the reason that people are pissed. QP put no thought into things, so it's "let's give them a video, it's better than nothing." If I oversaw the ANATO release, it'd be one of the greatest releases ever because I would treat it with reverence and respect, filled with historical data, interviews with peers and contemporaries, a look at the album in retrospect, track by track breakdown, and I'd get people like Lord Fickle to provide a 3rd disc so that the audiophiles could mix and listen to each track individually like they were at the sound board. That's top of my head stuff. QP came up with next to nothing with a few years to prep for this. Pathetic. |
| Mercuryworks 21.11.2005 17:37 |
To Bobby_Brown: Sir or Madam, Do you not understand why we are complaining of this "masterpiece" of a release. Let me run this release through the eyes of 1 yrs or older Queen collecting fans. Let me talk to you about the DVD. The whole DVD is crap not ONLY because of their teenage-like cut and paste staff but because of the footage. Houston, Earls, Hammmersmith, we already have these already and if you are going to go mad about quality then consider this: If anyone, maybe Barry, had one whole year to make Earls Courts as clear as WWRY concert than chances are he probably could. So the live footage straight is shit because who want to see the same shit over again. Now, the music videos, we've had these already and in PERFECT quality. Again (all that shit again" as Freddie may say). As for the "unseen" black and white footage, what the fuck is this bullshit? Who wants archive bullshits from the 40s that NOONE wants to see. I mean what do they have to do with Queen's music. They dont even accurately describe the songs. I mean Seaside Rendezvous, is a love song. As for the picture gallery, meh... still shit. And as for the super-duper E.X.C.L.U.S.I.V.E.!!!!! Brian Koto footage. Who fucking cares. Let now describe the DVD-A if they released The Miracle every year would you buy it. No right? So in terms of content this thing is giving Queen fans DVDA aka Double Ass, Double Vagina or if you are a guy Double Ass. A real Collectors edition shouldve been Queen Disc 1 - An actually acceptable DVD-A Queen Disc 2 - Collection of Demos and outtakes (including the 7 minute Bo Rhap) and you know they have enough Fucking demos to fill ONE CD I mean from ANATO they may have 20+ hours come on. Fuck your save for the Boxsets bulshit, they have enough. Queen DVD1 Full Hammersmith 75 DVD Collection DVD You know and compared to what they have this ( my colection idea) is a vault fart but instead they released a stupid piece of shit with a already made DVD-A, a DVD with useless and already WIDELY available footage. Now, that is why Bobby I blame Greg for not releasing more and Brian, Roger, and John for not making an effort to make most Queen fans smile. And dont worry Bobby I'm not picking on you but if you would like to remark with stupid steford attitude than I can also make you look silly with facts. |
| Mercuryworks 21.11.2005 17:39 |
You see how mad they get me that I even double-posted. :P |
| Boy Thomas Raker 21.11.2005 17:56 |
Please note Mercuryworks that using facts to back up a point of view is an unwise strategy that may lead to written abuse from the Stepford tribe. |
| NOTWMEDDLE 21.11.2005 17:58 |
Another album's 30th anniversary has been delayed until early 2006. Pink Floyd's Wish You Were Here is still to be released on Hybrid SACD in 5.1 surround sound. A shame PF didn't film any of their post-Dark Side 1972 tours until The Wall in 1980. Dark Side of the Moon's 30th was celebrated by three different releases. First, the Hybrid SACD which is now the best selling SACD ever. Second, the making of DVD which features some rare live performance film from PF at The Brighton Dome in June, 1972 and snippets of early and rare demos. Lastly, the PF at Pompeii DVD which featured studio footage of the band recording, or fakingly recording(to David Gilmour), DSotM. |
| NOTWMEDDLE 21.11.2005 18:01 |
Bobby_brown wrote:Pink Floyd The Final Cut was reissued with a bonus track in 2004Lester Burnham wrote: - The Who: My Generation - The Who: Who's Next - The Who: Tommy - Elvis Costello: My Aim Is True - Elvis Costello: This Year's Model - Elvis Costello: Armed Forces - Elvis Costello: Get Happy!! - Elvis Costello: Almost Blue - Elvis Costello: Trust - Elvis Costello: Imperial Bedroom - Elvis Costello: Punch The Clock - Elvis Costello: Goodbye Cruel World - Elvis Costello: King Of America - Elvis Costello: Blood & Chocolate - Elvis Costello: Spike - Elvis Costello: Mighty Like A Rose - Elvis Costello: Brutal Youth - Elvis Costello: All This Useless Beauty - Pavement: Slanted & Enchanted - Pavement: Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain - Bruce Springsteen: Born To RunWith the list you presented me, you're not even worhty of a proper reply. Let me ask you something, why do you think the Who re-releases are better then this NATO. (let's not talk about Elvis Costello, because those albums shouldn't be released in the first place). By the way, have you hever thought be a politician. You do talk like one! Take care Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon was re-released on Hybrid SACD with a new remaster for CD layer and a new 5.1 mix for SACD layer. It is to be repeated with Wish You Were Here. |
| NOTWMEDDLE 21.11.2005 18:08 |
Lemmy wrote: WOW!!! this goes straight with... Metallica's St Anger The Queen toilet roll and Britney Spears wanting to meet me!!! I understand times are hard, but come on, this is realy digging the dirt from the bottom of the barrell...Roger Waters' Ca Ira is deplorable. |
| Maz 21.11.2005 19:36 |
Please explain to me what the criticisms of the live DVDs were. As PG (correctly) points out, there was a fair bit of complaining about aspect ratios and the lack of a center channel on the GVH DVDs, but he also mentions that the overall comments were positive. As of the Tribute DVD, the criticism is that it's not the whole show. But what, pray tell, are the criticisms for the Wembley or Milton Keynes DVDs? As far as I can remember, there were none. Please enlighten me. I think, overall, the level-headed posters on QZ (not the Stepfords and not the BPP-acolytes) provide valid and constructive criticism for QP products, in addition to support for the things QP gets right. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 21.11.2005 22:27 |
From the Hollywood Records press release: "The DVD sparkles with rich visuals for every track, including restored versions of the original "Bohemian Rhapsody" and "You're My Best Friend" videos. The other classic tracks are set to new videos and picture albums drawn from the band's extensive live performance and photo library." I wonder which live performances the clips for Good Compnay and Seaside Rendezvous are pulled from. "Rich" visuals indeed. |
| Bobby_brown 22.11.2005 09:53 |
Serry<h6>Inventer of terrible English wrote:Someone said before that Earls Court is never gonna be released, because they can't remix the sound in 5.1 (and if i'm correct they don't have footage of Freddie's hands playing the piano).Bobby_brown wrote: If Queenproductions doesn't guive you guys the Earls Court DVD, Houston 77, you're allways gonna dislike what they have to offer. (Again, i'm not talking just to you, but it's the impression i have from the Queenzoners.)So maybe it would be more easy to give us what we've asked for many years? And what they've promised to give us (how many times they "wanted" to release Earls Court?)? It's like go to the shop and say "I want to buy the coat!" and salesman replies "Oh, here is your hat you've asked for, take it!". So, why compare every single release with what could have been? Take care |
| Serry... 22.11.2005 10:09 |
Because Queen were the band of four perfectionists (now it's the band of two guys who release useless re-release of their (one of) best albums and only cares about new remastering technologies, it's like a new toy). Because in 1985 they attacked each other in the discussion - have One Vision to be on 'Complete Vision' LP or not (!). Because we know they could do their work better as they did with Freddie's box set. Because we still don't know what they have and what is myth. Because I'll accept Earls Court without 5.1 sound, it's the last thing on the Earth I care about (I've seen Queen shows/promos on old VHS for the years and was happy). Because, because, because... Because we're the buyers! |
| NTL 22.11.2005 10:13 |
I bought this yesterday and cant belive I did, what a pile of shite. If I knew who was responsible for this I would post it back to them and and pay the extra to get the postman to throw it in their face on answering the door.
Bobby_brown wrote: Someone said before that Earls Court is never gonna be released, because they can't remix the sound in 5.1 (and if i'm correct they don't have footage of Freddie's hands playing the piano). So, why compare every single release with what could have been? Take careOh well if they dont have footage of Freddies hands playing the piano then Im not interested. Unless someone has filmed his feet on the pedals that is. |
| Bobby_brown 22.11.2005 10:16 |
Mercuryworks wrote: Now, that is why Bobby I blame Greg for not releasing more and Brian, Roger, and John for not making an effort to make most Queen fans smile. And dont worry Bobby I'm not picking on you but if you would like to remark with stupid steford attitude than I can also make you look silly with facts.With that kind of language you're the only one that looks silly!! 1- Explain me why you blame Greg for not releasing more. Does he have a word on this? For what i've heard he's the Queen archivist. 2-Brian, Roger and John for not making an effort to make most Queen fans smile. Obviously you forgot about the tour, but ... there was no Freddie, so you didn't smile. Jonh doesn't guive a F..k about the business anymore. 3- You talk about the already avaiable footage, probably you didn't read the topics i've made before. Avaiable for who?- Perhaps you could send a list of what you've got to Queenproductions and next time maby they can please you. 4- You say you make me look silly with facts, but i didn't read any facts, apart the fact that you would like the Hammersmith 75 concert. But this is also avaiable footage (at least for Queen fans with one year or more in collecting them), so i don't understand why do you want it that bad!? 5- Now, for what i've read you're not shure if i'm a boy or a girl, but looking at your profile pic i was having the same doubt about you! 6- You say you've presented facts, but the thing is there'S nothing in there. Your text is empty of meaning, apart the aspect of you trying to make me feel bad. Don't like the album, don't buy it. Save the money for more usefull things, like get an education!! Take care |
| Bobby_brown 22.11.2005 10:24 |
NTL wrote: I bought this yesterday and cant belive I did, what a pile of shite. If I knew who was responsible for this I would post it back to them and and pay the extra to get the postman to throw it in their face on answering the door.Don't blame me for this. I was just saying what they have said (and i have the same opinion as Serry on this one. Those were bad excuses).Bobby_brown wrote: Someone said before that Earls Court is never gonna be released, because they can't remix the sound in 5.1 (and if i'm correct they don't have footage of Freddie's hands playing the piano). So, why compare every single release with what could have been? Take careOh well if they dont have footage of Freddies hands playing the piano then Im not interested. Unless someone has filmed his feet on the pedals that is. I was trying to say that they have already said that it ain't gonna happen. For me they could release something like the Documentary "the Early years- Iron Maiden" and throw in these concerts since they don't think they have a quality of a proper release. TAke care |
| Boy Thomas Raker 22.11.2005 10:34 |
So, Bobby Brown, is your position that you are comfortable buying shitty quality, and that we should leave Brian and Roger alone because it's better than nothing? Serry hit the nail on the head. These guys were 4 perfectionists who had huge battles over all things Queen. Album covers, layout, design, liner notes, everything. Now, you get the cool ROTC cover which is a joke. And for the crown jewel of their catalogue you get a package that's an afterthought. I'm beginning to believe Brian and Roger are more concerned, and have been since Freddie's death, with milking every dollar out of the Queen catalogue that they can. These guys were artists, now they're salesman. That's painful. |
| Erin 22.11.2005 10:35 |
YourValentine wrote: I just watched the clips on QOL and I feel really bad when I see the excellent quality footage of Houston, Earls Court, Hyde Park and Hammersmith Odeon. We are shown all the great stuff but we cannot buy it. This is what I would love to spend money for: original unreleased Queen material.My thoughts exactly. |
| Wiley 22.11.2005 11:27 |
I couldn't be less excited about getting this release and that's something. I'm usually a level headed person but when it comes to new Queen releases I tend to get very excited. This is not the case. The problem is that this is not some 1998 Japanese only release or a 2005 live promo for the USA (of an italian show) or yet another compilation album for completists. It's supposed to be a COLLECTOR'S EDITION... yet collectors think it's shit. There's something terribly wrong about this. You can't pretend to release a collector's edition of an album and come out with this half baked product. I'm sure it looks great, I don't think anyone has complained about the packaging, but collectors surely would like to have NEW material. I don't know how much time did they take to put this material together but it doesn't look like it would take a lot. Ok, they did a new 5.1 mix but... well, it's definately not enough. I try to look at it with different eyes. Maybe if I didn't know there was a DVD Audio released two years ago and if I had never seen part of this unreleased shows... maybe if I were just a casual music enthusiast which happened to like Queen many years ago and now sees this great looking box. Maybe, just maybe I would be very excited... but I wouldn't be a Collector, right? I would still find the "seaside" footage really stupid, though. It's NOT a Collector's Edition and it's NOT a regular music enthusiast edition. I think it fails to impress either group or market. The problem is that this was supposed to be the ultimate ANATO release and it is NOT. It could be the best so far but now I find myself waiting for the 40th or 50th anniversary edition in hope for the definitive version. Actually, I was more excited with the DVD Audio release because it was a brand new thing: Queen's album in Surround sound, cool! Now it's not a novelty, it should have had some other things, specially compared to what some of Queen's contemporary fellow artists are doing, which some of you have mentioned already. One other thing, I couldn't really tell what was contained in every disc of the set. It reads: "DISC ONE – CD: A Night At The Opera – studio album. Re-mastered in 5.1 surround sound and stereo for this set. DISC TWO – DVD: A Night At The Opera – studio album presented in both DTS 5.1 Surround Sound and the re-mastered stereo mix." It does sound pretty much the same. What about this 5.1 surround sound and stereo for the CD?? which format is it? And the DVD has this stereo mix aswell? or is it a different mix? What's the point of these 2 discs having pretty much the same material? What's the point of this whole release anyway? Nice packaging, though... :S Wiley (thinking of this Lost Opportunity...) |
| Serry... 22.11.2005 13:20 |
Great post, Wiley! It's something what I've tried to say in my first one in this thread! :) ("Sorry, but if you name this release as COLLECTOR edition, then you need to make something more than just good package and audio commentaries. It's just an anniversary re-release of NATO, nothing more.") |
| Boy Thomas Raker 22.11.2005 13:26 |
Who would like to compose a NICE e-mail to send to Brian at his site and inform him of the overriding disappointment at the release? I know he won't answer it, even in private, and would most certainly defend it as cutting edge stuff, but I'd be interested in his response. Whoever takes up the challenge, please mention that you loved the musical and that'll get your foot in the door. |
| pma 22.11.2005 13:34 |
Well, I ordered my copy (cd-wow 14.7€) which I consider a fair price for a cd and a dvd. The reason I purchased was that the audiophile-forums I read had actually some nice words about the product (for a change). And those buggers usually whinge about every single thing... |
| Bobby_brown 22.11.2005 13:55 |
Serry<h6>Inventer of terrible English wrote: Great post, Wiley! It's something what I've tried to say in my first one in this thread! :) ("Sorry, but if you name this release as COLLECTOR edition, then you need to make something more than just good package and audio commentaries. It's just an anniversary re-release of NATO, nothing more.")In this i have to agree, it's not a collectors item. This was meant for the masses, the regular fan. Take care |
| Lester Burnham 22.11.2005 14:22 |
BHM 0271 wrote: Who would like to compose a NICE e-mail to send to Brian at his site and inform him of the overriding disappointment at the release? I know he won't answer it, even in private, and would most certainly defend it as cutting edge stuff, but I'd be interested in his response. Whoever takes up the challenge, please mention that you loved the musical and that'll get your foot in the door.I did when it was first announced, back on September 30th: Brian, When word got out about the 30th anniversary release of A Night At The Opera, I was excited! Finally, Queen's masterpiece getting the same treatment as other albums not worthy of licking the boots of other albums. And yet, when I read preliminary reports on Play.com for the bonus DVD, I was sorely disappointed. Archival live footage of the songs? Picture gallery? 1960's space footage?? Seaside footage?!? Slow motion images?! Honestly, I was hoping that Play.com were having us on, but, according to people who went to the fan club convention, this is sadly true. What is the thought process here? I don't mean to come across as a jerk, but I was looking forward to this. There was the opportunity to do something really excellent here: remaster the album, throw on a bonus disc of rarities, demos, and so forth (take, for instance, Elvis Costello's recent splurge of rereleases, which features new liner notes by him personally and a bonus disc filled with all sorts of good stuff), maybe even a DVD. The Hammersmith Odeon concert from 1975 would've been great, or an in-depth documentary on the making of the album. I get the feeling that this release missed the boat completely. Later this year, Bruce Springsteen's Born To Run is going to be re-released, in pretty much the same fashion that I just described. I haven't yet gotten into Bruce, but the release excites me - a bonus disc of unreleased stuff, and a live DVD. THAT is what fans want, not the same old stuff repackaged with marginal bonus material. Yeah, we get the 5.1 version of 'God Save The Queen', but... is it really worth buying A Night At The Opera over again just for that? I urge you to pick up The Kinks' 3-disc version of The Village Green Preservation Society and give it a listen. THAT is how Queen's back catalogue should be treated. We have been promised the box sets for so many years now it's not even funny; this would've been a perfect opportunity to either cancel those box sets and put on all the previously unreleased stuff onto remastered, special-edition versions of all the albums, or to rush-release those box sets. This is what fans want: stuff we've never heard before. We're constantly vying for new information, and an hour-long documentary on the making of ANATO would've been amazing. There was a great taster on the GVH1 DVD, with you playing all the tracks of 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and allowing the fans an insight into that song. Why not the same with the other songs? There are eleven other songs on that album that deserve a similar treatment. I don't send this letter with the intent to sound bitchy and moany, but I send it because I am saddened that Queen's greatest album is getting a shoddy treatment again. Maybe I'm wrong and the package will prove to be excellent, but I don't get that feeling. I'm not a pessimist by nature, especially considering the avid Queen fan that I am - been a fan for many, many years, and am going to see you in New Jersey in October - but this package is NOT what fans want, I can almost guarantee that. Maybe because I didn't go to the New Jersey show, Brian decided not to respond? |
| Boy Thomas Raker 22.11.2005 14:37 |
That's an excellent and fair letter, Lester. It's sad, because I've derived 30 years of joy listening to Queen's music. I believe that there best stuff will stand the test of time a la Bach, Beethoven and The Beatles. It's art in a world where genius is fairly uncommon. So from a totally selfish POV, I have been looking forward to my favourite album getting the royal treatment, and to get this is a joke. Brian's too scattered working on the tour, sundry shitty compilations and other meaningless stuff that means nothing except to the coffers of QP to care about this stuff. I certainly don't think that Brian would be honest and say "you know what Lester, we did blow it", because he believes there's been merit and worth in every goofy project that has been done post-Freddie. But I know that he's aware of the postings from places as he certainly answeed the backing tape question from 46664 pretty quickly, so maybe he'll feel the e-wrath of the Queen community and it'll be a turning point (ha!) in their process of releasing material. It's done now, but given the status of ANATO, I thing this puts the 5ive, Robbie, Pink/Beyonce/Britney/John Farnham fiascos in a good light. |
| kosimodo 22.11.2005 15:58 |
Lester Burnham wrote: This is what fans want: stuff we've never heard before. We're constantly vying for new information, and an hour-long documentary on the making of ANATO would've been amazing. There was a great taster on the GVH1 DVD, with you playing all the tracks of 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and allowing the fans an insight into that song. Why not the same with the other songs? There are eleven other songs on that album that deserve a similar treatment.That is exactly what i wanted... And i even payed a visit to Hamburg last may! |
| Jimi 22.11.2005 18:45 |
Lester Burnham wrote:great post although i'll only give you half the Elvis Costello albums otherwise you'll implode!Bobby_brown wrote: Tell me one re-release of an album you think beats this NATO, so i can see were you guys come from. Because sometimes i see criticism just for the sake of it, and even though some i might agree, i don't think that criticize everything (and i mean everything) Queen do nowadays is going to elevate your status as Queen fans. In my opinion i laugh that some of you even consider yourselves as fans.- The Who: My Generation - The Who: Who's Next - The Who: Tommy - Elvis Costello: My Aim Is True - Elvis Costello: This Year's Model - Elvis Costello: Armed Forces - Elvis Costello: Get Happy!! - Elvis Costello: Almost Blue - Elvis Costello: Trust - Elvis Costello: Imperial Bedroom - Elvis Costello: Punch The Clock - Elvis Costello: Goodbye Cruel World - Elvis Costello: King Of America - Elvis Costello: Blood & Chocolate - Elvis Costello: Spike - Elvis Costello: Mighty Like A Rose - Elvis Costello: Brutal Youth - Elvis Costello: All This Useless Beauty - Pavement: Slanted & Enchanted - Pavement: Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain - Bruce Springsteen: Born To Run And don't even start that "you're not a Queen fan because you don't automatically love everything they put out" bullshit. The band wrote a fucking song called 'I Want It All', so we're now not allowed to want it all? I only criticize because I know they can do better, I know they can put a product out there that can really blow the masses away, and they fucking blew it. Get a grip on yourself and reality and quit seeing things through rose-tinted glasses; Queen aren't infallible. They aren't gods. Queen Productions are putting out the most mediocre material at the most cost-effective price, and proving the belief that if they dressed up a "product" - because that's all this really is - nicely enough, they really CAN sell a piece of shit and everyone will buy it. stick nebraska and led zep 3 on there and i'm on the case! |
| Richy Mercury 22.11.2005 19:12 |
Has anybody bought this that will tell us whats on the disc 2, the dvd? |
| Jimi 22.11.2005 19:40 |
I've got it and its thoroughly enjoyable for a tenner or so. For fucks sake i can piss that up the wall in an hour. The dvd stuff is good until you see the cracks after watching it twice.It drifts away after Car for me.P Song is a major let down on dvd. If you have bootlegs of Earls Hammy etc you won't feel satisfied and if like me you have the DVDA i reckon you will be left wondering what all the fuss is about after a second watch. Queen Rocks anyone? Same argument. You can't rebuild an album without all key members...Brian Mays Queen is not enough. Lets face it Roger isn't arsed anymore. |
| goinback 23.11.2005 05:48 |
Back to one of the first posts about the typo on the periods and parenthesis on DOTL.... Wasn't this messed up on the LP? I know the typo was on the inside where the lyrics were (because it annoyed me to look at!), but I can't remember if it was on the back as well. I can't find a large enough picture of the back of the LP online.... |
| Jjeroen 23.11.2005 06:40 |
Don't have the LP at hand to check at the moment, but the same error was already there in the booklet of the very first EMI cd-release. |
| Serry... 23.11.2005 06:50 |
Brian is nominated on "The best joke of the year" award for the line: "...yes , this is quite simply the best "Night At The Opera" ever produced. I doubt if it can ever be bettered!" ;) Let me tell what we'll get in the end of 2006: 30th Anniversary collectors edition of "A Day At The Races". CD&DVD. Disk One: ABSOLUTELY new remastered version of ADATR in DTS 17.1 sound! Special surround sound mix of outro of Teo Toriatte including. Disk Two: archive footages of Queen playing in the different shows, special footages of Brian playing on plastic piano that he used in Teo Torriatte, clips of kissing men and women from old movies for NEW video of "You And I". |
| Jjeroen 23.11.2005 08:20 |
Don't forget the unique 1956 news-archive footage of 5000 people frying eggs on the new Drowse-video! ;-) |
| g2000 23.11.2005 09:51 |
The problem is that Queen being a huge HUGE band they are always acquiring new fans and i guess always have to be catered for. As a consequence the "older" fans like myself will always be disappointed. No doubt this is aimed at the fans whove just joined the party and if id started liking queen after freedie passed this release would be satisfactory. Unfortunately, as a fan who listened to anato incessantly when it was out, this release, queens sgt pepper no less, the album that really broke Queen into mega stardom, lacks so much its hard to know where to start. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 23.11.2005 11:12 |
g2000, that's an excellent point about the need to cater to new fans. Even then, I don't see how QP would feel that taking stock footage and adding it to songs makes it have anything to do with Queen. Someone made the point about the BBC owning the rights to Hyde Park or another early concert, so it's understandable why we wouldn't see it. Hello? Pay for the rights. If it costs 5 million pounds, which it wouldn't, that's about 5 weeks of the take from the musical. Spend the money. Doing something for the old fans isn't in the books I'm afraid. |
| Adam Baboolal 23.11.2005 11:51 |
g2000 wrote: The problem is that Queen being a huge HUGE band they are always acquiring new fans and i guess always have to be catered for. As a consequence the "older" fans like myself will always be disappointed. No doubt this is aimed at the fans whove just joined the party and if id started liking queen after freedie passed this release would be satisfactory.Look, I'm a Queen fan of 10 years and that means I joined after Freddie was out of the picture. That doesn't mean that you're right in thinking that people like myself must be thinking this is a satisfactory release. That's a horrible thing to say about any new fans. It's down to the knowledge and common sense of the matter. And while this is called a Collector's edition, it isn't supposed to cater to the literal collector amongst Queen fans. It's very well known that Queen fans are notorious for being hugely hungry for collecting and this ANATO set is not for that type of collector. I'm sure it's meant in the dvd "collector's edition" way of thinking. Not music collector. What we need to do is worry about upcoming releases because this is now out in the shops. It's out there and there's no sign that it'll be taken back for any kind of a reworking. So let's take the view that there's no use crying over spilt milk. Let's get some kind of connection with QP or Bri or whoever so that we can actually affect the next "special" release. I never expected any demos or unreleased tracks with this release. But those that mention a documentary or a concert around the time of the album are on the money. Things like that would've made it worth buying. Oh and, not reworking the surround mixes would've also been a great idea. Can't believe that was ok'd. I really love listening to those surround mixes from 2001/2. And while some think remastering is a gimmick, just remember that in this case, it was a necessity. As far as I'm concerned the last good ones were from 1993/4 in the UK. And they were done at 16-bit. Very old-hat. Could sound better and the 2001 JSS versions are a real dissapointment for altering the sound so much over the original. I'm still waiting for someone on here to advise how they sound or give us tracks to hear. I'm glad they asked someone outside the QP household as that means a fresh pair of ears for once. Peace, Adam. |
| Negative Creep 23.11.2005 12:11 |
the release is just a con - cheating the fans & milking the cash cow dry. they could have either included demos/outtakes or the hammersmith '75 gig as a bonus, but they quite obviously couldn't be bothered. they chose to do the bare minimum. the albums should have been mastered properly years ago. hammersmith '75 is never going to get it's own dvd release (this has fuck all to do with the bbc or their rights, qp already have the bbc material in their archives, digitally copied from the bbcs original tapes) because there are no multitracks available for them to edit the recordings. the performance is quite short anyway & doesn't exactly catch the band at their best for that period by any stretch of the imagination. |
| Oberon62AU 23.11.2005 21:34 |
Mercuryworks wrote: To Bobby_Brown: Sir or Madam, Do you not understand why we are complaining of this "masterpiece" of a release. Let me run this release through the eyes of 1 yrs or older Queen collecting fans. Let me talk to you about the DVD. The whole DVD is crap not ONLY because of their teenage-like cut and paste staff but because of the footage. Houston, Earls, Hammmersmith, we already have these already and if you are going to go mad about quality then consider this: If anyone, maybe Barry, had one whole year to make Earls Courts as clear as WWRY concert than chances are he probably could. So the live footage straight is shit because who want to see the same shit over again. Now, the music videos, we've had these already and in PERFECT quality. Again (all that shit again" as Freddie may say). As for the "unseen" black and white footage, what the fuck is this bullshit? Who wants archive bullshits from the 40s that NOONE wants to see. I mean what do they have to do with Queen's music. They dont even accurately describe the songs. I mean Seaside Rendezvous, is a love song. As for the picture gallery, meh... still shit. And as for the super-duper E.X.C.L.U.S.I.V.E.!!!!! Brian Koto footage. Who fucking cares. Let now describe the DVD-A if they released The Miracle every year would you buy it. No right? So in terms of content this thing is giving Queen fans DVDA aka Double Ass, Double Vagina or if you are a guy Double Ass. A real Collectors edition shouldve been Queen Disc 1 - An actually acceptable DVD-A Queen Disc 2 - Collection of Demos and outtakes (including the 7 minute Bo Rhap) and you know they have enough Fucking demos to fill ONE CD I mean from ANATO they may have 20+ hours come on. Fuck your save for the Boxsets bulshit, they have enough. Queen DVD1 Full Hammersmith 75 DVD Collection DVD You know and compared to what they have this ( my colection idea) is a vault fart but instead they released a stupid piece of shit with a already made DVD-A, a DVD with useless and already WIDELY available footage. Now, that is why Bobby I blame Greg for not releasing more and Brian, Roger, and John for not making an effort to make most Queen fans smile. And dont worry Bobby I'm not picking on you but if you would like to remark with stupid steford attitude than I can also make you look silly with facts.Facts? Your reply doesnt contain any facts at all. You say that we already have the videos in PERFECT quality... oh really? Check the other threads about the DVDs and watch the complaints roll in. You say "Houston, Earls, Hammmersmith, we already have these already and if you are going to go mad about quality then consider this: If anyone, maybe Barry, had one whole year to make Earls Courts as clear as WWRY concert than chances are he probably could" well... thats just your opinion. I dont have all those videos and Im sure there are millions of others out there who dont. Its not all about Queenzoners or Queenonliners you know! Theres a whole world of fans out there who dont have what a lot of people here take for granted. Its attitudes like this that I find hysterical. Really... nothing will please you folks. You pick and choose examples of what happened in other re-issue campaigns for other artists to support your own personal biases. I think its so funny that people here talk about how wonderful The Who re-issues or the Elvis Costello reissues etc are. Ive read fans of those bands and artists bitching and moaning about them just like you are. Even the new Springsteen box has its detractors who moan that it doesnt sound too good, or they dont want DVDs and stupid documentaries, they want outtakes etc. Frankly it just goes to prove that you cant please all of the people all of the time... but you just cant please some people EVER. Personally, I have it now, and I think it sounds great. Would I have liked Hammersmith |
| Saint Jiub 24.11.2005 00:00 |
A stepford and his money are soon parted. Unfortunately, too many stepford fans will buy any old reconstituted turd with the Queen name on it. Since the FM box was released in 2000, all of Queen's releases (except for Milton Keynes, South Africa and Live Aid) have consisted mostly of unimaginative recycled product (although Wembley, GVH I & GVH II were somewhat worth getting). Why open up the archives, when stepfords seem satisfied with recycled product? How can anyone defend a DVD with cheesy archive video footage? |
| john bodega 24.11.2005 04:07 |
You... really like that stepford word don't you? Can't you find a better way to describe these people? |
| john bodega 24.11.2005 04:09 |
Brian May wrote: Yes , this is quite simply the best Night At The Opera ever produced. I doubt if it can ever be bettered! ;)I think he was smoking something when he wrote that. I'm going to make a new Good Company video to replace that pigshit that they put on the DVD. |
| Localboy80 24.11.2005 06:21 |
I am so frustrated as a Queen fan right now. I bought the 30th anniversary of 'A Night At The Opera' yesterday and it left me feeling empty. Don't get me wrong, the presentation of the CD is good, with a nice booklet with lovely pictures that comes with it. As for the sound, no complaints on that front either, it is excellent. The thing is, considering this is Queen's biggest album (personally, not quite my favourite album) and it is their 30th anniversary, it is such a let down! I sat there with my girlfriend last night, who I am really getting into Queen more and more each day and was quite embarrassed when 'Seaside Rendezvous' and 'Good Company' came on. I just thought, 'What the hell is this shit?!' My girlfriend even said, 'What has this got to do with Queen?' The cutting and pasting did not synch to well either. I mean, apart from it not synching well, why on earth did they have footage of 'Return Of The Champions'? As much as I am all for the tour and thoroughly enjoyed the concerts I went to see, surely there is enough vintage footage of '39' to not include this? It just did not suit a 1975 Queen album! Also (and yes, I know I am being a little fickle here but hey, I expect things better than this), I thought later footage of 'Love Of My Life' was inappropriate, as I think again, there is more vintage footage of the song to show and what with this being the 70's era, the image of 80's Queen/Freddie performing the song, did not fit with the studio version and the whole 70's theme. Overall, the presentation is good, the sound is excellent but as for anything else, for a die hard Queen fan, this really is a mediocre piece for the collection. Why on earth didn't they do, I don't know, maybe 'A Night At The Opera' box-set? Include the original album, completely digitally remastered. Keep the DVD-a with different images and commentary but also include a CD of different takes of each song, demos, outtakes etc.. And then maybe a final CD of live versions of each song. There is so much more they could have done, to make this release one truly to get excited over. Again, once too often, Queen Productions have let us fans down again, in my honest, humble opinion!!! This comes from one dissatisfied Queen fan, who once again, is left hungry for more! |
| Togg 24.11.2005 06:31 |
One thing that I was very pleased to see was the clips of Roger playing those HUGE drums from the seventies concerts. Not having any of the bootleg shows it was great to seen the older concert footage. Whilst I have all the older videos there is little footage from that period on officail sources. |
| goinback 24.11.2005 07:00 |
Something I noticed on the last tour is Roger doesn't have a gong anymore...I kinda thought maybe they'd keep that, just because him hitting it at the end of Bo Rhap seems like a bit of a tradition (though I think the gong was gone in the '80s). Where exactly were the God Save The Queen tapes by the way? I remember Brian thought they were lost forever. I didn't have them, in case anyone was wondering. |
| Serry... 24.11.2005 08:11 |
the_hero wrote: I think the point behind ROTC in '39 is because it would've been stupid to show images of Freddie singing it on stage with Brian on the background.But it's many times stupid to show us kids playing with snow or girls laying on the beach during GC and SR... Isn't? ;) |
| Oberon62AU 24.11.2005 09:19 |
But it's many times stupid to show us kids playing with snow or girls laying on the beach during GC and SR... Isn't? ;)Serry, maybe it is stupid to show us kids playing with snow or girls laying on the beach during Good Company and Seaside Rendezvous... but what would you have them do? There isnt any live footage that I know about of them doing either song live - and even IF there was no doubt it would get the same criticism about DoRo cut and pastes that any netkid could do better. So.. they chose vintage footage to go with these two tracks. Is that so awful? Could this package have been more to my taste... absolutely. Is it badly done? No. I dont think it is badly done at all for what it is. Would I have wanted other things on the package? YES! Would it make any difference to the complaint level on this board? No! None whatsoever. If you put outtakes youd be sure to get some grump who doesnt like them. Im really starting to feel that the obsessive collector fans are the ones who will never be happy with anything that is released. Cos they never are! So naturally since they are a statistically small number of people out of the huge range of people who buy these things, naturally they tailor them for the biggest audience. Ah well... it will be interesting to see what gets released next! :) Steve |
| Serry... 24.11.2005 09:36 |
Oberon62AU wrote: Serry, maybe it is stupid to show us kids playing with snow or girls laying on the beach during Good Company and Seaside Rendezvous... but what would you have them do? There isnt any live footage that I know about of them doing either song live - and even IF there was no doubt it would get the same criticism about DoRo cut and pastes that any netkid could do better. So.. they chose vintage footage to go with these two tracks. Is that so awful?Steve, As art - it's not awful (as well as Made In Heaven films). But it is the worst solution how to make videos for COLLECTOR'S edition DVD. What would I have them to do? Include more rare or previously unseen footages, not only from the live shows. Maybe they could filmed something specially for those videos (like DoRo did with A Winter's Tale and HFE videos). And you forgot about one thing - I'm not a music videos director, no-one pays for me that, I don't have to think what they could do - it's their job. IMHO. And by the way directors of these videos are Lupton and Thomas as it stated on the sleeve, not DoRo. Sergey |
| Boy Thomas Raker 24.11.2005 10:22 |
But guys, what do the videos have to do with ANATO? Nothing! So why are they there? While realizing that not all new fans are idiots about Queen's past, I do believe that the old fans realize that ANATO is a 'time and place' thing. I was 15 when it was released, and it literally changed my life. It's a constant reminder that genius can be achieved, and creativity can rule the day in a world of sameness. This album strived for perfection, and damn near achieved it, vocally, musically, songwriting and production. It's THE definitive Queen album. I know that there are 10 people who have contributed to this thread who could have made a magnificent collectors edition, that's what's so frustrating about this thing. The videos are embarassing, and a slap in the face for what the album stood for, that being, Queen were announcing that they were a musical entity with no stylistic peers. Look at it this way, 30 years ago, the video for Bohemian Rhapsody was a ground breaker that went hand in hand with the musical message of the album. They could have got some stock footage of crazy artistic people running around for the Bo Rhap video, but instead created a timeless moment in rock history. Where was that kind of thinking this time around? |
| Rien 24.11.2005 11:27 |
there are a lot of parrots on this board. |
| Saint Jiub 24.11.2005 16:03 |
Zebonka12 wrote: You... really like that stepford word don't you? Can't you find a better way to describe these people?Nope. It's impossible. Gordonburstingfoam could not have invented a more perfect description. Hmm .. not entirely sure maybe someone else like Fatty invented the term. |
| YourValentine 24.11.2005 17:56 |
I bought the package after watching the samples on QOL. It's nice to see bits and pieces of concerts like Houston etc in real good quality but I would rather see them with the real sound and not playing to the studio mix which is a bit odd. I think the videos to Seaside Rendezvous and Lazing On A Sunny Afternoon and even Prophet's song are not too bad but are they a reason to buy the package? The surround mix is terrible. For example, in Prophet's Song whole guitar parts are just missing and the once mighty choir sounds weak and remote. What a bitter disappointment after hoping for a great mix with five channels. This mix is much worse than the DTS track of the DVD-A - I am sure for once I agree with Adam Baboolal. I have not yet listened to the audio commentary but it's archive material, so we probably have heard most of it. Another thing that annoys me with most of the Queen DVDs are the slow and difficult menus. You have to select set up for the sound and then you have to walk up the sub menu, back to the main menu where you can select the song. I think menus are always a bit complicated on Queen DVDs. Not to mention the annoying "virgins". |
| Adam Baboolal 25.11.2005 13:54 |
Rien wrote: there are a lot of parrots on this board.Here, here. It's a real shame because I've come to expect good discussion on here. It's a shame when repetition comes in as it just messes up the flow of decent comments. 7 pages of a lot of the same thing from the same people, reiterating their same point over and over. Peace, Adam. |
| Serry... 25.11.2005 14:36 |
If people ask the same questions - they always will get the same answers... |
| ANAGRAMER 25.11.2005 14:40 |
Wasn't that Jon Pertwee getting wed in Good Company? |
| Michael Allred 25.11.2005 19:26 |
I e-mailed the following to Brian the other day (I doubt he'll ever respond to mine or anyone else's.) "Brian, I recently picked up the 30th anniversary edition of "A Night at the Opera" and I must say that this was a "lost opportunity" to put out something that truly celebrated one the finest albums ever released in music history. Perhaps I set myself up for disappointment..maybe I just expected more for my money, I'm not sure. When I look at 30th anniversary editions of other artist's album like Bruce Springsteen's "Born to Run", I see the level that other music artists must rise to and sadly I do not think this new version of ANATO as risen to that level. We see the words "digitally remastered" used so often these days that it's lost all meaning. Just how good, clean and pristine can a stereo mix be made to sound these days? Once it's been done to the best of technology's ability, how much further can it be taken without it losing it's meaning and just becoming a marketing ploy? True there's the DTS surround mix included but that's already been made available for it's DVD-Audio release. Ok so "God Save the Queen" is now "better"? Is that the main selling point now? This just goes back to the "digitally remastered" label used for so many albums, how many times can something be improved? Look, I sincerely LOVE hearing Queen in surround sound and I hope to one day hear every album in such a fashion but is rehashing it time and again a good idea? Speaking as a fan, I'd like to see the effort in creating surround mixes concentrated on the albums that haven't been done that way yet. We know the album is great, we know the surround mixes are outstanding so what's the leave us with in celebrating this music? Realistically, anybody who already owns the CD or DVD-Audio can simply listen to what they already have in their homes and be content with that. So now we come to the DVD portion. Again, taking Springsteen's recent release, there are *two* DVDs along with the CD which feature a full fledged "making of" documentary for the album as well as live material. Having a look at what the ANATO release contains only leaves you wondering why more effort wasn't put into it. For example, why the cut & paste "videos"? This just harkens back to the days of DoRo where they just edited together Queen clips to the music. It's not visionary, interesting or exciting. It gives no insight into the music at all. We're teased with live concert video but no live audio. Why not include live renditions of the music? What purpose do these so-called "videos" serve exactly? We've heard audio outtakes from the making of "Opera" in studio, why aren't we seeing this included? No demos of the songs? Why didn't Simon Lupton and Rhys Thomas create a documentary and interview *everybody* involved in the making of the album? Where's Roy Thomas Baker? The audio commentary was, by far, the most interesting part of the DVD but it makes you think how much better a full fledged documentary would've been. I also admit I liked the design of the menus, bringing the crest to life so to speak. Anyway, it just seems like you guys really missed the mark here (and this is coming from a true Queen fan.) So much more could've been done, "A Night at the Opera" should have been spotlighted as the classic album it is but what we got was a lot of mediocre bonus material that gives virtually no perspective or insight into the music. It could've been jam packed with the kind of stuff Queen fans have been waiting for but I honestly feel this release let us down. If you plan on releasing "better" editions of albums in the future, I really hope more thought and effort are put into it. Think of the fans, "What would they want?" It's a concern because what fans want have been consistently put |
| Boy Thomas Raker 25.11.2005 20:47 |
Fabulous Michael. Fairly put, you're a good man. |
| Saint Jiub 25.11.2005 21:56 |
Michael - No fair attempting to get your second flaming on Brian's soapbox. Please, give the rest of us a chance to get flamed. LOL Hopefully Brian will be too busy preparing for the North American tour to get his panties in a bunch over this e-mail. I'm not sure we need Brian going off the deep end again. However, I do not think the discontent expressed here and elsewhere will matter, because too many people will buy this to complete their collection. The completist Queen fans will convince themselves that this shoddy remaster (compared to the previous DVD-A) with bogus videos is worthwhile, because of the commentary or because of a few extra piano cords of Death on Two Legs on a menu. QP must be concluding that Queen fans are satisfied dolts, because Queen product, whether excellent or substantard, sells regardless. No wonder QP puts out medicre products lately. |
| Adam Baboolal 25.11.2005 22:25 |
Far too much ranting there Michael. Small important notes would've been much more effective. The main points are interesting, but I wonder if they get lost in the rant. Hey, here's something I've just realised... You can now buy both the cd and dvd for a tenner. The dvd-a separately is £12.99 alone. And including the nice packaging and the extra video and commentary stuff, it's actually decent for the price. I think this actually suits the joe bloggs fan out there. Not people like ourselves. And I still won't buy it! But I have to admit, if the cd really does sounds better, that alone is good enough for me. The rest is just extra packing to me. It may not be what WE would expect, but actually it does suit the casual fan to a T! Peace, Adam. |
| Saint Jiub 25.11.2005 22:39 |
The concensus seems to be that this DVD-A is inferior to the previous effort (especially the Prophet Song). Has anyone mentioned the CD being improved? |
| Adam Baboolal 25.11.2005 22:50 |
Rien did. But so far, I'm hesitant to buy into that without first hearing some samples. I found a site, but the samples were offline. Anyone got any ideas? Peace, Adam. |
| Saint Jiub 25.11.2005 22:55 |
Rien wrote: The sound of the cd (I don’t have DTS so I cannot judge the DVD on that) is great I think. Very clear. I must admit that on the DVD in The Prophet’s Song and if I’m not mistaken Bohemian Rhapsody some of the voices are a bit too soft, as mentioned in another post. |
| Saint Jiub 25.11.2005 22:59 |
jeroen wrote: Then on to playing the DVD... The surround mix sounds indeed very clear and it is a very creative one. BUT! I personally don't agree on some elements of the mix. Probably because it is so clear, there is a repetitive dynamics problem. There are not enougs 'balls' in it. In the quieter songs and segments it sounds awesome. But when the band should sound like they ROCK - it just sounds flat. Also I found some choises in the mix just wrong. Yes it is nice to hear things you never heard before. But the balance between auiable and non-audiable as on the ORIGINAL, is wrong. Lots of times essensial elements of the music (a voice, a guitar lick etc...) that is clearly audiable on the original is now way down in the mix and in some cases even inaudiable. Though some parts that are inaudiable on the original are nog way up in the mix, making some songs just sound wrong. I miss things! That one voice in the higher region that gives me goosebums every time I hear the original. Or some little detail that I always notice on the original that gave a certain song just that little bit extra. Again: I love to hear things that I never heard before, but letting sounds fall out of the mix just changes the character of some songs too much. |
| Saint Jiub 25.11.2005 23:03 |
jeroen wrote:YourValentine wrote: Jeroen - does the DVD have a new surround mix, i.e. does it have a 5 channel mix instead of the 4 channels in the old DVD-Audio? .Yes, it has. It is a new mix and very different to both the 'white border' and the 'blue border' DTS DVD-A's. and Bobby: I'm not saying it is 'THAT bad'! But I'm sure that If Brian listened to this carefully he WOULD have told people to lift some voices more up in the mix. For that matter the old DVD-A, which Brian personally supervised, is much better. Even the opera-section of Bo Rhap: It's not the best example, but listen to 'scaramouch-scaramouch' and 'magnificoooo'. They sound 'out'. They are both in the rear only, so people are probably going to say that I should adjust my rear-level. Possible, but in doing so you make them sound more 'isolated' and you're out of balance for all the other tracks. You don't want to hear the band play behind you, right?! And again: I'm picky! I'm very much an audiophiliac - but the people who create these mixes are supposed to be as well. They even get paid to be picky. |
| Saint Jiub 25.11.2005 23:17 |
YourValentine wrote: The surround mix is terrible. For example, in Prophet's Song whole guitar parts are just missing and the once mighty choir sounds weak and remote. What a bitter disappointment after hoping for a great mix with five channels. This mix is much worse than the DTS track of the DVD-A - I am sure for once I agree with Adam Baboolal. |
| frank39 26.11.2005 05:20 |
Why don´t they bring DVD-A´s from all the other albums? For me personally,A day at the races or Jazz would be great. ANATO again and again, its getting boring... But it all fits to gether, the making-cash-only- tour with a medium RnR singer, 3rd copy of ANATO... Still: Long live Queen!!!! But Queen is history, thats a fact, and no Paul Rodgers and 3rd. ANATO can change that. Just bringing some(excellent!) footage from Earls Court and Houston in Death on two legs, the rest is more or less well known, even partly obsolet. Come on Brian and Roger: you created a lot more than ANATO, so for the start I would say: first JAZZ DVDA, then News of the World DVDA etc. But I am afraid, they come up with the 20th anniversary BOX of Wembley with a "brandnew" Special Edition next year. |
| Fairy 26.11.2005 05:31 |
Serry<h6>Inventor of terrible English wrote: ROTC bits? |
| Lord Fickle 26.11.2005 06:26 |
I still haven't located my original DVD-A of ANATO since I moved house, but I didn't realise until recently, there were two versions of this. Which is supposedly the best version - the blue or white border? |
| Serry... 26.11.2005 07:38 |
Fairy, Only videos and very few new footages of Brian playing on guitar, toy koto and harp. But audio commentaries are very good, IMHO. |
| Jjeroen 26.11.2005 08:32 |
Adam Baboolal wrote:Very annoying indeed, but that's just because more and more people in here tend not to read any posts but the first and the last one.Rien wrote: there are a lot of parrots on this board.Here, here. It's a real shame because I've come to expect good discussion on here. It's a shame when repetition comes in as it just messes up the flow of decent comments. 7 pages of a lot of the same thing from the same people, reiterating their same point over and over. Peace, Adam. |
| Fairy 26.11.2005 11:33 |
Serry<h6>Inventor of terrible English wrote: Fairy, Only videos and very few new footages of Brian playing on guitar, toy koto and harp. But audio commentaries are very good, IMHO.That sounds decent then! I think I won't resist...I'll get it for Christmas. I'm also tempted to get the Born To Run 30th Anniversary edition and compare them....After all I used to be a big Springsteen fan! :-) |
| Adam Baboolal 26.11.2005 12:21 |
Well, thanks to Rien for letting me hear some snippets of the new remaster. Folks... it's good. Damned good! Here's what I thought: - The high end is sweeter sounding - The low-end and lower mids are a little bit less than they were. That's no bad thing as they seem to clean up the sound rather nicely. So, it's all nicely balanced out. - And it's a helluva lot better than the 2001 remaster for retaining a huge amount of the original sound. - Overall, the new remaster is a huge improvement. And my final finding is that the overall sound doesn't seem anywhere near as compressed as the 2001 remasters, either. So, as far as I'm concerned, it's a goody. The cd is for me, sounding like it could be the kind of remastering that's been waiting to be done for the last 5 years. Well done to the guy they gave it too. Peace, Adam. |
| Lester Burnham 26.11.2005 12:37 |
I have to admit that this release doesn't hold any interest for me, as I'm not an audiophile, and I really can't tell the difference between how one reissue sounds and how another sounds. I think, therefore, that's the reason that a lot of people are outraged and disappointed with this reissue, because it doesn't hold as universal an appeal as it should. Not only do I not have the set-up to play any kind of 5.1 DVDs or what have you, it just doesn't interest me all that much to begin with, and I'm frankly more than happy with the 1998 Crown Jewels reissues. So, I know that's where my disappointment comes, is that they couldn't have put something on there to appeal to everyone. And I just don't find the prospect of cut-and-paste videos all that appealing to begin with, and I'm certainly not going to waste $25 or however much it costs just to hear some interviews and get a nice booklet. |
| Michael Allred 26.11.2005 17:14 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: Far too much ranting there Michael. Small important notes would've been much more effective. The main points are interesting, but I wonder if they get lost in the rant. It may not be what WE would expect, but actually it does suit the casual fan to a T! Peace, Adam.Not sure where you get "ranting" from exactly. Ranting implies anger and hostility and I thought it came off reasonably even tempered. I'm also not sure how a casual fan would find anything interesting in the release. A casual fan would already have the regular CD by now and the "bonus" material doesn't add anything to what's there. Oh and Rip? I think if I was a journalist, Brian would've been more inclined to flame me. As it is, I think he believes no Queen fan would ever hate a product he so publically endorsed so he'll ignore it. |
| AlexRocks 27.11.2005 19:38 |
How many posts do I have to do that talk about blu-ray d.v.d.s?! Go to wlink to find out more about them. They will be recordable, hold ten hours of film (so the box sets will still cost the same but actually be one or two discs probably), and be EXTREAMLY scratch resistant. Hopefully the catelog of fifteen studio c.d. will get this treatment in the next year or two as I think this is where the entire entertainment industry are pretty much signed up and ready to go. Don't worry the players for them will play all the old discs too. Hopefully the three box sets (again what I guess will be one disc hopefully packaged like the Freddie Mercury box set from the year 2000) will still be unto themselves but hopefully each re-released disc will have some unreleased songs, alternate versions of songs, demos, outtakes, intrumentals, and accopellas as well as all films (music videos) relating to each release as well as making ofs, old interviews relating to the project, and new interviews as well. |
| AlexRocks 27.11.2005 19:55 |
Just wanted to say that what Rein said about them parrots is the funniest thing I have ever read! That was AWESOME! I can't stop laughing! Good job!! Lol!!!! |
| deleted user 28.11.2005 10:34 |
The Q+PR thing is perfect IMO, I mean they couldn't show Freddie singing live (except harmonies) when it's Brian on the studio version. Would you rather see another picture gallery like Lazing On A Sunday Afternoon and The Prophet's Song, I don't think so. Btw it wasn't that bad I mean it wasn't Paul Rodgers singing, it is BRIAN MAY so what's the problem? |
| Fenderek 28.11.2005 10:36 |
Not buying, not interested....maybe WILL do it after a while, just to make the collection kind of "complete"... Probably will wait for a second hand though so it's not going to bust the sales :P I'll probably go for vinyl now though- I'm sucker for those :) |
| YourValentine 28.11.2005 11:14 |
The blue ray disc is not yet a standard. With Sony facing billion dollar law suits for planting illegal spyware on user PCs it's not yet sure that the product will prevail, mainly as Microsoft does not support it. |
| Fairy 28.11.2005 17:39 |
So Pr never appears? I hope not. He would have nothing to do with ANATO |
| pma 28.11.2005 23:00 |
A very DIFFERENT discussion about this product at the Steve Hoffman forums. link |
| Libor2 30.11.2005 06:31 |
pma wrote: A very DIFFERENT discussion about this product at the Steve Hoffman forums. linkYes, it's VERY different discussion. It's worth to read it. Thanks for that link pma. I should say, I'm audiophile and that's why I ordered my copy of 30th anniversary ANATO. I'm mainly interested in classic stereo sound and hope that CD will fulfill my expectation of better (maybe definitely remaster) sound of ANATO. I have got DVD-A disc, so this new 5.1 remaster is only bonus for me (despite of I listen to it only in stereo). Concern to video bits, it's really indifferent for me. If there aren't any, I don't mind. On the other side, I agree it could be done better, with some demos or studio takes or something similar. Well, I haven't got it yet, so I'll see (hear:-) after it'll arrive. Libor |
| pma 30.11.2005 10:04 |
Rip Van Winkle wrote:This confused me, 4 channels on which old dvd-a? Which version is this then? My BM modified Elliot Scheiner mix used 5 channels (black spine). That is version #2 of the DVD-A. Can someone actually confirm that the original Scheiner version (light-blue spine) is a 4.0 mix? First time I hear of this...jeroen wrote:YourValentine wrote: Jeroen - does the DVD have a new surround mix, i.e. does it have a 5 channel mix instead of the 4 channels in the old DVD-Audio? .Yes, it has. It is a new mix and very different to both the 'white border' and the 'blue border' DTS DVD-A's. and Bobby: I'm not saying it is 'THAT bad'! But I'm sure that If Brian listened to this carefully he WOULD have told people to lift some voices more up in the mix. For that matter the old DVD-A, which Brian personally supervised, is much better. Even the opera-section of Bo Rhap: It's not the best example, but listen to 'scaramouch-scaramouch' and 'magnificoooo'. They sound 'out'. They are both in the rear only, so people are probably going to say that I should adjust my rear-level. Possible, but in doing so you make them sound more 'isolated' and you're out of balance for all the other tracks. You don't want to hear the band play behind you, right?! And again: I'm picky! I'm very much an audiophiliac - but the people who create these mixes are supposed to be as well. They even get paid to be picky. As far as the new version goes, the 5.1 is everything the old DVD-A should have been as far as the sonics go. Sweeter indeed on the highs (as pointed by Adam B.), less bright-harsh sounding to my ears (especially cymbals). The 5.1 mixes are great, with a few mild exceptions. I still feel that "Lazing On A Sunday Afternoon" lacks vocal presence, as do the first verses of Bohemian Rhapsody. Otherwise nice presence, smoother soundfield. These mixes never were for those who prefer 5.1 mixes that are somewhat based on the stereo-mix. The 5.1 provides a new MIX and a new way of presenting the audio. And that's what its supposed to in my opinion and not to just expand the original stereo with a few nifty gimmicky effects. That's lame and dated and done with. ;-) This is the best sounding version of the album so far, in 5.1 and stereo. A winner. The visuals? What visuals? I thought Queen were about music... |
| PainPleasure 30.11.2005 12:31 |
I'm not gonna buy that shit! |
| NOTWMEDDLE 02.12.2005 01:07 |
Michael Allred wrote: I e-mailed the following to Brian the other day (I doubt he'll ever respond to mine or anyone else's.) |
| Jjeroen 04.12.2005 06:54 |
and what about the Bowie anniversary editions?! :-) |
| Libor2 05.12.2005 10:18 |
If we're talking about these anniversary editions, I must add remastered Yes (until 90125). Very good done. |