shut the hell up you idiot, everything you just said is a total lie.
Can't you show a bit more maturity than that? I realize it's annoying when someone acts like they have superior knowledge about something, but there are more effective ways of challenging besides personal attacks.
As for this news, it's doubly disappointing for me. Greg mentioned something about a project like this months ago which I kept my mouth shut about, but I was under the impression that it was going to be rare tracks of all sorts, not just live stuff.
I didn't like the idea at first because I was afraid they'd choose to do this instead of releasing proper CD quality versions. I guess if it's just live stuff I don't care. Maybe they can save the studio stuff for proper release in the box sets.
I'd be fairly confident that Ron DOES know more about it than our mutual subject of discussion, and am battling to avoid making further comparison with the particularly intellectual slug in my garden....
Addendum - having reviewed Mr GP's entire posting history (30 requests/demands, 7 insults, 2 polite offers and 1 polite expression of gratitude), I conclude as follows..
1. Nobody ever taught the poor wretch how to punctuate.
2. He has a mental age of around 12.
3. No need to return to the hub anytime soon.
4. No need to start looking at torrents.
I don't see any reason for this other than to put bootleggers out of business. Which, I suppose, isn't a bad thing.
Personally, I have yet to download a live queen bootleg that is really of the quality to warrant a second listen. This is speaking purely in terms of fidelity (not content). As such, I find it odd that they're release such sub-par sounding material.
Now, if they're talking sound-board stuff...hmm...;o)
"Why the hell are they releasing bootlegs when they have sound board recordings of almost every show?"
This is a very important question. Because even an "unremastered" soundboard recording sounds better than 90% of Queen bootlegs.
Why should Queen suddenly release an inferior product then? When they can (with the same amount of effort) release a soudboard recording?
I can't believe that they're not willing to release Houston 77 on video (because it's not perfect quality) but they will (maybe) "release" for example Supporting Mott The Hoople (Oxford 1973) which is in terms of quality pretty much below average.
'tis indeed strange, considering that Roger has slated official live product (like "Live Killers" for example) in the past.
However, he was also "forced" to release his solo albums ("Fun In Space/Strange Frontier") because the bootleggers had heavilly targeted those also.
"However, he was also "forced" to release his solo albums ("Fun In Space/Strange Frontier") because the bootleggers had heavilly targeted those also."
So, that was the excuse for Fun In Space:)
When it comes to the anthology, however, we are being told that "bootlegging" is the main reason they are not yet released.
I can't believe they release (sell!!) the same bootlegs we can get for free on the internet, that would not make any sense.
"Why the hell are they releasing bootlegs when they have sound board recordings of almost every show?"
This is a very important question. Because even an "unremastered" soundboard recording sounds better than 90% of Queen bootlegs.
Why should Queen suddenly release an inferior product then? When they can (with the same amount of effort) release a soudboard recording?
I can't believe that they're not willing to release Houston 77 on video (because it's not perfect quality) but they will (maybe) "release" for example Supporting Mott The Hoople (Oxford 1973) which is in terms of quality pretty much below average.
I totally agree with you: Why release audience recordings when QP have sounboard ones?
Another question: Did anyone of you download songs from the QOL download shop? What format are the songs? (For MP3 files: which bitrate?)
"unless they decide to clamp down on bootleg sharing...?"
But is selling bootlegs themselves a way to do that? Martin is completely right: why should we buy an inferior product when soundboard recordings are not released because they are regarded sub standard? When I want a bootleg I can get it from another fan, I don't need to buy it from Trancer or ebay. Or download it from QOL for money. Who is supposed to profit from selling bootlegs? Sure not the fans... Maybe I am just too stupid to understand the idea behind that project.
Another question: Did anyone of you download songs from the QOL download shop? What format are the songs? (For MP3 files: which bitrate?)
They were 192 kbps licensed Windows Media files when last I checked. So even though you buy them and should then own them for personal use, they still exercise some control over it.
Far as I know, it allows for burning though, so you could of course burn it and then extract it to whatever format you want. But that's not good enough quality by many peoples' standards.
They are releasing downloads of the Bootlegs because they basically want to shaft the Bootlegers who constantly make money out of the Queen franchise as hinted by Richard. Inferior or not it is bound to have an effect on the smaller Bootlegging outfits
