OK I'll go first. LMEY guitar solo been done. If you listen to the old version you hear half a dozen scuffed notes. Would even go as far as saying this is a new studio dub done by Brian.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
I agree with that observation! Good catch. Though, I wouldn't say a dozen scuffed notes. Compared the discs I have and sounds like a couple of changes on the solo bit.
Any others?
Adam.
Any others?
Adam.
I am a huge Queen fan but come on,does it really matter?
David, this is a Queen forum. We are supposed to discuss these details to death. It's the only place where we can have such discussions without being frowned at.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]David, this is a Queen forum. We are supposed to discuss these details to death. It's the only place where we can have such discussions without being frowned at. [/QUOTE]
Apparently not...
To go by what Mr Mercury said in another thread, if this was a Beatles forum and people were asking about what was being overdubbed and what was fresh, people would really get into it here. Yet, for some reason, on a Queen forum, it's considered nitpicky to dissect it. I don't get it. If you don't like the thread or don't like what's being discussed, just go to another thread that you do like.
Apparently not...
To go by what Mr Mercury said in another thread, if this was a Beatles forum and people were asking about what was being overdubbed and what was fresh, people would really get into it here. Yet, for some reason, on a Queen forum, it's considered nitpicky to dissect it. I don't get it. If you don't like the thread or don't like what's being discussed, just go to another thread that you do like.
Hey! FUCK the overdubs!
Let's analyse Freddie's white shorts! :-P
Let's analyse Freddie's white shorts! :-P
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Jeroen wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Hey! FUCK the overdubs!
Let's analyse Freddie's white shorts! :-P[/QUOTE]
Man, them shorts was short!
Let's analyse Freddie's white shorts! :-P[/QUOTE]
Man, them shorts was short!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Erin wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Jeroen wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Hey! FUCK the overdubs!
Let's analyse Freddie's white shorts! :-P[/QUOTE]
Man, them shorts was short![/QUOTE]
...and what about TIGHT! 8-O
Let's analyse Freddie's white shorts! :-P[/QUOTE]
Man, them shorts was short![/QUOTE]
...and what about TIGHT! 8-O
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Jeroen wrote: [/QUOTENAME]...and what about TIGHT! 8-O[/QUOTE]
He must've used cooking oil to get 'em on!!
He must've used cooking oil to get 'em on!!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Lester Burnham wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]David, this is a Queen forum. We are supposed to discuss these details to death. It's the only place where we can have such discussions without being frowned at. [/QUOTE]
Apparently not...
To go by what Mr Mercury said in another thread, if this was a Beatles forum and people were asking about what was being overdubbed and what was fresh, people would really get into it here. Yet, for some reason, on a Queen forum, it's considered nitpicky to dissect it. I don't get it. If you don't like the thread or don't like what's being discussed, just go to another thread that you do like. [/QUOTE]
Not quite correct, Lester. I did not say any of that at all. My point in the other thread was solely about Benn talking about one song being out of place on the CD's and I only used the Beatles' Pepper album as a comparison. Please dont paint me as the villian here.
The overdubs thing does facinate me as I would rather hear a live concert as is - warts and all. And i will read this thread avidly to see what was fixed and what wasnt. Most of the time I wish that any band whether it be Queen or not, wouldnt touch any live recordings except maybe to correct the levels of the guitars, bass, drums, etc.
Apparently not...
To go by what Mr Mercury said in another thread, if this was a Beatles forum and people were asking about what was being overdubbed and what was fresh, people would really get into it here. Yet, for some reason, on a Queen forum, it's considered nitpicky to dissect it. I don't get it. If you don't like the thread or don't like what's being discussed, just go to another thread that you do like. [/QUOTE]
Not quite correct, Lester. I did not say any of that at all. My point in the other thread was solely about Benn talking about one song being out of place on the CD's and I only used the Beatles' Pepper album as a comparison. Please dont paint me as the villian here.
The overdubs thing does facinate me as I would rather hear a live concert as is - warts and all. And i will read this thread avidly to see what was fixed and what wasnt. Most of the time I wish that any band whether it be Queen or not, wouldnt touch any live recordings except maybe to correct the levels of the guitars, bass, drums, etc.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=FF9900>Mr Mercury</font> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Lester Burnham wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]David, this is a Queen forum. We are supposed to discuss these details to death. It's the only place where we can have such discussions without being frowned at. [/QUOTE]
Apparently not...
To go by what Mr Mercury said in another thread, if this was a Beatles forum and people were asking about what was being overdubbed and what was fresh, people would really get into it here. Yet, for some reason, on a Queen forum, it's considered nitpicky to dissect it. I don't get it. If you don't like the thread or don't like what's being discussed, just go to another thread that you do like. [/QUOTE]
Not quite correct, Lester. I did not say any of that at all. My point in the other thread was solely about Benn talking about one song being out of place on the CD's and I only used the Beatles' Pepper album as a comparison. Please dont paint me as the villian here.[/QUOTE]
Erm, yeah. Sorry, I didn't quite mean what I had written... I didn't mean it to be a bad thing, I meant to say that I was going to use the Beatles as an example, as you had.
My post wasn't meant to single you out or use you as an example – sorry if it came off that way!
The "apparently not" was directed at D@VID, not at you, if that's what you thought.
Apparently not...
To go by what Mr Mercury said in another thread, if this was a Beatles forum and people were asking about what was being overdubbed and what was fresh, people would really get into it here. Yet, for some reason, on a Queen forum, it's considered nitpicky to dissect it. I don't get it. If you don't like the thread or don't like what's being discussed, just go to another thread that you do like. [/QUOTE]
Not quite correct, Lester. I did not say any of that at all. My point in the other thread was solely about Benn talking about one song being out of place on the CD's and I only used the Beatles' Pepper album as a comparison. Please dont paint me as the villian here.[/QUOTE]
Erm, yeah. Sorry, I didn't quite mean what I had written... I didn't mean it to be a bad thing, I meant to say that I was going to use the Beatles as an example, as you had.
My post wasn't meant to single you out or use you as an example – sorry if it came off that way!
The "apparently not" was directed at D@VID, not at you, if that's what you thought.
Not wishing to wander off topic too much, but the interesting question is whether or not if it were YOUR performance they filmed, would you not want to correct your mistakes?
At the end of the day it is a creative product and most artists only want the public to hear there work as they intend it to be heard 'perfectly'
I personnally feel it is almost two different things the live concert you attend is a moment in time or almost a feeling if you like, the DVD of the concert becomes something that is there forever and then becomes something different and therefore needs to be treated differently, if in twenty years time it is played it needs to be a good representation of the 'band'.
I rather like the whole in-perfect VHS version and the touched up DVD they are both just as interesting to me.
I know many will disagree with this, but I am looking at it from the artist point of view, naturally a member of the audience would really want a perfect copy of the night 'they' experienced, which is impossible to do asit will be different for everyone and we all have selective hearing!
At the end of the day it is a creative product and most artists only want the public to hear there work as they intend it to be heard 'perfectly'
I personnally feel it is almost two different things the live concert you attend is a moment in time or almost a feeling if you like, the DVD of the concert becomes something that is there forever and then becomes something different and therefore needs to be treated differently, if in twenty years time it is played it needs to be a good representation of the 'band'.
I rather like the whole in-perfect VHS version and the touched up DVD they are both just as interesting to me.
I know many will disagree with this, but I am looking at it from the artist point of view, naturally a member of the audience would really want a perfect copy of the night 'they' experienced, which is impossible to do asit will be different for everyone and we all have selective hearing!
Lester thanks for clearing that up, I did misunderstand you a bit. Sorry for my part as well
Anyway, peace to you!!
(Off topic - are you doing any more Queen related books?)
Anyway, peace to you!!
(Off topic - are you doing any more Queen related books?)
Togg, I think it's a matter of taste - maybe it's more enjoyable NOT to hear Freddie's voice crack on FBG in Milton Keynes for 20 years but the idea of this thread is to trace down the actual overdubs and that is a very interesting topic. After 20 more people posted off-topic comments (myself included), the thread will hopefully return to the initial issue :))
The WWRY-dvd;
-Play the game
-Let me entertain you.
And probably a lot more.
-Play the game
-Let me entertain you.
And probably a lot more.