On 'Body Language' there's very little of Brian May. On 'Cool Cat' there's no Brian May. On the rest of the album there is more than a little, full stop. Of course, there's the subjective point of whether he 'felt' what he was playing or whatever, but unless you can read minds there's no way to know that. It's like speculating whether he had a red t-shirt while recording the tracks.
And what's your excuse for the drum computer thing?
By the way, your comments about me being full of theory are again a personal attack, which suggests you either have an obsession with me, or you simply can't accept you were wrong. In either case, you're a lot closer to the 'wall' you mention. And as you correctly pointed out, you contradicted yourself, adding to the overall possibility that you [i]do[/i] have a lot of insecurities.
[/QUOTE]
This problem arises once again because you read some comments too literally. When Soundfreak said there's little of Brian may on Hot Space, I doubt very much anyone but you assumed that meant literally that Brian May only plays a little bit on each song or not at all. Is it likely Soundfreak meant that Brian May was present for 79% of Jazz, 80% of Queen II, but only 24% of Hot Space?* What I assumed he/she meant is that the traditional Brian May "sound", style and trademarks that we all know and loved up to that point are either not present, or are so modified or muted that they are almost unrecognisable.
* those figures are made up to illustrate my point -- dont take them literally...
Sebastian · Member since
In that case, his/her statement is phrased the wrong way. And what's the explanation for Roger's drumming allegedly being mostly replaced by computers?
I suppose I can say most songs in [i]Hot Space[/i] were co-written by Bowie. Oh wait... they weren't. Whatever... don't take things literally.
Moreover, again, there's no excuse for personal attacks. Instead of addressing the contents of the problem/discussion (as opposed to what you've done when explaining the trademark sound thing), this user's been making offensive comments about me, when I haven't attacked him/her in any way. Is there an excuse for that? No, there isn't.
Some things are obviously not meant to be taken literally (e.g. Fred's comment about 'Bo Rhap' having them recreating a 160-200 voices effect, unknowingly creating a false legend when people indeed took it way too literally). Others are. Soundfreak commented on the album and in the process made some wrong statements such as multitracking no longer being exciting (OK, that one's partly subjective, but bottomline we can't read minds and know if they thought it was exciting or not), 'Dust' not having typical guitar sounds (it does, very few but it does), having too little of Brian May (it hasn't), and Roger's drums being replaced by a computer (which only happened in a minority of cases). Those things aren't subjective or based on personal opinion. Either an album has too little of Brian May or it doesn't. Either most of the drums are computeriser or they aren't. Either a song has typical guitar sounds or it doesn't (of course, the term 'typical' is subjective there).
Holly2003 · Member since
No, Soundfreak wasn't wrong about too little "Brian May", IMO he/she just phrased it in a way that he/she knew would be understood by most i.e. in an informal way that's appropriate for a forum like this. To be clearer, he'she could have put 'Brian May' in inverted commas to emphasise that he/she didn't mean for it to be taken literally (e.g. there's too little 'Queen' in Queen's Hot Space album), but in informal English, people seldom do this, nor should we expect them to, especially when the meaning is fairly clear anyway.
Sebastian · Member since
Let's say the 'too little' thing's a grey area (though I disagree, but I suppose I agree to disagree). What's the excuse for drums allegedly being chiefly computerised? What's the excuse for those nasty comments about me done entirely without provocation?
And by the way, if you think I'm taking things too literally, then the solution's simple: don't take my comments literally. If I say 'there's not too little of Brian in [i]Hot Space[/i]', you can assume I'm saying it metaphorically. Or is it OK for you to take my comments literally but it's not OK for me to take yours?
Holly2003 · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]
Let's say the 'too little' thing's a grey area (though I disagree, but I suppose I agree to disagree). What's the excuse for drums allegedly being chiefly computerised? What's the excuse for those nasty comments about me done entirely without provocation?
And by the way, if you think I'm taking things too literally, then the solution's simple: don't take my comments literally. If I say 'there's not too little of Brian in [i]Hot Space[/i]', you can assume I'm saying it metaphorically. Or is it OK for you to take my comments literally but it's not OK for me to take yours?
[/QUOTE]
I don't know enough about drums to comment, but I suspect Soundfreak was exagerating for effect -- indulging in a bit of hyperbole. Again, this is acceptable and normal in informal conversation. Certainly, I don't think Soundfreak expected to be taken to task over this in the way you've done, which probably explains the hostility. The flipside to that is how your own obtuseness and bluntness has also contributed to that. Fair enough? I don't get your last point: I try to understand what people write in the context of the forum (as opposed to comments in a book, academic journal etc). Sometimes they are sarcastic, ironic etc. I use my best judgment.
brENsKi · Member since
as an album i think the production sucks - which makes me turn it off. most rock bands were messing about with synthesised crap in the early 80s...that didn't make it bad, what made it bad was overuse of synths and a very tinny/hollow production.
the whole album sounds like it was recorded on someone's home tape recorder - with the dolby button pushed right in.. and for that i hate it
Sebastian · Member since
> I suspect Soundfreak was exagerating for effect -- indulging in a bit of hyperbole.
Maybe. But that's how false rumours are created (remember the 180 voices thing). I merely stated that it wasn't like that and commented on how it's usually taken for granted that the album was machine-dominated when in reality it wasn't. There was nothing disrespectful in my message. Which makes it completely uncalled for that his/her replies contained personal attacks.
> Again, this is acceptable and normal in informal conversation.
Of course it is. But stating the album had mostly human drums and more than 'too little' of Brian is also acceptable and normal in informal conversation. There was nothing disrespectful in my message. Which makes it completely uncalled for that his/her replies contained personal attacks.
> Certainly, I don't think Soundfreak expected to be taken to task over this in the way you've done
Which way exactly? Did I insult that person? Call him/her 'Mr Everybody Else Is Wrong'? Made nasty comments? No I, didn't.There was nothing disrespectful in my message. Which makes it completely uncalled for that his/her replies contained personal attacks.
> that is how your own obtuseness and bluntness has also contributed to that.
Obtuseness and bluntness how? Is it OK for a person to say something false because they're not meant to be taken literally but it's not OK for another person to correct a false statement because that makes them obtuse and blunt? Double standards.
> I try to understand what people write in the context of the forum (as opposed to comments in a book, academic journal etc).
So do I. If someone says '[i]Hot Space[/i] is the best album ever', good for them. It's not 'true' or 'false' as it depends on personal opinion. If someone says the album's dominated by drum computers... well, it isn't.
> Sometimes they are sarcastic, ironic etc. I use my best judgment.
So, if somebody else says '[i]Hot Space[/i] has too little of Brian' it's simply a figure of speech, but if I say' no, it doesn't' it's a person being obtuse and blunt?
Winter Land Man · Member since
There can't be any winning arguments with Sebastian, he's pretty much a genious. I don't know if he's a true musician or not, but he knows what he's talking about... and he will go on forever. I love him for it!
Sebastian · Member since
Of course there can be 'winning' (though 'winning' in an on-line forum is not quite an honour anyway), and of course I'm not a genius. I've been wrong many, many times, and will continue to be, pretty much like anybody else. However, it doesn't mean I'm giving in before any poster who simply can't stand corrected or who has to direct personal attacks when running out of arguments. And it doesn't mean I've got to take crap from other people just because they want to believe the earth is flat and whoever states it isn't is merely stubborn, narrow-minded or whatever.
Holly2003 · Member since
I don't have anything to add. What I've said is fairly clear. Whether you take it onboard or not is up to you,
maxpower · Member since
As Freddie said "it's only a bloody record"
Sebastian · Member since
I've always thought that alleged nonchalant attitude by Freddie was a defence mechanism. TBH, he seemed (even to a person who doesn't know him at all, like it's my case) to care a lot about things he stated weren't not too important. I mean, if he really thought other people's opinions didn't make any difference, why bother addressing them?
Same for Brian and the press.
Unknown
"Hot Space" may be the least interesting Queen-album, but its still a hell of a fun.
Great 80s disco tunes (my favourites are "action this day", classic "under pressure", "body language" plus great ballad "las palabres de amore")
bought this in spring 1993 - fuck, so many years habe passed .......
Cheers, Peter Cetera aka Chris
plumrach · Member since
I like it, but then i like disco and dance type music anyway
