Press Release: QUEEN: FIRST FIVE ALBUMS RE-ISSUED ON ISLAND RECORDS

As to The Beatles, the big benefit was, of course, the first four LPs in stereo.  Granted, it was 2 or 4 track, but it was FINALLY stereo.  For me, to make 'best of ' disks for my listening pleasure and others, it also meant being able to put together the nonLP tracks with album tracks, and having the loudness and quality equal.

I also know that within three months of the box set release, individual LPs could be purchased for under $15.  A great deal.  I received the complete set for xmas two years ago.  This summer, I will finally listen to the post-'Revolver' releases.  I know they won't match the changes of the first seven LPs, or the 'Yellow Sub' soundtrack from the '90s, but...........it was a great 'buy'.

The 'Anthology' series was superb.  Yes, they could have done a 12-24 CD collection, and there are shortfalls, but it was done well, 'fiscally' responsible, and much better than what the QP people are doing.

They just always do things badly.  Envision Led Zeppelin coming out with an expanded 'Zoso', and including as their 'bone us' tracks,  a karaoke 'Stairway To Heaven', an edited live version of 'Dazed and Confused' or 'Moby Dick' from four years later, and a 2011 remix of 'Rock 'n Roll' or 'Black Dog'.  What did we expect from a 'band'/organization who claimed such great things were going to be released and would sound like on the Hwood crap?

As stated by others before, we will choose not to buy.  We wanted to.  We really did.  But, you did not give us one....ONE....solitairy reason to.

Not listening to any of your customers is called 'bad business'.

Wilki Amieva wrote: Of course that is only your opinion. But someone could have argued quite the opposite. Some Beatles fans did raise the following points:

1) Inconsistency: The stereo box had a mixture of original and 1987 stereo mixes. Further original stereo mixes are included as bonus in the mono box. This makes NO SENSE at all.

2) Exclusivity: The mono albums could ONLY be bought in a limited (and quite expensive) box. The first four albums are barely listenable in stereo as the original stereo mixes aren't proper mixes at all, at the time they just released the 2-track multitrack masters (and that is what is just included in the stereo box - they didn't make new stereo mixes of these, as you imply above).

3) Lack of extra content: No bonus tracks, just Quicktime video documentaries with re-edited material from ALREADY AVAILABLE clips in the ANTHOLOGY video series. There was of course a bonus DVD compiling all such documentaries in proper format, but it was released exclusively as part of the stereo box.

There were also minor complaints about some "replaced" or "tweaked" versions, mistakes in the liner notes and even the quality of the remasters (excessive noise reduction and/or peak limiting in the stereo box versions).
==============================================================
This is becoming very off-topic but I want to answer, anyway :-)

as to 1) The only 1987 digital stereo mixes on the stereo box are the George Martin mixes of Help and Rubber Soul. As you may know George Martin was not present for the original stereo mixes of the two albums in 1965/66 and he was not happy with them. Therefore he made his own digital stereo mixes from the original analogue tapes for the 1987 CD releases. It is true that there is an inconsisteny, perhaps the project management thought that they already had an optimum digital master for the two albums. The two original stereo mixes ( the ones George Martin did not supervise) were put on the mono box - as you say this is an inconsistency but it is also a little extra for the hardcore fan. For me it was the first digital version of the very first album I ever bought in my life :-) These two mixes should be on the stereo box but history-wise they truly belong into the mono period. Btw, the stereo mixes are extras on the respective mono CDs, not some bonus CDs to make the product more expensive.

as to 2) yes, I mentioned that the mono box is an exclusive edition. You must buy the complete box for approx 190 € (for example here http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/SESSIONID/9d11f9e278e702fcb552e5e552b9fb60/poprock/detail/-/art/The-Beatles-The-Beatles-Mono-Box-Set/hnum/5308100 ) - per CD still cheaper than the recent Queen GH1+2 re-issue

as to 3) I do not see lack of additional content as a big minus: After, all it's an album re-issue and not an anthology. It would be more annoying if they had put a CD with 12 unreleased tracks into the box and made all fans who want the unreleased tracks buy the box. However, I am not saying the product is beyond reproach, certainly we can find a lot of faults and omissions but it was not designed to rip off the fans.

In the same way we can discuss the Freddie Mercury box which is still one of my most cherished boxes. There are little mistakes and  omissions, the text in the book is just terrible and let us not get into the "Untold Story" but the intention is good. It is not cheap in any way, it aimed at completeness and is overall a truly pleasurable item for the fans - not the casual listeners who do not need all the instrumentals and demos. The casual listener was quite happy with the 3 CD box. That was my whole point. A product should have the customer in mind and not only the highest possible profit.

As you see, what for some people is a blatant inconsistency that ruins the entire product, for others is the best feature in it. The bottom line is that you CANNOT make everybody happy - and that's my whole point. Anyway, "designed to rip-off fans" is quite harsh an statement to make upon a product that hasn't even seen the light of day.

And, for the record...
"As you may know George Martin was not present for the original stereo mixes of the two albums in 1965/66 and he was not happy with them. Therefore he made his own digital stereo mixes from the original analogue tapes for the 1987 CD releases."
This just isn't the case - you can check the facts in 'The Beatles Recording Sessions', the remarkable book by Mark Lewinsohn published in 1988. Martin WAS indeed present and produced most of the stereo mixes of both albums as well as the stereo mixes of the first four albums. He was not happy with any of them - as a matter of fact, he didn't even care about them, as stereo was not the mainstream format yet. In 1987, when EMI decided to reissue the entire catalogue in CD, he analogically produced new stereo mixes for HELP and RUBBER SOUL as these were originally recorded in 4-track and he thought he could do a better job. As for the first four albums, those were recorded in 2-track and Martin suggested that EMI should disregard the original stereo mixes altogether and release just the mono mixes - and they did just that. The new compilations do not follow Martin's considerations as to what is "definitive" nor the Beatles' (everything mono up to and including SGT. PEPPERS, then stereo), nor they follow the original discography. That's inconsistency in my book.

If there should be more on the bonus CDs than was announced, I will gladly take my "rip-off" comment back.

So you having to buy the Beatles stereo box to get the DVD ...and not even getting all the original stereo mixes, or the mono box to get any of its content, or the fact that none of the boxes comprised the albums in the most considerate way (so you have to buy them both to get the albums with any logic), or the lack of previously unreleased material is OK for The Beatles. I quote you: "After, all it's an album re-issue and not an anthology".

As far as I know, Queen is just rereleasing their albums. This is not an anthology either.

This will be the first time the ENTIRE catalogue is remastered from the original master tapes or the BEST available sources by the SAME team and issued WORLDWIDE (well, almost - albeit I'm pretty sure that HR will get these as well, eventually). It's pretty much the same situation as with The Beatles. The good thing is that there are no fancy boxes with 'exclusive' material. You can buy any album separately - and they even come in two versions: with or without extras, to suit any taste.

i'd like to add something to this debate....
the sprigsteen and bowie deluxes were beautifully presented...as were ac/dc and the who stuff....and latterly thin lizzy have also shown that giving the fans what they want is a good thing....

so why are queen treating us like poor relatives?    there can only be two reasons
1. brian doesn't want us having any of his "private stuff"
2. there's f-all to add to make up deluxes - hence the inclusion of widely available crap

if 1. then he needs a dose of reality.....hang on to it...by all means Brian, but eventually it will all leak - then it'll no longer be private, and your opportunity to bolster your retirement fund will have long-gone
if 2. then that really is sad. and serves em right for not looking after all those outtakes, sessions and demos a lot better

i personally think we should all have awhip-round and try and raise some considerable sums for the private collectors to release mp3(only) versions of songs like hangman- then they can make somehting and stuff QPL

on a final note...the latest deluxe - rainbow's down to earth is stunning - got it today off play.com downloads...very nice all round...can't wait for "rising" next month, and hopefull (soon) Ritchie B will consider LLRnR for the deluxe works

to be honest, for a very long time i have suspected that there's alot more stuff outside the archive than there is unheard inside it.

If there's stuff from 7 years before Queen's first album (The Reaction, Left Handed Marriage, I even think there was a Hectics-tape from 1958?) - I'm sure there must be stuff in the archives that we haven't heard. No way that the best thing they could find in the archives was an a capella version of Leroy Brown.

Pim Derks wrote: If there's stuff from 7 years before Queen's first album (The Reaction, Left Handed Marriage, I even think there was a Hectics-tape from 1958?) - I'm sure there must be stuff in the archives that we haven't heard. No way that the best thing they could find in the archives was an a capella version of Leroy Brown. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
exactly my point. i really feel Brian May doesn't want this stuff getting out...EVER!!!! i think he feels like he is the worlds biggest queen collector....and this stuff is now "for his ears only"

the older i get, the more i dislike queen (well 25% of em), shit product, shit packaging, shit new (and old releases), shit attitude

and then people talking about guitarists like Blackmore being a a**hole...well that's as maybe, but he knows how to treat fans....blackmore could show BHM a thing or two. - the pruple remasters/repackages were amazing, but the rainbow DTE - which i'm still lsitening to - is better still.

for fuck's sake Brian...bring something NEW to the table....don't keep selling us the same battered old table.
QPL can fuck right off if they think i am forking out for a fifth copy of my favourite album - queen II - with no worthwhile extra product on it...selfish, egotistical, money-grubbing c*nts

No, they are not just re-releasing their albums. They also release a so-called "deluxe" edition. Nobody would have a problem if there were only a re-release - it's obvious that the catalogue is re-issued when artists switch  record companies. My only issue are the so-called bonus discs. I already said that  in a previous post.

The DVD in the Beatles stereo box is an extra but the mini documentaries are on each album, so you do not lose material when you buy the single albums. However, you can always criticise a product, I said that in a previous post, as well. Surely, the 1965/66 stereo mixes of Help and Rubber Soul could be in both boxes in case a fan feels compelled to buy the mono box in order to get two old  stereo mixes, we can agree on that , as well.

If Queen put the bonus tracks on the albums instead of an extra CD, I won't say a word about inconsisteny or doublettes. I have not yet heard anyone complain about the two extra tracks on the Japanese GH1 and 2. For obvious reasons we do not know anything about the sound quality, yet.

Barb
i agree with your comments 100% - which is why i have said what i have - previously in this thread...QPL really are rob-dog-snidey-money-grubbing-thieves

for those unsure here are the universally used definitions of album releases:

Standard Edition:    as it came out on day of release

Special Edition:     usually released about 6mths to a yr after initial release when a new single is added to it to boost sales, or where one or two extra tracks are added - which then get released as singles. can also include a promotional dvd release to accompany the album

Re-issue:   usually a later re-release (to mark an anniversary) in it's initial format.

Remix:    where tracks have been edited or remixed to change the feel, tempo, or length of the tracks

Remaster:    where the original masters are used to re-cut the discs to enhance or improve the quality of previous pressing

Expanded Edition: usually a released of an album with some previously available extra tracks - very often live tracks or b-side

deluxe edition:     a release of an original album with a set of previously unavailable tracks to enhance the quality of the product.

....at best queen's 2011 releases are somewhere between re-issues and expandeds...THEY ARE NOT DELUXES...and they've got a fucking cheek calling em that

I've already explained what the deal is but you all do not want to hear it.    Cry babies.

I really do not believe that Brian decides to hold back stuff from sheer ill-will or something to that effect. I think it's a business decision. Also, I did not expect rare studio demos like Silver Salmon or Hangman etc. These should be released in the long overdue anthology.

Imo it's exactly like brensKi said: It's the mislabelling and all the fuzz with the 40 year extra website and the fanfares for some insignificant extra tracks that is so annoying.  Personally I would have been overjoyed with CD/DVD-Audio couples or other 5.1 surround copies or some video extras like concert stuff from the 70s but of course you can never make everybody happy as wilki correcty pointed out. But trying would have been worth the effort.

I've been a record collector for more of 20 years now and let me say that I have seen "special", "definitive", "expanded", "collector's", "deluxe", etc. used fairly inconsistently worldwide since the dawn of CD. These are NOT standard definitions at all - but marketing tags used to improve the perceived value of a product vs. a standard/original release. Each label has a preferred term, which can be tweaked by the project manager to suit almost any product - sometimes it just makes reference to a different sleeve. On the other hand, "de luxe" has a definite meaning: it means luxurious. So let's wait and see how much luxury they pack in.

Now if the problem is that some of you are not willing to purchase (again) 15 albums for "just" about 80 bonus tracks (most of them officially unreleased), that's OK. Just don't buy them. I am pretty sure that those tracks will be compiled again sooner or later.