Good Ole Brooksy

Marknow wrote: Riveting thread, congratulations to all who have helped to move it on, this is some real Catcher In The Rye level reading material. Keep it coming, you are really breaking new ground here.

Essential reading for any serious Queen fan.

GB: You sound genuinely surprised Mark!!  It's the norm for here.  But you do put it well.   :-)

Queen Archivist wrote:

dudeofqueen wrote: Anyone heard anything from good Old Greggy Brooks lately?

There haven't been any posts from him seeking information or material that ought to be at his fingertips for a while.

He went strangely quiet after TFFMS turned up magically on Live AT The Rainbow.........

GB:  Hey there dudeofqueen….  I wrote this elsewhere on QZ today, so I'll say it to you too….

Re: Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke on the Rainbow product… I did NOT know it was on the tapes until we all sat and listened to the tapes for the first time in 40 years, in early 2014. I'm not clairvoyant, so, like all of us, including the band, I was as surprised as you were to discover that song WAS on the tape after all, which was wonderful.

Did you think of that?  Yes, I was wrong about that.   Have YOU never been wrong about anything dudeofqueen? 

Allow me to ask this simple question:
Why did they autotune Freddie's vocals?

Queen Archivist wrote:
Re: Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke on the Rainbow product… I did NOT know it was on the tapes until we all sat and listened to the tapes for the first time in 40 years, in early 2014. I'm not clairvoyant, so, like all of us, including the band, I was as surprised as you were to discover that song WAS on the tape after all, which was wonderful.

Did you think of that?  Yes, I was wrong about that.   Have YOU never been wrong about anything dudeofqueen? 

but YOU are THE ARCHIVIST. and have been long prior to 2014. as archivist YOU should have logged and detailed what was on what tape/disc/video - that's what archivists do.

the fact that YOU had no idea it was there, possibly reflects exactly how seriously you take your (ahem) work.

Q] if you are NOT logging exactly what is on each tape/disc/video stored, then what exactly is your job?


Recent Meeting at QPL HQ:

QPL: so, Mr Archivist, have you complied a complete database of the entire Queen archive?
GB: yes i have
QPL: could you let us know everything we have?
GB: yes, i have compiled an exhaustive report, detailing EVERY item in the archive, i can read it out for you - all of it, if you like
QPL: do we have time?
GB: yes, it'll only take seconds
QPL: really? go ahead then
GB:

My Complete & Detailed breakdown of the entire contents of the Queen Archive.

1] 20 acetates
2] 60 live videos
3] 100 tapes
4] 200 programmes
5] 1000 photos
6] 200 press cuttings
6] 300 vinyl/CD recordings
7] 50 pin badges
8] some fluff in corner of one box
9] a shoebox containing a dead mouse

Quit being so hard on the guy.

I've been enjoying that complete BBC Sessions release from 1999.

Especially ALL of the remastered ones that were included on the News Of The World bonus disc, and specifically, WWRY slow/fast, and 'It's Late' Those were fab!

Live Killers remastered, and complete, is also a treat.

*goodco* wrote:
Quit being so hard on the guy.
.

i will. when he retracts the personal insults he's levelled at people - people who've quoted facts

^
My whole post was satirical.....

*goodco* wrote:

^
My whole post was satirical.....

in that case, withdrawn.
but also NOT withdrawn - if you get my drift

on my way up wrote: Hi Greg,

Please throw us a bone.

 

GB: Okay...

Just say that there's a really exciting release coming in 2016 :-)

 

GB: There is. A great Queen item and some surprises re Freddie too.


That's enough but if you can give more info (a bit of flesh around the bone...), then that wouldn't be a bad thing and really most welcome!

 

GB: OK, see this     http://www.crittercures.com/blog/files/2012/02/raw-food-diet.jpg

cheers

P.S.: Has the Knebworth video been found? (sorry)

GB: No. It never existed to be found now. Shame aye![/b]

Well DoRo would probably not agree with that statement. Or ITV. Or the man who filmed the gig on an amateur camera. It depends how you define "Knebworth video" :-)

brENsKi wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote:
Re: Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke on the Rainbow product… I did NOT know it was on the tapes until we all sat and listened to the tapes for the first time in 40 years, in early 2014. I'm not clairvoyant, so, like all of us, including the band, I was as surprised as you were to discover that song WAS on the tape after all, which was wonderful.

Did you think of that?  Yes, I was wrong about that.   Have YOU never been wrong about anything dudeofqueen? 

but YOU are THE ARCHIVIST. and have been long prior to 2014. as archivist YOU should have logged and detailed what was on what tape/disc/video - that's what archivists do.

the fact that YOU had no idea it was there, possibly reflects exactly how seriously you take your (ahem) work.

Q] if you are NOT logging exactly what is on each tape/disc/video stored, then what exactly is your job?

GB:  BrEnski, you truly are a top drawer imbecile. You prove it time and time again.

I realise you're not an archivist, but even so I think SOME of these points I'll tell you now should have at the very least occurred to you, if only in part.  If only a fragment of these things had entered your limited brain, it would have been something, but for NONE of it to have occurred to you, is quite staggering. My mum would have a fair idea of some of this, not because she's been in our archive, but because she has basic common sense and access to the internet.  You can look these things up you know, BrEnski.  You need to try it, rather than asking me dull and inane questions.

I will indulge you now, however, so that any other persons that might think the way you do - though I doubt anyone else is as dense as you - might also understand what should probably be obvious anyway...

BrEnski: but YOU are THE ARCHIVIST. and have been long prior to 2014. as archivist YOU should have logged and detailed what was on what tape/disc/video - that's what archivists do. 


GB: The original Queen session multi tracks are very precious fragile things. You don't simply walk in, put them on a machine, press play and listen. Fast forward, rewind, stop, pause, eject. NO!!!!

One has to take extreme care. An experienced engineer or producer, or indeed one of the band members, would have to prepare the machine, set up the playback, and invariably bake the tape prior to attempting to play it.  Are you getting it BrEnski?   Does any of this sound reasonable, even to you?

We generally play tapes as we get to each new project, as was the case with Rainbow 74. With a specific project in mind, we got out all the original tapes, prepared them, played them - for the first time in 40 years.  Do you understand this, BrEnski???  Could you not have predicted even the tiniest part of this?

BrEnski: the fact that YOU had no idea it was there, possibly reflects exactly how seriously you take your (ahem) work.  

GB: You have no idea about anything you say or suggest, as your first point clear demonstrates, and this second point further proves. God knows why you feel it appropriate to comment on details you cannot possibly know the first thing about. Do you see me suggesting ludicrous things about the work you do?  No. You are an arrogant annoying uneducated lazy person. Too lazy to consult the internet or a book in a million libraries.

BrEnski: if you are NOT logging exactly what is on each tape/disc/video stored, then what exactly is your job? 

GB: I log very precisely the content of every tape I listen to, when we listen to them.  I do NOT log the content of tapes that have not been played for 40 years. Do you get it now BrEnski????  Oh I do hope so.

God!!!!!   Your poor poor mother!!!!

pittrek wrote: Well DoRo would probably not agree with that statement. Or ITV. Or the man who filmed the gig on an amateur camera. It depends how you define "Knebworth video" :-)

GB: Dear pitDick….

There was a TV report and a little bit of footage around the event on the day. This included footage of two songs. The main concert was NOT filmed.

cmsdrums wrote: "No there isn't a studio version of Hangman"....you missed off "in the official archives".

Is this the same as "no, there isn't a live version of The Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke"?

GB: Read my previous posts this week and even you with your tiny volume of grey matter may grasp the reasons for why NO-ONE, including me, knew that Fairy Feller was on the Rainbow tapes, until we played them for the first time in 40 years. We are not clairvoyant.

You are such an annoying twat. Sorry to use that word, but you truly are.  I bet you hear this a lot, from very many people in your life!

Queen Archivist wrote:

pittrek wrote: Well DoRo would probably not agree with that statement. Or ITV. Or the man who filmed the gig on an amateur camera. It depends how you define "Knebworth video" :-)

GB: Dear pitDick….

See? Try to re-read this post, maybe you will understand why are so many people here so negative to you.

Queen Archivist wrote:

brENsKi wrote:

Queen Archivist wrote:
Re: Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke on the Rainbow product… I did NOT know it was on the tapes until we all sat and listened to the tapes for the first time in 40 years, in early 2014. I'm not clairvoyant, so, like all of us, including the band, I was as surprised as you were to discover that song WAS on the tape after all, which was wonderful.

Did you think of that?  Yes, I was wrong about that.   Have YOU never been wrong about anything dudeofqueen? 

but YOU are THE ARCHIVIST. and have been long prior to 2014. as archivist YOU should have logged and detailed what was on what tape/disc/video - that's what archivists do.

the fact that YOU had no idea it was there, possibly reflects exactly how seriously you take your (ahem) work.

Q] if you are NOT logging exactly what is on each tape/disc/video stored, then what exactly is your job?

GB:  BrEnski, you truly are a top drawer imbecile. You prove it time and time again.

I realise you're not an archivist, but even so I think SOME of these points I'll tell you now should have at the very least occurred to you, if only in part.  If only a fragment of these things had entered your limited brain, it would have been something, but for NONE of it to have occurred to you, is quite staggering. My mum would have a fair idea of some of this, not because she's been in our archive, but because she has basic common sense and access to the internet.  You can look these things up you know, BrEnski.  You need to try it, rather than asking me dull and inane questions.

I will indulge you now, however, so that any other persons that might think the way you do - though I doubt anyone else is as dense as you - might also understand what should probably be obvious anyway...

BrEnski: but YOU are THE ARCHIVIST. and have been long prior to 2014. as archivist YOU should have logged and detailed what was on what tape/disc/video - that's what archivists do. 


GB: The original Queen session multi tracks are very precious fragile things. You don't simply walk in, put them on a machine, press play and listen. Fast forward, rewind, stop, pause, eject. NO!!!!

One has to take extreme care. An experienced engineer or producer, or indeed one of the band members, would have to prepare the machine, set up the playback, and invariably bake the tape prior to attempting to play it.  Are you getting it BrEnski?   Does any of this sound reasonable, even to you?

We generally play tapes as we get to each new project, as was the case with Rainbow 74. With a specific project in mind, we got out all the original tapes, prepared them, played them - for the first time in 40 years.  Do you understand this, BrEnski???  Could you not have predicted even the tiniest part of this?

BrEnski: the fact that YOU had no idea it was there, possibly reflects exactly how seriously you take your (ahem) work.  

GB: You have no idea about anything you say or suggest, as your first point clear demonstrates, and this second point further proves. God knows why you feel it appropriate to comment on details you cannot possibly know the first thing about. Do you see me suggesting ludicrous things about the work you do?  No. You are an arrogant annoying uneducated lazy person. Too lazy to consult the internet or a book in a million libraries.

BrEnski: if you are NOT logging exactly what is on each tape/disc/video stored, then what exactly is your job? 

GB: I log very precisely the content of every tape I listen to, when we listen to them.  I do NOT log the content of tapes that have not been played for 40 years. Do you get it now BrEnski????  Oh I do hope so.

God!!!!!   Your poor poor mother!!!!

By this account, you are not an archivist. You are nothing more than a slug watching over the inventory of Queen.
If you actually were an archivist, and were archiving stuff, you WOULD be baking tapes, and transferring them so they could be archived digitally. Not just logging them and storing them, so they can sit on a shelf and deteriorate for years.
Such a waste

Queen Archivist wrote:
GB: The original Queen session multi tracks are very precious fragile things. You don't simply walk in, put them on a machine, press play and listen. Fast forward, rewind, stop, pause, eject. NO!!!!

One has to take extreme care. An experienced engineer or producer, or indeed one of the band members, would have to prepare the machine, set up the playback, and invariably bake the tape prior to attempting to play it.  Are you getting it BrEnski?
We generally play tapes as we get to each new project, as was the case with Rainbow 74. With a specific project in mind, we got out all the original tapes, prepared them, played them - for the first time in 40 years.

So nothing has been heard until you start a project? what utter bollocks...it has to be heard to be labelled/archived in the first place - otherwise YOU have no idea what's on there.

Factor in the fact that things can get mislabelled (your Queen Live book is an excellent example of mislabelling). Surely when you were brought in as archivist, it was YOUR job to ensure everything was labelled correctly? or do your "ski-slopes-for-shoulders" excuse you any responsibility or pride in doing your job properly?

Anything short of that makes your job pointless and little more than a glorified Gatekeeper/Nightwatchman

Fortunately, the archivists at the British library don't take the same attitude to their job "oh yeah, we've got loads of books here...fucked if we know what, but there are loads...we won't be able to tell you anything about specific volumes/editions until we read a specific book"