I recently disvovered Mad the Swine on youtube. A great song. On queenpedia, it says that the song didn't feature on the first album over a disagreement with Roy Thomas Baker concerning the drum sound and percussion. Could someone go into greater detail as to why it failed to make the album? Thanks.
steven 35638 · Member since
Since the song is a first person account of Jesus as he saves his followers, it has been speculated that its overly religious tones may have been a factor in its exclusion. Of course, as you mentioned, the disagreement between Roger, Freddie, and Roy Thomas Baker over the percussion sound is certainly a more realistic reason for the exclusion. That's about as much as I know. Hopefully someone will enlighten us!
Penetration_Guru · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
On queenpedia, it says that the song didn't feature on the first album over a disagreement with Roy Thomas Baker concerning the drum sound and percussion. Could someone go into greater detail as to why it failed to make the album? Thanks.
[/QUOTE]
Certainly. The band had a disagreement with the producer (whose name was Roy Thomas Baker) concerning the production of the track, specifically the drum and/or percussion sounds.
Does this enlighten you sufficiently?
mechaman89 · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Steven wrote: [/b]
Since the song is a first person account of Jesus as he saves his followers, it has been speculated that its overly religious tones may have been a factor in its exclusion. Of course, as you mentioned, the disagreement between Roger, Freddie, and Roy Thomas Baker over the percussion sound is certainly a more realistic reason for the exclusion. That's about as much as I know. Hopefully someone will enlighten us![/QUOTE]
Maybe they didn't want two "religious"songs on the album?Personally,i think Mad the Swine is the better of the two.
i-Fred · Member since
coz its shit
mike hunt · Member since
mad the swine is a good song, but jesus was the better of the 2. i don't think it would have fit into the album.
August R. · Member since
I've heard the drum sound disagreement explanaton as well, but come to think of it, Liar has religious tones as well. 3 religious songs would definately have been too much. They would have sounded like Led Zeppelin-meets-Jesus Christ Superstar if they had put yet another religious song onto the first album.
Claudio_CQI · Member since
we all know the official reason related to the poor production of drums in Mad. But, personally, I think a great song as March of the Black Queen (from the second album) has even worst drums sound (unfortunately). So I really don't know the true reason of this exclusion.
Stay right
Cla
john bodega · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]August R. wrote:[/b]
They would have sounded like Led Zeppelin-meets-Jesus Christ Superstar if they had put yet another religious song onto the first album
[/QUOTE]
... I would've bought that.
Bigfish · Member since
I have it on the 12inch of HEADLONG if I remember correctly. I think it was really just down to quality. It´s a little repetitive and meandering for my ears. I don´t think it stands up too well and yes I believe JESUS is a little better. Regardless of technical arguments if it had been good enough I think it would have made it on there.
liam · Member since
i think its a great song that should have definetly been on the album instead of Jesus.
Also, some of the songs from Queen 2 have a much worse drum sound and are nearly inaudible in a number of spots ie. father to son and march of the black queen.
Micrówave · Member since
The record company didn't like the backwards Satanic messages that were on the track.
Instead, they went with Doin' Alright. When you play it backwards you can clearly hear
"Buy Queen II".
