John S Stuart 13.11.2006 18:35 |
A new 2006 version of 'Self Made Man' by Queen has been blasting its way through Belfast night clubs for the last two months. This version is more of a remake than a remix, and as Mr. Latemix suggests: "It sounds NOTHING like the original and keeps the character of Freddie completely intact." link It is hugely popular in Northen Ireland and those within the Queen circle who have heard it seem to like it. It was played on BBC Radio (with the permission of the band) a few weeks ago but this seems to have passed largely un-noticed on the Queen fan radar. I have been scouring e-bay for some sort of promotional version, but as yet, the track seems confined to sampled DJ sets. So I have two questions concerning this track: First: If there is a public demand - why has it not received a wider audience or official release? Second: If the track exsists - but is not yet releaseable, would it be possible to create a ground swell of opinion so that either EMI or Queen Productions can sit up and take notice? I know it is no box-set, but surely any genuinely new Queen product is better than no Queen product? Finally, has anyone actually been physically able to get hold of the disc? |
Bobby_brown 13.11.2006 18:59 |
Never heard of it. Interesting stuff, but it´s strange indeed that Queen fans radars didn´t get this one! But this version has Freddie on vocals, instead of Brian? Let´s organise ourselves and do wathever we can to put a single out!! Take care |
Suigi 13.11.2006 19:05 |
How the heck did this one slip under the rader?! We have gotta get this out on a wider release!! Greg Brooks, if is this your doing, getting this single out, allow me to plant a big kiss on the cheek if we ever meet. |
FriedChicken 13.11.2006 19:24 |
I can hardly believe that queen gave permission having an unreleased idea with mumbling vocals and more improvised stuff on BBC radio |
Winter Land Man 13.11.2006 19:27 |
Bobby_brown wrote: Never heard of it. Interesting stuff, but it´s strange indeed that Queen fans radars didn´t get this one! But this version has Freddie on vocals, instead of Brian? Let´s organise ourselves and do wathever we can to put a single out!! Take careBut Freddie's even on the demo, in the center |
John S Stuart 13.11.2006 19:30 |
Suigi wrote: How the heck did this one slip under the rader?! We have gotta get this out on a wider release!! Greg Brooks, if is this your doing, getting this single out, allow me to plant a big kiss on the cheek if we ever meet.Actually, I don't think Greg knows anything about this one - and I know for sure that he had nothing to do with it's 'release'. You can still kiss him if you care to, but please, not under false pretences! I am very lucky in that my future son-in-law, is a semi-professional DJ and worked over there recently in the (relatively) lucrative student circuit, so it's the old story about who you know. |
Suigi 13.11.2006 19:43 |
John S Stuart wrote:So is this more akin to the It's A Beautiful Day 2005 remix? (except instead of stealing from Ross Robertson, it's new instrumentation)Suigi wrote: How the heck did this one slip under the rader?! We have gotta get this out on a wider release!! Greg Brooks, if is this your doing, getting this single out, allow me to plant a big kiss on the cheek if we ever meet.Actually, I don't think Greg knows anything about this - and I know for sure that he had nothing to do with it's 'release'. You can still kiss him if you care to, but please, not under false pretences! I am very lucky in that my future son-in-law, is a semi-professional DJ and worked over there recently in the (relatively) lucrative student circuit, so it's the old story about who you know. |
John S Stuart 13.11.2006 19:51 |
Suigi wrote:No; It is a completely new track.John S Stuart wrote:So is this more akin to the It's A Beautiful Day 2005 remix? (except instead of stealing from Ross Robertson, it's new instrumentation)Suigi wrote: How the heck did this one slip under the rader?! We have gotta get this out on a wider release!! Greg Brooks, if is this your doing, getting this single out, allow me to plant a big kiss on the cheek if we ever meet.Actually, I don't think Greg knows anything about this - and I know for sure that he had nothing to do with it's 'release'. You can still kiss him if you care to, but please, not under false pretences! I am very lucky in that my future son-in-law, is a semi-professional DJ and worked over there recently in the (relatively) lucrative student circuit, so it's the old story about who you know. This version is more of a remake than a remix, and as previously suggested: "It sounds NOTHING like the original and keeps the character of Freddie completely intact." |
ern2150 13.11.2006 20:02 |
GAh -- seriously dude, somebody hook me up with a sample!! Email's in the profile, I'd love to even put out a snippet of it on the Podcast, get the word out, yknow!! (this message brought to you by excited fan-speak) |
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) 13.11.2006 20:58 |
This certainly is an interesting development. It would be a nice addition to the upcoming Singles box set. What better way to release a "collection" product then by adding something new to it. Only if... |
Projector Freddie 14.11.2006 00:18 |
anyway someone can send me this? My email is zackbrown1@cox.net |
Deacon Fan 14.11.2006 02:01 |
Ya'll are getting way too excited over this. It's obviously just a bit taken from the leaked demo and mixed with some new music. I think that techno mix of Face it Alone that someone shared recently was more exciting, but that's just me. BTW, this Self Made Man thing was reported quite awhile ago as being heard in a club by someone. It was over in the general discussion. I'll try to find it.... |
Back2TheLight 14.11.2006 02:06 |
Yeah but chances of it becoming on the box set are about the same chances of it coming through this very website...slim to none, unless you are one of the what I like to call 'Queenzone Corporate'. Then you DEFINATELY have no chance of getting a hold of it!! |
Deacon Fan 14.11.2006 02:27 |
Here's the topic where it was first discovered: link |
bigV 14.11.2006 04:48 |
High time something like this happened. Albeit a demo, SMM is one of Queen's finest compositions and it certainly deserves to be heard by the general public. Why it was not included on "Innuendo" or "Back to the Light" is beyond my comprehension. V. |
Daveboy35 14.11.2006 05:39 |
Hi guys this topic struck me first thing and i'm excited by this and seeing has i have good friends in ireland who are djs i've asked around to see if there is a snippet or a sampler/mix around of this. Hopefully they will get back to me soon with it and when they do i will let you know. Cheers |
bitesthedust 14.11.2006 05:40 |
Whilst I don't agree it should have been included on the Innuendo album, it would be nice to see a "new" Queen release, albeit a remix, as opposed to yet another version of Another One Bites The Dust. |
cream 14.11.2006 05:44 |
I have heard it in Belfast, and then again at a formal event in a country club just outside Belfast. I asked the dj for a copy at the formal dance and he took my name and address but no luck as yet :( Its a very good track from what I can gather |
Daveboy35 14.11.2006 06:05 |
Hey i've just heard from someone who reckons that they have heard it it features freddie but it also features brian as he sings lead on the demo and he says it's a cheesy house remix and that he seen it on WHITE label in HMV . Hope this helps. |
cream 14.11.2006 06:12 |
The version I have heard features Brian on guitar But Freddie does all the singing |
Adam Baboolal 14.11.2006 10:02 |
If it really is out there, and has been for 2 months... why hasn't it arrived on these pages before now? Today, is the first time I've ever heard of it. I wonder how good it really can be because it's just going to be from the demo we've all heard. And Freddie's part will, no doubt, come from that. Nothing new, unless something of the track has escaped from the vaults. Adam. EDIT: Brian's guitar is on the demo, too. |
Al TurHao 14.11.2006 11:04 |
I take this news with both joy and cepticism. John Stuart says that "this version is more of a remake than a remix" and Mr. Latemix suggests: "It sounds NOTHING like the original and keeps the character of Freddie completely intact." Am I the only one who thinks it's rather strange? To be a remake that would mean that musicians had to had acess to the song and its tracks, and that would mean that others than Queen would have played it. Brian and Roger agreeing in letting other musicians to remake their song, and them it be credited to Queen? |
cream 14.11.2006 11:56 |
This version is by the irish composer Stuart Leathem last I heard of him he was making a radio programme with David Richards................. |
Serry... 14.11.2006 12:12 |
composer@stuartleathem.com << let's ask him! |
Adam Baboolal 14.11.2006 12:20 |
You're not alone with your scepticism, Al TurHao. I will also await any real proof this exists. And for those of us who actually have scepticism about this, don't start insulting us because we're a little more into questioning these kind of things. I've seen harsh comments banded about recently and it's really sad for a place like QZ. Adam. |
Bohardy 14.11.2006 13:18 |
Oops. |
Bohardy 14.11.2006 13:31 |
This definitely exists, and believe me, it's nothing worth getting excited about. It's 2:47 long. It mostly features the bridge section of SMM, but also contains some of the other elements of the song, although nothing with Brian's vocals. It contains one instance of the "Self Made Man" refrain (sung by Fred of course). I think there's one or two snippets taken from other Queen/Brian songs too. The dancey backing and other new production elements, to my ears, sound dreadfully bland and unexciting. And a bit messy and incoherent too. There's nothing to distinguish this from any other fan-made remix that relies on officially released product. And I see no reason why we should start viewing this as if it was in some way official Queen product. |
Jjeroen 14.11.2006 13:33 |
2:47 only??? That's the shortest CLUB mix in history then! Sounds like it doesn't have dub in- and outro's. Bit suspicious to say the least. All the more reason to believe this is a fan mix or such as opposed to an 'official' or even 'professional' club mix 12". |
_Bijou_ 14.11.2006 13:52 |
So there's no chance I'd be able to hear it? |
Bohardy 14.11.2006 13:58 |
The version I have is 2:47 anyway. I've no idea if a longer version exists. It doesn't sound edited, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be extended. I'll see about uploading it later. I'm late for a rehearsal. |
Adam Baboolal 14.11.2006 14:29 |
Sounds like gumph then! Just seems to be someone looking for a little fame, don't you think? 2:47? Why the heck were people so excited about it. ESPECIALLY the topic starter which I'm extremely surprised at because he has claimed not to like fan mixes. Well, I suppose he didn't really know it was one. Fair enough. But still, a "remake"?? Someone led him on. Adam. |
John S Stuart 14.11.2006 14:32 |
Adam,
First: Why do you feel the need to address me as the ‘…the topic starter', and that you need view my information with ‘scepticism’? I guess that you may not like me, but, you can still call me by my first name.
Second: Have I ever deliberately misled anyone in Queenzone?
No – I do not think so.
So why call into doubt what I have written by saying that this information was ‘sceptical’?
As one observant QZ reader noted, from 10 unknowable/unverifiable pieces of information which I wrote about in 1996 – he has personally witnessed 8 of my ‘accounts’ accurately come to pass. Now while you (or he) still retain the right to doubt the final two which are still by public account unverifiable, at least he had the grace to judge me on past track record – because he, so far, has had no reason to doubt me.
link
MikloS wrote: So far i have not seen any evidence of John Stuart lying intentionally to any of us about Queen facts or tapes/recordings that does / does not exist (note: I talk about facts, not his relationship with Greg or QP or anybody else, just simply facts and trivia and information regarding Pre-Queen/Queen recordings). His research about pre-Queen activity (i am referring to Record Collector articles in 95-96) was excellent at that time. Ibex/Green/Reaction/Opposition/1984 were recordings he wrote/spoke about earlier than anybody else, and most of these are already out and downloadable, all fans can enjoy them. We havent seen evidence of the Hangman acetate or the Hectics recordings, that means possibly 2 out of 10 ultra rare recordings are not confirmed, but unconfirmed recordings does NOT prove that he is lying about those.Third: What I actually wrote above was: ‘A new 2006 version of 'Self Made Man' by Queen has been blasting its way through Belfast night clubs for the last two months… It was played on BBC Radio (with the permission of the band) a few weeks ago but this seems to have passed largely un-noticed on the Queen fan radar. I have been scouring e-bay for some sort of promotional version, but as yet, the track seems confined to sampled DJ sets’. Can I point out that this third point is STILL indeed accurate and that this 'release' sounds more than just another lame Queenzone fan mix – or can you point me in the direction of any other Queenzone mixer who have been showered with such an honour? And while the above may ‘appear’ to be a disservice of the work of some of the remixers in here, can I point out that I consider other ‘official’ mixes such as the ‘Stone Cold Crazy' – trash mix or any of the legitimate (though dreadful) Rick Rubin ‘We Will Rock You’ remixes, still fair game to add to MY Queen collection. I also thought that the Robertson ‘Beautiful Day Instrumental Version’ (which was later officially released by Queen as a download at Queenonline), and the sublime ‘New York At Last’ remixes were also worthy of a physical release. However, I do not manufacture product, I only catalogue and collect, and as this latest ‘Self Made Man’ is bubbling in the Belfast underground scene, what I really wanted to know was - if a physical version exists. If it does not, that does not negate the fact that it has been causing quite a bit of excitement over in Northern Ireland. Otherwise, I have no complaint with your mail, but I do think that you could be a little more gracious. Besides, 'Sounds like gumph then'! - really sounds like sour grapes if you have not heard the track in question. |
Adam Baboolal 14.11.2006 15:49 |
John S Stuart wrote: Adam, First: Why do you feel the need to address me as the ‘…the topic starter', and that you need view my information with ‘scepticism’? I guess that you may not like me, but, you can still call me by my first name. Second: Have I ever deliberately misled anyone in Queenzone? No – I do not think so. So why call into doubt what I have written by saying that this information was ‘sceptical’? As one observant QZ reader noted, from 10 unknowable/unverifiable pieces of information which I wrote about in 1996 – he has personally witnessed 8 of my ‘accounts’ accurately come to pass. Now while you (or he) still retain the right to doubt the final two which are still by public account unverifiable, at least he had the grace to judge me on past track record – because he, so far, has had no reason to doubt me. linkYou ARE the topic starter! Why should I have to use a person's screen name? I felt the topic was more important.MikloS wrote: So far i have not seen any evidence of John Stuart lying intentionally to any of us about Queen facts or tapes/recordings that does / does not exist (note: I talk about facts, not his relationship with Greg or QP or anybody else, just simply facts and trivia and information regarding Pre-Queen/Queen recordings). His research about pre-Queen activity (i am referring to Record Collector articles in 95-96) was excellent at that time. Ibex/Green/Reaction/Opposition/1984 were recordings he wrote/spoke about earlier than anybody else, and most of these are already out and downloadable, all fans can enjoy them. We havent seen evidence of the Hangman acetate or the Hectics recordings, that means possibly 2 out of 10 ultra rare recordings are not confirmed, but unconfirmed recordings does NOT prove that he is lying about those.Third: What I actually wrote above was: ‘A new 2006 version of 'Self Made Man' by Queen has been blasting its way through Belfast night clubs for the last two months… It was played on BBC Radio (with the permission of the band) a few weeks ago but this seems to have passed largely un-noticed on the Queen fan radar. I have been scouring e-bay for some sort of promotional version, but as yet, the track seems confined to sampled DJ sets’. Can I point out that this third point is STILL indeed accurate and that this 'release' sounds more than just another lame Queenzone fan mix – or can you point me in the direction of any other Queenzone mixer who have been showered with such an honour? And while the above may ‘appear’ to be a disservice of the work of some of the remixers in here, can I point out that I consider other ‘official’ mixes such as the ‘Stone Cold Crazy' – trash mix or any of the legitimate (though dreadful) Rick Rubin ‘We Will Rock You’ remixes, still fair game to add to MY Queen collection. I also thought that the Robertson ‘Beautiful Day Instrumental Version’ (which was later officially released by Queen as a download at Queenonline), and the sublime ‘New York At Last’ remixes were also worthy of a physical release. However, I do not manufacture product, I only catalogue and collect, and as this latest ‘Self Made Man’ is bubbling in the Belfast underground scene, what I really wanted to know was - if a physical version exists. If it does not, that does not negate the fact that it has been causing quite a bit of excitement over in Northern Ireland. Otherwise, I have no complaint with your mail, but I do think that you could be a little more gracious. Besides, 'Sounds like gumph then'! - really sounds like sour grapes if you have not heard the track in question. And the scepticism is not at YOUR information. I actually re |
Suigi 14.11.2006 17:58 |
Apparently, this tune's by the same guy: link |
John S Stuart 14.11.2006 17:59 |
Adam: You are most probably correct, and indeed it may just be my paranoia, but I find addressing someone by using their given name is just a polite common courtesy and certainly a far friendlier method to engage in a conversation, than calling someone ‘…the topic starter'. Therefore the latter is not a practice I can endorse, and as such I always observe such respectful pleasantries when talking to fellow correspondents, so that the said writer knows for definite that I have not snubbed them in any way. But as you so correctly observe, that may just be me.
Again, forgive me, and it may well be that good old fashioned paranoia kicking-in once more, but I certainly view the below quote as a personal slur;
Adam Baboolal wrote: You're not alone with your scepticism, Al TurHao. I will also await any real proof this exists.Now I guess you are free to view this as either transferred anger, or as further evidence of paranoid delusion, but as ‘…the topic starter' - Latest Queen single: Self Made Man - in question, the fact that you ‘await any REAL proof this exists’ strongly suggest (to my unreasonable mind) that you do indeed question my credibility as a reliable source, and without further collaborative evidence, my word can not be trusted. But as you so keenly observed, I deduce that this must be more paranoia on my part also. It may also have something do with the fact you posted this phrase in MY thread, under this umbrella so to speak. Again, this may well be my misunderstanding, but because this mail resides in MY thread, I guess I illogically presumed that it refered to my topic! It is however nice to know that it actually refers to a different topic and different poster - but without actually making this clear to me at any time - so I guess this is further evidence of me searching for bogey men which do not exist. Finally, I really do not know why I give so generously of myself on these forums. I can only liken it to ‘casting pearls before swine’, and again that may be the paranoia talking, but it seems some only visit here to take a delight in trying to discredit those who are doing their best to push this site forwards. But again, that may just be my disillusioned take on it. |
roy_fokker 14.11.2006 18:00 |
The only thing that makes sense now, instead of conjectures, is tryin' to get this song for share.. |
Adam Baboolal 14.11.2006 18:19 |
roy_fokker wrote: The only thing that makes sense now, instead of conjectures, is tryin' to get this song for share..Bingo! So, who has it? I think Bohardy will be uploading it, actually. Adam. |
Al TurHao 14.11.2006 18:23 |
John Stuart, as far as I am concerned, you belong to the creme de la creme of the queen fan universe. I have a deep respect and admire you for your passion and I read your posts with most satisfaction. I regard you as a colector, I do not know if you have same musical skills (they would help for instance to hear differences between versions or even the old "who wrote what"). (just let me know if you need or want some assistance in the subject ;) What I was trying to say ment in no way that I was being sceptical towards you, at all. I ment the info you presented. I tried to call your atention to the fact that the so-called remake would be signed as "Queen", authorized by band members but eventually played by other musicians. That does not make much sense, specially these days when Brian and Roger are recording a new album. Best Regards, AlTurHao |
Jan78 14.11.2006 21:29 |
I wouldn't get excited either. Even calling this "latest Queen single" is too much. Check this out, thats the same guy. link He's obviously taken Freddie's bridge in the demo and made up his own rocker. Of course it sounds all different (I haven't heard it thought), thats like taking out Freddie's bridge from the Invisible Man demo and making a Man on the Prowl kind of song out of it. Could be called The Invisible Man but would not sound anything like it. I guess thats the same thing with this "remix". Officially approved? I'm really not sure. Why would Brian and Roger accept that there was a remix made out of a song that shouldn't be out there in the first place (parasites anyone?). It's like I make a fan mix of Robbery or whatever and make it appear in the clubs and eventually it becomes "official" because it's been played on BBC radio? Can anyone prove that the band agreed with all this? To me this is just another fan mix, that happens to appear in the clubs. Nothing official like Living on my own. Jan |
Adam Baboolal 14.11.2006 21:40 |
John S Stuart wrote: Adam: You are most probably correct, and indeed it may just be my paranoia, but I find addressing someone by using their given name is just a polite common courtesy and certainly a far friendlier method to engage in a conversation, than calling someone ‘…the topic starter'. Therefore the latter is not a practice I can endorse, and as such I always observe such respectful pleasantries when talking to fellow correspondents, so that the said writer knows for definite that I have not snubbed them in any way. But as you so correctly observe, that may just be me. Again, forgive me, and it may well be that good old fashioned paranoia kicking-in once more, but I certainly view the below quote as a personal slur;Let's just forget it. But as a final note, I think that you're reading too much into these things. I'm not discrediting anything you say or do. Know that, John.Adam Baboolal wrote: You're not alone with your scepticism, Al TurHao. I will also await any real proof this exists.Now I guess you are free to view this as either transferred anger, or as further evidence of paranoid delusion, but as ‘…the topic starter' - Latest Queen single: Self Made Man - in question, the fact that you ‘await any REAL proof this exists’ strongly suggest (to my unreasonable mind) that you do indeed question my credibility as a reliable source, and without further collaborative evidence, my word can not be trusted. But as you so keenly observed, I deduce that this must be more paranoia on my part also. It may also have something do with the fact you posted this phrase in MY thread, under this umbrella so to speak. Again, this may well be my misunderstanding, but because this mail resides in MY thread, I guess I illogically presumed that it refered to my topic! It is however nice to know that it actually refers to a different topic and different poster - but without actually making this clear to me at any time - so I guess this is further evidence of me searching for bogey men which do not exist. Finally, I really do not know why I give so generously of myself on these forums. I can only liken it to ‘casting pearls before swine’, and again that may be the paranoia talking, but it seems some only visit here to take a delight in trying to discredit those who are doing their best to push this site forwards. But again, that may just be my disillusioned take on it. Now that it has been confirmed by a few folk here that it is really out there, it had better live up to the hype that others have layed on it. Not you, John. Just thought I'd better throw that in. Adam. |
Serry... 15.11.2006 00:34 |
It's A Beautiful Day Remix which you can hear on QPR shows is remix done by Robertson AND DJ Koma. I'm saying that not because DJ Koma is Russian and has the same name as me, but because there's IABD by ONLY Ross Robertson and it's different track. |
john bodega 15.11.2006 07:28 |
latemix wrote: I have heard it in Belfast, and then again at a formal event in a country club just outside Belfast. I asked the dj for a copy at the formal dance and he took my name and address but no luck as yet :( Its a very good track from what I can gatherIsn't that because you did it?? |
cream 15.11.2006 09:54 |
No I didn't do it And I still haven't a copy of the damn thing |
ern2150 15.11.2006 11:43 |
So you all know I'm using this as a convenient excuse to delay my podcast this month. I'm sure that'll motivate noone to upload it :) JSS -- have you seen any further Freddie remix competition entries? I'm guessing this would qualify... |
Bohardy 15.11.2006 13:13 |
Apologies one and all, but I won't be uploading this mix anywhere, nor can I share it privately or anything. Jan78's comments a few posts up pretty accurately sum-up the situation. It turns out this matter is currently with EMI, and I don't think they and their lawyers want anybody spreading this track around right now. And I don't want to mess with EMI's lawyers. If you want to hear the mix that much, hop on a flight to Belfast and hit the clubs! |
Adam Baboolal 15.11.2006 14:10 |
Well, there's goes the neighbourhood... |
Penetration_Guru 15.11.2006 16:18 |
I've been thinking about this and it doesn't ring true. If EMI wanted to "test the waters"... 1. They would have the track mixed in-house 2. They would use a well known clubbing city. With all due respect to Belfast, that ain't it. 3. Their lawyers wouldn't now be "all over it", as any issues would have been resolved before "release" 4. Galileo on QOL would have started hinting, as per the Felix & Arty thing. Isn't it more likely that some DJ heard this & decided to use it? |
Bobby_brown 15.11.2006 18:22 |
Bohardy wrote: Apologies one and all, but I won't be uploading this mix anywhere, nor can I share it privately or anything. Jan78's comments a few posts up pretty accurately sum-up the situation. It turns out this matter is currently with EMI, and I don't think they and their lawyers want anybody spreading this track around right now. I don't want to mess with EMI's lawyers. If you want to hear the mix that much, hop on a flight to Belfast and hit the clubs!How do you know about this? - Do you have an insider?? Take care |
Bohardy 16.11.2006 12:37 |
PG: It has nothing to do with EMI wanting to test the waters, and everything to do with one of Jan78's points. |
john bodega 18.11.2006 14:13 |
latemix wrote: It kicks the ass off Nobody Understands Me It was dis-jointed Self Made Man is a disco track, something to move toYakety Sax was something I could move to. I'm highly dubious about this Self Made Man thing. (Note : not dubious about it's existence, dubious about it's *quality*). As for Nobody Understands Me being 'disjointed', I think the word is 'atonal'. |
Crezchi 18.11.2006 19:36 |
Is this for real? lol If so it would be interesting, but, odd. |
ok.computer 18.11.2006 23:00 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: I've been thinking about this and it doesn't ring true. If EMI wanted to "test the waters"... [snip] 2. They would use a well known clubbing city. With all due respect to Belfast, that ain't it. [snip]Mr Leatham probably did mix it, but I think you should reconsider the above.... link You should try it... |
ok.computer 18.11.2006 23:01 |
If someone could find out from Latemix which bar he heard it in, I'll use it as a base from which to track down Mr Leatham in person. Cheers |