freddies bell end
https://www.backstageauctions.com/catalog/1579-queen-1973-keep-yourself-alive-original-demo-reel/ai/0/32863/
Thread
Posts in chronological order
dysan
That'll cost a sarm and a leg
dudeofqueen
Wonder if Brian knew he was signing something that was being sold for profit; shouldn't a donation be made to save a badger or two from the proceeds.........?
Not sure why anyone'd want to buy ANOTHER copy of KYA though......
Not sure why anyone'd want to buy ANOTHER copy of KYA though......
DeHavilland
Brian's so handsy about his archival stuff, I'm surprised he didn't lift it right off the guy instead of signing it.
"Oh, thank you so much for bringing this back to us. I'll just put this away for safe-keeping."
"Oh, thank you so much for bringing this back to us. I'll just put this away for safe-keeping."
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]dudeofqueen wrote:[/b]
Not sure why anyone'd want to buy ANOTHER copy of KYA though......[/QUOTE]
If it's a different mix, it's valuable.
But considering they didn't record at SARM until 1974, chances are this is the "long lost retake" version. In that case, the seller must be confusing stories.
Unless there's a story of them doing the studio version of KYA in 1973 that hasn't been told. But that's a whole other can of worms, especially now that the 1972 acetate version of KYA has been heard. It's entirely possible that the studio version was recorded in early 73, long after the rest of the album had been finished.
So many questions, so few answers.
Not sure why anyone'd want to buy ANOTHER copy of KYA though......[/QUOTE]
If it's a different mix, it's valuable.
But considering they didn't record at SARM until 1974, chances are this is the "long lost retake" version. In that case, the seller must be confusing stories.
Unless there's a story of them doing the studio version of KYA in 1973 that hasn't been told. But that's a whole other can of worms, especially now that the 1972 acetate version of KYA has been heard. It's entirely possible that the studio version was recorded in early 73, long after the rest of the album had been finished.
So many questions, so few answers.
dysan
Yeah I was going to point out that it's very unclear exactly what version this is. As you say the US cut makes sense and they're getting the year confused.
Although it could be the right year and all the other details are wrong.
Although it could be the right year and all the other details are wrong.
Nathan H
Also, when I read this the other day I noticed that none of the photos included at the bottom of the page were actually taken in 1974.
There are so many mistakes or confirmed details which in my opinion makes this a risky purchase especially for the starting price - $15,000!
There are so many mistakes or confirmed details which in my opinion makes this a risky purchase especially for the starting price - $15,000!
dysan
I think they're mainly to illustrate the authenticity of the seller
thomasquinn 32989
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]dudeofqueen wrote:[/b]
Not sure why anyone'd want to buy ANOTHER copy of KYA though......[/QUOTE]
But that's a whole other can of worms, especially now that the 1972 acetate version of KYA has been heard.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I might be missing something here, but are you referring to the De Lane Lea-demo, or is there another acetate version?
[QUOTE] [b]dudeofqueen wrote:[/b]
Not sure why anyone'd want to buy ANOTHER copy of KYA though......[/QUOTE]
But that's a whole other can of worms, especially now that the 1972 acetate version of KYA has been heard.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I might be missing something here, but are you referring to the De Lane Lea-demo, or is there another acetate version?
thomasquinn 32989
Double post. Incredible. There seems to be a way to mess up *editing* a post to create a duplicate, although I'm not entirely sure how I did it.
thomasquinn 32989
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]dudeofqueen wrote:[/b]
Not sure why anyone'd want to buy ANOTHER copy of KYA though......[/QUOTE]
But that's a whole other can of worms, especially now that the 1972 acetate version of KYA has been heard.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I might be missing something here, but are you referring to the De Lane Lea-demo, or is there another acetate version?
[QUOTE] [b]dysan wrote:[/b]
That'll cost a sarm and a leg[/QUOTE]
I have just referred this to the International Court of Justice, Criminally Terrible Puns Division. Your plane ticket to The Hague will be in the mail shortly.
[QUOTE] [b]dudeofqueen wrote:[/b]
Not sure why anyone'd want to buy ANOTHER copy of KYA though......[/QUOTE]
But that's a whole other can of worms, especially now that the 1972 acetate version of KYA has been heard.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I might be missing something here, but are you referring to the De Lane Lea-demo, or is there another acetate version?
[QUOTE] [b]dysan wrote:[/b]
That'll cost a sarm and a leg[/QUOTE]
I have just referred this to the International Court of Justice, Criminally Terrible Puns Division. Your plane ticket to The Hague will be in the mail shortly.
dysan
Thank you. This is the wake up call I needed.
Also yes there was a 2nd KYA demo shared on here a couple of years ago.
Also yes there was a 2nd KYA demo shared on here a couple of years ago.
Negative Creep
The link states that someone took a/the Trident version to Sarm to make a tape copy to send to the US.
Sebastian
[QUOTE] [b]Negative Creep wrote:[/b]
The link states that someone took a/the Trident version to Sarm to make a tape copy to send to the US.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. It's a Sarm tape but it doesn't mean at all that the song was recorded at Sarm. The Sarm staff made a copy of the tape, so the copy had the Sarm logo and stuff rather than the original Trident one. Simple as that.
The link states that someone took a/the Trident version to Sarm to make a tape copy to send to the US.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. It's a Sarm tape but it doesn't mean at all that the song was recorded at Sarm. The Sarm staff made a copy of the tape, so the copy had the Sarm logo and stuff rather than the original Trident one. Simple as that.
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Negative Creep wrote:[/b]
The link states that someone took a/the Trident version to Sarm to make a tape copy to send to the US.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. It's a Sarm tape but it doesn't mean at all that the song was recorded at Sarm. The Sarm staff made a copy of the tape, so the copy had the Sarm logo and stuff rather than the original Trident one. Simple as that.[/QUOTE]
But why would they even do that - especially when the band had an exclusivity deal with Trident ?
[QUOTE] [b]Negative Creep wrote:[/b]
The link states that someone took a/the Trident version to Sarm to make a tape copy to send to the US.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. It's a Sarm tape but it doesn't mean at all that the song was recorded at Sarm. The Sarm staff made a copy of the tape, so the copy had the Sarm logo and stuff rather than the original Trident one. Simple as that.[/QUOTE]
But why would they even do that - especially when the band had an exclusivity deal with Trident ?