| Queen Archivist 31.08.2006 11:47 |
Due to the BBC's policy of wiping master tapes, as we've all heard about and found incredulous, we are looking for a much better copy of the TOTP Seven Seas Of Rhye footage than the one we have in our vault. I've seen a pretty good version on Youtube.com, which seems great, but I cannot get at the source. That's the usual thing i run into. Often when I approach people for such things, they are suspicious that QPL are going to hit them with some legal headache, but that is not the idea at all. We simply want to gather all the great rarities we can, and are not interested in going after people in a secret way in order to throw law suits at them. If we did that NO ONE would ever speak with us again thereafter. So...if you know of any good Queen or related rarities on film/video, let me know a source and I will chase it. NOT rumours, NOT speculation or Might Be's. Just point me at definite leads that you know of (there won't be many I'm sure) and I will certainly look into it. The quality we have of things like SSOR (TOTP) is not what we would like, or ever would, to present to fans on products - we want to get the best posssible quality that's available out there for our next or future possible DVD releases. It is that simple. Just post the details here. But, as I say, only good ireliable info please. Not questions or speculation - or new threads going off at unrelated tangents. Lets keep this neat and concise and informative please. We already have TONS of questions and MILLIONS of speculative rumours and hearsay. Thanks |
| rocks. 31.08.2006 11:56 |
Oh! If you want the one on youtube! I know how to get it! There's this thing, if you're usuing mozzilla firefox that you can download videos off pages without links and stuff, such as youtube, its a download that you have to get seperatly from the mozilla website, and you have to have a certain player that I know you can download, just let me find the links |
| rocks. 31.08.2006 12:02 |
Ok, if you dont have Firefox on your server (it's a web browser, than you can download it here: link Ok, this is the site you use to download the extension that will allow you do download the videos off youtube, and you need a player to open them, or you can just convert them to a format of a player you have on your computer, im sorry but I cant remember what format they get downloaded in link EDIT: It's an FLV file that they get downloaded in. |
| Queen Archivist 31.08.2006 12:16 |
I appreciate your reply, but I don't want to download it, I actually want to get at the original source. It's prabably an old reel to reel thing. That's the kind of thing we need. If we got hold of that original analogue tape, or celuloid film, of anything, not just SSOR, we could probably restore it a good deal. Downloads are no good. We need the original BEST source. Thanks though. |
| rocks. 31.08.2006 12:17 |
Eh, no problemo. I didnt expect it to help very much, haha. Good luck. |
| Wilki Amieva 31.08.2006 12:31 |
Hello, Greg. Long time no see. Please contact me privately. |
| Donna13 31.08.2006 14:15 |
Have you tried posting a request in the "comments" section of these Queen YouTube links? |
| Jjeroen 31.08.2006 16:55 |
Greg - are you seeking info on professionally/officially recorded stuff only, or also for for instance audience-recorded shows? |
| John S Stuart 31.08.2006 18:53 |
Good to see you have a 'nice' side Greg. I am sure your comments will be greeted with positivity. |
| Lester Burnham 31.08.2006 19:40 |
See, Greg? Some QZers may get wound up pretty easily if you scream and shout, but most of the time they're very nice people who have no problem helping others out. ...unless, of course, that person asks if Freddie and Roger really DID kiss... Anyway, I'm sure if you try to contact the person on Youtube - just click on the user's name and there might be an email address or something - and explain yourself, the user might be willing to help out or point you in a helpful direction. |
| FriedChicken 31.08.2006 20:57 |
Hi Greg, Have you seen the other topic about Hamburg 1974? Lynyrd Skynyrd played as a support act to Queen that day in Hamburg, and some user posted a fragment of Lynyrd footage where you can see Roger's drumkit and the Queen crest on monitors on stage. Maybe it's worth trying to find where that came from. The quality of the Lynyrd Skynyrd footage is awesome, and it's pro shot. It would be strange if some (local) tv crew only filmed the support act and not the headlining band. Right? So there's prove that there was tv recording equipment that night. and there's prove that there have been recordings made.. But.. are there Queen recordings? I hope this helps you a bit.. |
| Jjeroen 01.09.2006 05:56 |
FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: Hi Greg, Have you seen the other topic about Hamburg 1974? Lynyrd Skynyrd played as a support act to Queen that day in Hamburg, and some user posted a fragment of Lynyrd footage where you can see Roger's drumkit and the Queen crest on monitors on stage. Maybe it's worth trying to find where that came from. The quality of the Lynyrd Skynyrd footage is awesome, and it's pro shot. It would be strange if some (local) tv crew only filmed the support act and not the headlining band. Right? So there's prove that there was tv recording equipment that night. and there's prove that there have been recordings made.. But.. are there Queen recordings? I hope this helps you a bit..According to WDR themselves they have NO Queen-footage in the archives whatsoever... |
| Tim June 01.09.2006 07:27 |
Hamburg is north Germany. The local TV station there is the NDR (Norddeutscher Rundfunk). I think they have their own archive. Maybe that helps. |
| Jay Mantis 01.09.2006 09:54 |
I think almost any television company (big and small) have their own archive. So there's really no telling what's out there exactly. |
| thomasquinn 32989 01.09.2006 10:04 |
Tim June wrote: Hamburg is north Germany. The local TV station there is the NDR (Norddeutscher Rundfunk). I think they have their own archive. Maybe that helps.Yes, but the recording was made for Rockpalast, which is a WDR programme. Thus, if anyone has the tapes, it's WDR. |
| Jjeroen 01.09.2006 11:04 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote:...and they don't.Tim June wrote: Hamburg is north Germany. The local TV station there is the NDR (Norddeutscher Rundfunk). I think they have their own archive. Maybe that helps.Yes, but the recording was made for Rockpalast, which is a WDR programme. Thus, if anyone has the tapes, it's WDR. |
| KevoM 01.09.2006 11:18 |
God I wish I had a decent copy of SSOR then I would 'hold it to ransom/Negotiate a deal' for QPL. Not for any huge amounts of money, all I would ask is that they release all the 'usual concerts' on DVD, that's all. Not asking for much is it? |
| Mr. Scully 01.09.2006 11:40 |
OK, I don't have any decent copy of SSOR but I do have a question: Queen (Productions) always ask, always get but never give. Fans always offer help but I don't remember anybody getting a single penny or a damn backstage pass. So what can you offer in exchange for such rare recordings? I'm sure there's some sort of a budget for this sort of things. Money? Recordings? |
| Wilki Amieva 01.09.2006 12:06 |
A fair question deserves a fair answer... (You are really brave, Martin!) |
| John S Stuart 01.09.2006 13:07 |
To be fair Martin, I was paid by Queen Productions for the inclusion of 'Ibex' on the FM Box set, but my master tape was not returned (stolen at source was the official response), and I was never compensated in any way for the loss. (Not even with a free CD!). An apology (or even an acknowledgement from someone higher tha GB) may have helped - but the offer was never made. I know that quite a large number believe 'Hangman' is bullshit - but it is my 'pension fund', and everyone knows where it is - and that is the real surprise - I flash my wares like a baboon in heat, and not once has anyone other than GB even considered to make the call. Quite strange indeed. |
| Pierre 01.09.2006 13:23 |
John S Stuart wrote: To be fair Martin, I was paid by Queen Productions for the inclusion of 'Ibex' on the FM Box set, but my master tape was not returned (stolen at source was the official response), and I was never compensated in any way for the loss. (Not even with a free CD!). An apology (or even an acknowledgement from someone higher tha GB) may have helped - but the offer was never made. I know that quite a large number believe 'Hangman' is bullshit - but it is my 'pension fund', and everyone knows where it is - and that is the real surprise - I flash my wares like a baboon in heat, and not once has anyone other than GB even considered to make the call. Quite strange indeed.Thats was a sad move from QP.. if they returned the ibex tape we could had hangman in the queen box set.... |
| Jay Mantis 01.09.2006 13:26 |
John S Stuart wrote: I know that quite a large number believe 'Hangman' is bullshitThere is a easy solution to make people aware once and for all that it is not bullshit... Just post a 10 or 20 sec sample in a lossy 128 kbps compressed mp3 file and that's it! I understand that this raritie might have a very personal toutch to it because you probably have gone through a lot to get it but in my opinion it is the most easy and obvious solution to make people aware that it really does exist. |
| Micrówave 01.09.2006 13:31 |
Wow! This behind-the-scenes stuff is neat. I'm curious what do you get "paid" for this kind of stuff. You mentioned a pension-fund. Is it really THAT kind of money? Not trying to get the actual $$$ amount, John, just curious if you are fairly compensated, or if it's based on sales, etc. Fascinating stuff. |
| its_a_hard_life 26994 01.09.2006 21:32 |
Queen Mum Archivist wrote:Hahahaha, you changed your name!!!!! LMAO.John S Stuart wrote: ...I know that quite a large number believe 'Hangman' is bullshit - but it is my 'pension fund'...Honey... ever heard of those thousands of people who once worked for Enron believing in their "pension"-funds? Go enjoy your life now... and fuck "Hangman"! ;-) |
| Queen Archivist 01.09.2006 22:03 |
God! I get so bored with you, John Stuart, hijacking any and every thread you can with your continual moaning about the same old things. Please shut up. This thread has NOTHING to do with Ibex. Life on QZ does NOT revolve around you, you'll be shocked to hear. PLEASE stop going on about your bloody Ibex tape. It was 6 entire years ago now. We lost your tape, we apologised, we paid you, you took the cash, you were invited to the Freddie box launch, you came, you bored us senseless, you mingled, you loved it, you told me you loved it. Now... get over it. You are such a moaning old woman John. You say that no one at Queen, other than me, ever contacted you. Correct. TAKE THE HINT. Ask yourself why that might be. There are good reasons why I was the one who got lumbered having to act as middle man. Work it out, it isn't hard. I'M NOT RESPONDING ANY MORE TO YOU JOHN, BECAUSE YOU ARE SO VERY TEDIOUS AND REPETITIVE AND STILL BITTER, AND IT IS SO TIRESOME AND EXHAUSTIVE. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHEN TO STOP GOING ON AND ON AND ON ABOUT AN ISSUE THAT HAPPENED 6 YEARS AGO. IT IS UNTRUE TO PRETEND QPL DID NOT APOLOGISE. I CAN PULL OUT THE EMAILS TO PROVE YOU WRONG - AND YOU KNOW IT. NOW, WOULD YOU KINDLY FOXTROT OFF AND LEAVE THESE THREADS ALONE - YOU SAD BITTER LITTLE INDIVIDUAL. I'm trying to get on with more constructive and MUCH more interesting things, with people who are neither boring or bitter. Now then, Mr Scully..... your question is next... |
| Queen Archivist 01.09.2006 22:22 |
Martin (Scully)... You make a fair point - that fans who come up with stuff that Queen uses, do not get paid - and don't get any rare recordings either. It is a fair point, but it is totally wrong. Remember the Magic rehaersal footage on the Wembley DVD? We paid a fan for that. The Ibex recording on the FM box. We paid a 'fan' for that. A very nice live recording of Queen, from early 1970s, reel-to-reel. we've just paid a fan for that. It's on my proposal for a Best Of Queen Live DVD (properly done... NOT like Rare Live) A Queen BBC session, containing a mega rare item no-one knows exists.. including us until 2 years ago. We just paid a fan for that. The fan who provided the bootlegs for QOL. He was paid. Footage of Queen live in the 80s, on 8mm film. We paid a U.S. fan for that. Martin... we DO pay people, but we don't shout from the rooftops about it. Why should we? I spend my time, with Justin and Kris, etc, gathering material for future product. Some of it might never materialise, who knows? But if it does - like a proper FULL Queen's BBC sessions box for example, which we'd love to do - then such a thing might include some fantastic elements that YOU guys do not even know exist. We spend time finding things, paying for them... just like the Magic rehearsal footage. Fans do get paid. You would be startled, seriously, to find out what things have come to light in recent years, that QPL has paid fans for, and non-fans (general collectors), for certain audio or footage. We recently purchased a great interview with Freddie (transcript of which appears in the new book). That came from a Jo-public punter, who was paid. AND WE CREDIT THESE PEOPLE TOO, MARTIN. CHECK THE SLEEVE NOTES TO WEMBLEY DVD, MK DVD. You see, you say these things, make these blanket statements, but actually you are wrong. Just because things are not made public, doesn't mean that financial deals don't go on privately - no more than if you do a private deal yourself. What business is a Martin Scully private transaction, of Greg Brooks or anyone else on QZ??? NONE, it would be your business only. Fair enough you should be "very brave" (as some QZ curiously stated) and make the point, but maybe you might collect some detailed facts before you open yourself to this kind of obvious retort. I'm not being smart-arse. I simply mean that if you want to go for the preverbial Queen jugular, then be sure of your facts first. That's fair, right? |
| Queen Archivist 01.09.2006 22:57 |
Scully, I forgot something. You also say, sarcastically, no one ever got a backstage pass. You are wrong on this as well. An Australian fan who helped us, called Luke, who some of you know, got a backstage pass to the WWRY Musical Premiere in that country. Great seats, for him and a guest, plus BS passes too. The same thing happened to UK fans at the London launch. |
| Wilki Amieva 01.09.2006 23:47 |
Well, I am the one who made the 'curious' statement. Believe me, I was just referring to Martin's question - nothing else. |
| on my way up 02.09.2006 04:55 |
Queen Archivist wrote: Martin (Scully)... You make a fair point - that fans who come up with stuff that Queen uses, do not get paid - and don't get any rare recordings either. It is a fair point, but it is totally wrong. Remember the Magic rehaersal footage on the Wembley DVD? We paid a fan for that. The Ibex recording on the FM box. We paid a 'fan' for that. A very nice live recording of Queen, from early 1970s, reel-to-reel. we've just paid a fan for that. It's on my proposal for a Best Of Queen Live DVD (properly done... NOT like Rare Live) A Queen BBC session, containing a mega rare item no-one knows exists.. including us until 2 years ago. We just paid a fan for that. The fan who provided the bootlegs for QOL. He was paid. Footage of Queen live in the 80s, on 8mm film. We paid a U.S. fan for that. Martin... we DO pay people, but we don't shout from the rooftops about it. Why should we? I spend my time, with Justin and Kris, etc, gathering material for future product. Some of it might never materialise, who knows? But if it does - like a proper FULL Queen's BBC sessions box for example, which we'd love to do - then such a thing might include some fantastic elements that YOU guys do not even know exist. We spend time finding things, paying for them... just like the Magic rehearsal footage. Fans do get paid. You would be startled, seriously, to find out what things have come to light in recent years, that QPL has paid fans for, and non-fans (general collectors), for certain audio or footage. We recently purchased a great interview with Freddie (transcript of which appears in the new book). That came from a Jo-public punter, who was paid. AND WE CREDIT THESE PEOPLE TOO, MARTIN. CHECK THE SLEEVE NOTES TO WEMBLEY DVD, MK DVD. You see, you say these things, make these blanket statements, but actually you are wrong. Just because things are not made public, doesn't mean that financial deals don't go on privately - no more than if you do a private deal yourself. What business is a Martin Scully private transaction, of Greg Brooks or anyone else on QZ??? NONE, it would be your business only. Fair enough you should be "very brave" (as some QZ curiously stated) and make the point, but maybe you might collect some detailed facts before you open yourself to this kind of obvious retort. I'm not being smart-arse. I simply mean that if you want to go for the preverbial Queen jugular, then be sure of your facts first. That's fair, right?I'm happy to read that. Collecting all the existing stuff is important and is something which is the job of Queen Productions.I love nothing more than buying a fantastic Queen-product in the best quality possible that I haven't seen or heard before. I hope in the future more such releases will happen because after Queen on fire there hasn't been a really cool release , in my opinion. I would kill for things like Japan'75 on dvd, rare studiorecordings, maybe footage from Queen in america,... |
| YourValentine 02.09.2006 05:05 |
Well, Greg - somehow I always knew you are a Queenzoner by nature :) John did not hijack the topic - no need to be so rude. He is not bitter and his contribution to the discussions here are very very valuable. He has given us more information than any other individual here, ever. One doesn't need to be Freud to see that you two don't get along but he is here and I really hope he will be here for a long time. And he is a fan - not a "fan" :) Martin did not claim anything - he asked. It's cool you answered, that is really very interesting information, thanks for that. Mainly that a fan was paid for publicly available bootlegs was an eye opener. I suppose he was not paid for the bootlegs but the expert advice? |
| Freddie May 02.09.2006 05:21 |
A complete BBC-box or a good compilation-DVD like the Led Zeppelin one would be amazing Greg ! I hope these things will come out soon ;) |
| Jay Mantis 02.09.2006 05:34 |
Queen Archivist wrote: Martin (Scully)... You make a fair point - that fans who come up with stuff that Queen uses, do not get paid - and don't get any rare recordings either. It is a fair point, but it is totally wrong. Remember the Magic rehaersal footage on the Wembley DVD? We paid a fan for that. The Ibex recording on the FM box. We paid a 'fan' for that. A very nice live recording of Queen, from early 1970s, reel-to-reel. we've just paid a fan for that. It's on my proposal for a Best Of Queen Live DVD (properly done... NOT like Rare Live) A Queen BBC session, containing a mega rare item no-one knows exists.. including us until 2 years ago. We just paid a fan for that. The fan who provided the bootlegs for QOL. He was paid. Footage of Queen live in the 80s, on 8mm film. We paid a U.S. fan for that. Martin... we DO pay people, but we don't shout from the rooftops about it. Why should we? I spend my time, with Justin and Kris, etc, gathering material for future product. Some of it might never materialise, who knows? But if it does - like a proper FULL Queen's BBC sessions box for example, which we'd love to do - then such a thing might include some fantastic elements that YOU guys do not even know exist. We spend time finding things, paying for them... just like the Magic rehearsal footage. Fans do get paid. You would be startled, seriously, to find out what things have come to light in recent years, that QPL has paid fans for, and non-fans (general collectors), for certain audio or footage. We recently purchased a great interview with Freddie (transcript of which appears in the new book). That came from a Jo-public punter, who was paid. AND WE CREDIT THESE PEOPLE TOO, MARTIN. CHECK THE SLEEVE NOTES TO WEMBLEY DVD, MK DVD. You see, you say these things, make these blanket statements, but actually you are wrong. Just because things are not made public, doesn't mean that financial deals don't go on privately - no more than if you do a private deal yourself. What business is a Martin Scully private transaction, of Greg Brooks or anyone else on QZ??? NONE, it would be your business only. Fair enough you should be "very brave" (as some QZ curiously stated) and make the point, but maybe you might collect some detailed facts before you open yourself to this kind of obvious retort. I'm not being smart-arse. I simply mean that if you want to go for the preverbial Queen jugular, then be sure of your facts first. That's fair, right?Very interesting post Greg, thanks for that! :-) |
| Mr. Scully 02.09.2006 05:54 |
Thanks for the honest reply, Greg. It's just that I know I will ask for *something* (money / pass) next time before I do anything as my time is too expensive. Remember how you asked me to scan all my ticket stubs because you would love to use them in the "I Want It All" book? Well you never got in touch again since then... |
| guild93 02.09.2006 06:17 |
Queen Archivist wrote: Scully, I forgot something. You also say, sarcastically, no one ever got a backstage pass. You are wrong on this as well. An Australian fan who helped us, called Luke, who some of you know, got a backstage pass to the WWRY Musical Premiere in that country. Great seats, for him and a guest, plus BS passes too. The same thing happened to UK fans at the London launch.Indeed that is true, after-show tickets for Melbourne and Sydney. (a forever grateful) Luke |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2006 06:39 |
Greg: Thanks for the personalised reply, it was certainly far more than I deserved.
Mistakenly, I believed I actually contributed very positively to this thread. "Good to see you have a 'nice' side Greg. I am sure your comments will be greeted with positivity."
Furthermore, in reply to Martin’s very legitimate question; "Queen (Productions) always ask, always get but never give…. So what can you offer in exchange for such rare recordings?", I thought I offered a very frank and personalised answer -
John S Stuart wrote:To be fair Martin...However, I did not expect this very pointed and individualised answer to be interpreted as " …hijacking (and) ...shocked to hear… Life on QZ does NOT revolve around (me)". I also did not expect for you to sum me up so accurately Queen Archivist wrote: …continual moaning… a moaning old woman…VERY TEDIOUS AND REPETITIVE AND STILL BITTER… SAD BITTER LITTLE INDIVIDUAL.but there you have it – you seem to know me, better than I know myself. If you may allow me a little leeway, perhaps I could make a very solid contribution to this thread. As you already know, apart from me, there are a few ‘elite’ collectors who do indeed own oodles of rare audio and visual material. One collector whom we both know, privately owns film stock of an alternative Seven Seas Of Rhye promotional film – which has never been seen by the public – nor has his Bohemian Rhapsody video out-takes. I know these exist – (as well as many other alternative films and takes) as I have been privilege to a private screening. We both know these exist, and we both know that ‘Hell would freeze over’ before Queen Productions were ever able to obtain such rarities, and before you criticise me on this point, they do not belong to me, nor do I have any influence over how they should be ‘handled’, but I digress. My main point is regardless of the passage of time (you may well remember in 2005 John Humble – The Yorkshire Ripper Hoaxer – was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment for a tape he recorded in 1978) – I find that I do indeed still take the theft of ‘my’ tape from a very secure Queen Productions very ‘personally’ indeed. If that makes me bitter, then I hold my hands-up, but forgive me if this dents my faith in a billion pound organisation. What I am trying to say is that I do not know of any ‘serious’ collector who would pass ‘serious’ material to such projects, because in essence – no ‘serious’ collector would ever trust QPL – harsh I know, but I am only reflecting the thoughts (of a few) of the main dealers and players. Personally, I find this both a sad and sorry affair, because as a “fan”, I too would like to own some of these ultra-rare gems, but it also leaves me with some very difficult questions… If (I speak the truth) how was this climate created in the first place? Why are some collectors so reluctant to be involved? Why does this huge mistrust exist? Of course, I may be wrong (and God knows – I often am), but I have a sneaking suspicion only QPL have themselves to blame. |
| Paulos 02.09.2006 07:02 |
I have a BBC Transcription Disc of Queens Golden Green Hippodrome gig on the 13th September 1973. You've no doubt already got it Greg but i thought i'd get this thread 'constructive' and throw it into the ring. |
| Sebastian 02.09.2006 07:35 |
John, I think we all realise you're not hijacking the thread, we all realise your intentions are good and your messages (in this and other discussions) are sincere and valuable. Then why worrying about one bloke who can't understand that? As you cleverly say "life's too short", then don't waste it replying Greg's senseless insults. That time could be put in better use, like writing a book ;), or whatever you want. |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2006 08:10 |
Sebastian wrote: John, I think we all realise you're not hijacking the thread, we all realise your intentions are good and your messages (in this and other discussions) are sincere and valuable. Then why worrying about one bloke who can't understand that?Good points Seb, but what I have personally learned from this thread is that Martin has scanned many tickets for no reward; "Remember how you asked me to scan all my ticket stubs because you would love to use them in the "I Want It All" book? Well you never got in touch again since then...". A fan was PAID for sharing bootlegs (whom I presume did not own the master tapes - or even record the gigs for that matter). "The fan who PROVIDED the bootlegs for QOL. He was paid." (Which kind of answers violonbleu's earlier question:link "When a fan records a concert... is it his right to share it... or does he have to ask... Queen Production(s)? Are the playing artists the owners of their music..."). And finally, "You say that no one at Queen, other than me, ever contacted YOU. Correct. TAKE THE HINT." Therefore, I fail to see how QPL could possibly believe that any half decent fan would offer them anything, when in fact, the reality is, there is indeed "Something... rotten in the state of Denmark". Here I am standing like 'Gladys Knight & The Pips' shouting 'Here I am, take me in your arms and love me', only to be told I am a " moaning... SAD BITTER LITTLE INDIVIDUAL". I know I should not highlight such negativities, but I feel it is about time that QPL took stock of what is happening INSIDE, and face the fact that many rare and hidden gems will NEVER see the light of day - not because of unwilling, selfish or even greedy fans - but because as a faceless entity, QPL are the ones who treat that very same fan base no better than sh*t - and unless that bridge is spanned by something a bit more concrete, far more rarities will be driven underground than ever possibly imagined. |
| Jay Mantis 02.09.2006 10:05 |
Excuse my interuption but I have a question that I'm still very much looking forward to have answered. Greg, On Martin's website it states that Queen Productions owns a recording of the Marquee '72 show on the 20th of December in London. link Now I trust that this information on QueenConcerts.com is accurate (it always has been so far) but is it possbile for you to confirm this? and if so... (here it comes :P) Could you give us any details about it? |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2006 10:19 |
« Jay » wrote: ...On Martin's website it states that Queen Productions owns a recording of the Marquee '72 show on the 20th of December in London... Could you give us any details about it?Queen: Unreleased, Live, Marquee, London, 20 December 1972 Great King Rat, Son & Daughter, Jesus, Doing Alright, Ogre Battle, Keep Yourself Alive, Liar, Jailhouse Rock, Bama Lama Lama Loo Jay: The Marquee 1972 is the earliest known Queen live recording – but it is dreadful quality - and could never be released. (Imagine your worst bootleg - then some!). Original owner Richard Thomson (1984/Ibex): recorded mono reel-to-reel. SOLD: Christie’s Pop And Guitars Auction, Thursday 6th June 1996. Richard Thomson: Lot 154 sold £2,800 Bought by Queen Productions Ltd – John S. Stuart, Record Collector, 11th June 1996. Set similar to 10th March 1992, except, Night Comes Down, See What A Fool I’ve Been, Stone Cold Crazy, and Hangman dropped from the set. New material includes Doing Alright, and Ogre Battle. |
| Jay Mantis 02.09.2006 10:31 |
John S Stuart wrote:« Jay » wrote: Jay: The Marquee 1972 is the earliest known Queen live recording – but it is dreadful quality - and could never be released. (Imagine your worst bootleg - then some!).Ouch! that hurts. :P |
| IvoDutch 02.09.2006 11:29 |
Hi Greg, I'm just a regular Queen fan, and I don't have the time or the money to hunt down rare Queen material. I do own all the Queen DVD's, and really enjoy all the extras on them. I spend some money on a couple of bootlegs years ago, but was disappointed by the poor sound and video quality. I would love to see a GVH3 one day, with the innuendo material. I'm very curious what unreleased stuff from the Innuendo-sessions is out there. I also would love a "Best of Live" DVD, or a DVD from the 1979 tour, because I really like the "Live Killers" album. Anyway, good hunting, and please be generous in releasing stuff that is worthwile. I'm looking forward to the next Queen DVD (Christmas, Maybe?). Thanks for your work. Ivo from The Netherlands |
| The Real Wizard 02.09.2006 11:47 |
Queen Archivist wrote: A very nice live recording of Queen, from early 1970s, reel-to-reel. we've just paid a fan for that. It's on my proposal for a Best Of Queen Live DVD (properly done... NOT like Rare Live) A Queen BBC session, containing a mega rare item no-one knows exists.. including us until 2 years ago. We just paid a fan for that. Footage of Queen live in the 80s, on 8mm film. We paid a U.S. fan for that.Any chance you could tell us a bit more about this material, Greg? I'm especially interested in knowing about the 70s reel-to-reel. |
| Queen Archivist 02.09.2006 11:57 |
To Martin Scully, who wrote... Thanks for the honest reply, Greg. It's just that I know I will ask for *something* (money / pass) next time before I do anything as my time is too expensive. Remember how you asked me to scan all my ticket stubs because you would love to use them in the "I Want It All" book? Well you never got in touch again since then... *************** Martin, I thanked you very much in an email for your very interesting scans. I further told you in email, which I retain... that nearer the time (of the design of that book) I would get back in touch to discuss the finer details - by which I mean what credit you'd like IF we use any of your stuff - which is very likely. And, contact you nearer the time is precisely what I will do. Probably early months of 2007. Why do you think it necessary to portray it in a way that will make it seem that I treated you badly? Why would you do that? we had a decent correspondence; friendly and constructive, and I left it in a constructive way too. I will contact you nearer the time. I couldn't have made it any clearer. Why imply otherwise, Martin? What's your purpose in doing that here on QZ? It is unfair and gives the deliberate misinterpretation that you intended. It is unnecessary. AND... if you were genuinely bemused that I did not reply to one of your mails, why didn't you just send a polite reminder... "Dear Greg, I sent you the scans but I have not heard back from you. Did you get them OK?" That's the natural and obvious thing to do in that situation. Would that not have been a bit nicer than what you imply above? Your comment (reprinted above) tries to make me look unnecessarily rude. There is no need for it.... not from you Martin. AND, by the way... having complained that no Queen fan ever got paid or got a backstage pass for the help they gave us, which I clearly disproved... because you were totally WRONG, did you have the grace to apologise, or to take it back, or say, "Greg, fair enough, thank you for outlining that, I was in error." No. You did not. Martin, be fair and balanced, not biased and misleading. That's my point, and it is reasonable. Usually you are those things with me... why all of a sudden are you painting a different picture? Don't answer that. Just be fair. And don't imply things you know to be otherwise. It's really not much to ask. |
| Queen Archivist 02.09.2006 12:13 |
A QueenZoner wrote... ...there are a few ‘elite’ collectors who do indeed own oodles of rare audio and visual material. One collector whom we both know, privately owns film stock of an alternative Seven Seas Of Rhye promotional film – which has never been seen by the public – nor has his Bohemian Rhapsody video out-takes. I know these exist – (as well as many other alternative films and takes) as I have been privilege to a private screening. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS. I HAVE EXTREMELY GOOD REASONS FOR NOT BELIEVING THIS. THIS IS BULLSHIT INVENTED TO MAKE A POINT WHICH IS ALSO INVALID AND NOT WORTHY OF YOU. We both know these exist, NO WE DO NOT 'BOTH' KNOW ANY SUCH THING. YOU MAY THINK THEY EXIST, I DO NOT. THAT IS NOT BOTH OF US AT ALL. IT'S JUST YOU, AND YOU TRYING TO ATTACH BOGUS CREDIBILITY TO YOUR BULLSHIT. and we both know that ‘Hell would freeze over’ before Queen Productions were ever able to obtain such rarities, THIS IS JUST THE PREDICTABLE TAIL OUT I WAS EXPECTING. IT EFFECTIVELY MEANS THAT THE ITEMS YOU INVENTED WILL NOT HAVE TO BE, AS IT WERE, GIVEN IN EVIDENCE. THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT YOU WOULD SAY, KNOWING THAT THEY CANNOT EVER BE PRESENTED. RIDICULOUS AND PUERILE COMMENT, AND TOTALLY TRANSPARENT TO ALL OF US.... OR THOSE OF US THAT CAN BEAR TO FACE THE REALITY THAT YOU DO GET THINGS WRONG, AND THAT YOU MAKE UP THINGS THAT MOST PEOPLE CANNOT REFUTE.... BUT IN THIS CASE, I CAN. I'M TELLING YOU, DEAR MOANZONERS, THAT... 'Seven Seas Of Rhye promotional film – which has never been seen by the public – nor has his Bohemian Rhapsody video out-takes.' SIMPLY DO NOT EXIST. DO NOT GIVE THIS PERSON YOUR TIME OR EFFORT. DO NOT BE SO MANIPULATED. IT'S JUST ANOTHER STRATMAN TYPE OF SUNBURY CONCERT 1974 FILM INVENTION. THEY DON'T EXIST. THEY NO MORE EXIST, THAN THE PERSON WHO TOLD YOU THIS, BIG CIRCLE OF FRIENDS AND ADMIRERS EXIST. THEY ARE ALL FIGMENTS OF IMAGINATION SUDDENLY PUT FORWARD TO IMPRESS YOU AND MAKE A POINT IN ANGER (OR FRUSTRATION) 'I have been privilege to a private screening.' "MY ARSE!" AS JIM ROYAL SO ELOQUENTLY PUTS IT. IF YOU BELIEVE YOU WILL BELIEVE ANYTHING. IF HE SAID THAT FOOTAGE OF FREDDIE MERCURY BEATING UP GARY GLITTER IN 1979, AT A PARK IN COVENTRY, AFTER A GIG, EXISTED, GOD, WOULD YOU BELIEVE THAT TOO? PLEASE DON'T BE GULLIBLE ENOUGH TO TAKE THAT IN. |
| Queen Archivist 02.09.2006 12:14 |
Apologies, i meant the above to be a new thread. See new thread. |
| Mr. Scully 02.09.2006 13:28 |
Greg, I mentioned this matter because I thought the release of the "I Want It All" book was scheduled for November 2006 or so (which would mean that you decided to use nothing from my collection and did not let me know at all). If the situation is different, then I apologize. I will be more patient. Regarding Marquee 1972 - Richard Thompson doesn't own a copy anymore. |
| John S Stuart 02.09.2006 14:03 |
John S Stuart wrote: ... face the fact that many rare and hidden gems will NEVER see the light of day - not because of unwilling, selfish or even greedy fans - but because as a faceless entity, QPL are the ones who treat that very same fan base no better than sh*t - and unless that bridge is spanned by something a bit more concrete, far more rarities will be driven underground than ever possibly imagined.Greg: (Notice how I can use YOUR name), For years I have written on this board, and for years I have made all sorts of predictions and leaked all sorts of information, therefore regular readers will be able to decide for themselves whether I am a good source of information or whether I fictionalise - and frankly I care not one jot either way. But you are correct, I would not share with you the steam from my proverbial sh*t, not because it does not exist - but because I can. And if this makes me a bad person - so be it, and if you wish to deny the existence of this based on you own prejudices, then again, that is not my problem either. Can you not see the damage you are doing by isolating genuine people? Earlier last year you reported one gentleman "jumped up and down each time he saw you", and while I believe that to be a gross exaggeration - do you REALLY know what stuff that gentleman has? NO: you do not. Do you know what I own: NO you do not. So please do not come on here and try bluff your way with "if you have it show me the money", because that rouse is well past his sell-by date. Martin: Yes you are correct. As I stated above, Richard Thompson sold his original tape at auction in 1996. |
| on my way up 02.09.2006 14:28 |
John S Stuart wrote:I don't understand why Greg does so difficult. That isn't very intelligent from a commercial point of view. It is the task from Queen Productions to gather as much material as possible. Well, then you don't tell possible sellers AND buyers to fuck off.That is what greg sometimes does. Brian May or Roger Taylor won't be happy with this situation. The archivist shouldn't give the die-hard fans which we(and john above all!)I always read with great pleasure the posts on here(also on queenonline)and sometimes people make trouble for nothing. We are here for the same reasons. We just want as much material released for the fanzs and the better that material , the happier the fans. Greg should contribute to that and help the fans. Not call them names. Like it or not ,greg, you represent Queen!John S Stuart wrote: ... face the fact that many rare and hidden gems will NEVER see the light of day - not because of unwilling, selfish or even greedy fans - but because as a faceless entity, QPL are the ones who treat that very same fan base no better than sh*t - and unless that bridge is spanned by something a bit more concrete, far more rarities will be driven underground than ever possibly imagined.Greg: (Notice how I can use YOUR name), For years I have written on this board, and for years I have made all sorts of predictions and leaked all sorts of information, therefore regular readers will be able to decide for themselves whether I am a good source of information or whether I fictionalise - and frankly I care not one jot either way. But you are correct, I would not share with you the steam from my proverbial sh*t, not because it does not exist - but because I can. And if this makes me a bad person - so be it, and if you wish to deny the existence of this based on you own prejudices, then again, that is not my problem either. Can you not see the damage you are doing by isolating genuine people? Earlier last year you reported one gentleman "jumped up and down each time I he saw you", and while I believe that to be a gross exageration - do you REALLY know what stuff that gentleman has? NO: you do not. Do you know what I own: NO you do not. So please do not come on here and try bluff your way into "if I have it show me the money", because that rouse is well past his sell-by date. Martin: Yes you are correct. As I stated above, Richard Thompson sold his original tape at auction in 1996. |
| Penetration_Guru 02.09.2006 15:47 |
Here we go again.... As a collector (at a medium level - neither the bottom of the chain nor the top), I have very little chance of helping with finding material (although I did send some pics for the IWIA book, confident that they would be duplicates but wanting to make sure nothing got missed out), so can only watch and wonder. What I would say is that I know which people claiming to have things I trust, and which I do not. So, for example, I believe that a Hangman studio acetate does exist, and video footage of Queen at Sunbury does not. However, I must acknowledge that I didn't believe the first reports of PR joining Q, and believed that the Top 100 bootlegs would be lossless recordings from Queen's own archives, so judge me on my judgements.... |
| Jay Mantis 02.09.2006 16:58 |
What I don't understand is why every interesting thread turns into a huge discussion or even a fight when it reaches two pages or more. Seriously what is up with that? We should be working together and share information. Not endlessly argue with each other. Call me naive if you must but this place would be a lot more fun if everybody would accept and respect each other for who they are and left their personal issues behind them. |
| Negative Creep 02.09.2006 17:08 |
John S Stuart - have you ever thought of asking QP for a digital clone for the digital master they have of your tape? It would obviously be of much higher quality than your MD dub. |
| Crezchi 03.09.2006 00:32 |
Queen Archivist wrote: |
| Mr. Scully 03.09.2006 04:09 |
John - yes but Richard kept a copy. But then lost it... Jay - the problem is that we feel Queen Productions ask for more than they give. And that's valid not only about recordings but also about info. We do provide info that Hangman acetate exists or there's no Sunbury video. But I don't remember getting this sort of info from the other side, from Queen. And I don't blame Greg this time, he probably has his orders. |
| Crezchi 03.09.2006 04:58 |
Sorry there Mr. Skully, but Sunbury '74, & Hamburg (WDR) '74 exist! I have seen WDR on a few collectors lists a few years back, and i have seen about 2mins of Sunbury, from a guy in Australia named Nygel. |
| Serry... 03.09.2006 05:17 |
Collectors' lists are very dangerous items, to be honest... |
| Mkls 03.09.2006 05:54 |
Crezchi wrote: Sorry there Mr. Skully, but Sunbury '74, & Hamburg (WDR) '74 exist! I have seen WDR on a few collectors lists a few years back, and i have seen about 2mins of Sunbury, from a guy in Australia named Nygel.Sorry there, Hamburg (WDR) is a totally new information, nobody noticed this LS footage before with the Queen crest... No collector had it on their list. Why start another false rumour? |
| Jay Mantis 03.09.2006 06:00 |
Mr. Scully wrote: Jay - the problem is that we feel Queen Productions ask for more than they give. And that's valid not only about recordings but also about info. We do provide info that Hangman acetate exists or there's no Sunbury video. But I don't remember getting this sort of info from the other side, from Queen. And I don't blame Greg this time, he probably has his orders.I understand that dude. I just think we should try to avoid turning every thread into yet another discussion whitch is pretty much spread through out the whole board. That's all. Alright back to the topic: Greg have you ever heard about the private recording that exist of the Fort Worth show on the 10th of December, 1977? I think someone recently claimed that a family member of his or her has recorded a large part of this show on Super 8. This would certainly be interesting seeing as how there's not much video material availible from this era. I definitely think this is worthy of tracing seeing as it's more then just a speculation. Also, (although I must admit this is still a rumour but since a lot of people seem to know who owns this recording, I'll just include it). The first show Queen performed in Holland on the 8th of December at The Hague in 1974 was apparantly recorded on video. Many claim that at least one person has a possible full recording of that show (seeing as the show wasn't that long). Best of all, the hall that Queen used at the Congres Gebouw was known to capture most of their shows on tape with a large camera that was set up at the back of the hall. They did this with bands like the Rolling Stones as well. (material from that show exist!) This might be something to trace. |
| Crezchi 03.09.2006 06:22 |
Miklos wrote:A concert that was performed in 1974, new info? lol right. This was known that Queen played there. You said, "No collector had it on their list. Why start another false rumour?" First off, you DO NOT know every Queen collector in the whole world, secondly, i don't EVER remember starting ANY rumours! The collectors lists i saw the Hamburg concert on were of a couple of Lynyrd Skynyrd collectors, and 1 Queen collector, of whom lives in Jacksonville, Fla. and has been a huge collector of both LS and Queen for many of years, and i know this person well. Her and her husband have been to many, and i mean many of the Queen conventions over the years, and she has some awesome rarities. So before you start making statements about me, get your facts straight, i am not here to start fights or rumours, i only speak of REAL life Queen experiences, i am not like some of the other people here who CLAIM they have everything, and then don't share a damn thing. All i said was i have seen some of Sunbury, and i have seen Hamburg on collectors lists in previous years. In closing, do you actually think that even 10% of serious Queen collectors are here at QZ? I think not. I will tell you the same thing i told Greg Brooks, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS ALL OUT THERE, AND NEVER WILL! Now with that said, let's all get along here. :)Crezchi wrote: Sorry there Mr. Skully, but Sunbury '74, & Hamburg (WDR) '74 exist! I have seen WDR on a few collectors lists a few years back, and i have seen about 2mins of Sunbury, from a guy in Australia named Nygel.Sorry there, Hamburg (WDR) is a totally new information, nobody noticed this LS footage before with the Queen crest... No collector had it on their list. Why start another false rumour? |
| Mkls 03.09.2006 06:27 |
Welcome back Stratman. "A concert that was performed in 1974, new info" OK you are still uncapable of reading and interpreting. The new info is the WDR LS footage, with the Queen crest. |
| Crezchi 03.09.2006 06:33 |
Miklos wrote: Welcome back Stratman. "A concert that was performed in 1974, new info" OK you are still uncapable of reading and interpreting. The new info is the WDR LS footage, with the Queen crest.Welcome back Stratman? OMG, to be honest, i have better things to do than be insulted! I am NOT stratman or anyone else, i have really only been here very shortly! I never even heard of this site until about 3 months ago. So dude, why don't you chill out and quit trying to avoid the facts? And BTW, YOU are the one that is starting false rumours, you are saying that i am this dude that i don't even know, nor do i even care about, i am NOT stratman, or whoever the hell you are talking about, and nor am i a liar like the person/troll that you mention! |
| Mkls 03.09.2006 06:44 |
Crezchi wrote:ehehe.... found and hit?Miklos wrote: Welcome back Stratman. "A concert that was performed in 1974, new info" OK you are still uncapable of reading and interpreting. The new info is the WDR LS footage, with the Queen crest.Welcome back Stratman? OMG, to be honest, i have better things to do than be insulted! I am NOT stratman or anyone else, i have really only been here very shortly! I never even heard of this site until about 3 months ago. So dude, why don't you chill out and quit trying to avoid the facts? And BTW, YOU are the one that is starting false rumours, you are saying that i am this dude that i don't even know, nor do i even care about, i am NOT stratman, or whoever the hell you are talking about, and nor am i a liar like the person/troll that you mention! |
| Crezchi 03.09.2006 06:50 |
Miklos wrote:Sorry i don't follow???Crezchi wrote:ehehe.... found and hit?Miklos wrote: Welcome back Stratman. "A concert that was performed in 1974, new info" OK you are still uncapable of reading and interpreting. The new info is the WDR LS footage, with the Queen crest.Welcome back Stratman? OMG, to be honest, i have better things to do than be insulted! I am NOT stratman or anyone else, i have really only been here very shortly! I never even heard of this site until about 3 months ago. So dude, why don't you chill out and quit trying to avoid the facts? And BTW, YOU are the one that is starting false rumours, you are saying that i am this dude that i don't even know, nor do i even care about, i am NOT stratman, or whoever the hell you are talking about, and nor am i a liar like the person/troll that you mention! |
| Jay Mantis 03.09.2006 07:44 |
Here we go again... |
| Mkls 03.09.2006 08:14 |
« Jay » wrote:Fort Worth.Mr. Scully wrote: Jay - the problem is that we feel Queen Productions ask for more than they give. And that's valid not only about recordings but also about info. We do provide info that Hangman acetate exists or there's no Sunbury video. But I don't remember getting this sort of info from the other side, from Queen. And I don't blame Greg this time, he probably has his orders.I understand that dude. I just think we should try to avoid turning every thread into yet another discussion whitch is pretty much spread through out the whole board. That's all. Alright back to the topic: Greg have you ever heard about the private recording that exist of the Fort Worth show on the 10th of December, 1977? I think someone recently claimed that a family member of his or her has recorded a large part of this show on Super 8. This would certainly be interesting seeing as how there's not much video material availible from this era. I definitely think this is worthy of tracing seeing as it's more then just a speculation. This might be something to trace. "Atlanta 8th December. Bob Harris, the compere of Englands major rock TV programme, arrived with the film crew to do some filming for the forthcoming documentary about the band. They began filming at Fort Worth and Houston, after which the film crew returned home and Bob Harris stayed with the band and flew them to Las Vegas." OIQFC Spring 78 issue. Unfortunately in the lack of official confirmation, we dont know how much of the concert was recorded, or whether it survived. If somebody has the book "Quen - The early years", there is a chapter where Bob Harris tells the story of a day in 1978, when some people from QP arrived at their studios, and took all US footage reels with them . I am not saying it is a genuine story, but that is written in that book. The Fan Club mag continues... > "during the stop in Long Beach, the band did a 15 minute slot for the NBC six o clock news. This included interviews with the band and film of the setting up of the equipoment and the stage"... link .. any production company is able to ask a research for the above news footage... |
| Jay Mantis 03.09.2006 08:17 |
Well there you have it, it at least proves that a film crew have attempted to shoot the concert. If the tapes are still locked away is another thing of course but he it's a start! :-) |
| Queen Archivist 04.09.2006 07:47 |
To Crezchi. YOU DID NOT FOLLOW THE THREAD CAREFULLY ENOUGH. So, gather your facts properly and then what you say might be accurate, instead of in error. I did NOT say that Sunbury doesn't exist, silly boy, I said that YoungStratMan having the Sunbury footage was an invention, which it was. This has now been proven on this site - if you bothered to read it carefully before shouting your mouth off in error at me, you'd see and read that. We know the footage exists somewhere, but NOT with StratMan. My point was that LIKE Stratman owning the footage, the Bo Rhap out-takes DO NOT EXIST. Please get your facts straight before spouting off. |
| Crezchi 04.09.2006 08:05 |
Queen Archivist wrote: To Crezchi. YOU DID NOT FOLLOW THE THREAD CAREFULLY ENOUGH. So, gather your facts properly and then what you say might be accurate, instead of in error. I did NOT say that Sunbury doesn't exist, silly boy, I said that YoungStratMan having the Sunbury footage was an invention, which it was. This has now been proven on this site - if you bothered to read it carefully before shouting your mouth off in error at me, you'd see and read that. We know the footage exists somewhere, but NOT with StratMan. My point was that LIKE Stratman owning the footage, the Bo Rhap out-takes DO NOT EXIST. Please get your facts straight before spouting off.Sorry maybe i did misunderstand, but you don't have to be so rude about it. Honestly i still don't think you were specific about your statement. I don't know the whole story about stratman, so i can't be expected to know every detail of what is said. Sorry. For future encounters, why not be a little less rude? |
| Queen Archivist 04.09.2006 08:30 |
Ok Crezchi, But it was rather rude of you to attack me as you did without first reading the threads and doing just a tiny bit of homework before having a go at me in error. That's rude too. I'll be less rude next time, if you are not so eager to find fault in me for no reason. That seems fair. |
| Crezchi 04.09.2006 08:39 |
Queen Archivist wrote: Ok Crezchi, But it was rather rude of you to attack me as you did without first reading the threads and doing just a tiny bit of homework before having a go at me in error. That's rude too. I'll be less rude next time, if you are not so eager to find fault in me for no reason. That seems fair.I did say "Sorry" to you, and that i may have "misunderstood" what you meant. I don't go looking for faults in anyone Greg, i really respect you just like i respect everyone else here, but i can only give the respect that i am given also. |
| Queen Archivist 04.09.2006 09:16 |
« Jay » wrote: What I don't understand is why every interesting thread turns into a huge discussion or even a fight when it reaches two pages or more. Seriously what is up with that? We should be working together and share information. Not endlessly argue with each other. Call me naive if you must but this place would be a lot more fun if everybody would accept and respect each other for who they are and left their personal issues behind them.******* Jay... there are MANY people here on MoanZone, and FEW and an ever dwindling number of genuine people, who really care about getting at serious Queen and related issues. Sadly, you will always find that decent honest and reasonable questions and threads get sabotaged or hijacked by a series of morons intent upon spoiling it for everyone. That is the nature of these kinds of forum sites. It cannot be avoided. You have young idiots, utter morons and spanners (as we call them here) that have nothing constructive to contribute, no knowledge or experience, and can only offer something stupid, untrelated, insulting, banaal, predictable. There are MANY of them, and they even piss off other QZ-ers. But STILL they are here!!!!! STILL THEY ARE TOLERATED. GOD ONLY KNOWS WHY. You will soon see comments added to this point of mine, now, that will endorse the point. Some of them seem to be 9 or 10 years old. Is that feasible? I guess it must be. And even those in their late teens and 20s seem as mad as march hares. Some are the kind of people you would serious avoid if you saw them on the street. Believe me, I know what I'm talking about on this issue. Some are genuinely 'dangerous' individuals with what's going on inside their heads. You can determine this easily enough by some threads on this site, as you know. This is the nature of these sites. I'm aware of that. That's why most people who want serious debate and whom want to get at the real essence of interesting Queen issues, do so in private email without the risk of dickheads interrupting and getting in the way just because they can. Sad, isn't it. There is some great stuff here on QZ, which I read, and sometimes follow up on, or which I direct certain people within the Queen circle towards. BUT it is littered with so much pollution and unrelated trash and stupidity from people who know nothing, that most of the main people I direct to things, get bored very quickly and leave. Is this what you want? I think it would be great if there was some efficient and ruthless way of filtering away those who seek only to sabotage, hijact, corrupt and generally fuck up what could otherwise be a forum/site with an unusual and enviable reputation. This is, as far as I can see, the main reason that a lot of key people avoid this site. It COULD be very different. At the moment QZ's reputation is far from enviable. Of course there will be those to disagree with this, but those people would argue with ANYTHING at all, just for the sake of it. But you know what I mean. If QueenZone were a high street shop, many of the people who come in and abuse it, who try to pollute and break it, would surely be thrown out - some with a good and well-earned smack round the ear as they were ejected. But here on QZ, ANY nasty sod can say what he/she likes - to disrupt good conversation and block proper progress, to the huge detriment of it all. It's so tedious and, I think, unnecessary. There seems to be NO policing, no care, no monitoring of this sight. Imagine if you tried to run a shop or office company that way! Why can't there be some sensible filtering of those who use and abuse this site? Ok, I might get thrown off too, as too might the mean and moody Poppy (who said she made a 13-years old QZ-er cry and bugger off), but that might not be a bad thing. I for one would certainly sacrifice myself and my extremely amusing and entertaining presence, and my genius comments and huge |
| The Real Wizard 04.09.2006 18:55 |
Greg, could you please reply to my post on page 3? |
| The Real Wizard 04.09.2006 19:04 |
Crezchi wrote: The collectors lists i saw the Hamburg concert on were of a couple of Lynyrd Skynyrd collectors, and 1 Queen collector, of whom lives in Jacksonville, Fla. and has been a huge collector of both LS and Queen for many of years, and i know this person well. Her and her husband have been to many, and i mean many of the Queen conventions over the years, and she has some awesome rarities.There have been so many times where people have said this thing exists and that thing exists, and 99 times out of 100, they never come to fruition. We therefore are filled with skepticism when yet another person comes along saying they've heard of a couple concerts that aren't circulating among Queen collectors. So, if you can provide us with names and email addresses of these collectors you've mentioned, then we'll be happy to get in contact with them, and see where things go from there. |
| Crezchi 04.09.2006 20:12 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:As i stated in another thread, i didn't say that i saw Hamburg or KNOW that it exists! I simply said that i have seen it on Collectors lists in the past, but does that mean that i am saying it is 100% acurate or 100% real? No it does not. I just wish that people here (not you GH) would relise that just because collectors aren't active in qz that does NOT mean that they don't have anything rare or they aren't anybody when it comes to Queen collecting, acutally it means they have better things to do than to hang around the web all day. And i will NOT give out anyones email address', but i will give you a name. Diane McClanahan. I have known here and her husband Lacy for about 12 years give or take a year.Crezchi wrote: The collectors lists i saw the Hamburg concert on were of a couple of Lynyrd Skynyrd collectors, and 1 Queen collector, of whom lives in Jacksonville, Fla. and has been a huge collector of both LS and Queen for many of years, and i know this person well. Her and her husband have been to many, and i mean many of the Queen conventions over the years, and she has some awesome rarities.There have been so many times where people have said this thing exists and that thing exists, and 99 times out of 100, they never come to fruition. We therefore are filled with skepticism when yet another person comes along saying they've heard of a couple concerts that aren't circulating among Queen collectors. So, if you can provide us with names and email addresses of these collectors you've mentioned, then we'll be happy to get in contact with them, and see where things go from there. |
| Mkls 05.09.2006 01:22 |
link We can all ask her of course whether YSM is telling the truth. You see its that easy ;) |
| Crezchi 05.09.2006 01:44 |
MS wrote: link We can all ask her of course whether YSM is telling the truth. You see its that easy ;)Dude this is tha last time i will bloody say this! I AM NOT YSM OR ANY OTHER FUCKER YOU THINK I AM!! SO SHUT THE HELL UP ALREADY! I haven't had any other problems with anyone else, so why start on me? Get over it! Go ahead and ask Diane, i have known her and her husband for 12 or more years, so like i care what you ask her. |
| Wilki Amieva 05.09.2006 02:03 |
You certainly have made a very valid point with your last post, Greg. On the other hand, you have not always behaved in 'orthodox' ways (to say the least) within this forum. I guess we all just will have to take QUEENZone mostly as a "live and let die" scene: cherishing the good moments - by-passing the rest. Don't you agree? |
| Mkls 05.09.2006 04:48 |
Crezchi wrote:Chill out dude. So if you know her for 12 years, why you never had time to ask for a copy of Hamburg 74?MS wrote: link We can all ask her of course whether YSM is telling the truth. You see its that easy ;)Dude this is tha last time i will bloody say this! I AM NOT YSM OR ANY OTHER FUCKER YOU THINK I AM!! SO SHUT THE HELL UP ALREADY! I haven't had any other problems with anyone else, so why start on me? Get over it! Go ahead and ask Diane, i have known her and her husband for 12 or more years, so like i care what you ask her. YSM = JFarnham = YSWoman = Moanzone Twat = Queen Mum Archivist = Crezchi khmm... personality problems? |
| Crezchi 05.09.2006 05:31 |
Now you are just being plain stupid! lol hahahaha, get over yourself, honestly. lol |
| Crezchi 05.09.2006 05:33 |
Ask Barb to trace the IP address of these users "YSWoman = Moanzone Twat = Queen Mum Archivist" Then she can tell you that NONE of these people are me at all! |
| Jjeroen 05.09.2006 05:35 |
The individual IP's HAVE been checked! Just so you know. There is indeed some schizofrenic behaviour going on in here! :-) |
| The Fairy King 05.09.2006 05:37 |
Queen Archivist wrote:« Jay » wrote: What I don't understand is why every interesting thread turns into a huge discussion or even a fight when it reaches two pages or more. Seriously what is up with that? We should be working together and share information. Not endlessly argue with each other. Call me naive if you must but this place would be a lot more fun if everybody would accept and respect each other for who they are and left their personal issues behind them.******* |
| Crezchi 05.09.2006 05:39 |
jeroen wrote: The individual IP's HAVE been checked! Just so you know. There is indeed some schizofrenic behaviour going on in here! :-)Dude, DO NOT even try and say that i am "YoungStratWoman, Moanzone Twat, or Queen mum archivist"! because if you are saying the IP's are the same or from my area, you are a liar! |
| The Fairy King 05.09.2006 05:57 |
Crezchi wrote:Yes but you ARE YoungStratWoman, Moanzone Twat, and Queen mum archivist.jeroen wrote: The individual IP's HAVE been checked! Just so you know. There is indeed some schizofrenic behaviour going on in here! :-)Dude, DO NOT even try and say that i am "YoungStratWoman, Moanzone Twat, or Queen mum archivist"! because if you are saying the IP's are the same or from my area, you are a liar! |
| Crezchi 05.09.2006 06:03 |
<b><font color="green">The Fairy King wrote:Based on what evidence???? It is not possible for me to go to a different state or country and post comments, get real, Barb will clear this up. Of course you guys will probably argue with her as well.Crezchi wrote:Yes but you ARE YoungStratWoman, Moanzone Twat, and Queen mum archivist.jeroen wrote: The individual IP's HAVE been checked! Just so you know. There is indeed some schizofrenic behaviour going on in here! :-)Dude, DO NOT even try and say that i am "YoungStratWoman, Moanzone Twat, or Queen mum archivist"! because if you are saying the IP's are the same or from my area, you are a liar! |
| Reading Princess 05.09.2006 06:35 |
Greg seems to want to turn this site into some QPL controlled police state. It'll never happen. AND WE KNOW EVERYONE READS IT no matter what you say Greg. Queen are a business. They have to know what's bubbling. |
| Jjeroen 05.09.2006 08:10 |
Crezchi wrote:I didn't, did I?jeroen wrote: The individual IP's HAVE been checked! Just so you know. There is indeed some schizofrenic behaviour going on in here! :-)Dude, DO NOT even try and say that i am "YoungStratWoman, Moanzone Twat, or Queen mum archivist"! because if you are saying the IP's are the same or from my area, you are a liar! I did not draw any personal conclusions in my remark. I leave that to the readers. I just presented a fact. I'm sure YV will indeed be happy to clear this up as soon as she's back from her trip. |
| Lisser 05.09.2006 09:03 |
I don't see why it is Barb's responsibility to prove who is who. If someone accused me of being someone I wasn't, I wouldn't get worked up over it or get defensive. I could care less if anyone thinks I am not me. I could be the Queen of Sheba or I could just be Lisser. Who cares either way? If you're not YSM, just ignore those who are saying you are. Why do you allow them to waste your time? Just act like they don't exist rather than give them the attention they want from you. |
| Crezchi 05.09.2006 09:57 |
jeroen wrote:Sorry dude, but the way you worded your comment, it makes it seem that the IP's were checked and i am these people! But i am NOT. So leave me alone with these lies.Crezchi wrote:I didn't, did I? I did not draw any personal conclusions in my remark. I leave that to the readers. I just presented a fact. I'm sure YV will indeed be happy to clear this up as soon as she's back from her trip.jeroen wrote: The individual IP's HAVE been checked! Just so you know. There is indeed some schizofrenic behaviour going on in here! :-)Dude, DO NOT even try and say that i am "YoungStratWoman, Moanzone Twat, or Queen mum archivist"! because if you are saying the IP's are the same or from my area, you are a liar! @ Lisser, i understand your meaning, but, i do not even want to be compared to someone such as any of these users in question not alone be claimed to be one or all of them! I am not a troll or some insane psycho. |
| John S Stuart 05.09.2006 13:22 |
Queen Archivist wrote: My point was that LIKE Stratman owning the footage, the Bo Rhap out-takes DO NOT EXIST.Re: Queen footage. Apart from the usual bootlegs and Queenzone downloads, I do not know what is out there film-wise - that is not my area of expertise. Certainly, I have no exclusive footage QPL may be interested in. However, I do know that some fans are so ‘obsessed’ they take upon themselves the mantle of ‘blind-bidder’ (or as our friend Wilki would say, a ‘suicide-bidder’). Simply, sometimes unmarked – or random items come up for sale – but the owner does not know the full extent of what they are selling – and while these sales usually end up as junk – on odd occasions, they have actually turned up trumps. Here are a few examples. (Unfortunately, I am not at liberty to use real names – but most are known on Queenzone). Mr. Red blindly bought a batch of five EMI master reel tapes. He did not know what was on them. He does not own a reel-to-reel recorder. After paying to have these digitally transferred, I believe one was of David Bowie, the other Elton John. The other three tapes have yet to be converted. Blindly bought – and so far no return. Mr. Blue blindly bought a 7” Acetate at auction. No information was available, except that it came from Freddie Mercury who passed it onto David Minns, who was behind the sale. Unfortunately, this was not a rare Queen or even solo track, but it did turn out to be a very rare unreleased Freddie produced ‘Trax’ disc, and as we know, all ‘Trax’ material was subsequently erased. Blindly bought – and a nice result. Mr. Green blindly bought some U-matic video tapes. These tapes, he thought would contain copies of the BBC’s ‘Top Of The Pop’s’ or ‘Old Grey Whistle Test’ – or whatever, but they did not. After waiting years to have them converted by the correct machinery, what he discovered was that he owned a copy of the Bohemian Rhapsody video (two different versions) and some outtakes from the session. Blindly bought – major coup. These stories are not unique. I believe both early ‘Simon and Garfunkle’ and some ‘Beatles’ tapes appeared at car boot sales, but again they were blindly bought as a batch of old tapes. Finally, what do you realistically think happened to those stolen Queen tapes? My guess is that they are sitting in someone’s attic as you read this. (NO: certainly not mine). So while every fibre of your being tells you that those ‘Rhapsody’ out-takes do not exist, please do not be so naïve to believe that you are always correct. |
| Bobby_brown 05.09.2006 15:17 |
John S Stuart wrote: Finally, what do you realistically think happened to those stolen Queen tapes? My guess is that they are sitting in someone’s attic as you read this. (NO: certainly not mine). So while every fibre of your being tells you that those ‘Rhapsody’ out-takes do not exist, please do not be so naïve to believe that you are always correct.It´s a shame that whoever got the "NOTW" tapes didn´t said a word, because in this case this is something that doesn´t belong to collectors. Master tapes belong to the band, because it´s their work (acetates and films, are a diferent story!!), and because of that they weren´t able to release the best Mix possible for their Best-of DVD´s. And i think this is only a question of having good sense, and not pactuate with bad actions (stealing the tapes). But what you said is indeed true and it has happened a lot with the Beatles, and i believe it will happened again. How did this guys have recorded so many songs over such a small period of time? Take care |
| Wilki Amieva 05.09.2006 15:44 |
Well, I guess a blind-purchase could actually get suicidal if you did pay way too much for nothing! ;-) Oh, sh*t, this brings bad memories. |
| Mkls 05.09.2006 15:56 |
Wilki Amieva wrote: Well, I guess a blind-purchase could actually get suicidal if you did pay way too much for nothing! ;-) Oh, sh*t, this brings bad memories.link thats what i call a blind purchase ;) |
| luthorn 05.09.2006 23:40 |
Shouldn't this thread go under Requests instead of Serious Discussion? |
| Adam Baboolal 06.09.2006 05:40 |
Bobby_brown wrote:Here, here!John S Stuart wrote: Finally, what do you realistically think happened to those stolen Queen tapes? My guess is that they are sitting in someone’s attic as you read this. (NO: certainly not mine). So while every fibre of your being tells you that those ‘Rhapsody’ out-takes do not exist, please do not be so naïve to believe that you are always correct.It´s a shame that whoever got the "NOTW" tapes didn´t said a word, because in this case this is something that doesn´t belong to collectors. Master tapes belong to the band, because it´s their work (acetates and films, are a diferent story!!), and because of that they weren´t able to release the best Mix possible for their Best-of DVD´s. And i think this is only a question of having good sense, and not pactuate with bad actions (stealing the tapes). But what you said is indeed true and it has happened a lot with the Beatles, and i believe it will happened again. How did this guys have recorded so many songs over such a small period of time? Take care |
| Fireplace 06.09.2006 06:54 |
luthorn wrote: Shouldn't this thread go under Requests instead of Serious Discussion?It's more like a request for a serious discussion :-) |
| Asterik 06.09.2006 07:28 |
Well I said I'd give Mr Brooks a second chance and so far he's wasted it, merely confirming on this thread what I first thought. |
| Benn 06.09.2006 11:07 |
John S. You're absolutely right and it happens with bands all the time - just look through the pages of Record Collector and, every month, there's a story about a newly discovered gem from the dark and distant past. I've been assisting on The Who's new film directed by Murray Lerner and, regardless of various statements from the producers of the official re-issues, master tapes (bot audio and visual) DO exist in private collections, both already known to the band and it's management and that are COMPLETELY private. Why "official" sources feel the need to so *OPENLY* deny the existance of material that they really have no idea about is beyond me. I believe that, in most cases, there's a bit of embarassment behind it all in that the fan base would be so shocked that an official archive has been so poorly maintained. The fact is that no one realised at the time that there would be any interest in historical recordings and that the re-issue market would be the single largest growing market in music. Take the earliest known Who recordings - recorded as The High Numbers in 1964 as a test session for EMI, which subsequently saw EMI turn them down. The stuff is magic. Concert film from the period 1968-1973 has emerged that was previously though not to exist, including, AMAZINGLY, the historic Live At Leeds show from 14.02.1970. It's openly known that The WHo's archive was always poorly maintained and, anything that does turn up is something of a surprise to the band too. However, with Queen, the boast has always been that the arcive is excellently maintained and probably as complete as it can be. Hell, they have even employed their own archivist! But, in reality, the archive could contain absolutely anything and, from what has emerged so far in terms of credible evidence, it doesn't contain very much at all that is of historical interest. Certainly, the archivist must be under one hell of a non-disclosure agreement judging by his lack of apparent willingness to inform.... |
| Togg 06.09.2006 11:30 |
It stands to reason that when Bo Rap was filmed it was edited to make the final video, the original tape may never have been seen by the members of Queen, so it is not a huge leap to assume that if Greg asked Brian about it he would say, no never heard of it. Whether the scraps from the cutting room floor were ever kept is quiet possible but unknown to anyone except possibly the guys that edited the film. It's not a giant leap to make that at some point someone put them back together and sold it, I doubt it has much of interest probably just people walking into place and casual chat before a take, nothing much more exciting than that. But to catagorically deign it exists is foolish, how can it be proved not to? Bruce Gowers is the man who probably knows, he directed it |
| Jjeroen 06.09.2006 11:34 |
'We must all see to believe' ...hmmm... reminds me of a game that won't run on my computer anymore... |
| Serry... 06.09.2006 11:46 |
I know, I know! Queen The Eye! What I won? |
| Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira 06.09.2006 13:31 |
Wilki Amieva wrote: You certainly have made a very valid point with your last post, Greg. On the other hand, you have not always behaved in 'orthodox' ways (to say the least) within this forum. I guess we all just will have to take QUEENZone mostly as a "live and let die" scene: cherishing the good moments - by-passing the rest. Don't you agree?I totally agree, Wilki. The only additional comment I have is that Richard, being the owner, is free to decide if, when and what to do. He might well believe that most at Queenzone prefer to have it unmoderated, which is not unlikelly. And thanks Greg, for the mainly positive approach in this thread. I've learned a lot in it, thanks to the mostly positive attitude of all involved. As for other parallel discussions going on, since they did not concern me, I just didn't read. These things do get in the way, but I can certainly leave with them. Cheers, Ogre- |
| Jjeroen 06.09.2006 15:49 |
Serry... wrote: I know, I know! Queen The Eye! What I won?A kiss... From ME! :-) |