http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnstuart001/8743009127/in/photostream
Is this a UK number "4" or a European number "7"?
John S Stuart
Thread
Posts in chronological order
tcc
It looks like it was a 4 but someone tried to alter it to a 7.
tomchristie22
I'd say 4. The longer I look at it the weirder it looks, but it doesn't resemble a 7 to me. Plus, Spread Your Wings' outro would have to drag on a fair bit to bring the track's time up to 7 minutes.
mooghead
Whoosh.........
horse feathers
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....
inu-liger
It's a very sloppy 4
inu-liger
Is there an end prize to these polls, John? :)
inu-liger
[QUOTE] [b]horse feathers wrote:[/b]
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....[/QUOTE]
Not really. He's clearly poking fun at a certain couple of acetates or so that have gotten people debating about whether unreleased extended versions of certain songs actually exist or not.
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....[/QUOTE]
Not really. He's clearly poking fun at a certain couple of acetates or so that have gotten people debating about whether unreleased extended versions of certain songs actually exist or not.
Queen fan
[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnstuart001/8743009127/in/photostream
Is this a UK number "4" or a European number "7"?[/QUOTE]
it is def meant to be a number 4
but is a little man with one leg up
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnstuart001/8743009127/in/photostream
Is this a UK number "4" or a European number "7"?[/QUOTE]
it is def meant to be a number 4
but is a little man with one leg up
scottmax
it's 47......
Thistle
[QUOTE] [b]horse feathers wrote:[/b]
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....[/QUOTE]
Parchment IS paper :p
I can understand why you've said this, HF, but in the context of whats being going down here in the last few weeks, this is making a good point: if you take a bit of time to catch up, I'm sure you'll think differently about it.
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....[/QUOTE]
Parchment IS paper :p
I can understand why you've said this, HF, but in the context of whats being going down here in the last few weeks, this is making a good point: if you take a bit of time to catch up, I'm sure you'll think differently about it.
John S Stuart
If there was a prize; then it would have to shared between Inu and Thistle boy.
therefore; I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of a free posh dinner ticket which can be redeemed at any Michelin Star restaurant of their choice - any time the two meet up together!
Yes; there is a point to this. There always is.
For those who bothered to click on the link; this is the supposed evidence to suggest that a 7 minute (extended) version of "Spread Your Wings" exists out there.
For on continental Europe this timing was read as 7:10.
But this was recorded in the UK and I claim it reads 4;00 (roughly the same timing as the regular version).
Based on the above evidence alone - do you think this refers to the ordinary 4:00 version - or is this proof of a 7:10 wonder?
therefore; I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of a free posh dinner ticket which can be redeemed at any Michelin Star restaurant of their choice - any time the two meet up together!
Yes; there is a point to this. There always is.
For those who bothered to click on the link; this is the supposed evidence to suggest that a 7 minute (extended) version of "Spread Your Wings" exists out there.
For on continental Europe this timing was read as 7:10.
But this was recorded in the UK and I claim it reads 4;00 (roughly the same timing as the regular version).
Based on the above evidence alone - do you think this refers to the ordinary 4:00 version - or is this proof of a 7:10 wonder?
thomasquinn 32989
[QUOTE] [b]Thistleboy1980 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]horse feathers wrote:[/b]
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....[/QUOTE]
Parchment IS paper :p
[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry, what?!!! NO!!!! Parchment is made from hide! It's considerably closer to leather than it is to paper. That is also why it's so durable.
[QUOTE] [b]horse feathers wrote:[/b]
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....[/QUOTE]
Parchment IS paper :p
[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry, what?!!! NO!!!! Parchment is made from hide! It's considerably closer to leather than it is to paper. That is also why it's so durable.
Thistle
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Thistleboy1980 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]horse feathers wrote:[/b]
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....[/QUOTE]
Parchment IS paper :p
[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry, what?!!! NO!!!! Parchment is made from hide! It's considerably closer to leather than it is to paper. That is also why it's so durable.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but whose hide? I was deliberately mistaking parchment for "parchment paper", Thomas.
But since we're in a pedantic mood: Horses DON'T have feathers :p
[QUOTE] [b]Thistleboy1980 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]horse feathers wrote:[/b]
It's really getting very, very silly on this site now? Is it written on paper or parchment? FFS.....[/QUOTE]
Parchment IS paper :p
[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry, what?!!! NO!!!! Parchment is made from hide! It's considerably closer to leather than it is to paper. That is also why it's so durable.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but whose hide? I was deliberately mistaking parchment for "parchment paper", Thomas.
But since we're in a pedantic mood: Horses DON'T have feathers :p
GratefulFan
Parchment horses have feathers. They're sold as stationary sets.