Forums > Queen - Serious Discussion > Greg Brooks Q&A on QOL - hoax or real?

forum rss feed
Author

YourValentine user not visiting Queenzone.com
registered July 27th 2001
YourValentine
Deity: 7611 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 05:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

GB has answered some questions on the QOL forum - the answers were posted by a user - fairydandy. Here are some answers and I wonder if this is for real! Greg Brooks' answers are all in Caps

Q: Where else have you worked?

GB: I ALSO WORKED PART TIME AT MY LOCAL POND, CHEWING UP BREAD FOR DUCKS WITH GUM DISEASES THAT COULD NOT CHEW UP THEIR OWN BREAD. IF I DIDN’T DO IT, THE POOR CREATURES WOULD HAVE STARVED!

Q: Do you think Brian, John and Roger read QOL sometimes?

GB: MY GUESS WOULD BE THAT BRIAN MIGHT, SOMETIMES, ROGER RARELY, JOHN.... DUNNO, BUT PROBABLY FROM TIME TO TIME. AND FREDDIE MAYBE MIGHT DO TOO, I’D LIKE TO THINK – ESPECIALLY ALL THE GREAT STUFF YOU GUYS OFTEN SAY. THAT’S A NICE IMAGE

Q: Why is there still Keep Yourself Alive, Stone Cold Crazy and HANGMAN in the Golders Green setlist in the newly UPDATED book when almost everybody knows it they DIDN'T play them... You even mentioned a transcript tape- and on it you can hear a guy saying that they "WON'T BE PLAYING THEIR LATEST SINGLE K.Y.A."...

GB: THIS WAS A PRINT ERROR. THEY PRINTED THE WRONG PAGE – NOT MY ‘AMENDMENTS’.

JIM JENKINS GAVE ME ALL THE CORRECT STUFF, BUT THEY PRINTED WHAT YOU SEE. VERY ANNOYING, BUT SOON TO BE RECTIFIED.

Q: Why is there Spread Your Wings in Houston'77 setlist when it's obvious (for those owning an audio or video) they DIDN'T play it...

GB:BECAUSE I MADE A MISTAKE, IT SEEMS. YOU MIGHT HAVE MADE ONE OR TWO MISTAKES IF YOU HAD TAKEN ON A TASK THE MAGNITUDE OF THIS BOOK – BEFORE THE INTERNET EXISTED.

Q: Why there are still many mistakes in the newly updated QUEEN LIVE book?

GB: SEND ME A LIST AND I’LL RECTIFY THEM. I REALLY WILL.

ALSO... WHEN I PUT A MESSAGE OUT TWO YEARS AGO, ON ALL THE MAJOR SITES, ASKING FOR FANS TO SEND ME DETAILS OF ANY SUCH ERRORS THEY KNOW OF, PEOPLE LIKE YOU DID NOT BOTHER TO DO SO.

EVERY SINGLE PERSON THAT REPLY... I DID ACTION THEIR COMMENTS. THAT’S WHY MANY ERRORS HAVE NOW GONE.

SO I SAY AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN... SEND ME A LIST AND I’LL RECTIFY THEM.

Q: Roger in the interview back in 1980 said that they recorded almost two albums worth of material- is that true?

GB: LOTS OF STUFF IN 1980, YES. NOT THAT MUCH THO.

Q: What do you think Freddie would have thought about Paul doing his songs live?

GB: I THINK HE’S HAVE LOVED IT. AND HE MIGHT EVEN HAVE JOINED ON HIM ON STAGE FOR ‘THE SHOW MUST GO ON’. WOULDN’T THAT HAVE BEEN GREAT?



the complete Q&A is here, he also says something about his "guest appearance" on Queenzone last year:)

http://forums.queenonline.com/viewtopic.php?t=25453



I do not want any google ads here.

Benn user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1332 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 07:09 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Also.........

How long have you been involved with Queen?

SINCE 1976 AS A FAN

SINCE LATE 80’S AS AN OCCASSIONAL CONSULTANT – THEY USED TO RING AND ASK ME STUFF FROM TIME TO TIME.

SINCE 1997 PROPERLY.


Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!


Benn
Fenderek user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4924 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 10:45 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It is real. Some of the answers I actually found interesting.

Serry... user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 8271 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 10:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Someone send him the list with errors or the link to www.queenconcerts.com better!

Wiley user is on Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1704 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 11:45 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

He sounds a little "nicer", maybe because he's talking to the nice people of QOL and not the evil Queenzoners who question every indirect and ambiguous answer he gives... I don't think it's a fake but I think he is not allowed to answer many thinks properly.

Wiley

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18638 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 12:05 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Oh yeah, that's Greg for sure. But at least he speaks some truth this time.

YourValentine wrote:

GB: THIS WAS A PRINT ERROR. THEY PRINTED THE WRONG PAGE – NOT MY ‘AMENDMENTS’.

JIM JENKINS GAVE ME ALL THE CORRECT STUFF, BUT THEY PRINTED WHAT YOU SEE. VERY ANNOYING, BUT SOON TO BE RECTIFIED.


Sure, blame it on somebody else.

Q: Why is there Spread Your Wings in Houston'77 setlist when it's obvious (for those owning an audio or video) they DIDN'T play it...

GB:BECAUSE I MADE A MISTAKE, IT SEEMS. YOU MIGHT HAVE MADE ONE OR TWO MISTAKES IF YOU HAD TAKEN ON A TASK THE MAGNITUDE OF THIS BOOK – BEFORE THE INTERNET EXISTED.


What a horribly unprofessional comment to make. If you cannot do a perfect job, then don't do it. Can a shuttle engineer make the same excuse? "I was able to complete 98% of the engine. A task of this magnitude can't possibly expected to be perfect, so my apologies if it explodes in space."

So he admits there is no SYW in Houston... interesting. But I still don't take that as concrete evidence. Surely he didn't check, provided that he actually can. He told me about a year ago that he still hadn't heard the complete Houston show. So if he does have access to Queen's soundboard recording of the show, he was granted that access only within a few months after that at most. But I still doubt that he checked. He took a fan's word that the song wasn't played. I wonder what he'd do if I said my recording had It's Late? I bet he'd ask for a copy, rather than question me.

ALSO... WHEN I PUT A MESSAGE OUT TWO YEARS AGO, ON ALL THE MAJOR SITES, ASKING FOR FANS TO SEND ME DETAILS OF ANY SUCH ERRORS THEY KNOW OF, PEOPLE LIKE YOU DID NOT BOTHER TO DO SO.


Print errors? So this means he was stupid enough not to proofread the final text before it was printed. Hahaha, that's hilarious! Another thing - the Knebworth 86 stage banter in his book is still from Newcastle 86! Considering he is the band's "official archivist", that is an absolute embarrassment. I can't believe Brian, Roger, and Jim Beach are so blind. Someone needs to tell them, and soon. I am fairly confident that he has been forced to silence on certain issues, but the errors and his unprofessionalism are just plain pathetic. Almost every one of his replies was not a concrete answer!

Screw modesty for just one moment: I sent him a list of corrections - hundreds of them, and dozens of other things which required two minutes of research to clarify. Ultimately, a few of my corrections were used, but most were ignored, and there was no further discussion with me, despite the fact that I brought up several specific issues with him. He is a very poor communicator. There is very little new information in his book, other than stage banter from bootlegs and Queen's soundboard recordings. Overall, I am disgusted.

But I am slowly working on my list of new revisions to publish online, and I'll let you all know when it's done. And I'm seriously considering writing my own book. I'll have to contact a lawyer to discuss the legal stuff, regarding what kind of information is copyrighted, and what isn't. This may get interesting... stay tuned.



"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
Fenderek user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4924 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 12:05 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Serry... wrote:

Someone send him the list with errors or the link to www.queenconcerts.com better!

I think many people did and... nothing happened...

Fenderek user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4924 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 12:22 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

And I'm seriously considering writing my own book. I'll have to contact a lawyer to discuss the legal stuff, regarding what kind of information is copyrighted, and what isn't. This may get interesting... stay tuned.

Fucking hell man- this is getting really interesting!!! :)
Go for it I'd say! (provided is feasable)

Maz user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 5799 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 12:25 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Greg's whole reply concerning his ''big rumpus'' on QZ shows his true personality.

If you can't beat them, make them look like fools. For a man who says he didn't take the whole episode seriously, this answer is one of the longest he gives. He calls us ''faceless, nameless, cowardly individuals,'' and calls our discussions ''trivial,'' ''tediuous,'' and ''banaal.''

We are obviously critical of him and his work, which based on comments from people like Sir GH, we are have every right to be. If he puts out a product, we as consumers can critique it and argue about to our heart's content. But to dismiss us and call us, in effect, losers with too much time on our hands is incredibly short sighted and arrogant of him.




DJ's the man we love the most
The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18638 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:02 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I just read through that topic on QOL, and the only good reply in it was the one by Wiley. Give it a day, and it will probably be edited or removed completely. I can't believe how many ass-kissers there are on that board, and every one of them is completely blind as to what's really going on.

"I think that Greg might have gotten into those fights over in Queezone because most people wouldn't settle for some of his partial and ambiguous answers and I think some people got in touch with him to make corrections for his book but he didn't take them into consideration. At least, that's what I heard.

It's just that most of them (or 'us', since I do post over there a bit) are a little more critical and some of them have taken years of their lives to make research regarding Queen material and have gotten (what they consider to be) better results without having Greg's privileged access to the Queen Vaults."

Bingo. But that's in very kind-hearted terms, Wiley.

When Greg came to QZ a while back, he was horribly immature, and was 100% wrong in almost everything he did. But unfortuantely the truth will never get out to the folks at QOL, because that place is so heavily moderated.

Brooks told a few interesting things in there which is of course always welcome, but there is far too much "I don't know" and similar uncertainty in there. Since he gives so few concrete answers to the questions we ask, it can therefore be concluded that he is in this job for HIMSELF, and only that. Otherwise, he would have answered questions like these by now, all of which I have asked him: How many shows were filmed between 76-78? What is are the true setlists for 1971, 1972, and early 1974? Why has the boxed set been delayed for over five years now? Which venues are the Live Killers songs from, the ones which I HAVEN'T ALREADY FIGURED OUT FOR YOU?

Things we will probably never know. Furthermore disgust.



"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
YourValentine user not visiting Queenzone.com
registered July 27th 2001
YourValentine
Deity: 7611 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:14 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The reasons why I thought it's a hoax:

GB telling he once had a part time job pre-chewing bread for ducks ... that sounds incredibly odd to me

GB assuming that Freddie might like QOL that much that he even might post there ... sounds odd to me

GB assuming that Freddie likes the QPR project so much that he even might like to join the group for TSMGO .. come on, the man is dead. If he were not dead there would not be a QPR concert.

GB telling his readers (customers) that its's THEIR fault that there are so many mistakes in the book, because they did not send him the correct information. Sorry but that is pretty extremely odd for someone who calls himself "Archivist and writer"

Now, that the answers have been up for a day and nobody complained I think they are for real:)



I do not want any google ads here.

fairydandy user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 232 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:19 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I do wish that you would stop saying that QOL is heavily moderated. It is NOT heavily moderated. If you think you have some evidence of this, please supply it. Please supply the topics and the poster who has had the comments removed (not from the first few months of the board please, that's hardly relevant) because I am certain that it isn't happening.

I took Greg's comments about the users on the internet who discuss the tiniest of details to mean both here and QOL. I don't think he's wrong in that either, we do discuss irrelevant garbage sometimes.
I think he came across very well actually. It was nice of him to give us his time to answer our questions (in the same manner as other Queen 'celebrities' have at QOL). He told me before answering that he couldn't give too much away for obvious reasons..personally I can understand that.




The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18638 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:24 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

fairydandy wrote:

I do wish that you would stop saying that QOL is heavily moderated. It is NOT heavily moderated. If you think you have some evidence of this, please supply it. Please supply the topics and the poster who has had the comments removed (not from the first few months of the board please, that's hardly relevant) because I am certain that it isn't happening.


Fairydandy, I am one of those people Wiley referred to as doing years of independent research without the help of any archive material. Many people here can vouch for me as doing more pertinent and more proficient work than Greg Brooks has for his new book, which is little more than a re-hash of his first error-ridden book coupled with works by other people. For one thing, I went out of my way to do an analysis of the Live Killers album, with the help of only bootlegs, to figure out once and for all which venues each song was from. Greg has access to the soundboard recordings, and did not do anything of the sort. He just teased us with stage banter from some of the concerts. Anyone with ears to hear and fingers to type could have done the same.

So, if I posted a topic with the subject line "The Truth about Greg Brooks", thus publically exposing him for how unprofessional he is, both in his communication and his works, gave a comprehensive list of things he specifically ignored and did not bother to update in his new book, and proceeded to say that I am on my way to publishing a better and more complete book, my post would not be edited or removed, but welcomed with open arms?

Come on fairydandy, let's see what you've got. But before replying, be sure to read what I had to say about Greg in my blog at http://sir_gh.queenzone.com. Every word of it is true.



"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
fairydandy user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 232 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:34 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

fairydandy wrote:

I do wish that you would stop saying that QOL is heavily moderated. It is NOT heavily moderated. If you think you have some evidence of this, please supply it. Please supply the topics and the poster who has had the comments removed (not from the first few months of the board please, that's hardly relevant) because I am certain that it isn't happening.


Fairydandy, I am one of those people Wiley referred to as doing years of independent research without the help of any archive material, and many here can vouch for me as doing more pertinent and more proficient work than Greg Brooks has for his new book, which is nothing more than a disgrace to the intelligence and hard work of fans like myself.

So if I posted a topic with the subject line "The Truth about Greg Brooks", exposed him for how unprofessional he is, both in his communication and his works, and gave a comprehensive list of things he specifically ignored and did not bother to update in his new book, and proceeded to say that I am on my way to publishing a better and more complete book, my post would not be edited or removed, but welcomed with open arms?

Come on fairydandy, let's see what you've got.


I don't see why it should be removed. There are of course laws to protect people against libel and slander...so what you say would have to be accurate for that reason I suppose.

Why are you talking to me as if this is a school playground anyway? Who are you to do that? What exactly have you got, apart from a big mouth (and an unpublished book that is of no use to anyone)?

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18638 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:39 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sorry, I edited my post, so please read it above again.

fairydandy wrote:

What exactly have you got, apart from a big mouth (and an unpublished book that is of no use to anyone)?


I have written plenty criticisms for Greg on this forum and in my blog. They're all here to see, if you'd like to have a look. I may be a small voice, but I may not remain as such for very long. Give me time, and if the legal issues work out, I fully plan to have my own book, full of correct information. If you yourself are not a critical fan of Queen's live career, then you won't see all of the mistakes and false information in his book. Simple as that. But as of now, you are choosing to ignore some very key things I and others have to say about him, which just proves how you are standing by his side through thick and thin, no matter what you hear.

This is not a merely a personal attack on Greg. It is the voice of a true Queen fan who wants all of the pertinent information possible about his favourite band to be commercially available. At the moment, this is far from being so. A book that has hundreds of errors is definitely not as such.



"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
fairydandy user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 232 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

Sorry, I edited my post, so check it out above again.

I have written plenty criticisms for Greg on this forum, and in my blog. They're all here to see, if you care to look.


Sir GH can I just say that I don't know Greg Brooks. I have never met him, I am not in any way connected to him and I am not here to speak for, or argue for him. You obviously have some problems with him...I respect that, but it isn't my concern. Sorry.

fairydandy user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 232 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:48 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

Sorry, I edited my post, so please read it above again.

fairydandy wrote:

What exactly have you got, apart from a big mouth (and an unpublished book that is of no use to anyone)?


I have written plenty criticisms for Greg on this forum and in my blog. They're all here to see, if you'd like to have a look. I may be a small voice, but I may not remain as such for very long. Give me time, and if the legal issues work out, I fully plan to have my own book, full of correct information. If you yourself are not a critical fan of Queen's live career, then you won't see all of the mistakes and false information in his book. Simple as that. But as of now, you are choosing to ignore some very key things I and others have to say about him, which just proves how you are standing by his side through thick and thin, no matter what you hear.

This is not a merely a personal attack on Greg. It is the voice of a true Queen fan who wants all of the pertinent information possible about his favourite band to be commercially available. At the moment, this is far from being so. A book that has hundreds of errors is definitely not as such.


Do you have to keep editing these posts!! ;-)
Sorry, as I have already said, it's not my problem. Good luck with the book.

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18638 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

How can such a regular poster at Queen's official website's forum not have a proper reply to things like these being said about the band's official archivist? It just goes to show that QOL people don't bother to publically give their true opinions on certain things.

fairydandy wrote:

Good luck with the book.


But - thanks, all the same. :)



"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
kagezan1313 user not visiting Queenzone.com
kagezan1313
Bohemian: 940 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 13:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

YourValentine wrote:

The reasons why I thought it's a hoax:

GB telling he once had a part time job pre-chewing bread for ducks ... that sounds incredibly odd to me


I feel silly even devoting attention to this subject, but for one, not having teeth, ducks don't have gums, thusly they are incapable of having a gum disease, and two, for anyone who's ever fed a duck, as soon as you throw bread into water, it turns to mush anyway, removing the need to chew. Lastly, bread is not the natural food of ducks (luckily for unarmed bakers), and they don't rely on it for survival, as the article suggests. If these are real comments, then I'm hoping this is what passes for humour with Mr. Brooks. Otherwise...


Thank you, God bless you, sweet dreams you lot of tarts, Good-bye!
fairydandy user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 232 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Sep 05, 14:07 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:

How can such a regular poster at Queen's official website's forum not have a proper reply to things like these being said about the band's official archivist? It just goes to show that QOL people don't bother to publically give their true opinions on certain things.

fairydandy wrote:

Good luck with the book.


But - thanks, all the same. :)


That's ridiculous! The ony reason I haven't given a "proper reply" to you, is that I really (no really) couldn't give a toss about it. So, the book is innaccurate, you are upset with Greg..fine..but that's not my concern. I appreciate what you are saying...get the book out, make it right.