Queen crest Queenzone

Response to Ewell 71

45 posts Page 3 of 3
Thread

Posts in chronological order

Search forum
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]John S Stuart wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Sir GH, I am not too sure if your post was directed at me or not - so let me explain[/QUOTE]

Certainly it was not! I was referring specifically to the_hero, and anyone else who would later say something as he did. I hope I didn't come across as naysaying Mr. Mitchell, as that was not my intent at all.
Queenzone is overrun with trolls and circling the drain - join us here instead: http://queenforum.net
Wow, I'm amazed that for once, there is something extremely controversial and ridiculous, and it has nothing to do with me for a change!

Sorry, but I had to say that.

And I personally believe that it was the real Barry selling it on eBay.

In fact, I almost had him stop selling it entirely because of a stupid comment I made about having it shared freely on QZ, which greatly upset him.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Inu-Liger<h6>-The Blu-Ray Fanatic- wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Wow, I'm amazed that for once, there is something extremely controversial and ridiculous, and it has nothing to do with me for a change![/QUOTE]

YOU? Being amazed by YOURSELF??? Not a chance! ;-)
Wilki We must all HEAR to believe
eddieshore was Evan Porada, he is banned from QZ and his account was deleted.
I do not want any google ads here.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]eddieshore was Evan Porada, he is banned from QZ and his account was deleted.[/QUOTE]

Where have I heard that name before?????

Hmmmmmmm...
:P
HOLD ON!!!!

Has anyone here been to the Golders Green 1973 concert or does anyone know anyone who went there to hear Queen play?
After listening to both recordings (GG & Ewell) closely, my opinon is that those are indeed identical. They are also both soundboard recordings. If you listen to the audience cheering just before Big Spender starts, it fades out instantly on the first drumbeat of the intro. If it was an audience recording, there would most likely be someone screaming or cheering during the rest of the intro as well.
http://queencdr.tripod.com
Yes, I haven't noticed it at first either (although the "echo vocals" were suspiciously similar to Golders Green) but now it's obvious it IS Golders Green.

I'm sure it wasn't Barry's intention (as John says, he is probably a nice shy guy) but for God's sake, he has earned some 400 pounds for selling a bad-quality fake MP3 on ebay!
http://www.QueenConcerts.com
Am *I* glad that I didn't buy it on eBay when I had the chance...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]MIKEBOSSY wrote: [/QUOTENAME]...besides you still got his autograph, and that alone is worth probably more than what any of the fake recordings sold for.
[/QUOTE]

I don't know what people paid for the recording but I higly doubt his autograph is worth much, if anything.
Queen Archives - http://www.queenarchives.com Queenpedia - http://www.queenpedia.com
I have exchanged a couple of emails with Barry Mitchell and with John Stuart last night and today. There is not doubt in my mind that Barry Mitchell is an honest person who had no idea that the recording he sold on ebay was not Ewell 1971. He offered me a refund (although he is still convinced his recording is Ewell) but I declined - it was a mix up from the beginning and I am sure it was a mistake and no bad intention when the recordings were mixed up - some 10 years ago!

Maybe the real Ewell will pop up some day, maybe it won't. After so many recordings appeared in the last two years, it's nice to have something to wish for. As far as I am concerned the case is closed.
I do not want any google ads here.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]maurice_richard wrote: [/QUOTENAME]hes a saint because we have absolutely no right to ask for our money back because it was a MISTAKE!
[/QUOTE]

Even if it was a mistake, people should get a refund if they didn't get what they paid for.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Erin wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]maurice_richard wrote: [/QUOTENAME]hes a saint because we have absolutely no right to ask for our money back because it was a MISTAKE!
[/QUOTE]

Even if it was a mistake, people should get a refund if they didn't get what they paid for.[/QUOTE]

I absolutely agree! It doesn't make any difference at all if it was an intention or a mistake (like in Barry's case). People paid a lot of money for a fake MP3, all of them should get their money back.
http://www.QueenConcerts.com
For me it makes all the difference. If someone sells me a fake recording on purpose I can reclaim my money. If someone sells me something he has good reason to take for genuine, he fulfilled his part of the deal.

When I buy an inofficial product on ebay, there is always a risk. I am an adult and I know the risk. My communication with Barry was very nice and friendly. He could have ignored my email, what could I have done? Complain to ebay about a bootleg? Certainly not. It's between him and myself and that's it. Other people who bought a copy have the same possibilty to contact him. No need to start some kind of witch hunt here or anywhere else, he certainly does not deserve that.
I do not want any google ads here.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]For me it makes all the difference. If someone sells me a fake recording on purpose I can reclaim my money. If someone sells me something he has good reason to take for genuine, he fulfilled his part of the deal.

When I buy an inofficial product on ebay, there is always a risk. I am an adult and I know the risk. [/QUOTE]

Well said Barb. The Bootleg maket is always ull of risk and this just shows that it's not always the newbies who get caught. As with all bootleg purchases it's best to remembe that if it sounds too good to be true it usually is.

N
"amateurs practice till they get it right, professionals practice till they can't get it wrong"