Queen to release "There is more to life than this" as new single.

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]

If you read my post carefully when i said ironic that the album is called "Queen Forever"
but contains a song with Michael Jackson, i meant you would think with a title like Queen forever it
would only contain Queen only tracks and no guest appearances from anyone else.
why i have to explain myself on here to a bunch of infants is beyond me.
Are you all on heroin or something????[/QUOTE]

I'll dive into your bog of eternal stench one time, and one time only........with titles such as Queen 'Hot Space', 'A Kind Of Magic', 'Innuendo', 'Greatest Hits' (US, Canada, Japan and other countries), or 'Greatest Hits II' (UK), "you would think it would contain Queen only tracks and no guest appearances from anyone else."

Oh, almost forgot Queen 'Jazz', with a guest appearance courtesy of the Big Guy.

[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]

Hey tomp63 i was very shocked at what was chosen for the new single.
i am sure there are more Queen unreleased tracks and that Brian is telling porkies saying that there isnt.[/QUOTE]

it's sound business sense - surely we can all see that?

Queen = established fanbase
Michael Jackson = established fanbase

this maximises potential single (and susequent) album sales as Michael Jackson fans get introduced to Queen[/QUOTE]

I agree with this. As a fan i would love to see the release of LMIYHA but if i were in their (Queen, Universal) place i would probably do the same thing. Fact is, it´s about making the biggest profit from it, and we shouldn´t attack artists based on this, because if labels like Universal didn´t make money, Queen and other artists would be out of contract.

But this doesn´t mean that LMIYHA is out of the question. It may be the second single for the Christams market, and it CAN work beautifully around Christmas. A great song about love, with some of the best vocals i´ve heard from Freddie. Maybe this will push "Queen Forever" to number 1. Competition is strong with the new Pink Floyd album, so i really understant this more agressive move to include the Michael Jakson duet to raise people´s awareness about Queen Forever. Let´s not forget that Michael Jackson is doing very well on his own right now.
In the end, this seems to be the best decision.

[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]Brenski knows he is been a twat so he wont get the better of me, and please move on.[/QUOTE]
BEDEVERE: What makes you think she is a witch?
VILLAGER #3: Well, she turned me into a newt.
BEDEVERE: A newt?
VILLAGER #3: I got better.
VILLAGER #2: Burn her anyway!
CROWD: Burn! Burn her!
BEDEVERE: Quiet, quiet. Quiet! There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
CROWD: Are there? What are they?
VILLAGER #2: Do they hurt?
BEDEVERE: Tell me, what do you do with witches?
VILLAGER #2: Burn!
CROWD: Burn, burn them up!
BEDEVERE: And what do you burn apart from witches?
VILLAGER #1: More witches!
VILLAGER #2: Wood!
BEDEVERE: So, why do witches burn?
VILLAGER #3: B--... 'cause they're made of wood...?[/QUOTE]

Ah. .. second favorite python film. I've got a soft spot for THE MEANING OF LIFE (even though it's more of a compilation)

I don't mind it as a single, as long as the mix is fixed. It sounds good in the trailer, so will keep my fingers crossed. They should follow it up with Let Me In Your Heart Again in winter.

TMBMTLTT lead single to appeal to a broader base. Let me in your heart again as Christmas single with lots of hype around being "a brand new Queen song". Then Love Kills backed with Let me in your heart again as a Record Store Day limited edition 7" thingie.
If they play their cards right, this shitty compilation will sell like pancakes.
They could do some fan service by creating some sort of video for the singles (more "Free as a bird", less DoRo compilation crap) and increase sales of physical formats by adding some exclusive remixes or even edits as B-sides... but of course they won't. They'll go for the easy buck.

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]

i am sure there are more Queen unreleased tracks and that Brian is telling porkies saying that there isnt.[/QUOTE]

Of course there is more. But the question is - how much of it is usable?

The fact that it took nearly 20 years for ANYTHING new with Freddie on vocals to come out surely must indicate how little there is..

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

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]

i am sure there are more Queen unreleased tracks and that Brian is telling porkies saying that there isnt.[/QUOTE]

Of course there is more. But the question is - how much of it is usable?

The fact that it took nearly 20 years for ANYTHING new with Freddie on vocals to come out surely must indicate how little there is..[/QUOTE]

Do you want to hear him sing in German ? I`am not joking about that...he tried..just for some Demos with a more or less well known guitar player ( local wise)

You just can`t put everything on the market.

Do those demos still exist? ^

^ It is in question..."officially"...but don`t expect him to sing a complete track in german..he was doing his "dedodedodada" thing and combined it with a few Words he know.
So there are NO complete tracks like Cliff Richards " Rote Lippen soll man Küssen" ( German version of his "Lucky Lips" Song).

If those Demos still exsist - no one will have them till the day that guy is dead - rich musician and no attention seeker - he is a bit like JD,he stepped back from the limelight, not that strict but significant :)

A tape recorder was used if I remeber correctly ( not if I was there of course)...no multi tracks I guess.

Brenski: yes i have banged on about my dislikes but that is what discussions are all about.
But if i read about other fans who do not like AD then i join in, can you handle that?
If you cannot handle that then do not reply =simples.
i have had replies from fans who are in agreement with me, but i guess you have overlooked them.
Horses for courses lol
cheerio now.

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]If you read my post carefully when i said ironic that the album is called "Queen Forever"
but contains a song with Michael Jackson, i meant you would think with a title like Queen forever it
would only contain Queen only tracks and no guest appearances from anyone else.
why i have to explain myself on here to a bunch of infants is beyond me.
Are you all on heroin or something????[/QUOTE]
"Forever" is a measurement of time, not a measurement of "purity"
there is no irony in the title

To my mind, this would be a sound business decision if the track was worthy of either name. In my opinion, however, neither the track nor the mix is of sufficient quality to please fans of either artist, nor the general public at large.

It just isn't very good, unfortunately. I don't think it will be much of a hit, even with both these huge names attached to it.

[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b][QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]If you read my post carefully when i said ironic that the album is called "Queen Forever" but contains a song with Michael Jackson, i meant you would think with a title like Queen forever it would only contain Queen only tracks and no guest appearances from anyone else.
why i have to explain myself on here to a bunch of infants is beyond me. Are you all on heroin or something????[/QUOTE]
"Forever" is a measurement of time, not a measurement of "purity"
there is no irony in the title [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b] Brenski: yes i have banged on about my dislikes but that is what discussions are all about. But if i read about other fans who do not like AD then i join in, can you handle that?
If you cannot handle that then do not reply =simples.
i have had replies from fans who are in agreement with me, but i guess you have overlooked them.
Horses for courses lol
cheerio now.[/QUOTE]
it's not a discussion....you're trying to indoctrinate people. i don't like AL (who the fuck is AD?) or this current collaboration - but i don't bang on about it. make your point once and leave it - we ALL know how you feel. why would YOU need to start new threads on the same subject? who the f*ck doesn't already know how YOU feel?

Listen......... i said if AD is mentioned i will reply.
Can you not get that into your thick head mate?
i do not have to justify myself to you, who the hell do you think you are?

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]Listen......... i said if AD is mentioned i will reply. Can you not get that into your thick head mate?i do not have to justify myself to you, who the hell do you think you are?[/QUOTE]

who is this "AD" of whom you speak? last time I checked "Lambert" hadn't got a "D" in it anywhere

There used to be someone else round here who used to spout lies and crap and generally make up stuff about queen - as you do.
But the difference was Fatty & his Diary were genuinely intentionally hysterical. You ain't.