What REALLY happened

Admittedly I do approach this topic from a mostly musical perspective. I just enjoy listening to stuff.

Random acts of altruism don't hurt anyone. I just think that, with QPL taking their sweet time to get good stuff out the door, it doesn't make sense to have the fan community doing the same thing. The collectors that are griping, to me, are akin to people who made a bad decision on the stock market. Dust yourself off and be wiser next time.

Actually.. to expand on a post above... Hangman, from what I have heard of it.. is fucking shit. Ever wondered why it never appeared on an album and the band never spoke of it?

Either.. put everyone out of their misery and share the crap or keep it to yourselves. No one cares.

Its awful.

"Hangman, from what I have heard of it.. is fucking shit"

It's not high art, that's for sure. I love shit like "Feelings, Feelings" and "You Are The Only One" - ok, they weren't really complete or fleshed out, but they were a lot more impassioned than bloody filler Hangman.

[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]
"But surely, if everything was in the public domain, it would be worthless as a collection?"
FINALLY, someone gets it. Yes. It should be worthless. If you want to make money, go and collect stamps, or baseball cards, or Lamborghini's, or some other fuckin' thing.[/QUOTE]
But the same could be said then, of stamp collectors, baseball card collectors, or Chris Evans. Whatever one 'collects', surely one hopes it will retain some value? That's just human nature.

[QUOTE]Hell - collect the physical tapes or discs that the music came on![/QUOTE]
I believe some have, and do, and those are what costs money - hence, it's perhaps unsurprising that maybe some acetates haven't seen the light of day.

[QUOTE]Collectors have got to understand that whatever one's moral position on collecting bootlegs, they will always and forever be coming up against the fact that there are people out there that just want to hear stuff.[/QUOTE]
I can fully understand that, and can see it from both sides. Not being a collector myself, I'm not all that interested in bootlegs, as most of them are of pretty poor sound quality (when compared to an official release), but I've downloaded plenty, just to listen to, in the hope of a decent live version of It's Late.

However, if a collector had paid for a one-off tape / CD / LP, that doesn't exist elsewhere, I wouldn't expect them to simply upload it for general consumption, as, to a collector, it would not only hold personal value, but would be tradeworthy as well. I think that's partly the issue with the Reaction stuff - the trading value has gone, now that it's been 'released'.

[QUOTE]When I speak of having it in the public domain as a means of preservation, what I'm getting at is that the music itself (even if it's as boring as the Reaction shit) stands a much better chance of being enjoyed (or at least acknowledged) in years to come if more people can get a crack at it.[/QUOTE]
I see that point, and agree, in part, but I think it's arguable with my point above. That said, if someone had, hypothetically, an acetate studio outtake of Freddie singing Long Away, and put it out in low grade MP3 quality, just so people could hear it, I don't see how that would impact on the overall value of the original.

I've just realised, and I have to apologise, but we're in danger of having a reasonably civilised debate in this thread - LOL!!

[QUOTE] [b]mooghead wrote:[/b]
Actually.. to expand on a post above... Hangman, from what I have heard of it.. is fucking shit. Ever wondered why it never appeared on an album and the band never spoke of it?
Either.. put everyone out of their misery and share the crap or keep it to yourselves. No one cares.
Its awful.[/QUOTE]
I think most of the 'demo' stuff that didn't make it to completion is pretty crap, isn't it? I haven't heard anything yet, where I thought, "Christ, why didn't that make the album?"

"I've just realised, and I have to apologise, but we're in danger of having a reasonably civilised debate in this thread - LOL!!"

Quick, one of us will have to call the other a rude name. Think of something!

"But the same could be said then, of stamp collectors, baseball card collectors, or Chris Evans. Whatever one 'collects', surely one hopes it will retain some value?"

Indeed, but like I said in the other thread - the Mona Lisa hasn't been even remotely devalued by my being able to look it up on Google Images. I'm not sure where the happy middle ground might exist as far as Queen rarities go, but there really ought to be one. I think low quality copies is more than an okay compromise.

[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]
Quick, one of us will have to call the other a rude name. Think of something![/QUOTE]
Err... umm... ooh... BIG EARS!!

[QUOTE]Indeed, but like I said in the other thread - the Mona Lisa hasn't been even remotely devalued by my being able to look it up on Google Images. I'm not sure where the happy middle ground might exist as far as Queen rarities go, but there really ought to be one. I think low quality copies is more than an okay compromise.[/QUOTE]
The Mona Lisa probably wasn't the best analogy. :)

The digital age has a lot to answer for, and therein lies much of the problem. Now, a first generation tape can be digitally copied a million times, and retain it's original sound quality, as can an acetate. Hence, the value of such original recordings immediately diminishes, once they've been digitally shared, as the only 'value' then remains in the actual physical item. As you've been saying, Zeb, all most people want is to hear stuff, so once it's 'out', they would then have no interest in obtaining the original copy, as it would be no better quality than the digital replica. A low grade MP3 would allow non-collectors to hear what's around, but, presumably, wouldn't impact on the trading (or collectable) value of the original.

i quite like
dog with a bone
think it woulda made a good album track

who wrote it>?
it's got a distinct "roger" feel about it lyrically, but i'm inclined towards "brian" because of some fat bottomed girls similarities

Yeah, that's probably one of the better ones. Face It Alone, for all the pre-release drama it created, is just a monotonous drone, in my opinion.

Whilst not agreeing with how Dave Fuller has acted, I do agree with the poster here who said that the 'elitist' group surely have double standards when they are openly talking of having rare studio tracks which, unless they were handed them directly by QPL or band members, they know are absolutely 100% stolen property. Now, if those who actually own the material went after them to recover these, that would be interesting.

I couldn't take possession of, say, a stolen painting from a gallery and then say "but unpaid thousands for this so it's mine", so I'm not sure how it can be right in the instance of the tracks being talked about here.

[QUOTE]I couldn't take possession of, say, a stolen painting from a gallery and then say "but I paid thousands for this so it's mine", so I'm not sure how it can be right in the instance of the tracks being talked about here.[/QUOTE]

That's exactly what I was thinking.  Again, no disrespect to anyone in the threads, this is just out of curiousity.

[QUOTE]A low grade MP3 would allow non-collectors to hear what's around, but, presumably, wouldn't impact on the trading (or collectable) value of the original[/QUOTE]

I disagree.  I'm one of those non-collectors.  While my officially released collection would rival some here, I have never paid for any rare recording of anyone.  But if I were a Queenie (like a Trekkie only a bit more sensitive and better dressed), perhaps I would make the jump to paying $200 for a nice digital copy of Hangman.  But if I heard a low quality recording of it, then I would realize I like Body Language better and decide not to pay the $200.

The value just dropped.

[QUOTE] [b]Micrówave wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE]A low grade MP3 would allow non-collectors to hear what's around, but, presumably, wouldn't impact on the trading (or collectable) value of the original[/QUOTE] I disagree.  I'm one of those non-collectors.  While my officially released collection would rival some here, I have never paid for any rare recording of anyone.  But if I were a Queenie (like a Trekkie only a bit more sensitive and better dressed), perhaps I would make the jump to paying $200 for a nice digital copy of Hangman.  But if I heard a low quality recording of it, then I would realize I like Body Language better and decide not to pay the $200.The value just dropped.[/QUOTE]
Valid point. But most of us probably know what Hangman kind of sounds like, given that we've heard the live versions - it's not a great track, but still a bit of a Holy Grail.

[QUOTE] [b]Micrówave wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE]A low grade MP3 would allow non-collectors to hear what's around, but, presumably, wouldn't impact on the trading (or collectable) value of the original[/QUOTE] I disagree.  I'm one of those non-collectors.  While my officially released collection would rival some here, I have never paid for any rare recording of anyone.  But if I were a Queenie (like a Trekkie only a bit more sensitive and better dressed), perhaps I would make the jump to paying $200 for a nice digital copy of Hangman.  But if I heard a low quality recording of it, then I would realize I like Body Language better and decide not to pay the $200.The value just dropped.[/QUOTE]

Well that's not really how it works is it. Because the value to these guys is in the item itself, not if the material on it is good or bad. Most of it is very bad, but it's rare, so hey.

Oh, I know. I just don't think that releasing any of it would be "harmless"... no matter who's doing the releasing or the quality.

Once it's out, the value drops.

But I, for one, still have no idea what it sounds like.