That's interesting about not feeling that TCR was a proper studio album, Amazon. Without (or with!) an essay, why would you feel this way? For me, MIH isn't a studio (or Queen) album, just curious about your TCR thoughts.
Amazon · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
Fair enough. As fans of music, we're inclined to think that way. But Brian has recently said it was a proper Queen album, so who are we to say otherwise?
[/QUOTE]
Of course the producer would say that... but at the end of the day it's about how each one of us feels about the concept of 'proper (Queen) album'. IMO, 'Flash' is, 'Made in Heaven' isn't, and there could be thousands of people agreeing and disagreeing with both.
Word meanings and concepts aren't an exact science.
[/QUOTE]
Sebastian, this is as good a time as any, but I've been to your site a few times, and although I think it's wonderful, [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] there were a couple of things on which I disagreed. One related to MIH. Why do you not consider it to be a proper album? I believe that your objection is due to so much 'recycled' material, but does it really matter when a song was written and whether it was specifically intended for a particular album? Take Let Me Live. I'll say straight off that I love this song, but regardless of taste, even if Queen wrote it in 1983, does that truly affect the legitimacy of MIH? Afterall, several other songs, including WATC were written previously. Also, if one takes the covers of 4 solo songs, how does that affect MIH, considering that so many of Led Zeppelin's early albums featured covers?
Amazon · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sheer Brass Neck wrote: [/b]
That's interesting about not feeling that TCR was a proper studio album, Amazon. Without (or with!) an essay, why would you feel this way? For me, MIH isn't a studio (or Queen) album, just curious about your TCR thoughts.[/QUOTE]
Well, I actually misspoke. I do acknowledge that it is a proper studio album, just like any other proper studio album. However I don't consider it to be a proper Queen album. It's more of a 'Queen' album for me, rather than a Queen album. My partner refers to it as a non-classical Queen album, and I think she's right. [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] Certainly I'm with Sebastain and others who feel that that the name Queen shouldn't have been used for the album. I guess I referred to it as a non-proper album in this discussion as I wanted to make clear that no matter what status is given to Flash, IMO it will always have more legitimacy among Queen works than TCR.
BTW, why do you not consider MIH to be a studio or Queen album?
Sheer Brass Neck · Member since
Thanks Amazon. I'm in the "not Queen" camp for TCR myself! [/QUOTE]MIH isn't a studio album, and this could open up a can of worms and "but only Roger plays on Fight from the Inside so does that mean it's not a Queen song?" type of discussions, so here's why I don't think it is. The context of songs were changed to fir the concept of MIH, which is not a group effort when one of the group (who wrote most of the material) is dead. The song MIH from Mr. Bad Guy, was a fairly upbeat ditty, and after the last line where Freddie sings "written in the stars", it fades out over a major key piano sequence. But on MIH, it became plodding with the big Queen drums, a solo that wasn't there before, and worst of all, for me, the ending after "written in the stars", is dark and minor keyed. It's about Freddie, and the album being "made" while Freddie was in "heaven." The original song may have been about life in general being a piece of heaven. It could have been about Freddie's night at London gay club "Heaven" in the 80s. But the MIH version changed the tone, which I find dishonest. It's not the song the author wanted (nor was IWBTLY), it's a patchwork that was meant to make songs, finished or otherwise, solo or discarded, sound like a Queen album. To do so without the input of arguably the driving creative force made it a cynical, manipulative album for me. Some people love it though, musically I don't, conceptually I think it's dishonest. [/QUOTE]
Amazon · Member since
That's really interesting SBN. I don't own either of Freddie's solo albums (yet) so I didn't know that. Can I ask; musically aside, knowing that by the time of his death Freddie was working on another Queen album so MIH didn't come out of nowhere, does that make it less dishonest in your eyes?
Pim Derks · Member since
[QUOTE] But the MIH version changed the tone, which I find dishonest. It's
not the song the author wanted (nor was IWBTLY), it's a patchwork that
was meant to make songs, finished or otherwise, solo or discarded,
sound like a Queen album. To do so without the input of arguably the
driving creative force made it a cynical, manipulative album for me.
Some people love it though, musically I don't, conceptually I think
it's dishonest.
[/QUOTE]
The tracks Made In Heaven and I Was Born To Love You show exactly why Freddie was NOT Queen and people should stop their wining about Freddie being the almighty genius in the band. While the Freddie versions are crappy 80's tunes which were dated the day after they were released, the 1995 Queen versions are among the best tracks in their catalogue and still kick ass to this day - almost 14 years later.
Patchwork or not, Made In Heaven has always been one of my favourite Queen-albums. Together with Innuendo the only post-Game output which is essential listening IMO.
Sebastian · Member since
There are several interesting points there. I'm gonna put my opinion and of course you're more than entitled to agree or disagree with it:
[i]Man from Manhattan[/i] features the two Queen members who wrote most of the songs, did most of the arrangements, participated the most in production, were most important to the band's image and shared the largest amount of fans. But it's still not a Queen song or a Queen + Eddie song. Reason? No John & no Roger = no Queen.
[i]Bijou[/i] is written, arranged and performed by the two Queen members who wrote most of the songs, did most of the arrangements, participated the most in production, were most important to the band's image and shared the largest amount of fans. But it's still a Queen song since it's co-produced (at least executively) by Roger and John, and it had to go through their approval to be on the album.
[i]You Nearly Did Me In [/i]features three Queen members, but it's still not a Queen song or a Queen + Ian song. No John, no Queen. Same for the kids' [i]Who Wants to Live Forever[/i] - no Freddie, no Queen. Same , of course, for 'The Cosmos Rocks'. All of that IMHO.
Btw, [i]Fight From the Inside[/i] features Brian.
As for 'Made in Heaven', I think it's an extraordinary project (music-wise) and it's incredibly well-produced. But, it's not a proper album for me, considering only three songs are post-Innuendo. Sure, [i]Champions[/i] and [i]Sheer Heart Attack[/i] were written before 'News', but still 80+% of the album is brand new and the recordings are also brand new (AFAIK). In 'Made in Heaven', most of the vocal and piano tracks had come from many years earlier. It's more a sort of compilation/rework with three post-'Innuendo' songs, marketed (at the moment) as an album made by a dying Fred begging B+R to write songs for him (which is paradoxical since the three post-'Innuendo' things are written or co-written by Mercury himself). Great project, but not a Queen album IMO.
But, when (rather than [i]if[/i]) I make a new version of my website I am gonna include MIH. The time will come...
Amazon · Member since
Pim Derks, I agree with you. MIH is one of my favourite Queen albums as well, and was IMO their best album since The Game (perhaps even since some of their 70's works but I'm not sure about that.)
Sebastian, I found your post to be fascinating. I take it that you also don't consider 'No-One But You' to be a Queen song since it didn't feature Freddie?
Sheer Brass Neck · Member since
Pim, when you say, "The tracks Made In Heaven and I Was Born To Love You show exactly why Freddie was NOT Queen and people should stop their wining about Freddie being the almighty genius in the band. While the Freddie versions are crappy 80's tunes which were dated the day after they were released, the 1995 Queen versions are among the best tracks in their catalogue and still kick ass to this day - almost 14 years later", that's not the point. I agree 100% that the recording and playing is better. However, when Freddie WROTE and RECORDED those songs for Mr. Bad Guy, one would have to assume as the artist of a large band, he had some degree of creative control. I don't think Freddie wanted Mr. Bad Guy to be Queen-singer-does-Queenlikesongs-without-Queen. So what we got is an album of songs, dated or not, that came out exactly how Freddie wanted them to. Now he passes away, we're hearing instrumentation and arrangements that he had no say in (there goes the band's democratic process, plus Brian said the song author always got final say), plus for me, manipulating key changes that the author didn't want takes a song like MIH into maudlin, creepy territory. IMO.
Let's say Brian passed away, and Freddie was in control of the posthumous recording process. Would we say it would be okay for Freddie and the remaining members to change a song like Back to the Light into a brooding minor key mopefest? That song was about Brian's struggles to return to mental health and happiness, and despite the subject matter, is musically optimistic. Freddie could construe it as a mopey ballad when it was redone, which to me is a disservice to the author, and creatively dishonest. If that's the case, let's go back and make Bohemian Rhapsody more hip-hop sounding, Long Away techno, and let's give that Mona Lisa a little bit of a frown for these times. I'm sure that DaVinci would approve of his vision being reworked.
Sebastian · Member since
After all, Alice Baily was Da Vinci's favourite painter.
Pim Derks · Member since
[QUOTE]Sebastian, I found your post to be fascinating. I take it that you also don't consider 'No-One But You' to be a Queen song since it didn't feature Freddie?
[/QUOTE]
I believe Sebastian considers it 'the best Queen song even though it isn't a Queen song'. Or something totally ridiculous like that.
Sebastian · Member since
No, I don't consider it the best Queen song. I consider it better than most Queen songs (maybe it'd only lose to [i]'39[/i]), but it's not a Queen song IMO. And it's not something ridiculous at all. What's the need to cyber-bully someone just because you disagree with them?
Fuck me... that thread was from April 2008... that's one of the saddest things i've ever witnessed on this site. Have you actually waited all that time to pull him up on that.
Back to discussion... MIh is def a Queen album IMO, and the Freddie tracks do sound better reworked by the group... as did Roger's Heaven for Everyone sound better reworked on MIH, as would prob any of their solo works.... Brian included, should they have more input from the rest of the band. Queen where alsways WAY better than anything individual.
Maybe Barcelona would be the exception.
That bit above is still freaky as fuck tho... ha ha... you either hate this guy or have a very good memory, either way... weird.
