Queen 'A Night At The Opera' signed album - real or fake?

Views: 1470

Attachments:

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Thanks Mercury, much appreciated

The more I look at this item the more I think this is the real deal.

Compares quite well to other mid  to end 70´s sigs from Queen.

Don´t think the autographs are off at all. What do others think?

Here the photo of the album:

 

Genuine 100% for me... Typical OPERA tour autographs and Excellent price also.. I would have bidded if known early.

Its a genuine one imo

really hope you didn't buy this. it's fake.

Hi Luke

Why is that?

The only unusual thing I can spot is the "M" in Mercury...the rest including the inscription looks spot on to me. I think he pretty much used a "softer M" during that period, but I have seen quite a few genuine exemplars with the "sharper M" as well.

And Taylor, Deacon, May are in my opinion text book exemplars for that era. Here is an album (signed in 1976) sold by RR and pre-certified by Roger Epperson:

that's not good. my problem with early 1970s Freddie signatures are that they weren't uniform. there's no real way to claim a say 1973 Freddie to be real because he switched it up every other day. he was figuring out what his auto should look like. late 70s on is considered "text book" because by then he didn't change it up too much. there's a pretty famous interview out by David wigg where Freddie says if he could do it all over again he would. when asked to explain he said it took him years to find his look voice skill and even how to write his name. said it took him years to find himself as a star and he'd go back with the lessons he'd learned so far and use his time more wisely. there are a few passages in some books about him I think written by his ex David minns and friend David Evans that say the same thing. also that if he was stuck in a crowd of fans or just didnt want to sign he would pass the item to a "family member" (friend) to sign for him. his personal assistant said the same in his book Freddie Mercury. which I'm sure contributes to the different "styles". it's just a gamble. his auto changed too much during that time to ever really be sure. alot of long time queen collectors won't touch aearly Freddie autos because it's too much of a gamble. that's just the way it was for that time period. I don't like the original post because in personal letters and on the album he dotted his I with a circle. that's true. but all the examples from roadies I have seen at conventions where he dotted the I with a circle in the dedication he also dotted the I with a circle in his name as a serlperate thing. you just kind of can't be good at picking out early Freddie autos if Freddie himself said he changed it up too often. also I tend to roll with my gut feeling. gut is saying no. police album they are selling looks weird too. at least sting.
The seller claims to have worked "on tour" with a number of bands. which is cool. he copy and pasted the same description for his albums he's selling. don't know much about the police autos but I have been looking into STING and can't say this looks legit. seen a few of his book signings and a few police signed albums on julien's and they don't look like this. https://touch.trademe.co.nz/#listing/view/628620908
Luke, I respect your opinion. Posts like this are useful for fan and collector to grow in their experience on collecting Queen autographs. I feel as you, for example, about 80's Queen signatures which are The most faked in The market.
But if you point your references on roadies, Queen staff autographs please show some signed Queen stuff from 75-76 as reference on what you say.

Look at this
http://www.peterhince.co.uk/index.php?f=384&q=983

It's from Peter Hince, an Excellent provenance , I think you agree on this, do you?
Well I cannot see great differences on John, Brian and Roger.
Ok, Mercury is too long on The one posted Above but I've seen others like that..
So please if you know good provenance Queen autographs from The mid 70's I really like to have a look.
Because being so scarce as The demand was very low at that time compared to the 80's ones, this doesn't mean that if they appear they are all fakes...
yo. ill have my old man ask ratty. they email alot. but even on his site he admits to not being an expert on their autos. even says he doesn't have one. i don't collect pictures for your reference. maybe my old man does. idk. not to mention the early autos real or fake are pretty ugly. granted rushed autos are usually ugly regardless of era. the first post and the example AB gave didn't match Freddie autos at all. appreciate him giving the example. I don't know enough about the others to say genuine or not. but those two Freddies are completely different for having been signed around the same era. just goes to show if they are real how Fred didn't have any set in stone signature at the time. as for the 80s autos being more forged, that's just not true. his autos from all eras were forged. even willingly. he TOLD his friends and even Terry to sign stuff for him when he didn't feel like signing. that started from as far back as David minns. they met around 74-75.
also never said every auto from that era was fake. said it was a gamble.
dont think u understood me. saw the examples I was talking about at queen conventions where these roadies were. its not like a website. old man might have taken pictures. i didn't.

RSS

© 2019   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Community Manager.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service