[b]The Real Wizard wrote: [/b] Fuck me - Greg Brooks starts a great thread and it becomes yet another flame war between intelligent people and a buffoon with an IQ of under 75 using a translator.
Someone needs to create a Queen forum that doesn't suck.[/QUOTE]
If you`re so clever and you do have time for it create your own forum we will do everything we want everything
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
Well, back on topic...
The SSOR acetate - if the rest of the collection is authentic, then what's the story with this utterly bizarre acetate? There are so many oddities, from the misnomer-title to the "Radio"-text on the label. Has anyone ever seen an AUTHENTIC acetate like this before?
FriedChicken · Member since
Doesn't the lacquer on an acetate damage and disappear after a couple of plays? This surely isn't something you want on a radio, right?
And also the 'Seven Seasons of Rhye' is just weird. Like it was done on purpose.
And it says 'Wrong backing track', which suggests that the master vocal take is present on this version. In a time where they didn't use clicktracks it's really hard to record a new backing track under an already existing vocal track or to put the vocal track on a different backing track. These days it's easy to do when you record do a tempo track or click, but in ye olden days it was almost impossible.
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]FriedChicken wrote:[/b]
Doesn't the lacquer on an acetate damage and disappear after a couple of plays? This surely isn't something you want on a radio, right?
[/QUOTE]
Like I said, I am aware of acetates being used (in a limited way) as a kind of 'last resort' to broadcast something that should've been done live, but for one reason or another had to be pre-recorded. If it's a one-time only thing, an acetate is a cheap and practical solution. However, a song for radio play on an acetate is just weird. Considering how important radio play was to promote a song especially in those days, I can't imagine that an early, evidently faulty mix, would ever have made it to a disc for radio play, and I certainly can't imagine them using an acetate for such a thing.
I don't think it's a fake, quite simply because of the hassle of making an acetate (requires specialist equipment and such), and the fact that this thing is so outlandish that it begs to be considered a fake, which would be very poor strategy for a forger. However, I don't understand at all what this thing is. Is this perhaps a test version for a proposed radio-mix? Also, what is the meaning of the "Required CMRF"? From what I could find, it refers to Combined Mode Resonator Filter, but I don't know the purpose thereof.
brENsKi · Member since
my understanding was that even the very best acetates would only last for 40-100 plays - and that's if they are best quality and cared for for their entire life. when you factor in stylus quality/wear you can significantly reduce this figure.one dodgy needle can damage an acetate and make it unplayable, because a worn stylus will rip the lacquer off the acetate, whereas a dodgy stylus would only scratch a vinyl record.
bearing in mind this "SSOR" has been around for 40 yrs and anyone wanting to purchase it in the past will have asked to hear it - won't that count as a [i]"play"[/i]? - it must be very difficult to have many original acetates around that have their "theoretic play counter" still near the max.
so if this is genuine - it may look good - but shouldn't it play like shit?
as regards the "Required CMRF"[/b][i][b] (Combined Mode Resonator Filter)[/b][/i] does this help? is it connected in any way? [i]"They usually used a crystal cutter head that had a frequency response of about 100hz to about 3khz. The output level was about -2db below standard reference level. Commercial cutting heads could get from about 50hz to about 10Khz, and about +6db of level.
Nowadays with the feedback, moving coil cutterheads, the response jumped to about 20hz to 18Khz, many times reaching 22Khz, and the levels of +10 are possible. Aardvark cuts their plates at +6 as +10 puts way too much risk on the cutterhead" [b] [/b][/i][b](from: http://www.moremusic.co.uk/links/features/acetate.htm)[/b][i]. [/i]
mooghead · Member since
If this turned out to be unplayable but genuine... would it still be a Queen collectable?
Go....
brENsKi · Member since
yeah and the mad doctor would insist on checking it is unplayable before allowing it to be sold
* Greg compared this one with Brian his own acetates, because this has a different label , is the claim this isn't real. So this means that the test versions handed out to the artists are excatly the same as the ones made for other pruposes?
* Some high class collectors including JSS asked me for the file and told me he was very interested in this ebay lot. And now he claims this one is a fake.
* this item features a unique version of the song, which cannot be made by amateurs , queen keeps on playing extra verses... This is without the "I like to be the seaside ending" which could be meant as a standalone track.And this appears on Reel to Reel as wel....
* I recieved emails that my Sheffiled acetate is a fake as well : this one I bought in person of Sheffield, there is no doubt.
* See the first topic in Greg his topic "sikke's acetates"
* Why in heaven sake would a evil man which is aiming to gain money out of pirates and bootlegs spent his time and effort in making a costy acetate with the risk to gain maybe 100 pounds knowing this will take a lot of time and effort. Knowing he can't be pooring out acetates : people will know and think it is suspicous when one person is flooding the market with rare acetates !
* See point above : why would use words like "rejected alternate version" , "take 5 rejected" etc.etc.
* Nobody told assumed it is a fake , while pictures of this one where on my facebook for 1 year or so... No people loved it.... People wanted to buy it.
* It has been in my collection since 1999 I bought it at a auction house. While unpakcing boxes with Queen I noticed I have 2 of these the one sold and the same on Trident label.
* Why is it a radio acetate : who knows why ? Why are the BBC sessions cut on Acetate they have the reels of the sessions.... ohhhh wait I just found out that the BBC aceates are all fakes !!
* It is a acetate all the point JSS mentioned in his topic count for this being genuine , he forgot 1 thing : the specifc smell of acetates.... The older they become the thinner it's sent will be. You have to be experienced for this.
Well I hope this makes sence.
The biggest fake acetate is Hangman :
* this one does NOT excist ! This has been confirmed by QPL employees.
* Why cut a acetate of a not going to be single release ? (curious point !)
* A picture showing a trident aceate with "angman" written on it can easily be made.
Further I have to react to the Reel tape point in JSS his topic.
The one I sold is the one shared here for free to celebrate Bob W. his birthday. I paid $ 800,- for it back then , knowing uploading it would make it only a piece of memorbilia and dlete it's value. And not a exciting piece of possible content. Btw this is the March show of Rainbow, not the November one of the VHS. As you know there are no VHS releases of the march show. And it is genuine.
Further one the reveresed /ufo story : this makes no sence at all. And sound like a explanation of my daughter after watching 2 hours the History Channel (ancinet aliens) this kind of engeneering was done way before 1947 : during the World Wars, and even in dark ages , finding out how to built trebuchets.
The Real Wizard · Member since
If you want to prove that your acetate is genuine, post a wav file of the music contained therein. It wouldn't devalue the acetate itself.
If you're selling the acetate you obviously don't have an issue with the music getting out there, so the "it needs to remain rare" argument doesn't apply here.
If you don't want people to ask questions, then don't talk about it and don't post it on ebay. People are skeptical by default until proven otherwise. The questions are bound to come, and you carry the burden of proof.
brENsKi · Member since
or failing that - lossy mp3 - but still clear enough to see there are no amateur edits/joins/splices
Negative Creep · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
If you want to prove that your acetate is genuine, post a wav file of the music contained therein. It wouldn't devalue the acetate itself.[/QUOTE]
LOL - Why would you need it in WAV/lossless quaity? You're not very subtle - you want to make out it's fake just to get the old owner to just hand you a lossless copy of something you don't have for free. An acetate featuring unreleased material is worth far more than an acetate with standard release material, so of course distributing the audio in any form would devalue it.
