hotspace vs thriller

In fact it doesnt matter what style the album is, if it is a dance/funk record or rock album or whatever style it is.

All that matters are the compositions. In that way. TCR and Hot Space have something in common: the majority of the tracks are mediocre compositions. I even think that TCR is worse than Hot Space because i dont hear any composition that comes close to Under Pressure for example. That saved the album in being even worse.

Thriller has only great compositions, like also A Night At The Opera has. Look at U2, they did a complete change of style with Achtung Baby back in 1991. The reason why the album is still sounding fresh is because of the great compositions.

[QUOTE]





[b]Sunshine wrote: [/b]



All that matters are the compositions.
 

[/QUOTE]
I disagree. Compositions are important, but so is performance. Would [i]Love of My Life[/i] have been that beautiful if it'd been sung by Roger Waters and had Roger Taylor on bass, Freddie Mercury on guitars and Ringo Starr on piano? Would Saint-Saens's Piano Concerto No 2 sound brill with John Deacon playing it? Would [i]Bohemian Rhapsody[/i] be as great if recorded by The Ramones?

And then there's production as well... same story.

While 'Hot Space' didn't have masterpieces, the problem was IMO about performances. With better playing (as it happened on stage), some of those tracks could be, if not 'excellent' or 'marvellous', at least 'reasonably good'. Take [i]Staying Power[/i] for instance, or [i]Back Chat[/i].

Likewise, 'A Night at the Opera', if recorded a la 'Hot Space', would be sub-par. Imagine shitty drum-machines replacing Roger on [i]Sweet Lady[/i], a cheesy synth-bass walking all over [i]Love of My Life[/i], replacing Brian's guitar jazz band on [i]Good Company[/i] by a brass section from KC & The Sunshine Band's rejects, [i]Bo Rhap[/i]'s rock section with e-drums and synth-bass, [i]Prophet's Song[/i]'s canon being replaced by a synth-arpeggiator break, [i]I'm in Love With My Car[/i] having only one (clean) guitar appearing sporadically and replacing the rock flavour by a disco one, and the national anthem having a JP-8 'monster-bass' or 'Flash Gordon'-esque pads rather than the guitar ensemble.

I think we can't compare HOTSPACE with THRILLER. It' two diferent thinks, like you compare steve wonders with guns and roses. Queen make diferent musics comparing with MJ... So it's no fair dispute... I can say that Thriller is a suck,, because i'm in a Queen forum,, but i don't say that because i respec the forum and MJ and i like MJ.. So i think we can't do a fair comparation!

this is my opinion!!!

[QUOTE]

[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]

[QUOTE]

 



 



 



 



 



 



 



[b]Sheer Brass Neck wrote: [/b]



 



 



 



Queen in their later years (even now with QPR) desperately needed the opinions of people who aren't yes men.  Having someone thing that the type of music being played on TCR would win an audience in 2008 was absurd, with cliched mid-tempo rockers.  They've needed to be freshened up artistically many times, but when you've their success would you listen to an outsider?



 



 



 

[/QUOTE]
This is exactly what Rush did with their latest album, Snakes And Arrows.  They got a producer who wasn't a yes-man, who would tell them when something was going wrong or didn't sound good.  Result: the strongest Rush album since Signals, or even Moving Pictures.


[/QUOTE]



I always said that, snakes and arrows is the best rush album since signals. A solid album.

I'm a bit 'ashamed' about never having listened to Rush (not on purpose anyway). Got to do it sooner or later.

Rush arn't for everyone, but give them a try.  You'll be impressed I think.

[QUOTE]





[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]



I'm a bit 'ashamed' about never having listened to Rush (not on purpose anyway). Got to do it sooner or later.

[/QUOTE]
Start with the Rush In Rio DVD.

I've yet to find a fan of rock music who didn't enjoy that to some degree.  Music aside (amazing and passionate as it is), the audience are worth the price of admission.

[QUOTE]

[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]

[QUOTE]

 



 



 



[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]



 



I'm a bit 'ashamed' about never having listened to Rush (not on purpose anyway). Got to do it sooner or later.



 

[/QUOTE]
Start with the Rush In Rio DVD.

I've yet to find a fan of rock music who didn't enjoy that to some degree.  Music aside (amazing and passionate as it is), the audience are worth the price of admission.

[/QUOTE]
Ohhh I don't know about that. Geddy's voice isn't great on that show and since he's got one of those 'love it or hate it' voices then maybe it's better to point a first time listener towards a better-sounding show (although I agree the crowd was amazing, as all South American audiences seem to be). I would suggest Exit Stage Left as the live album and either Moving Pictures or Signals as the studio album.

Fair enough.

Exit Stage Left then.  The focus really is on the music, and it's them at their creative peak.

[QUOTE]

[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]

[QUOTE]

 



 



 



[b]Sunshine wrote: [/b]



 



All that matters are the compositions.
 



 

[/QUOTE]
I disagree. Compositions are important, but so is performance. Would [i]Love of My Life[/i] have been that beautiful if it'd been sung by Roger Waters and had Roger Taylor on bass, Freddie Mercury on guitars and Ringo Starr on piano? Would Saint-Saens's Piano Concerto No 2 sound brill with John Deacon playing it? Would [i]Bohemian Rhapsody[/i] be as great if recorded by The Ramones?

And then there's production as well... same story.

While 'Hot Space' didn't have masterpieces, the problem was IMO about performances. With better playing (as it happened on stage), some of those tracks could be, if not 'excellent' or 'marvellous', at least 'reasonably good'. Take [i]Staying Power[/i] for instance, or [i]Back Chat[/i].

Likewise, 'A Night at the Opera', if recorded a la 'Hot Space', would be sub-par. Imagine shitty drum-machines replacing Roger on [i]Sweet Lady[/i], a cheesy synth-bass walking all over [i]Love of My Life[/i], replacing Brian's guitar jazz band on [i]Good Company[/i] by a brass section from KC & The Sunshine Band's rejects, [i]Bo Rhap[/i]'s rock section with e-drums and synth-bass, [i]Prophet's Song[/i]'s canon being replaced by a synth-arpeggiator break, [i]I'm in Love With My Car[/i] having only one (clean) guitar appearing sporadically and replacing the rock flavour by a disco one, and the national anthem having a JP-8 'monster-bass' or 'Flash Gordon'-esque pads rather than the guitar ensemble.
[/QUOTE]

Hi Sebastian,

Yeah you are right. My writing was too one dimensional. What i meant was that it starts with good compositions and yes you are right, a good composition can be fucked up like you describe above.
I just don't think there are so many great compositions on Hot Space, certainly not compared to Thriller. The stand out song is obviously Under Pressure and the album could have been saved from ' Bad to Mediocre' like most people's opinion is at the moment, to reasonably good if the production and performances would have been spot on.

Body Language, Dancer, Put Out The Fire, Life is Real, Calling All Girls, i think it is all crap. I really like Back Chat live at the Bowl, but it sounds too flat and uninspired on the record. Staying Power is also nothing exceptional..hmm..no i think Hot Space is a failure in Queen's catalogue. I also think Brian is not allowed to use Hot Space and Thriller in one sentence, it is light years away in terms of quality, performance and production.

Though i think A Night At The Opera would have been hilarious in the excution like you describe:)