Forums > Queen - General Discussion > Multitracks Killer Queen and Bo Rhap

forum rss feed
Author

Jan78 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 264 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 04 Feb 08, 23:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote


Just one question...not wanting to be a party pooper...but how come that everybody gets so amazingly excited when usually there would be nicer and not so nice voices saying "it's offical, can't be shared, please remove"?

In saying that, the future now should be to share any recording whatsoever, everything else would be hypocritical, right?

Jan

thunderbolt 31742 user not visiting Queenzone.com
thunderbolt 31742
Bohemian: 647 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 00:57 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I see your point, and have wondered about it myself, and I would argue that it depends on your definition of the word "official." If someone were to come on here and post the album version of KQ or BR, of course they'd be asked to take it down. However, these are the raw 24-tracks--not a finished product. These multitracks were never officially released in any album. The finished, mixed product of these tracks has been released, but the recordings themselves haven't.

That said, I do think it's only a matter of time before QPL finds out about this (they probably already know) and sends QZ a love letter explaining how they generally put up with the occasional official share that gets overlooked, but this is taking it a few steps too far.


"Do you think I should keep this mustache? Did you say no? F--- off."
Jan78 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 264 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 02:44 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Agreed, Thunderbolt...but then you can also argue things into a way you want it to go (not you personally). How about we share a stolen product here...maybe even almost official. We cover it with "leaked" or "shared", but it's stolen property. Not public domain.

I struggle to understand really, how this is hailed as the treasure of the year, whereas someone requesting maybe "Hijack My Heart" or "Stealin'" will be told off by probably the same people who celebrate the multitracks now, even if to him it might be an equally big treasure because he never heard it before (I felt that way in the days before mp3 and the internet).

But well...just in this particular case I find it interesting how the Queenzone rules apply or actually don't. I don't want to start an argument, but I thought this is a case that is in the most simple sense of the word interesting.

On some level it might be like "we as fans deserve having/owning/hearing those things". And on another level it may be "someone "leaked" a tape, which in fact means it was stolen from QPL, but because they (the band or Jim Beach or whoever) were withholding it from me, that thief is actually a hero"...

Penetration_Guru user not visiting Queenzone.com
Penetration_Guru
Deity: 11013 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 02:44 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

That is a good point - these are official (because they contain the guitars from the official release, th evocals, etc etc and the fact that OTHER stuff is also included is irrelevant) and my hypocrisy is acknowledged.

Are we taking the links down then?

Jan78 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 264 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 02:55 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Guru,

I did not request the links to be taken down. I have always supported sharing out of print material (and not in print material) simply from the perspective of "I'd like to support the band, and buying it would be good, but if they don't give me the chance to buy it, I might as well get it somewhere else."
Is that in a sense stealing?

I don't want to go on about consciousness and "sharing official material is theft". I have a sort of practical interest in this matter. A microscopic look at "why is this ok when that is not?". I am fine with keeping it on this level. Dr. May might of course see it rather differently. Did he ever mention "leaked" (read: stolen) demos like Robbery, Self Made Man or My Secret Fantasy in the Soapbox? I remember his rant about the Cozy Powell demo though...

thunderbolt 31742 user not visiting Queenzone.com
thunderbolt 31742
Bohemian: 647 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 05:18 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The difference between the KQ/BR multis and something like "Stealin'," "Hijack My Heart," or "Mad the Swine" is that there are several other websites out there--primarily "blogs" from South America--which post official albums in full. They also post all kinds of one-off demos, B-sides, 12" tracks, and the "Royal Rarities" collection, which is chock-full of official stuff. I have no problem saying to someone, "Sorry, you'll have to look elsewhere for those," because five minutes of Googling would turn up one of those websites. As I recall, QZers were instrumental in shutting one or two particularly bad ones down last year, which has engendered a bit of good will from the powers that be over at QPL.

Honestly, Jan78, while I don't see a need for us to preemptively remove the KQ and BR multitracks, I do think these will prove to be QZ's ultimate test in terms of what's "official," and what counts as a one-off studio demo. They really are the grayest of gray areas. I'm waiting for Dr. May to either express happiness that such important historical documents are being preserved in high quality, or (more likely) blow a gasket in his Soapbox over the fact that they leaked out. QPL has people who visit this site--they *have* to know by now.


"Do you think I should keep this mustache? Did you say no? F--- off."
cmsdrums user not visiting Queenzone.com
cmsdrums
Deity: 3037 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 08:37 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I can see both sides of the argument her. The individual parts have never been released like this officially, and therefore, in line with existing QZ protocol, they are allowed. However, they are Queen tracks, recorded in the studio under licence to QPL and/or Trident or EMI etc.. are the copyright is owned by them and so is 'official' and shouldn't be shared.

However, if we take the later argument, absolutely anything that Queen recorded in the studio is 'official', regardless of whether it has been released or not, and therefore all demos and rare unreleases session tracks should not be shared either as they are official.

The normal argument against downloading official already released material (and my view) is that 'official' tracks already released should not be sharable as they are available commercially elsewhere, and therefore if these are shared rather than bought they could be taking money directly from the artist or record company. Fair enough.

My view however is that tracks like these multitracks are never realistically going to be available commercially, and so regardless of how many of us here download them, we are not affecting any profits for anyone elsewhere. They should continue therefore to be avaialable because the argument given by record companies themselves (ie profit) is not in any way being affected.

Cwazy little thing user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 483 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 09:16 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I made very similar points to these a page or two into the Killer Queen 24 track thread, and I did wonder whether there would be any further discussion.

The point I made before was about bootlegs of shows which have been officially released - Im talking audience recordings, or taped live off the TV type things, for example the tribute concert;

The final product released officially was, firstly, not totally complete, and secondly, touched up to cover mistakes (an example Ive heard being Bri's solo on Stone Cold Crazy). Yet Im certain if you request a bootleg for these shows, for example to compare the differences between them and the released version, you'll be told since they were released officially, they cant be shared here.

There is a fine line between that, and what we have here, yet these multitracks are not even questioned by those very same people drawing the line before the bootlegs- why? Rarity. Not many people have these, whereas thousands taped the tribute concert from the live broadcast.

So yes, the rules have been bent if you ask me. Is it a bad thing? Maybe.

That totally depends on your stance on copyright, and particularly the right of an artist to decide exactly what work they want to let the public see, and what they would prefer stays behing closed doors. The reason we havent heard these before is because Queen decided on the bits they liked, the mistakes they didnt, and edited the song accordingly - it was never intended for the fan to hear these, and Im an advocate of respecting the right of the author of copyrighted material to say no, I dont want anyone to hear that, cos its not good enough, or whatever.

The fact is, we live in a world where people want things, and often dont care about what the band may or may not have wanted you to hear, because they'll take any little piece of Queen they can get - demand will always exceed available resources, because there was only so much the band could produce.

I want it all, and I want it now indeed.

Now, if the band were happy for this stuff to leak to the fans, and for us to privately enjoy it, so long as the finished products they released were selling well, then there would be no problem (morally at least). But if Brian doesnt like us having these, then it is wrong for us to have them, in my opinion at least.

Theres a very complex argument here, and as was mentioned above, this is truly a grey area. Ultimately, I dont think we should have these files in the first place - it was theft of the highest order for someone to pinch them, but what to do now they are here?
Leave them for now, and when, as I think is very likely, QZ is asked to remove them, so they will be removed!

The fact is, Ive happily downloaded these, and listened with great interest, so it clearly didnt bother me that much, lol, but I suppose Queen have been tolerant of bootlegs in the past, so maybe, just maybe, Brian will see that as long as no one is making money from these, by remixing/sampling etc, then these are the sorts of things that fans find incredibly interesting and exciting, and it wont harm record sales.

Very interesting thing to have a discussion about though.


Adventure Seeker on an empty street...

www.myspace.com/ampfirerock
brENsKi user not visiting Queenzone.com
How shall we f**k off, Oh Lord
brENsKi
Deity: 8088 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 12:28 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

how about we delay making a definitive decision on what is official or not until AFTER the Queen II multitracks are released for download ;-)


go deo na h√Čireann
Raf user not visiting Queenzone.com
Stop this noise!
Raf
Deity: 8274 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 13:08 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Maybe once Brian finds out that the tracks are here, we could point out to him that, as it's too late to prevent them from being heard by the public, he could take advantage of it and make a remix contest...?

Peter Gabriel, Nine Inch Nails and several other artists have already made remix contests.


We got the Cosmos rockin'!

We got the Cosmos rockin'!

We got the Universe rockin'!

We got the Cosmos rockin'!

We got the Cosmos rockin' to the mighty power of rock'n'roll!
GiantSpider user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 345 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 13:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Its already been said here that if we towed the "it's owned by QP/EMI" line, nothing would ever get shared. If you think, the contents of all bootlegs are owned by the band and their associated labels.

So, a pragmatic approach then. If someone wanted to download Killer Queen for example, we would send them to somewhere they could do it officially. If we uploaded it, they would be stealing money from the band, and we would be helping them.

However these multi-tracks aren't "out" there, are Queen going to lose any money by them being on here? No. The only way they would would be if someone was to download the KQ multi-track as opposed to an .mp3 of it. 5mb or 500mb?


James

Jan78 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 264 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 14:20 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote


I think, live bootlegs feel different...I don't know why though.
But as for demos and those multitracks...how about the thought that we are actually sharing a stolen product around? Would we all drive a car to feel what it's like if we knew it was stolen in the first place?

victor fleitas user not visiting Queenzone.com
victor fleitas
Bohemian: 209 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 15:22 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

acctually, where I can download these multi-tracks?

Raf user not visiting Queenzone.com
Stop this noise!
Raf
Deity: 8274 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 15:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

*edit: feeling slightly guilty*


We got the Cosmos rockin'!

We got the Cosmos rockin'!

We got the Universe rockin'!

We got the Cosmos rockin'!

We got the Cosmos rockin' to the mighty power of rock'n'roll!
Adam Baboolal user not visiting Queenzone.com
Adam Baboolal
Deity: 4986 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 16:12 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Very muddied waters indeed. In the end, we have something that shouldn't be here or anywhere, but in the band's hands. I'll definitely think about removing the BoRhap links. Especially if Bri says something about it. I'm suddenly a little less comfortable with myself right now.

Adam.

primavera user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 26 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 16:32 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Even though I found the tracks amazing it did feel going criminal to me. Such things are not distributed openly... so I'm wondering about the source of the leak.

It's not about stealing money from the group, but more of a moral issue. I don't think anyone would love to have their raw material distributed in any way.

I have downloaded the tracks and I am going to keep them but I'm not spreading the thing further... that's for sure

PieterMC user not visiting Queenzone.com
PieterMC
Deity: 3931 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 05 Feb 08, 16:34 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Adam Baboolal wrote:

In the end, we have something that shouldn't be here or anywhere, but in the band's hands.


The same could be said for the demos that have been shared on here, and that are readily available on youtube.

mooghead user not visiting Queenzone.com
mooghead
Deity: 3667 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 06 Feb 08, 01:58 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Much as I love these multitracks I think if I was Brian, Roger or John I would feel like I was being arse raped.

bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12700 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 06 Feb 08, 02:38 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I'm not guilty at all. I made multitracks of mine available once. There was one band that released a song or two of theirs as GARAGEBAND files for Christ's sake.
Trust me, if anyone from QP is watching this, my official opinion is 'oh that's terrible, delete all the links at once'.

But really, this is only a recording that's been gathering dust for 30+ years. Queen aren't doing anything with it anymore, and it'll be a cold day in hell before they start selling us anything this interesting. I for one am more than glad (and grateful) that this leaked.


"Your not funny, your not a good musician, theres a difference between being funny and being an idiot, you obviously being the latter" - Dave R Fuller
thunderbolt 31742 user not visiting Queenzone.com
thunderbolt 31742
Bohemian: 647 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 06 Feb 08, 03:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Zebonka12 wrote:


But really, this is only a recording that's been gathering dust for 30+ years. Queen aren't doing anything with it anymore, and it'll be a cold day in hell before they start selling us anything this interesting. I for one am more than glad (and grateful) that this leaked.


The well-known retard (who generally doesn't strike me as retarded at all) has a good point here. The argument that, I'm sure, will be made eventually is the "this is not the finished product--this is not what we wanted you to hear" line. While I honestly doubt that Freddie would have wanted the multitracks out there for all to hear--judging by his fiercely private nature--I don't see the harm in it either. If nothing else, the multitracks are an absolutely fascinating glimpse into the genesis of two incredible songs, and they've only deepened my appreciation for the two works.

Now, the argument I *wish* QPL would make (and then follow through on) is "You can't share those multitracks, because later this year, we'll begin re-releasing all the original Queen studio albums in individual boxed sets with the multitracks on a separate CD."

Ah, one can dream...


"Do you think I should keep this mustache? Did you say no? F--- off."