Roger´s new album - "Smile" preview

It absolutely does. I'm not being pointless and nonsensical - I'm being completely practical. If you don't like the way collectors currently do their business, then I invite you to be the change you wish to see in the world. How else will you know first hand that the current process is categorically wrong unless you experience it yourself?


Step 1 - go to a music auction and be the highest bidder (be sure to bring four figures of banknotes with you)

Step 2 - transfer the recording to digital to see whether or not you're lucky enough it actually is something uncirculated (this often isn't the case)

Step 3 - decide whether you'd like to trade this item for something else which will eventually result in two new things for everyone to enjoy

(skip step 3 if you wish to change the existing model)

Step 4 - share your one new thing and everyone rejoices


You don't go into an established bowling league to tell them that you wish they did ten pin bowling instead of five. You start your own ten pin bowling league.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

You don't go into an established bowling league to tell them that you wish they did ten pin bowling instead of five. You start your own ten pin bowling league.[/QUOTE]

Which is exactly what, in essence, David Fuller has done. Same pins, bigger balls.

Is this the Big Lebowski?

[QUOTE] [b]GratefulFan wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

You don't go into an established bowling league to tell them that you wish they did ten pin bowling instead of five. You start your own ten pin bowling league.[/QUOTE]

Which is exactly what, in essence, David Fuller has done. Same pins, bigger balls.

[/QUOTE]

Absolutely.

Except he did it while holding up a sign that said "I learned how to do five pin bowling from these guys, and I'm going to run a bulldozer over their bowling alley to create my own."

What happened was he crashed into the wall and was sent off running.

If he wants to start his own league, then he can do so without stealing from others who were generous enough to help him and asked for nothing in return.

Taking all the credit for someone else's work is never an honourable thing to do.

[QUOTE]

[b]The Real Wizard wrote: [/b] It absolutely does. I'm not being pointless and nonsensical - I'm being completely practical. If you don't like the way collectors currently do their business, then I invite you to be the change you wish to see in the world. How else will you know first hand that the current process is categorically wrong unless you experience it yourself?

Step 1 - go to a music auction and be the highest bidder (be sure to bring four figures of banknotes with you)

Step 2 - transfer the recording to digital to see whether or not you're lucky enough it actually is something uncirculated (this often isn't the case)

Step 3 - decide whether you'd like to trade this item for something else which will eventually result in two new things for everyone to enjoy

(skip step 3 if you wish to change the existing model)

Step 4 - share your one new thing and everyone rejoices

You don't go into an established bowling league to tell them that you wish they did ten pin bowling instead of five. You start your own ten pin bowling league.[/QUOTE]

Tell me, is the scenario above what happened to the Roger Taylor track?  What auction did it come from?

Re: bowling league -- a ridiculous comparison. Is there much demand for digital copies of some old duffer playing down the local bowling league? C'mon.

Let's stick to what's happening rather than bizarre analogies.

Damn.... I can't wait to hear the full track of Smile. Love it already!

Thanks to everybody who brought this to my ears! ;-)

They peed on his rug man.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

Absolutely.

Except he did it while holding up a sign that said "I learned how to do five pin bowling from these guys, and I'm going to run a bulldozer over their bowling alley to create my own."

What happened was he crashed into the wall and was sent off running.

If he wants to start his own league, then he can do so without stealing from others who were generous enough to help him and asked for nothing in return.

Taking all the credit for someone else's work is never an honourable thing to do.[/QUOTE]

Fuller may be no prince but he is the only person I am aware of who has ever given off any sense of seeing himself as a curator and not just a collector. Art is not an automobile or a bowling ball, nor is it's highest purpose to be a chip on a somebody's strategic private bingo card. The internet changed the format of music and the speed of everything, but it also dramatically changed demand. Suddenly everybody in the world who might turn their eyes to a music forum discovered that treasures existed that they hadn't even previously imagined. It's disingenuous to pretend that the collecting world would want or remotely benefit from a torrent of inexperienced new demand rolling in like an avalanche on on the same fixed supply. That people selfishly want something for nothing is a useful meme but the truth is that nobody with the power to make it happen has developed any practical way for everybody who might like to participate and contribute to do so.

A 1970's era model in 2013 serves only the maintenance of the current distribution of power and privilege and while it's only human nature to find justification in that, the cost to the collective you has been the void into which David Fuller has so determinedly tumbled. It's not his fault the collecting world didn't have the vision or the tendency to reflection that might have ignited a shift to the idea of being both curators and collectors when the barriers of distance and lack of awareness fell. I can't go to the Louvre and stand in front of the Mona Lisa, but I can go to their website and see a picture of it. I can order a print and I can donate to the museum with a click. There is no reason that I can't after a little amount of time listen to a low quality copy of a rarity, or a portion of one, or one with an audio mark all over it, or one distinguished in some other way from a high quality version that a skilled collector operating in an orderly system has acquired, other than the fact that the collective you has decided that it shouldn't be so. I can't donate to an auction purchase or the purchase of some audio equipment because nobody made me a donate button, not because I don't want to.

You don't like Fuller's ethics and he doesn't like yours. I understand. But nonetheless the no trial executions and the careless false accusations a la the Cherie track and the public and back channel communications to shut people up on this topic are disturbing. Why don't you try beating him with a better system instead of what is essentially intimidation and the determined squashing of dissent?

Meh, leak everything.

Maybe it would be time for me to release some of my other rarities. Just to name two:

Queen
Out of Luck (1:43 min 1985 demo , drum track , guitar, lead vocal Roger)

Brian May
Supernatural (3:14, 1991, instrumental complete demo, no vocals)

Excuse the blatant materialism, but I feel that like many people here who could never dream of accessing such things would be gleefully grateful! The philosphists can argue about the rest to their heart's content! Bring it on!

Thank you! (I hope)

^^^^^^^^
oh go on then, if you insist.......

[QUOTE]

[b]TRS-Romania wrote: [/b] Maybe it would be time for me to release some of my other rarities. Just to name two:

Queen
Out of Luck (1:43 min 1985 demo , drum track , guitar, lead vocal Roger)

Brian May
Supernatural (3:14, 1991, instrumental complete demo, no vocals)[/QUOTE]

You should hang onto them. After all, you might still be able to wring some value out of them with other traders. Get every last drip drop of blood out of that stone. Another 12 years of mean and grubby haggling between fellow traders and then you can release "Out of Luck" to the masses on the 40th anniversary of its creation. (Created not by you of course, but by the band we're all fans of.) Then we shall worship you as a true God of Capitalism.

David Randolph Fuller? A curator??? It seems you really don't know what a curator is! Having been one for several years of my life (nothing Queen-related), I feel ashamed to hear that noble word being used to describe what Fuller did/does.

He's definetely NOT a curator. A curator KNOWS about the material he offers, she/he CARES about it, she/he helps tracing it and/or establishing its source, and do her/his best to restore it in all its glory. That's exactly what the people Fuller has stolen from has been doing in the past decades. Not only gathering stuff - but COLLECTING it. That means a quest, a lot of research, and it's been ALWAYS a collaborative effort.

I have the privilege to count amongst my friends some of the greatest Queen collectors in the world, and the collector's path (to hell - some would say!) has always been a joyful one thanks to them. Of course we had bad times, some disappointments, a few rotten apples and robotos, and a lot of fruitful disagreements. It was good.

Then some collectors conformed the Fanthology, and it was decided to open the game to some people beyond the realms of collecting, to gather the best sourced material and all the accessory info available, with the aim of making the best fan-made anthology (hence the name) possible, and eventually SHARE it for FREE and ANONYMOUSLY. And it was very good.

Some of use were really trying to change things for the better, it seems.

The ONLY bad thing about that group was -strangely enough- one member who exposed very sensitive (Brian May was concerned about it) material to gain personal fame and then lied to us. And -strangely enough- he left the group without never contributing anything. Nada. Nothing. Zip. Zero. To be fair, we didn't expect him to contribute much material - after all, he was not a collector. He was invited because he was proficient in YouTube affairs, and we thought he might be able to offer some expertise at the sharing stage. But it seems he didn't want to share (no pun intended) the credit. Can you guess his name?

Fuller only thinks about Fuller - don't make a mistake on this. It's as simple as that. And now he's got all the adulation he (wetly) dreamed for, he's SELLING other people's material...

I think the paradigm changed for the worst.

Also, there's one more consideration to make... Most (almost all) of the Queen-related rarities circulating nowadays come from actual items in the hands of Fanthology members. Yes, there is a pattern here... But there is also a lot of uncirculated stuff that has been in the hands of other people for years. And now it would be more difficult to make those collectors part with it. We all lose in the long term. Thanks again, David!

You people really need to get a life. Bickering about scraps of tracks that the band haven't released.

I'll happily wait to hear 'Smile' or anything else when it's released - in the form it's creator intended. And if it's shit I won't buy it. (it's not the 70s anymore).

It;s clearly not about collecting. It's all about power isn't it? I have this, you haven't, therefore I have something over you.

What a shit way to lead your life.