"I stick to what I know about, because I am there actually INSIDE the room with the tapes"
vs.
"I cannot go looking for recordings"
Forgive me for misunderstanding you, but I cannot reconcile these two statements with each other. Could someone explain to me how this works?
Thread
Posts in chronological order
I thought he left us for the year... Anyway - when You're The Only One was recorded? I'm asking this for the third time! John couldn't answer it, so now it's your turn, QA! C'mon, show yourself, destroy your fears, release your mask!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Serry... wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I thought he left us for the year... Anyway - when You're The Only One was recorded? I'm asking this for the third time! John couldn't answer it, so now it's your turn, QA! C'mon, show yourself, destroy your fears, release your mask![/QUOTE]
He can say any year and nobody can prove him wrong, so what's the point?
He can say any year and nobody can prove him wrong, so what's the point?
What an odd post. The archivist from one of the world's major bands starts a topic to piss all over one of the more respected members of the QZ community. I know neither man, have followed the previous discussions with a bit of amusement, but regardless of whether or not John Stuart is 'inside the room', he has scads more credibility than Greg Brooks. The mistakes that Sir GH, Sebastian, Lester Burnham et al have pointed out are the type of mistakes you'd expect from the people here who want to know if Freddie was gay or if Brian made his own guitar. Inexcusable. Sad, because I'm sure Greg is hamstrung by the joke that is QP, but he's doing himself no favours with these types of attacks. The half-hour spent to compose his posts would be better served fact checking and proof reading his next error filled project.
HEY!!! im GB and so is my wife................
Greg, I didn't find any useful information in your endlessly long posts. All you do is ask for information. Could you please stop repeating yourself?
Greg Brooks: "If I were to sit and write a book about the Queen sessions, which I have contempleted, John is one one the few people in the world I would try to tie up with. Does that sound like I hate him? No. Clearly not."
No, clearly not. It sounds as if you couldn't do it without him. And that exactly is YOUR problem, as a so-called "Archivist", not John's or anyone else's. He gave us far more correct information than you, without being paid for it, without insulting people, without boasting.
p.s. you promised to stay away for a year.
Greg Brooks: "If I were to sit and write a book about the Queen sessions, which I have contempleted, John is one one the few people in the world I would try to tie up with. Does that sound like I hate him? No. Clearly not."
No, clearly not. It sounds as if you couldn't do it without him. And that exactly is YOUR problem, as a so-called "Archivist", not John's or anyone else's. He gave us far more correct information than you, without being paid for it, without insulting people, without boasting.
p.s. you promised to stay away for a year.
Just to add a little sarcasm...
As a song... HANGMAN is not THAT good...
Fuck Hangman.. give us the real thing!
As a song... HANGMAN is not THAT good...
Fuck Hangman.. give us the real thing!
> WE CAN ALL DO THAT.
Look at the lists he's done or the articles. Even if he and I never got along, I admit that's far beyond what "we can all do".
> I say what I feel and don't worry about how my 'standing' or 'reputation' with QZ long-termers (Lifers!!!) will be effected, or how you regard me.
Yeah, sure...
> I believe John stating things that I know to be wrong, helps no-one.
According to that it'd help no-one if somebody stated that, say, Brian sang the first verse of Who Wants To Live Forever, or that Crystal was Roger's roadie.
> People begin to imagine all kinds of things from what John implies, and soon there are more myths out there than ever. That is not helpful, is it?
For some extent it is. I don't know if everything John says about rarities is true, since I've got no idea about them. I do agree with you that he could claim that Denmark won the World Cup two days ago and half of the forum would believe him, but that's none of my business.
But even if he lied about something (i.e. Hangman studio version) it's always better to dream about it than waiting around for shitty compilations and the never-coming box-set. What's even sadder is that then QP come with news of a mediocre singles compilation (the same old crap), and to add insult to injury many fans then get all happy about getting the same for zillionth time. That takes the biscuit.
> If I were to sit and write a book about the Queen sessions, which I have contempleted,
Please don't. It'd break your own record of most mistakes per page.
> Someone suggested I must be jealous of JSS, and that's why I say what I say. Yes, that must be it. It must be to do with envy. You are a shrewd bunch.
Thanks! Anyway, I said that because that what you've demonstrated through your own posts. After reading you whining about John's prestige (something he wouldn't do about yours), even an ape would say "he's jealous".
> I thought he left us for the year...
Maybe he's a dog and his years last shorter than ours. In that case I do understand his "we're not kids comment". A two-year old IQ, translated to dog-years, would result in an adult, evidently!
Look at the lists he's done or the articles. Even if he and I never got along, I admit that's far beyond what "we can all do".
> I say what I feel and don't worry about how my 'standing' or 'reputation' with QZ long-termers (Lifers!!!) will be effected, or how you regard me.
Yeah, sure...
> I believe John stating things that I know to be wrong, helps no-one.
According to that it'd help no-one if somebody stated that, say, Brian sang the first verse of Who Wants To Live Forever, or that Crystal was Roger's roadie.
> People begin to imagine all kinds of things from what John implies, and soon there are more myths out there than ever. That is not helpful, is it?
For some extent it is. I don't know if everything John says about rarities is true, since I've got no idea about them. I do agree with you that he could claim that Denmark won the World Cup two days ago and half of the forum would believe him, but that's none of my business.
But even if he lied about something (i.e. Hangman studio version) it's always better to dream about it than waiting around for shitty compilations and the never-coming box-set. What's even sadder is that then QP come with news of a mediocre singles compilation (the same old crap), and to add insult to injury many fans then get all happy about getting the same for zillionth time. That takes the biscuit.
> If I were to sit and write a book about the Queen sessions, which I have contempleted,
Please don't. It'd break your own record of most mistakes per page.
> Someone suggested I must be jealous of JSS, and that's why I say what I say. Yes, that must be it. It must be to do with envy. You are a shrewd bunch.
Thanks! Anyway, I said that because that what you've demonstrated through your own posts. After reading you whining about John's prestige (something he wouldn't do about yours), even an ape would say "he's jealous".
> I thought he left us for the year...
Maybe he's a dog and his years last shorter than ours. In that case I do understand his "we're not kids comment". A two-year old IQ, translated to dog-years, would result in an adult, evidently!
Fished in, every one of you.
Greg, please, get a life. Do something, instead of moaning, old lady. Release stuff we fans WANT. Not a re-re-re-re-re-re-re-release of a Greatest Hits album. Or a Freddie solo collection, damn. Stop bragging about your job and please give use some proper information. You should feel ashamed of yourself releasing a book with still so many errors. Freddie singing the first verse of WWTLF?? What the f*ck? Ever saw the bloody video? As a Queenfan you don't even recognize Brians voice, who is singing the first verse, in case you still didn't know. Please Greg, climb in the biggest tree you can find and stay there. You're nothing but a nitwit. You don't know nothing about Queen at all. Get your nose out of the archives. You selfish bitch. Share some interesting Queenstuff with us real fans, we don't need another bloody remastered version of We Will Rock You.
And please Greg, stop being so childish and deal with real criticism.
And please Greg, stop being so childish and deal with real criticism.
Mr. Brooks you have posted a lot of comments on this whole situation but somehow you are constantly ignoring the real question: when are you going to share some information with us we can actually use and is worth something to the Queen fans?
If this still has to do with the whole "I can't post this kind of CLASSIFIED information with you" then why the hell post at all on these forums? Surely you must understand that you are the only person right now who could give us some answers to question some of us have been dying to hear about.
If this still has to do with the whole "I can't post this kind of CLASSIFIED information with you" then why the hell post at all on these forums? Surely you must understand that you are the only person right now who could give us some answers to question some of us have been dying to hear about.
Your Valentine... You have completely missed my point.
Yes part of my job has become research, and this I do off my own back, not because I was employed to do that (as you seem convinced I was, but never bothered confirming with me - no change there then) because I wasn't, I was employed to sort the tapes out and log them. I do the research purely for my own interest, actually, and it has the added advantage too of benefitting Queen/Freddie projects... my reseaerch and that of other people too like Gary Taylor, Jim Stevenson, Gary Nolan, Paul Bird, Andreas, Rinus, etc. But NOT you YV, because you've never contibuted so much as a cmma or fullstop!
Have YOU, Your Valentine, ever submitted anything at all that was new and interesting and useful?? Have you?? Lets hear it.
You moan a fair bit about me and what i write, but honestly, what do YOU do to widen the Queen collective pool of knowledge.
The point you missed - because you're too busy looking at something to dig about, as usual, again - is that when someone, like John SS, hints at the existence of something rare, but will not confirm it or provide a decent lead for me, or us, to chase up, then that means we run into a barrier and can go no further.
I, or others who look into these things too, can only research so far, but when you get close to the source, or actually AT the actual source, like JSS (who says he has this and that and the other rare gem, and MIGHT have Hangman studio version, or not!!), but he clams up at the cricial point (like when we are planning the rarities box, or the 2000 Freddie box), then thats neither use nor orniment. It helps NONE of us, does it?
Do you understand this rudimentry point YV? Can you fathom the basic principal I'm putting to you here?
Can you say or offer something constructive or useful, rather than yet another very predictable negative moan?
YV, you have no more idea about the parimetres and 'duties' of my job, and what I am paid for, than I do about yours. You've made that very clear in the things you have gotten wrong about my job. The different is you stick your nose into my business with your limited knowledge and get all insensed over things that are not even part of my brief. You'd understand the absurdity of that much better if I did it back to you.
AND you don't have the good grace to come clean when a valid criticism is lodged at you. Instead you pick on some incidental point in what I write and use it as a diversion because it's easier to do than apologise.
I don't even know who you are because you still use this silly bogus indentity thing. We cannot even therefore talk like 'normal' people, with both parties knowing who the other is.
Stop bloody moaning and whinging and picking and bleeting, and say something you haven't said before.
Address the MAIN issue of this email, if you can understand that very simple concept.
You (and Togg, etc) wonder why I take the tone I do, YV, but honestly you do seem always to pick on the blatantly obvious and easy things to say, and avoid anything remotely close to the truth.
I don't think you treat these things with a balanced approach. You are always tainted towards picking holes in me, trivial ones at that, instead of conceding the things I know you can see the sense in, but cannot concede to in case you lose the tiniest modecum of face with the QZ-ers you perform to.
GB.
Yes part of my job has become research, and this I do off my own back, not because I was employed to do that (as you seem convinced I was, but never bothered confirming with me - no change there then) because I wasn't, I was employed to sort the tapes out and log them. I do the research purely for my own interest, actually, and it has the added advantage too of benefitting Queen/Freddie projects... my reseaerch and that of other people too like Gary Taylor, Jim Stevenson, Gary Nolan, Paul Bird, Andreas, Rinus, etc. But NOT you YV, because you've never contibuted so much as a cmma or fullstop!
Have YOU, Your Valentine, ever submitted anything at all that was new and interesting and useful?? Have you?? Lets hear it.
You moan a fair bit about me and what i write, but honestly, what do YOU do to widen the Queen collective pool of knowledge.
The point you missed - because you're too busy looking at something to dig about, as usual, again - is that when someone, like John SS, hints at the existence of something rare, but will not confirm it or provide a decent lead for me, or us, to chase up, then that means we run into a barrier and can go no further.
I, or others who look into these things too, can only research so far, but when you get close to the source, or actually AT the actual source, like JSS (who says he has this and that and the other rare gem, and MIGHT have Hangman studio version, or not!!), but he clams up at the cricial point (like when we are planning the rarities box, or the 2000 Freddie box), then thats neither use nor orniment. It helps NONE of us, does it?
Do you understand this rudimentry point YV? Can you fathom the basic principal I'm putting to you here?
Can you say or offer something constructive or useful, rather than yet another very predictable negative moan?
YV, you have no more idea about the parimetres and 'duties' of my job, and what I am paid for, than I do about yours. You've made that very clear in the things you have gotten wrong about my job. The different is you stick your nose into my business with your limited knowledge and get all insensed over things that are not even part of my brief. You'd understand the absurdity of that much better if I did it back to you.
AND you don't have the good grace to come clean when a valid criticism is lodged at you. Instead you pick on some incidental point in what I write and use it as a diversion because it's easier to do than apologise.
I don't even know who you are because you still use this silly bogus indentity thing. We cannot even therefore talk like 'normal' people, with both parties knowing who the other is.
Stop bloody moaning and whinging and picking and bleeting, and say something you haven't said before.
Address the MAIN issue of this email, if you can understand that very simple concept.
You (and Togg, etc) wonder why I take the tone I do, YV, but honestly you do seem always to pick on the blatantly obvious and easy things to say, and avoid anything remotely close to the truth.
I don't think you treat these things with a balanced approach. You are always tainted towards picking holes in me, trivial ones at that, instead of conceding the things I know you can see the sense in, but cannot concede to in case you lose the tiniest modecum of face with the QZ-ers you perform to.
GB.
Greg,
I for one am tired of you coming on this site and attacking people. If you can't do it in private then don't do it at all.
I could not care less what problem you have with John or YV or anybody else for that matter. The same is true in the other direction.
What you are doing is completely childish.
Before you ask, no I have never sent any suggestions to you or QPR.
I for one am tired of you coming on this site and attacking people. If you can't do it in private then don't do it at all.
I could not care less what problem you have with John or YV or anybody else for that matter. The same is true in the other direction.
What you are doing is completely childish.
Before you ask, no I have never sent any suggestions to you or QPR.
To Jay... who wrote...Mr. Brooks you have posted a lot of comments on this whole situation but somehow you are constantly ignoring the real question: when are you going to share some information with us we can actually use and is worth something to the Queen fans?
Jay... Will you please share with us here on QZ all the most private details of your familiy, AND all the private intimate details relating to where you work, what your employers have in their reords about staff, and all kinds of other sensitive data that your bosses and your parents would much prefer to keep private? Will you hand over all these things for total strangers to pick over? I doubt it very much. i know that I certainly wouldn't.
No. You can't do that. It would be unethical, right? You would hate everyone to have access to all that you regards as private.
Well, same here. It's NOT my job to spill the beans on what's in the archive and on the tapes. It's none of my business. My business is to log tapes, sendthem out, copy masters, supply working copies, etc. That is all.
WHY do you guys think you have a right to know all that private stuff?????? You don't claim the same rights in numerous other aspects of life, so why do you in terms of the Queen tape archive?
The tapes are owned by Queen. It is THEIR property. Just like YOUR diary and letters and emails and faxes and photographs, and any recordings you have ever made, ARE YOURS. We have no right to demand that the archivist you might employ in 10 years time, tells QZ about all YOUR stuff, ok, but yet you are questioning the exact reverse.
Do you see my point, Jay.
How is it that you and so many others feel you have the right to insist I divulge things? You seem to really believe you are OWED it. You are not, Jay.
I understand how you feel - I spent 15 years aching to hear those tapes - but you don't have the RIGHT to hear them. I didn't, i was just lucky. No-one has THE RIGHT.
I think you need to think of it from that point of view. Just ponder that.
Imagine QZ-ers moaning and whinging and getting pissed off at YOU because you won't hand over your diaries and pesonal effects, because YOU won't let them scritunise all your private recordings. Do you see what I mean?
GB
Jay... Will you please share with us here on QZ all the most private details of your familiy, AND all the private intimate details relating to where you work, what your employers have in their reords about staff, and all kinds of other sensitive data that your bosses and your parents would much prefer to keep private? Will you hand over all these things for total strangers to pick over? I doubt it very much. i know that I certainly wouldn't.
No. You can't do that. It would be unethical, right? You would hate everyone to have access to all that you regards as private.
Well, same here. It's NOT my job to spill the beans on what's in the archive and on the tapes. It's none of my business. My business is to log tapes, sendthem out, copy masters, supply working copies, etc. That is all.
WHY do you guys think you have a right to know all that private stuff?????? You don't claim the same rights in numerous other aspects of life, so why do you in terms of the Queen tape archive?
The tapes are owned by Queen. It is THEIR property. Just like YOUR diary and letters and emails and faxes and photographs, and any recordings you have ever made, ARE YOURS. We have no right to demand that the archivist you might employ in 10 years time, tells QZ about all YOUR stuff, ok, but yet you are questioning the exact reverse.
Do you see my point, Jay.
How is it that you and so many others feel you have the right to insist I divulge things? You seem to really believe you are OWED it. You are not, Jay.
I understand how you feel - I spent 15 years aching to hear those tapes - but you don't have the RIGHT to hear them. I didn't, i was just lucky. No-one has THE RIGHT.
I think you need to think of it from that point of view. Just ponder that.
Imagine QZ-ers moaning and whinging and getting pissed off at YOU because you won't hand over your diaries and pesonal effects, because YOU won't let them scritunise all your private recordings. Do you see what I mean?
GB