Just read back over some of the past comments on the faults... seems I was incorrect that it was released in some parts with the errors included....ooops
oh well hopefully they have them all now...
Togg
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Togg
Oh my, just caught up on everything that's happened from the mistakes on The Lot to the website... blimey what the feck has been going on?
Ok I accept what GT and GB have said in defense so someone further up or down the chain fucked up... but bloody hell this has been pretty staggering to read through.
Come on guys Roger deserves better that this and so do the fans, get it right first time.
Ok I accept what GT and GB have said in defense so someone further up or down the chain fucked up... but bloody hell this has been pretty staggering to read through.
Come on guys Roger deserves better that this and so do the fans, get it right first time.
Sebastian
[QUOTE] [b]Togg wrote:[/b]
get it right first time.[/QUOTE]
That's really asking too much.
get it right first time.[/QUOTE]
That's really asking too much.
GB: Queen Archivist
[QUOTE] [b]Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) wrote:[/b]
Greg,
Would it be correct to assume this second wave of releases of The Lot will be the fixed version?[/QUOTE]
The Book text and CD errors are both being fixed right now. I don't know when it goes to print, but I'm sure it must be soon. Imminently indeed.
Greg,
Would it be correct to assume this second wave of releases of The Lot will be the fixed version?[/QUOTE]
The Book text and CD errors are both being fixed right now. I don't know when it goes to print, but I'm sure it must be soon. Imminently indeed.
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com)
Thanks Greg.
kosimodo
Thx Greg, always nice seeing you posting:)
You tricked me with the title though..
A few things if May.... Was publishing his lot...
You tricked me with the title though..
A few things if May.... Was publishing his lot...
Cockeye
Brilliant and useful information and much appreciated by all I'm sure. Are you able to confirm whether it's limited or not? In other words - bearing in mind it's now not available until what is (for some) the final pay cycle for Christmas, I would love to know if I can wait until after Christmas and purchase, or if it's limited....
ParisNair
I don't know about GB's original post..the only good (and important) thing about it was his confirmation that the errors/mistakes are being rectified.
QZer's have not singled out GT or GB only. Mostly people have put the blame on the team (justifiably) and named Roger in addition to GT and GB. I think its natural, considering these are the known "faces" in the team, as far as QZ are concerened. The GT-specific statements quoted by GB are totally irrelevant and its interesting that GB felt a need to respond to those while our queries about officially announced releases go mostly unanswered.
A lot of the fans found their satisfaction levels lowered due to the goof-ups, and QPL should take it on the chin and do a better job next time.
QZer's have not singled out GT or GB only. Mostly people have put the blame on the team (justifiably) and named Roger in addition to GT and GB. I think its natural, considering these are the known "faces" in the team, as far as QZ are concerened. The GT-specific statements quoted by GB are totally irrelevant and its interesting that GB felt a need to respond to those while our queries about officially announced releases go mostly unanswered.
A lot of the fans found their satisfaction levels lowered due to the goof-ups, and QPL should take it on the chin and do a better job next time.
GB: Queen Archivist
[QUOTE] [b]ParisNair wrote:[/b]
I don't know about GB's original post..
GB: You could try reading it, perhaps.
the only good (and important) thing about it was his confirmation that the errors/mistakes are being rectified.
GB: Well said.
QZer's have not singled out GT or GB only.
GB: Errr.... they have a bit.
Mostly people have put the blame on the team (justifiably) and named Roger in addition to GT and GB.
GB: Mmmmm! I've seen GT and GB names mentioned here more than anyone else's. But never mind, we are not bitter. You guys will invariably jump to those kind of conclusions as a default.
I think its natural, considering these are the known "faces" in the team, as far as QZ are concerened.
GB: QZ has a strange mind and mentality all of its own, don't forget. It is not necessarily representative of all other Queen fans, forums, sites and general feeling.
The GT-specific statements quoted by GB are totally irrelevant and its interesting that GB felt a need to respond to those while our queries about officially announced releases go mostly unanswered.
GB: I'm enormously pleased to see you've used 'specific' here, not 'pacific', because that always annoys me. You did however write "its", by the way, in your last 2 points, when it should have been "it's". One has to consider the detail sometimes.
GB: It is not the case that that your "queries about officially announced releases go mostly unanswered." We answer what we can. We cannot do more. We cannot answer them ALL. We'd be here all day every day. And.... many QZ-ers don't read stuff anyway, even when we do offer it, and so they ask the same questions over and over, even though they've been addressed by Gary and I before - often several times. How many times would YOU answer the same questions over and over and over??
You yourself begin this thread with "I don't know about GB's original post.." Had you read it first, you'd be better informed, right?
A lot of the fans found their satisfaction levels lowered due to the goof-ups, and QPL should take it on the chin and do a better job next time.
GB: Do you really mean QPL here?
Thank you. Good day. GB
I don't know about GB's original post..
GB: You could try reading it, perhaps.
the only good (and important) thing about it was his confirmation that the errors/mistakes are being rectified.
GB: Well said.
QZer's have not singled out GT or GB only.
GB: Errr.... they have a bit.
Mostly people have put the blame on the team (justifiably) and named Roger in addition to GT and GB.
GB: Mmmmm! I've seen GT and GB names mentioned here more than anyone else's. But never mind, we are not bitter. You guys will invariably jump to those kind of conclusions as a default.
I think its natural, considering these are the known "faces" in the team, as far as QZ are concerened.
GB: QZ has a strange mind and mentality all of its own, don't forget. It is not necessarily representative of all other Queen fans, forums, sites and general feeling.
The GT-specific statements quoted by GB are totally irrelevant and its interesting that GB felt a need to respond to those while our queries about officially announced releases go mostly unanswered.
GB: I'm enormously pleased to see you've used 'specific' here, not 'pacific', because that always annoys me. You did however write "its", by the way, in your last 2 points, when it should have been "it's". One has to consider the detail sometimes.
GB: It is not the case that that your "queries about officially announced releases go mostly unanswered." We answer what we can. We cannot do more. We cannot answer them ALL. We'd be here all day every day. And.... many QZ-ers don't read stuff anyway, even when we do offer it, and so they ask the same questions over and over, even though they've been addressed by Gary and I before - often several times. How many times would YOU answer the same questions over and over and over??
You yourself begin this thread with "I don't know about GB's original post.." Had you read it first, you'd be better informed, right?
A lot of the fans found their satisfaction levels lowered due to the goof-ups, and QPL should take it on the chin and do a better job next time.
GB: Do you really mean QPL here?
Thank you. Good day. GB
Queenman!!
Too hit the nail on the head is a bit hard, but I think all the frustration comes to the fact the QP is just like other big Music companies. A very 'Solid' 'Castle' which protects their property and communication(in every single way) to the outside world. The old days are over and businessformats and employeecontracts are top of the bill.. Every single farth has to go through a level of departsments till it reach the fans and friends of Queen and other bands. Unbelieve and anger are words that come with this unbelieve. Delayed Dvd's, shelved products, summier information and all those other things are nowadays very common in a large organisation as QP.
As I understand this position of QP and all the employees of them, I find it utterly hard to find myself bands on the road who have another kind of communication with their public. I think the need for THATkind of relation is very important for a fan and friend of Queen who supported this band from the early days until 2013. ( 22 years after Queen lost their main marketing product: RIP FM)
As I understand this position of QP and all the employees of them, I find it utterly hard to find myself bands on the road who have another kind of communication with their public. I think the need for THATkind of relation is very important for a fan and friend of Queen who supported this band from the early days until 2013. ( 22 years after Queen lost their main marketing product: RIP FM)
ParisNair
This is the first time I managed to interact with someone who's offically linked to my favorite band. Thanks for commenting on my post, Mr Brooks.
About the its-it's: somehow I never manage get these right. I also tend to mix-up "ie" and "ei" in words like friends etc.
You obviously got what I was saying in my post (including the beginnig "I don't know about GB's original post.. ") so Iemme just ask this - what is your opinion about cmsdrums' suggestion regarding Focus-groups in this link-
http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1362775/just-for-the-record-the-lot.aspx?page=4
Do you think that would work? Not asking if it can be implemented, cos its not in your scope to decide obviuosly. I'm just asking if you feel such a thing wold help bring out better products.
About the its-it's: somehow I never manage get these right. I also tend to mix-up "ie" and "ei" in words like friends etc.
You obviously got what I was saying in my post (including the beginnig "I don't know about GB's original post.. ") so Iemme just ask this - what is your opinion about cmsdrums' suggestion regarding Focus-groups in this link-
http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1362775/just-for-the-record-the-lot.aspx?page=4
Do you think that would work? Not asking if it can be implemented, cos its not in your scope to decide obviuosly. I'm just asking if you feel such a thing wold help bring out better products.
GB: Queen Archivist
Richard Dawkins is God!
thomasquinn 32989
[QUOTE] [b]GB: Queen Archivist wrote:[/b]
Richard Dawkins is God![/QUOTE]
You are now officially in trouble with Richard Dawkins. Also, he's a bit of an extremist prat, isn't he?
Richard Dawkins is God![/QUOTE]
You are now officially in trouble with Richard Dawkins. Also, he's a bit of an extremist prat, isn't he?
GB: Queen Archivist
[QUOTE] [b]ParisNair wrote:[/b]
You obviously got what I was saying in my post (including the beginnig "I don't know about GB's original post.. ") so Iemme just ask this - what is your opinion about cmsdrums' suggestion regarding Focus-groups in this link-
http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1362775/just-for-the-record-the-lot.aspx?page=4
Do you think that would work? Not asking if it can be implemented, cos its not in your scope to decide obviuosly. I'm just asking if you feel such a thing wold help bring out better products.[/QUOTE]
GB: It's an interesting idea. We'll have a think. The difficulty would be finding the right people; musicians, sound engineers, producers, graphic designers, proof readers, film makers, etc. They'd also ideally have appropriate knowledge of the band, trustworthiness, discretion and a keen eye for detail.
How about cmsdrums himself? Does he know anyone suitable?
You obviously got what I was saying in my post (including the beginnig "I don't know about GB's original post.. ") so Iemme just ask this - what is your opinion about cmsdrums' suggestion regarding Focus-groups in this link-
http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1362775/just-for-the-record-the-lot.aspx?page=4
Do you think that would work? Not asking if it can be implemented, cos its not in your scope to decide obviuosly. I'm just asking if you feel such a thing wold help bring out better products.[/QUOTE]
GB: It's an interesting idea. We'll have a think. The difficulty would be finding the right people; musicians, sound engineers, producers, graphic designers, proof readers, film makers, etc. They'd also ideally have appropriate knowledge of the band, trustworthiness, discretion and a keen eye for detail.
How about cmsdrums himself? Does he know anyone suitable?
inu-liger
[QUOTE] [b]GB: Queen Archivist wrote:[/b]
GB: It's an interesting idea. We'll have a think. The difficulty would be finding the right people; musicians, sound engineers, producers, graphic designers, proof readers, film makers, etc. They'd also ideally have appropriate knowledge of the band, trustworthiness, discretion and a keen eye for detail. [/QUOTE]
The bits I underlined above are areas that I have significant strengths in. I am known for having an insane amount of attention for small detail (ask your friend GT, Greg, I think he can vouch for that much!), and here is an example of my own work that also showcases the organizational methods I employ:
http://media.ppnstudio.com/inu-productions/rgqueencollection.htm
My attention for small details also carries over into my hearing. I've done research work for another non-Queen website with regards to a CD catalogue database, and have discovered some alternate mixes for instance on some odd releases that a lot of people would have never noticed at first, as well as going above and beyond to obtain extremely rare releases in order to help further complete the aforementioned CD db.
As for sound engineers, I have a buddy that has a certificate in that field, who has helped us out here with remastering a couple of audience audio tapes (Hyde Park '76 and Earl's Court '77 first night) to very positive reception.