Well, I think the first part is horrific. I can't even comprehend why accomplished musicians such as Queen would play such an awful synth in that way. Virtually no production in there. You hear a lengthy note with the synth and then, bam! It stops! No fade out. It is awful. Lyrically..it's ok. Straight from the Roger Taylor book of Happiness?/Electric Fire couplets and stanzas. Very basic. Very standard. As for Brian's guitar playing? Don't even go there. There is absolutely no innovation in there. It's just your bog standard 'Brian May-esque' playing up and down the fret board. You JUST KNOW he's done this type of stuff in his sleep. Virtually no melody to it either. The song only comes alive when Paul starts to sing.
Every song on Back To The Light, Happiness?, Made In Heaven, Another World, and Electric Fire are better than this.
Queen have not created songs in years and it shows. Too much fucking around with Robbie Williams, Pepsi ads, diva wannabees in musicals, boy bands and reality TV shows have turned them into the absolute shite composers they are today.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]monty-- wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, I think the first part is horrific. I can't even comprehend why accomplished musicians such as Queen would play such an awful synth in that way. [/QUOTE]
Perhaps you should go back and re-listen to the AKOM and Miracle albums.
Perhaps you should go back and re-listen to the AKOM and Miracle albums.
I love the song and I loved the version. I obviously disagree with the "Queen" name, I still think that they should've released it as Rodgers, Taylor & May (or Taylor, Rodgers & May, or May, Rodgers & Taylor, etc). But overlooking that aspect (which doesn't affect the music itself), my overall observations:
- I like the fact each one sings a bit, and I do wish Queen (the actual Queen, with Roger, Freddie, John and Brian) had done that more often (e.g. 'It's Late', each one having a 'scene').
- It makes me wonder how would other Roger's ballads sound with Brian's voice (e.g. 'Days of Our Lives', 'Foreign Sand').
- The guitar sound is great, but I think Brian tried too hard to be Queen-esque, being one of the very very very few cases where he did NOT work for the song. In that sense, it deserves "only" 9.5 out of 10 IMO.
- Great arrangement, but it's far from being the "epic" Dr May described.
- They desperately need a bass player (even if it's a session one and doesn't get included into the "Queen" name). Not necessarily John, but anybody who's capable of playing a professional melodic thing there.
- I think an acoustic piano would've been much better than the background synth. Brian's a very good keyboard player, and so is Paul, so it's sort of a waste putting that simple pad IMO.
- It's a very good 'trade card' for the collaboration between the three of them.
- Good drums, but I don't like the way they mixed the acoustic part.
- In spite of being quite detailed, it's not too dense or overwhelming, so they did a fine job all in all.
- I like the fact each one sings a bit, and I do wish Queen (the actual Queen, with Roger, Freddie, John and Brian) had done that more often (e.g. 'It's Late', each one having a 'scene').
- It makes me wonder how would other Roger's ballads sound with Brian's voice (e.g. 'Days of Our Lives', 'Foreign Sand').
- The guitar sound is great, but I think Brian tried too hard to be Queen-esque, being one of the very very very few cases where he did NOT work for the song. In that sense, it deserves "only" 9.5 out of 10 IMO.
- Great arrangement, but it's far from being the "epic" Dr May described.
- They desperately need a bass player (even if it's a session one and doesn't get included into the "Queen" name). Not necessarily John, but anybody who's capable of playing a professional melodic thing there.
- I think an acoustic piano would've been much better than the background synth. Brian's a very good keyboard player, and so is Paul, so it's sort of a waste putting that simple pad IMO.
- It's a very good 'trade card' for the collaboration between the three of them.
- Good drums, but I don't like the way they mixed the acoustic part.
- In spite of being quite detailed, it's not too dense or overwhelming, so they did a fine job all in all.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]- I think an acoustic piano would've been much better [/QUOTE]
Thank you. I completely agree.
Thank you. I completely agree.
Yes, a real bass player is missing in the song. The bass line is very, very simple, too simple compared to what John did.
My only "real" complaint, as it would pertain to a whole record. This song was a good teaser, a way for them to put a toe in to test the water, as it were.
My only "real" complaint, as it would pertain to a whole record. This song was a good teaser, a way for them to put a toe in to test the water, as it were.
I think many people around here knows better how to do a queen song than Roger or brian ;).
And I still get a little disappointed reading that they shouldn't use the name "Queen", because freddie's ashes would be upset...
Come on! If they want to use that name, let them do it. I prefer to see "Queen", than "Queen+Paul rodgers" or "Half Queen+something" or something like that. It's just a name... Many people here doesn't accept the fact that freddie is gone and John is probably jer***g o** somewhere on Timbuctu... (Not for real, of course).
I enjoy the song... yes, it could be better produced, yes, I don't like some effects, but I think that the most important thing here is that we finally have a song that is played by Brian, Roger and Paul, and is something "new" (and i mean, this song wasn't sung by freddie, so we can't compare). This is the first studio snippet of what could be a new Queen album with Paul, and i'm very excited with this.
And I still get a little disappointed reading that they shouldn't use the name "Queen", because freddie's ashes would be upset...
Come on! If they want to use that name, let them do it. I prefer to see "Queen", than "Queen+Paul rodgers" or "Half Queen+something" or something like that. It's just a name... Many people here doesn't accept the fact that freddie is gone and John is probably jer***g o** somewhere on Timbuctu... (Not for real, of course).
I enjoy the song... yes, it could be better produced, yes, I don't like some effects, but I think that the most important thing here is that we finally have a song that is played by Brian, Roger and Paul, and is something "new" (and i mean, this song wasn't sung by freddie, so we can't compare). This is the first studio snippet of what could be a new Queen album with Paul, and i'm very excited with this.
I'd just like to say this is a great thread, No name calling or nastiness, just differing opinions being shared-great.
I don't have too much more to add to the earlier comments other than hearing this version has given me a newfound respect for Roger's solo/acoustic performance during the Q+PR tour.
The opening synth chord sounded like a false start that they forgot to remove, Roger and Brian's vocals were rather synthesised/echoey/generated too which was a shame as this simple song matches a plaintive, bare vocal very well.
Another thing that struck me during the build up: I felt they were kind of saying.'here it comes....here's Paul, our vocalist- BOOM!', a kind of cacophony of Queen sound (well, drums and guitar) that would normally amaze and impress suddenly cluttered the fragile structure of the tune in order to make way for Paul's belting vocals. As ern2150 already mentioned the elongated 'meeeee-eeeee' at 3.53 was jarring and seemed to take something away from the important message that the song was sending.
That said,I do have high standards for the Queen guys but I'd still rate this music as far superior to 80% of today's other popular music output and the cause behind the song is what we should focus on here.
I wish them the best of luck with the new album. I have no problems with them still working, I want them to-even a little Queen is better than none but I just wish I could feel more excited about the prospect.
I don't have too much more to add to the earlier comments other than hearing this version has given me a newfound respect for Roger's solo/acoustic performance during the Q+PR tour.
The opening synth chord sounded like a false start that they forgot to remove, Roger and Brian's vocals were rather synthesised/echoey/generated too which was a shame as this simple song matches a plaintive, bare vocal very well.
Another thing that struck me during the build up: I felt they were kind of saying.'here it comes....here's Paul, our vocalist- BOOM!', a kind of cacophony of Queen sound (well, drums and guitar) that would normally amaze and impress suddenly cluttered the fragile structure of the tune in order to make way for Paul's belting vocals. As ern2150 already mentioned the elongated 'meeeee-eeeee' at 3.53 was jarring and seemed to take something away from the important message that the song was sending.
That said,I do have high standards for the Queen guys but I'd still rate this music as far superior to 80% of today's other popular music output and the cause behind the song is what we should focus on here.
I wish them the best of luck with the new album. I have no problems with them still working, I want them to-even a little Queen is better than none but I just wish I could feel more excited about the prospect.
As Benn says you have to remember that SINT was done by half of Queen and so therefore this song if it were done by all of them would probably not see the light of day.
That said, after 4 days i still think its exellent and am still playing it regularly.
Now on the subject of Paul Rodgers.
You have to remember that he is essentially a blues/rock singer.He would be more suited to singing somrthing like White Man for example.
I have followed him and his music since about 1970 through Free and Bad Company etc.
In SINT you hear his particular style of singing coming through.
SINT might well be an appetite whetter for the forth coming album as with the acquisition of Paul on vocals and guitar and piano the album may well be a lot heavier than Queen have did in the eighties and nineties.In a ways i hope so.
That said, after 4 days i still think its exellent and am still playing it regularly.
Now on the subject of Paul Rodgers.
You have to remember that he is essentially a blues/rock singer.He would be more suited to singing somrthing like White Man for example.
I have followed him and his music since about 1970 through Free and Bad Company etc.
In SINT you hear his particular style of singing coming through.
SINT might well be an appetite whetter for the forth coming album as with the acquisition of Paul on vocals and guitar and piano the album may well be a lot heavier than Queen have did in the eighties and nineties.In a ways i hope so.
I agree about the bass- especially when the songs will get more complecated than SINT (will they?) we will miss a REAL bass player...
I am worried the whole album may sound like Brian's ANOTHER WORLD- good for a Brian's solo effort but not for a Queen project...
I am worried the whole album may sound like Brian's ANOTHER WORLD- good for a Brian's solo effort but not for a Queen project...
> I think many people around here knows better how to do a queen song than Roger or brian ;).
In fact, sometimes you see things better from the outside.
> And I still get a little disappointed reading that they shouldn't use the name "Queen", because freddie's ashes would be upset...
I don't give a fuck about Freddie's ashes. But MY opinion is that it's completely COWARD to name themselves Queen, as if they needed that to justify themselves. They should justify their work by its quality, which is marvellous in its own way. Again, all of that in MY opinion.
> If they want to use that name, let them do it.
I can't stop them from doing it. But I can complain about that in an internet forum. So I'll keep doing it. Ever heard about freedom of speech?
> It's just a name...
So... they should change it.
> Many people here doesn't accept the fact that freddie is gone and John is probably jer***g o** somewhere on Timbuctu... (Not for real, of course).
So ... they should use another name.
> You have to remember that he is essentially a blues/rock singer.
But I think he's done an excellent job in other styles. He's a great, great musician.
In fact, sometimes you see things better from the outside.
> And I still get a little disappointed reading that they shouldn't use the name "Queen", because freddie's ashes would be upset...
I don't give a fuck about Freddie's ashes. But MY opinion is that it's completely COWARD to name themselves Queen, as if they needed that to justify themselves. They should justify their work by its quality, which is marvellous in its own way. Again, all of that in MY opinion.
> If they want to use that name, let them do it.
I can't stop them from doing it. But I can complain about that in an internet forum. So I'll keep doing it. Ever heard about freedom of speech?
> It's just a name...
So... they should change it.
> Many people here doesn't accept the fact that freddie is gone and John is probably jer***g o** somewhere on Timbuctu... (Not for real, of course).
So ... they should use another name.
> You have to remember that he is essentially a blues/rock singer.
But I think he's done an excellent job in other styles. He's a great, great musician.
hi monty(andy)its stu and dyan totally agree but lets make it short the song is no bad but paul just cant sing he sound like a male mariah carey just torture even worse than mr depressing(tim staffell)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]studyan wrote: [/QUOTENAME]hi monty(andy)its stu and dyan totally agree but lets make it short the song is no bad but paul just cant sing he sound like a male mariah carey just torture even worse than mr depressing(tim staffell)[/QUOTE]Disagree...Paul can sing.
Fabulous singer he is too.
Somebody says most Queen fans know how to write better than Roger and Brian.
Well why dont you Queenzoners write a song and put it on here.
See if you can better SINT.Go on give it a try!!!
Fabulous singer he is too.
Somebody says most Queen fans know how to write better than Roger and Brian.
Well why dont you Queenzoners write a song and put it on here.
See if you can better SINT.Go on give it a try!!!
Maybe most of us can't write something better than SINT. But Brian, Roger and Paul absolutely can. Or at least they can make a much better SINT.
So ... it's mediocre to do something which is far below their own level.
Still, as I said, 'Say It's Not True' is a great song and a great record. But could have Roger, Brian and Paul made a much better one? Of course. Considering, for instance, that Brian and Paul are both great piano players, having them put that stupid synth in the beginning is plain sad.
So ... it's mediocre to do something which is far below their own level.
Still, as I said, 'Say It's Not True' is a great song and a great record. But could have Roger, Brian and Paul made a much better one? Of course. Considering, for instance, that Brian and Paul are both great piano players, having them put that stupid synth in the beginning is plain sad.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Considering, for instance, that Brian and Paul are both great piano players, having them put that stupid synth in the beginning is plain sad.[/QUOTE]
Absolutely agree.
But than again it's nothing new- we had that since 1986 (Freddie was actually even better piano player than B. and p. put together...)
Absolutely agree.
But than again it's nothing new- we had that since 1986 (Freddie was actually even better piano player than B. and p. put together...)
I seem to be in the minority, but I actually think it's a good vocal from Roger, and one of Brian's best vocals for some time - he's actually in a comfortable register for his voice and not straining. I also thin kthat the lyrics are very goosd, very powerful and hit home with the exact nature intended. I think the problem a lot of people have with them is that they are very untypical of 'Queen' of old, and being of a political/social nature this doesn't sit well with some people.
As much as I appreciate the quality of Paul's voice, the actual method of his delivery in recent years is really starting to grate on me - too much trying to do a Mariah Carey type warbling up and down on too many notes unnecessarily in my opinion.
Once everything 'kicks in' it has a live feel to it as opposed to a really studio based production like Queen of old, and this seems to tie in with Roger's recent quotes of them all playing 'live' together in the stuido on a lot of new stuff.
Unfortunately the quality of the mp3 file available for download isn't great, but from what we've got the drum sound seems really good, but I agree with some others that Brian's pieces seem a bit 'Brian by numbers' and are a bit over the top in places and not as instantly memorable or melodic as his past works.
All in all, a good start, and it will be interesting to see what comes out next!
As much as I appreciate the quality of Paul's voice, the actual method of his delivery in recent years is really starting to grate on me - too much trying to do a Mariah Carey type warbling up and down on too many notes unnecessarily in my opinion.
Once everything 'kicks in' it has a live feel to it as opposed to a really studio based production like Queen of old, and this seems to tie in with Roger's recent quotes of them all playing 'live' together in the stuido on a lot of new stuff.
Unfortunately the quality of the mp3 file available for download isn't great, but from what we've got the drum sound seems really good, but I agree with some others that Brian's pieces seem a bit 'Brian by numbers' and are a bit over the top in places and not as instantly memorable or melodic as his past works.
All in all, a good start, and it will be interesting to see what comes out next!