Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Innuendo on November 18, 2015 at 11:09am

Got your message, PW. I'm not a certified expert. Can't issue any official COAs or anything. But as far as this item goes, the Brian is 100% genuine. The Roger ends with the final line not slanting downward the way it should, so as nice as the rest of it is, between that and the simple looking Taylor, plus the fact that although it's the same thickness, the marker he used seems to be much clearer and brighter than brian's, I wouldn't say genuine for Roger. John looks to be done with a completely different pen/marker as the rest. It's thicker and the Deacon is wrong as its much too simple even for a rushed John. The John looks ok, but I've seen many forgers get the first part of John correct so I'm assuming it isn't hard to fake. The deacon tells me it's bad. The Freddie is odd because of the obviously abnormal double Ds here. The Mercury is a bit boxy, however- the Mercury also had the trademark erc that you see on all genuine examples of his autograph from the late 70s to 91 IF he was able to sign while sitting down and NOT rushed. Most genuine rushed Freddie examples don't feature that. In conclusion, Brian is genuine, Freddie (as odd as it is) stands a chance, the John is absolutely fake and the Roger can't be called 100% for sure.
It could very well be another case of someone getting part of the band to sign genuinely and forged the remaining to make it a "full set" to make more $.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by tmbaway on November 21, 2015 at 6:28am

thanks for your answer innuendo. Very clear and serious. Fran, relax.. I'm not a forger searching the holy grail of perfect fake .. In the past, on this forum, fran, you have been very pleased to obtain details and precisions about a freddie autograph.. so, be cool.

Innuendo, your analyse is very fine. I had the same when i saw this album on pictures. Yes, a friend of mine has bought it . Personaly, I dont known if bought it .. However.. I think that is an interesting album. Far away from"horribles" fake . I can't tell if this album is genuine or not. I'm not an expert but i'im not a newbie too. I has seen hundreds of queen signatures, true or false. As you, i trust in my instinct and my logic.

This album would have been signed during Newcastel gig 86 to a journalist (which would explain the promo album) . There would have been a pen problem started on brian signature (that's why the signature appears brightless than freddie and roger, but visualy,  i confirm  that's the same pen ). When John wanted sign, the pen has not worked at all (there is indeed a trace of a first signature) and he changed pen to sign again. That's the story .. 

About Roger's signature, the final line not slanding downward don't shock me..On this  picture (from queen museum) the line is slightly ascending.The most disturbing is , for me, the "Italic" appearance and slightly curved on the right ...Brian, for me , is 100% genuine too. Typical. I agree with you innuendo about John. It missing the "E" of DEacon at least..(As the deacon picture queen museum) But the rest looks good. Maybe it has been been disrupted by the "whims" of the pen lol. Freddie perplexing me.. This double DD is very unusual and surprising .. But the rest looks good too. 

If it's a fake, the contrast between very good parts and very basics "errors" are very surprising..

Anyway for the buyer, the most important thing is to believe lol

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• magicTP_qm_1.jpg, 87 KB

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page