Greg Brooks calling John Stuart. OPEN INVITATION/REQUEST

GB: I haven't been here on QZ for a while, but I just had a quick look and saw a note from John Stuart, which reads...

JSS: Confession: I own the best versions of both the De Lane Lea and the BBC sessions (Inside or outside the Queen vaults) and they exist in their original raw (not sonically corrupted) master-tape (not degenerated copies) form.  This is not carrot dangling - but fact.

They may be uploaded here under the following conditions:

First: I do not upload them - I would not know how - and I would not accept the respnsibility of taking on Queen PLC.
If some brave proxy wanted to take that role upon themselves - that would be their decission - not mine.

Second: They were not devalued in anyway. (ie musically equalised, MP3'd, traded or ended up on ebay). 

TO JOHN, I OFFER THIS (OPEN AND ABOVE BOARD SO THAT I CAN'T BE MISQUOTED)......

Firstly, to state that you have, "the best versions of both the De Lane Lea and the BBC sessions (Inside or outside the Queen vaults)" is (again) something of an assumption, because it implies that you know precisely what we have in the Queen archive, and also, quite separately, what Roger and Brian also retain in theirs!!!!!  It's a ridiculous thing to claim. You don't know that. No fan knows that. Such an assumption is a bit 'much' in my opinion, but is typical of the type of unnecessary comment you make that has historically rubbed me up the wrong way. You would have been much better to have instead just said (if you must), 'the best versions of both the De Lane Lea and the BBC sessions (outside the Queen vaults) and then that would probably have been 100% accurate... not that it needed to be said even in that case.  

I am saying this so that people here can have an illustration of why I tend to get prickly with you JS when you make those completely blind and sweeping comments that presume too much - things you cannot know.  Let's be clear here.... the ONLY people who know precisely what things lurk inside the Lloyds Bank Archive, are Lloyds Bank employees - not you, John, nor me (despite what you might claim to the contrary, for reasons best known to yourself). Likewise, the ONLY people who know precisely what De Lane Lea demo recordings lurk within Roger & Brian's (and possibly John's) private archives.... are Brian, Roger & John.  But... John Deacon, not Stuart.  NOT you John, not even me as the band's Archivist.  

Is this not obvious???  Why am I stating these blatantly obvious things again?  Sorry, but it gives me the hump. It bugs me when you continually remind QZ-ers how important your collection is, and that we shouldn't ever forget it.  It's not just significant, oh no, with you it has to be more than that, it always has to be something like... "the best versions of blah blah Inside or outside the Queen vaults .... that no one else has and which only you have in your secret but no not that secret treasure trove that Queen don't have, on this planet or on any other."

John Stuart.... when exactly were you last in our Queen archive listening to the De Lane material????  When did you last step inside Brian's private archive???  Or Roger's????   Were you in the studio when we transferred this material???  I hope I've made my point there. It is directly relevant to this posting, and how we got to where we are. I need to make this negative point, in order to get to a positive place, without people saying that GB's irritation with JSS is completely unfounded. It is not. There are always reasons why people get so pissed off by the unnecessary assumptions, claims, inaccurate misinformation laid out by others.

Putting our rather tedious history of bickering to one side for the moment (if we are ever to make any constructive progress for the benefit of Queen and Queen Fans), there has been SO MANY mentions on this site over the years, from you John, about the various rare Queen audio treasures you have in your collection.

Obviously, these things are of interest; to fans, to QPL, to me, to anyone who is genuinely intent upon offering the best and most significant Queen products in the future. We ALL want that; we all long for the very best and most fascinating and historically significant rare recordings to come to the fore - and some of us have waited 30 years or more to have them quite literally within ear-shot.

So, John, why don't you and I meet up and sit and talk properly about what you have, that we do not have, and what if anything (from that material) is worth doing something with???  Let's get together, cut thru all the bullshit, and try to make some proper constructive progress.

It is VERY VERY SIMPLE for you to now list all the reasons why you WON'T do that, why you CAN'T do that. You can sit there and cite all the bad history you and I have, and all the ways in which you feel you have been badly treated, and so on and so forth, for the next 10 years, but ultimately it will lead nowhere. Nobody benefits that way. The likelihood is - let's be blunt - that you and I will die before your collection actually makes it onto the public stage.... and then, when you've gone to meet your Mercurial Music Maker, your family will put 6 boxes of your precious Queen 'gems' into a local boot sale - £25 the lot.  These things happen!!!

I regard our niggling nit-picking history as just a bit of fun, not to be taken remotely seriously. Some people may take certain issues and themselves far more seriously than they should, but I'm not one of them. I hope you're not.

I would like to see what exactly it is you have, as i have stated before at least twice in the last 12 years - and discuss whether any of it is relevant to the serious work we are currently involved in within QPL.   Right NOW is the most exciting period I've been involved in for QPL for the past decade or so. MANY wonderful things are being discussed.  So, let's cut the crap, let's NOT have to sit now, again, and read a list of reasons why you CAN'T or WON'T meet me half way with this.  That's already been done a thousand times on QZ. We know ALL that history John. Let's move FORWARDS not BACKWARDS again.

I'm certain that every person here on QZ knows all the bad things about me, GB, and about QPL and how shabbily I treated John when I was responsible for one of his rare (Ibex) recordings being lost (even tho it happened via the record company)... and you also know that I apologised profusely, several times. We all know this stuff. Do we need to go there AGAIN?  Must we?  Can we please move on to somewhere new and positive before too many more of us snuff it before these rarities emerge?

I will tell you all now.... I will ONLY move forwards from this, and I will NOT keep going over and over old stuff from years ago, because people have grudges dating back 6, 8, 10 years or more. Life is too short. We progress these important Queen rarity issues, or we shut up. Fair enough???

John... do you want to make proper serious progress for the good of all Queen projects (potentially, hopefully), or do you want to stay in the past, making bugger all progress???? 

I see you have offered up 'your' De Lane Lea Queen sessions for general grabs. I'm not getting into that. I'll instead stay, with a similar motivation in mind, let's talk and see where we can go with it.

This ALSO is not carrot dangling - but a genuine offer/suggestion.

GB (Queen Archivist)

"Carrot dangling" you say Greg!!!! 

           Year after year we get those Demo's played at the conventions,  Yes, it's great  to hear them at the convention & to have poor inferior copies with "property of Queen Productions" running through them. But I as many will say, we would much rather have the real deal in the "Boxed set" if it ever happens.   I think my "box" lowered into the ground will happen first!!!!

   But I can't blame you Greg, if I had your job (he say's green with envy, lol)  I wouldn't be in a rush to get any project finished quickly.  All I can say is maybe, Jim, Brian, Roger, may release something worthwhile now and again to keep the fans happy, who I might say have spent a lot of money over the years on the product called "Queen".

  I have read your statement to John S saying It's at an exciting time at this period, hopefully something will get released sometime in the near future.

  I agree with you Greg, life is too short & you and John S should bury the hatchet, but you can't blame John S for keeping things close to his chest,  after all, it's what QPL has been doing for years.

Best Wishes...

I imagine they're now trying to get wheels in motion now that Queen's signed over to Universal, and like I've said before I highly doubt Universal will be content on spending nth amount of contractual money just by rehashing the old catalogue repeatedly - they WILL want new product I'm sure! And hopefully new product will translate to box sets that actually WILL appeal to fans, casual or collector!

If John has the master, as I believe he has stated on here, then surely he DOES have the best version?

Queen Archivist wrote:

Some provocative stuff that will muddy the waters of the message he's trying to get across

Putting our rather tedious history of bickering to one side for the moment (now that I've had the last word), there has been SO MANY mentions on this site over the years, from you John, about the various rare Queen audio treasures you have in your collection.

So let's talk about them, you and me, without any previous agenda.

GB (Queen Archivist)
Summarised.

Greggy Boy, re:

>>So, John, why don't you and I meet up and sit and talk properly about
what you have, that we do not have, and what if anything (from that
material) is worth doing something with???  Let's get together, cut thru
all the bullshit, and try to make some proper constructive progress.

Bada BING!  There it is - the offer to meet up in the hope that you and / or QPL can get hold of stuff that they don't have.

It was only a matter of time until you slithered out from beneath the cow parsley and commented on John's offer of uploading the BBC / De Lane Lea material here - the surprising thing is that it's taken you so long to devise an angle from which to make it appear as though you and the band / QPL  actually DO have this material.

What an embarassment (and financial loss) to QPL if such great quality stuff were to appear here given that a complete BBC release was mooted back in 1991 and STILL, all we've seen is pre-existing material released as bonus tracks on CD singles.........surely, if they HAVE the material, there'd be nothing to stop it coming out as BBC sessions are collectable OUTSIDE of the Queen community - there's a huge market for it.

Oh.  Is it THAT time of year again?

i know to a fact that this john man is merely alias and a liar .... he has nothing but that things he downloads from the hub

This is exactly the reason why so many die hard Queen fans have become a lot more interested in other bands who give the fans what they really want. Just look at Judas Priest's British Steel box set, it looks great has 3 discs and sounds fantastic.What do we get? More fucking greatest hits to last a lifetime. It matters not if Priest are your cup of tea,the fact is they at least give the true fans something new.Queen Productions have squeezed the orange dry untill there is nothing left ,but still they manage to get a little more. This is not what dear Freddie would have wanted and lets face it he was the guy who pulled it all together in the first place.So many people have lived off what Freddie did during his time with Queen it just is not true.Freddie would never have forgotten the true fans like myself who were there at the start.Is this really what Brian and Roger want?Will the last person to leave the room ,please switch off the lights.

I don't think so, Andreas.

But it is possible that in some alternate reality that John Stuart / Greg Brooks is a Jeckyll & Hyde thing caused by mass amounts of Crown Royal.  See John is the Queen Archivist.  He lives in the Queen vaults and becomes overwhelmed at times by the amount of 70s concerts in stunning digital quality.  After a few hours, and a few pints, he "snaps" and becomes Greg Brooks for a couple of hours... posting on Queen fan sites, challenging himself to send himself original masters, and downloading porn.   It's okay, we all do it. 

The next morning, the John side takes over not realizing what fully happened the night before.

It goes on, day after day, year after year, until John decides to move to Montana and become a religious fundamentalist shunning all rock music.  He'll put out a couple of John Tesh style CDs recorded simply of a marimba and voice.

Why would anyone allow Greg or QPL to sift through the "Wreakage" again after QPL and its employees repeatly demonstrate that they cannot be trusted.

Negative Creep wrote: If John has the master, as I believe he has stated on here, then surely he DOES have the best version?
Absolutely.  If John DOES have a master copy Greg, then even if there were two master copies taken and the other copy is in the Queen archives, then that Queen copy is not better in quality than John's, merely the same.  I think that John could have possibly worded his info to say that he has 'a master copy, and therefore no better version exists anywhere else', but that is just semantics.

You may be able to dispute his claim that he has a better version than Queen has, but if he has a master then you equally cannot try to intimate that Queen has a better quality copy than John (which I doubt, because otherwise you wouldn't be here effectively trying to ask for a copy) whilst trying to save face and by not openly asking for it.

If, as your claim says, this post is to be open and frank, can you please tell us here and now if Queen (or associated parties) has a master copy of this material?  If yes, then we know that you and John (if he has one) have equally good copies, if not, then we know that John (if he has one) has the better copy.

Simples!

Micrówave wrote: I don't think so, Andreas.

But it is possible that in some alternate reality that John Stuart / Greg Brooks is a Jeckyll & Hyde thing caused by mass amounts of Crown Royal.  See John is the Queen Archivist.  He lives in the Queen vaults and becomes overwhelmed at times by the amount of 70s concerts in stunning digital quality.  After a few hours, and a few pints, he "snaps" and becomes Greg Brooks for a couple of hours... posting on Queen fan sites, challenging himself to send himself original masters, and downloading porn.   It's okay, we all do it. 

The next morning, the John side takes over not realizing what fully happened the night before.

It goes on, day after day, year after year, until John decides to move to Montana and become a religious fundamentalist shunning all rock music.  He'll put out a couple of John Tesh style CDs recorded simply of a marimba and voice.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I like that approach.
Being new to watching those "characters" act, I also had the impression that there is something wrong in that story.
But at last it's quite entertaining....

I was curious how "John" would get out of this story of making his "master-recordings" available on the internet.
The fact that nothing showed up within seven weeks was more than interesting. But this new step of "possible negotiations" with Queen Productions could lead to an elegant way out of this "tricky situation". Everyone will then understand that "he" can't put the tapes on the net...........when in fact this whole story was just made up....

if greg brook has got a perfect version 1 got from a man in the business all it says is delalane session and on disc its says QCD01 ITs perfect and i got losts more also greg what about freddie and barry gibb singing play the game whens that coming out if is pure class
also let me live with rod stewart?

Does anyone REALLY care?  QPL have made it VERY clear that they don't intend to relase any new material or anything remotely interesting - and singles box sets that everyone already owns all the songs digitally already (or almost all of them) don't really amount to shit.  Greatest Hits I (version 24.9) will only grab a few more fans - I think 'Absolute Shit' Greatest Hits proved that.

John, I tihnk it's cool that you potentially own this stuff but why talk about it if no one will ever hear it but yourself?  Release the music so everyone can enjoy it.  If you're not going to, then why these little tiffs with the Archivist?  It's pointless.  He's about as useful as tits on a boar.

BTW, does anyone know what the year is?  2010.  By my calculations, it is Queen's 40th anniversary.  Any bet they will release something MONUMENTAL?  Probably not.  They blew that chance last year when they could have released a revamped Live Killers w/ the addition of the songs they left off the set list and some video footage.  Whatever happened to Brian's talk about Hammy 75???

Queen is dead and so is their creativity and anyone's marketing creativity surrounding them.