Christ, this is the best read I've ever had on this site! LOL!
Although my musical PHD is in a few other bands, I'm heartened to know that rabid Queen scholars are dedicated to finding out the truth. Also, thanks for helping me to not reach for my wallet the next time I visit a bookstore.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
I've actually been working on my own book project over the past few years.
Wow, go Lester!!
..there is so much information provided in that book that it would be impossible to put it all online.
Sorry? Why's that? The internet does not have a content limitation :) I would think myself that a huge book on Queen done in a similar style to the Bowie one would be better anyway as a book, but you could always (mad if you didn't) have an online companion.
I suppose it's one of those "If no one else will do it..." situations, and I don't see anyone from Queen Productions, who has access to so much good stuff that every fan wants to hear, stepping up to the plate. I've been working hard on this project for a while, and "no one's gonna stop me now". I want this to come out, but I can honestly say that I trust anyone on this board more than I would ever trust what Greg Brooks says.
I think it sounds like an awesome project Lester. Good luck with it. But can you do it all by yourself? What about a collaboration with another clever head? (There are many here) Two, or even 20, are always going to be better than one. As you say, it's strange that QP don't want to do something like this themselves. GB certainly has access to much information, but doesn't seem like the right man for the job.
Anyway, good luck with it, and remember to put double redundancy into your backup procedures :))
Heh, thanks - I've actually saved and resaved on various Zip disks and CDs which are strategically placed around the room so that I always have a backup somewhere.
Regarding the project and being posted online - I think it would benefit more if it was in paper format. I don't know why, but I really got a kick out of laying on the couch with my headphones on as I read about random Bowie songs while listening to "Low" or "Heathen" or "Hunky Dory". There's just a more... intimate feel if it's in a book than reading it on a computer screen. Call me old fashioned I guess, but that's just how I like it.
A collaboration would not be the worst of ideas, but the project is really more of a collection of information from various sources. I don't think it would be too much for one to handle, but it would just take a while. For now, I'm really considering this project more of a personal hobby and collection for my own uses rather than a public thing; hopefully one day it does get published, but that might be way down the line.
However, if anybody's willing to collaborate, or just offer some assistance, it would be very much appreciated. Who knows? I really do think this should see the light of day.
Regarding the project and being posted online - I think it would benefit more if it was in paper format. I don't know why, but I really got a kick out of laying on the couch with my headphones on as I read about random Bowie songs while listening to "Low" or "Heathen" or "Hunky Dory". There's just a more... intimate feel if it's in a book than reading it on a computer screen. Call me old fashioned I guess, but that's just how I like it.
A collaboration would not be the worst of ideas, but the project is really more of a collection of information from various sources. I don't think it would be too much for one to handle, but it would just take a while. For now, I'm really considering this project more of a personal hobby and collection for my own uses rather than a public thing; hopefully one day it does get published, but that might be way down the line.
However, if anybody's willing to collaborate, or just offer some assistance, it would be very much appreciated. Who knows? I really do think this should see the light of day.
I must admit, Lester, to thinking about this type of project myself, though I was never willing to commit the time to it like you apparently have. It certainly is a worth-while project, so more power to you.
Collecting information is one thing. Coming with a suitable format is a different matter. It took me maybe 3 months to put all the info into a database (and I had to change the database structure several times since then). Doing any huge project without some kind of database is absolutely useless. You can't sort, do fulltext search etc.
For example I still haven't decided how to store setlists - as plain text? As links to a table of songs? Etc.
For example I still haven't decided how to store setlists - as plain text? As links to a table of songs? Etc.
So who has the time to help me make my own web-site?
I still want to keep my allegence to Queenzone - but at the same time - it would be sort of an annex. Obviously, what ever would be over there - would be available over here too.
I still want to keep my allegence to Queenzone - but at the same time - it would be sort of an annex. Obviously, what ever would be over there - would be available over here too.
So who has the time to help me make my own web-site?
D'you need someone who makes a nice coffee...? ;) That's the skill I can offer I'm affraid... :)
JSS
I wonder if Richard would make a special selection on QZ for you? that would make it related to QZ but in a way your own personal section, which indeed will have quite a few visitors due to the vast amount of people that come here.
HTML is not so hard, Just takes a certain amount of time, which is why I don't have a web page anymore as I spend less time on the internet now.
I wonder if Richard would make a special selection on QZ for you? that would make it related to QZ but in a way your own personal section, which indeed will have quite a few visitors due to the vast amount of people that come here.
HTML is not so hard, Just takes a certain amount of time, which is why I don't have a web page anymore as I spend less time on the internet now.
HTML is easy but that unfortunately makes people think creating good web sites is easy too... and we're flooded by thousands of totally useless ugly sites :-) 95% of Queen sites are crap (no offence).
The other option you can use if you feel insecure about your web design ability, is for somebody else to arrange and sort the info in a classy website (or here), then you would supervise the content.
I think it would be wonderful if you had your own website John....
Talk about a brilliant idea!!
Talk about a brilliant idea!!
Hi everybody, I'm a collector from Italy, I collecting Queen since 1989, and I'm 27 years old. I want to say thank you to all the people (like Mr. Scully, JSS, Sir GH and many other) who do a VERY GOOD works for collecting Queen!
Thank you again!
Now, I think that the GB's Book is a commercial operation, stop! Nothing special! He do the book for money, at least the 2nd version, not for us, not for fan, not for passion!
I've sent him many mail with some question about the number of video concert featured in the vault, the number of complete recordings, many many interesting (for my point of view) question but... nothing! he never answering! So my english is not good, but i think you can understand what I try to say! And when I read on the official queen site answer at question like this: What's an etched disc... what we can expect from him? a bible of Queen Concert? Don't spend money, go to QueenConcerts.com, buy a black cartridge, some a4 paper and print all the site! :) Or go to queenonstage.com and you can find many bootlegs or site like queentripod ecc..
I hope you understand something of what I write and I promises that when I've some time I study! :)
Thank you again guys!
Thank you again!
Now, I think that the GB's Book is a commercial operation, stop! Nothing special! He do the book for money, at least the 2nd version, not for us, not for fan, not for passion!
I've sent him many mail with some question about the number of video concert featured in the vault, the number of complete recordings, many many interesting (for my point of view) question but... nothing! he never answering! So my english is not good, but i think you can understand what I try to say! And when I read on the official queen site answer at question like this: What's an etched disc... what we can expect from him? a bible of Queen Concert? Don't spend money, go to QueenConcerts.com, buy a black cartridge, some a4 paper and print all the site! :) Or go to queenonstage.com and you can find many bootlegs or site like queentripod ecc..
I hope you understand something of what I write and I promises that when I've some time I study! :)
Thank you again guys!
OK- I just bought it... AND I'M DISSAPOINTED!!!!
WTF? Not only he still says KYA was palyed at Golders Green- he still claims that they palyed hangman and Stone Cold Crazy. AND he is to lazy to actually re-write the text. He just basically left what was already written about that gig and added that by 2004 he found BBC transcription and bought it... For fuck's sake- where's the Hangman on it than Mr Archivist???
ok- THERE'S SOME NEW STUFF IN THE BOOK. but- WHAT IS THIS ABOUT?
QUOTE- I have not always specified which song, adlib or particular Freddie/Brian audience address came from which show, because there is good reason to save that information for a bigger, better future (official) Queen live release...
WHAT????????!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is pathetic. I dunno what it's all about- I dunno how exactly was he doing this update... They you have it- by Oxford New Theater he still claims the soundcheck is fake.. Did you hear this recording Mr Brooks????
There are few myths that don't exist anymnore. Spread Your Wings doesn't come from Bremmen, yet STILL in the text it's exactly as it was- under this gig. Instead of re-writing the wrong parts of the text, he "updated" them by inserting some new sentence and that very often contradicts the one before!!! Fuckin' hell!!!
But p[lease, could someone expalin me what is it about "saving" some info for thefuture better release? This is more confusing than it was... It IS a lazy effort and it's just messy. If there's anything I'd expect from someone who's an ARCHIVIST that would be probably accuracy... And that's exactly what's missing... Lazy, lazy effort...
WTF? Not only he still says KYA was palyed at Golders Green- he still claims that they palyed hangman and Stone Cold Crazy. AND he is to lazy to actually re-write the text. He just basically left what was already written about that gig and added that by 2004 he found BBC transcription and bought it... For fuck's sake- where's the Hangman on it than Mr Archivist???
ok- THERE'S SOME NEW STUFF IN THE BOOK. but- WHAT IS THIS ABOUT?
QUOTE- I have not always specified which song, adlib or particular Freddie/Brian audience address came from which show, because there is good reason to save that information for a bigger, better future (official) Queen live release...
WHAT????????!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is pathetic. I dunno what it's all about- I dunno how exactly was he doing this update... They you have it- by Oxford New Theater he still claims the soundcheck is fake.. Did you hear this recording Mr Brooks????
There are few myths that don't exist anymnore. Spread Your Wings doesn't come from Bremmen, yet STILL in the text it's exactly as it was- under this gig. Instead of re-writing the wrong parts of the text, he "updated" them by inserting some new sentence and that very often contradicts the one before!!! Fuckin' hell!!!
But p[lease, could someone expalin me what is it about "saving" some info for thefuture better release? This is more confusing than it was... It IS a lazy effort and it's just messy. If there's anything I'd expect from someone who's an ARCHIVIST that would be probably accuracy... And that's exactly what's missing... Lazy, lazy effort...
what he means by saving for a later date is that he is to lazy to fix or add it now.
Fenderek: WTF? Not only he still says KYA was palyed at Golders Green- he still claims that they palyed hangman and Stone Cold Crazy. AND he is to lazy to actually re-write the text. He just basically left what was already written about that gig and added that by 2004 he found BBC transcription and bought it... For fuck's sake- where's the Hangman on it than Mr Archivist???
Having NOT read the book, if what you say is true, then I am very, very angry.
Although the BBC transcription disc of the Golder's Green gig has always been available, the full rock 'n roll medley has not. By the early 1980's the BBC had OFFICIALLY ERASED the master tapes - as part of their seek and destroy policy, and the master therefore did not exist.
In the mid 1990's (c1995ish) - I was approached by a BBC engineer who claimed to have rescued the sole BBC master from a skip - at the time of destruction. At that time, I was not interested - as NO one knew about the full version. But, he perservered, and I bought this master for a fair sum.
After buying it, I provided FREE digital copies to some Queen "personalities" - NOT the band. Infact, some of the traders on this board also KNOW for a FACT, I owned this tape long before "2004" when "...he found BBC transcription and bought it... " (It would also be nice for some of those guys to reply to this thread and confirm that this is indeed so).
Since then, I have seen much of the stuff I have forwarded to QP not only leak, but now available for internet download. Cest La Vis.
However, this latest insult to injury is a bit too hard to bear. GB did NOT discover that tape - I did, so not only is he too lazy too ammend any errors - he is now claiming credit for work he did not do.
I think the words GB and trust do not mix.
Ofcourse - his pat answer to me in the past has been that I did not own the ONLY master - but anyone with a modicum of knowledge or insight of the BBC at that time knows that this is a load of horsesh*t.
Having NOT read the book, if what you say is true, then I am very, very angry.
Although the BBC transcription disc of the Golder's Green gig has always been available, the full rock 'n roll medley has not. By the early 1980's the BBC had OFFICIALLY ERASED the master tapes - as part of their seek and destroy policy, and the master therefore did not exist.
In the mid 1990's (c1995ish) - I was approached by a BBC engineer who claimed to have rescued the sole BBC master from a skip - at the time of destruction. At that time, I was not interested - as NO one knew about the full version. But, he perservered, and I bought this master for a fair sum.
After buying it, I provided FREE digital copies to some Queen "personalities" - NOT the band. Infact, some of the traders on this board also KNOW for a FACT, I owned this tape long before "2004" when "...he found BBC transcription and bought it... " (It would also be nice for some of those guys to reply to this thread and confirm that this is indeed so).
Since then, I have seen much of the stuff I have forwarded to QP not only leak, but now available for internet download. Cest La Vis.
However, this latest insult to injury is a bit too hard to bear. GB did NOT discover that tape - I did, so not only is he too lazy too ammend any errors - he is now claiming credit for work he did not do.
I think the words GB and trust do not mix.
Ofcourse - his pat answer to me in the past has been that I did not own the ONLY master - but anyone with a modicum of knowledge or insight of the BBC at that time knows that this is a load of horsesh*t.