In defence of GB Live book I want to point that it was published LONG before he was the QUEEN archivist. Inaccurate as it is, it was a valuable resource for all collectors around the globe in the past decade. I wish him luck with the new version.
By the way, my real name is Pablo Martín Amieva and I am a 27 year-old man from Buenos Aires, Argentina (where I am known as Wilki).
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Greg - please visit the "Back Chat" thread. Can you give some constructive reply please?
"Greg Brooks" wrote:
> HOW TOUCHY YOU ARE ABOUT THIS MATTER.
> I WAS NOT QUESTIONING THAT.
> YOU ARE TOO TENSE. TOO STRESSED. TOO WILING TO
> REACT WHEN NOTHING WAS MEANT IN THAT VANE.
"Greg", I am sorry that my question has been misunderstood: I was not reacting over a "gender equality" issue at all.
My question was merely linguistic: I was genuinely asking for clarifications about a statement of yours because I could not figure out what it actually meant in practical terms.
As I said, English is not my native language and I do not understand its subtleties too well, so I try to take advantage of every interaction with native English speakers to learn something new.
And no, I'm not under pressure, thank you.
--
Gnomo
> HOW TOUCHY YOU ARE ABOUT THIS MATTER.
> I WAS NOT QUESTIONING THAT.
> YOU ARE TOO TENSE. TOO STRESSED. TOO WILING TO
> REACT WHEN NOTHING WAS MEANT IN THAT VANE.
"Greg", I am sorry that my question has been misunderstood: I was not reacting over a "gender equality" issue at all.
My question was merely linguistic: I was genuinely asking for clarifications about a statement of yours because I could not figure out what it actually meant in practical terms.
As I said, English is not my native language and I do not understand its subtleties too well, so I try to take advantage of every interaction with native English speakers to learn something new.
And no, I'm not under pressure, thank you.
--
Gnomo
Gnomo: "English is not my native language and I do not understand its subtleties too well, so I try to take advantage of every interaction with native English speakers to learn something new."
Bl*ddy h*ell Gnomo, your English is better than mine!
Bl*ddy h*ell Gnomo, your English is better than mine!
> your English is better than mine
... thank you, that's truly kind of you, but I have found out to my own expense that my English is still too poor for everyday conversation with native speakers - the language that a foreigner can learn from books is not what people actually speak, unfortunately...
:-)
--
Gnomo
... thank you, that's truly kind of you, but I have found out to my own expense that my English is still too poor for everyday conversation with native speakers - the language that a foreigner can learn from books is not what people actually speak, unfortunately...
:-)
--
Gnomo
now you ARE grovelling, John :-)
let me join in, to spread some positive vibrations, and tell you that there is no-one on this board who writes in better English than JSS...
"As I said, English is not my native language and I do not understand its subtleties too well, so I try to take advantage of every interaction with native English speakers to learn something new."
That's exactly what I'm trying to do here. But GB doesn't seem to have much feel for foreign languages, just as he doesn't seem to be up to date concerning the gender debate in the 21st century.
let me join in, to spread some positive vibrations, and tell you that there is no-one on this board who writes in better English than JSS...
"As I said, English is not my native language and I do not understand its subtleties too well, so I try to take advantage of every interaction with native English speakers to learn something new."
That's exactly what I'm trying to do here. But GB doesn't seem to have much feel for foreign languages, just as he doesn't seem to be up to date concerning the gender debate in the 21st century.
Hello, my name is Don Rauba, and I'm a Queenzoner.
("Hi Don!!!") So that's my real name. Big Frickin' Mystery. So much for my anonymity. (gosh! I feel so naked without it!) Having revealed such top secret data, I predict that, nonetheless, in 30 seconds, everyone will forget it.
Greg: does that really make you feel better? Somehow I doubt it.
And I don't live in England, so I have no chance of delivering a critique to you in person on the street as you desire, I'm afraid.
People abbreviate my chat name as GUMP, and I respond. I could use my own name, but some have argued it's not as funny as my "handle". Funny how creativity makes life more interesting to some... but not everyone has a sense of humor. Pity.
Greg, your very ambitious book should have been re-edited a long time ago, and you know it. The fact that I spent hard-earned cash for it means that I have a right to be annoyed at the editor/author when it contains factual errors. That's the risk you take when you write a book: readers rightly hold errors against you. The possibility that you are too busy to undertake the enormous task of revision enters the mind, but doesn't make anyone feel any better about having plunked down good money for a book they can't quote reliably without additional research. I will restrain myself from comparing it to Mercury & Me, although the temptation to make this perfectly valid comparison exists.
Last year, I read numerous internet email replies from you and was shocked at how often you seemed to lose your temper with people. But you sealed the verdict when you answered a fan question from someone on this board about It's a Beautiful Day (one question to which I actually cared to find the real answer). I wish the Search on this site worked for older posts, then I could quote it verbatim. But it was lost, apparently, and I can only tell you that it raised quite an interesting debate at the time. The question, simply paraphrased, was "when was IABD recorded". Your answer was something vague and inarticulate like "blah blah... Game sessions - yes, Freddie vox."
To appreciate the frustration this caused, forget "the real answer" while reading the next paragraph, and focus on the question and the vagueness of the answer.
It's clear the total song was likely recorded in parts, each part recorded at a different point in time. Those particular synths, e.g., could not have been from the Game sessions. So to say the whole thing was from the Game sessions is inaccurate because it generalizes too much. Your answer, to be clear, should have specified when the song was originated/conceived/demo'd compared with the sections that wound up included in the final mix on MIH, if known. For example, we still can't tell from your answer alone whether original vocal takes from Game session are the same ones used in the mix on the MIH album, or whether Freddie re-recorded them at some later point using the old Game session demos as inspiration. The same applies to the piano tracks.
Another minor point, but one that illustrates the laziness I cited and the lovably avoidable nature of confusion, is that you can't even be bothered to spell out the word "vocals" fully (using "vox" instead), so that anyone who doesn't know Latin can't understand, either (and they haven't required it in public schools for ages, rendering it a thing of the past).
My point is that tossing off a convenient, abbreviated, quick reply is (1) lazy, (2) misleading, and therefore (3) inaccurate, and leads to misquoting, rumor, and legend.
And as an archivist, you should be supremely interested in the avoidance of confusion, doing everything you can to avoid the creation of it. When a Queen fan asks a question or makes a statement, don't look for meanings between lines and ulterior motives. Moreover, don't assume fans are simpletons, either; assume they're
("Hi Don!!!") So that's my real name. Big Frickin' Mystery. So much for my anonymity. (gosh! I feel so naked without it!) Having revealed such top secret data, I predict that, nonetheless, in 30 seconds, everyone will forget it.
Greg: does that really make you feel better? Somehow I doubt it.
And I don't live in England, so I have no chance of delivering a critique to you in person on the street as you desire, I'm afraid.
People abbreviate my chat name as GUMP, and I respond. I could use my own name, but some have argued it's not as funny as my "handle". Funny how creativity makes life more interesting to some... but not everyone has a sense of humor. Pity.
Greg, your very ambitious book should have been re-edited a long time ago, and you know it. The fact that I spent hard-earned cash for it means that I have a right to be annoyed at the editor/author when it contains factual errors. That's the risk you take when you write a book: readers rightly hold errors against you. The possibility that you are too busy to undertake the enormous task of revision enters the mind, but doesn't make anyone feel any better about having plunked down good money for a book they can't quote reliably without additional research. I will restrain myself from comparing it to Mercury & Me, although the temptation to make this perfectly valid comparison exists.
Last year, I read numerous internet email replies from you and was shocked at how often you seemed to lose your temper with people. But you sealed the verdict when you answered a fan question from someone on this board about It's a Beautiful Day (one question to which I actually cared to find the real answer). I wish the Search on this site worked for older posts, then I could quote it verbatim. But it was lost, apparently, and I can only tell you that it raised quite an interesting debate at the time. The question, simply paraphrased, was "when was IABD recorded". Your answer was something vague and inarticulate like "blah blah... Game sessions - yes, Freddie vox."
To appreciate the frustration this caused, forget "the real answer" while reading the next paragraph, and focus on the question and the vagueness of the answer.
It's clear the total song was likely recorded in parts, each part recorded at a different point in time. Those particular synths, e.g., could not have been from the Game sessions. So to say the whole thing was from the Game sessions is inaccurate because it generalizes too much. Your answer, to be clear, should have specified when the song was originated/conceived/demo'd compared with the sections that wound up included in the final mix on MIH, if known. For example, we still can't tell from your answer alone whether original vocal takes from Game session are the same ones used in the mix on the MIH album, or whether Freddie re-recorded them at some later point using the old Game session demos as inspiration. The same applies to the piano tracks.
Another minor point, but one that illustrates the laziness I cited and the lovably avoidable nature of confusion, is that you can't even be bothered to spell out the word "vocals" fully (using "vox" instead), so that anyone who doesn't know Latin can't understand, either (and they haven't required it in public schools for ages, rendering it a thing of the past).
My point is that tossing off a convenient, abbreviated, quick reply is (1) lazy, (2) misleading, and therefore (3) inaccurate, and leads to misquoting, rumor, and legend.
And as an archivist, you should be supremely interested in the avoidance of confusion, doing everything you can to avoid the creation of it. When a Queen fan asks a question or makes a statement, don't look for meanings between lines and ulterior motives. Moreover, don't assume fans are simpletons, either; assume they're
Not good
Bloody hell! You must have too much time on your hands, digging up a 14 year old thread for no apparent reason! :)
Yeah, this is really bad manners. You don't revive years-old threads unless you have something *really* meaningful to add.
Prick.
Haha
The Call.
46664