Sebastian
Very good point. Great info.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Wiley
I think Dave may be onto something here.
I remember listening to the Long Lost Retake and noticing those lyrics at the end, which Freddie used to sing live in the widely available versions I knew back then (LK, WWRY). It made sense, being a retake, that it had additional ideas and lyrics not available in the studio version. I guess everybody just assumed that the retake had been recorded after the album version but BEFORE Queen I was released, as opposed to almost 3 years later.
Hopefully someone can comment on the Instruments used and the overall sound of the LLRT recording and we can conclude something.
I remember listening to the Long Lost Retake and noticing those lyrics at the end, which Freddie used to sing live in the widely available versions I knew back then (LK, WWRY). It made sense, being a retake, that it had additional ideas and lyrics not available in the studio version. I guess everybody just assumed that the retake had been recorded after the album version but BEFORE Queen I was released, as opposed to almost 3 years later.
Hopefully someone can comment on the Instruments used and the overall sound of the LLRT recording and we can conclude something.
rhyeking
Indeed, a very good catch.
I took a moment to explore this development, listening to the various known versions I own and here's what I can add:
1) De Lane Lea Demo (1971): Starts with acoustic guitar, adds Red Special at 8 seconds and the main riff at about 11 seconds, adds percussion at 18 seconds and full drums at 24 seconds. Basically, it starts with guitar and layers the elements one at a time at the start leading into the first verse.
2) Album Version (Mike Stone Mix - June 1972): Starts with one layer of Red Special, instead of the DLL acoustic; at 8 seconds, the next layer appears, providing the main riff at 11 seconds (same as the DLL Demo); percussion counts in at 14 seconds (approximately the same as the DLL Demo); at 24 seconds, the drums kick in (again, the same as the DLL Demo).
3) BBC Version #1 (February 5th, 1973): Follows a similar structure as the Album Version, but with a few differences. It starts with one layer of guitar, then at 8 seconds *both* the second guitar and the percussion layer onto it. At 11 seconds, the main riff appears, as standard. At 17 seconds, the tapping percussion is replaced with a high-hat (about the time the percussion would normally appear for the first time). At 24 second, the drums kick in. Despite the difference in percussive layering, this recording follows the same structure as established in the DLL Demo.
4) BBC Version #2 (July 25th, 1973): Is exactly the same backing track as BBC Version #1, which the exception of a third (new) layer of guitar added throughout and new vocals by Freddie.
5) Shitkickers Version (Recorded live at The Rainbow Theatre March 31st, 1974): Starts with guitar (one layer) and percussive beat-keeping standard to the usual structure. Since it's live, without overdubs, the subtle layering is absent, but as noted, the structure is pretty much the same: guitar, percussion, riff, drums...
6) Xmas Eve Version (Recorded live at the Hammersmith Odeon, Dec. 24th, 1975): As noted by the other poster, here we see a relatively significant change. The song starts with the heavy bass drum marking time, pounding in the song before the guitar comes in via some cool feedback, similar now to the "Long Lost Re-Take" intro. Also, as noted by the previous poster, the "Get it, get it, get it, boy! Keep yourself alive!" appears here, where it is absent from the previous versions. Normally, it's variations on "All you people, keep yourself alive!"
7) Earls Court Version (Recorded live at Earls Court, June 6th, 1977: Heavy bass drum + percussive intro, with some flares from Roger. Here, Brian seems to start a bit before Roger, but Roger comes in quickly and heavily. The "Get it, get it, get it, boy! Keep yourself alive!" ends the song.
8) Houston Version (Recorded live at The Summit, Dec. 11, 1977):Heavy bass drum + percussive intro, with some flares from Roger. Previously (DLL, Album and BBC) it was guitars and more guitars until the drums kicked in later. Lastly, the "Get it, get it, get it, boy! Keep yourself alive!" ends the song.
9) Live Killers Version (1979): Heavy bass drum + percussive intro, following the altered structure seen in the Xmas Eve Version of drums leading the way and guitar following suit. "Get it, get it, get it, boy! Keep yourself alive!" ends the song.
10) Montreal Version (Nov 24th, 1981): This is a bit different because it starts with a sampling of "Sex Show" (an unreleased track from the Hot Space sessions, according to Brian in the Queen Rock Montreal commentary). However, after Brian changes keys into KYA, it follows the heavy drums + percussion + guitar intro. The song is not finished (leading instead into Roger and Brian's respective solos), so we don't hear the full ending.
So, what does it all mean? Well, in 1975 thereabouts we see a marked change in the intro to "Keep Yourself Alive," where it seems to reflect the "Long Lost Re-Take" approach, and the ending line ("Get it, get it...") appears and stays as the finale of the song (at least when performed in its entirety). Is this conclusive? No, but it's certainly compelling.
I was always open to the idea, but now I'm very much coming to believe there may be validity to the LLRT being from 1975.
I took a moment to explore this development, listening to the various known versions I own and here's what I can add:
1) De Lane Lea Demo (1971): Starts with acoustic guitar, adds Red Special at 8 seconds and the main riff at about 11 seconds, adds percussion at 18 seconds and full drums at 24 seconds. Basically, it starts with guitar and layers the elements one at a time at the start leading into the first verse.
2) Album Version (Mike Stone Mix - June 1972): Starts with one layer of Red Special, instead of the DLL acoustic; at 8 seconds, the next layer appears, providing the main riff at 11 seconds (same as the DLL Demo); percussion counts in at 14 seconds (approximately the same as the DLL Demo); at 24 seconds, the drums kick in (again, the same as the DLL Demo).
3) BBC Version #1 (February 5th, 1973): Follows a similar structure as the Album Version, but with a few differences. It starts with one layer of guitar, then at 8 seconds *both* the second guitar and the percussion layer onto it. At 11 seconds, the main riff appears, as standard. At 17 seconds, the tapping percussion is replaced with a high-hat (about the time the percussion would normally appear for the first time). At 24 second, the drums kick in. Despite the difference in percussive layering, this recording follows the same structure as established in the DLL Demo.
4) BBC Version #2 (July 25th, 1973): Is exactly the same backing track as BBC Version #1, which the exception of a third (new) layer of guitar added throughout and new vocals by Freddie.
5) Shitkickers Version (Recorded live at The Rainbow Theatre March 31st, 1974): Starts with guitar (one layer) and percussive beat-keeping standard to the usual structure. Since it's live, without overdubs, the subtle layering is absent, but as noted, the structure is pretty much the same: guitar, percussion, riff, drums...
6) Xmas Eve Version (Recorded live at the Hammersmith Odeon, Dec. 24th, 1975): As noted by the other poster, here we see a relatively significant change. The song starts with the heavy bass drum marking time, pounding in the song before the guitar comes in via some cool feedback, similar now to the "Long Lost Re-Take" intro. Also, as noted by the previous poster, the "Get it, get it, get it, boy! Keep yourself alive!" appears here, where it is absent from the previous versions. Normally, it's variations on "All you people, keep yourself alive!"
7) Earls Court Version (Recorded live at Earls Court, June 6th, 1977: Heavy bass drum + percussive intro, with some flares from Roger. Here, Brian seems to start a bit before Roger, but Roger comes in quickly and heavily. The "Get it, get it, get it, boy! Keep yourself alive!" ends the song.
8) Houston Version (Recorded live at The Summit, Dec. 11, 1977):Heavy bass drum + percussive intro, with some flares from Roger. Previously (DLL, Album and BBC) it was guitars and more guitars until the drums kicked in later. Lastly, the "Get it, get it, get it, boy! Keep yourself alive!" ends the song.
9) Live Killers Version (1979): Heavy bass drum + percussive intro, following the altered structure seen in the Xmas Eve Version of drums leading the way and guitar following suit. "Get it, get it, get it, boy! Keep yourself alive!" ends the song.
10) Montreal Version (Nov 24th, 1981): This is a bit different because it starts with a sampling of "Sex Show" (an unreleased track from the Hot Space sessions, according to Brian in the Queen Rock Montreal commentary). However, after Brian changes keys into KYA, it follows the heavy drums + percussion + guitar intro. The song is not finished (leading instead into Roger and Brian's respective solos), so we don't hear the full ending.
So, what does it all mean? Well, in 1975 thereabouts we see a marked change in the intro to "Keep Yourself Alive," where it seems to reflect the "Long Lost Re-Take" approach, and the ending line ("Get it, get it...") appears and stays as the finale of the song (at least when performed in its entirety). Is this conclusive? No, but it's certainly compelling.
I was always open to the idea, but now I'm very much coming to believe there may be validity to the LLRT being from 1975.
IanR
Here's a quick OCR and Google translation of that Dutch interview:
Recently Netherlands eerisvereerd again with a two-day visit of the world band Queen. The previous
visit was not even a year ago and the statement seems justified that the band
led by Freddie Mercury made entirely in our cozy swamp delta in the ne. Last
year you could get another chapter Ciriiii-Queen of the vicissitudes of the
four reading, recorded from the beautiful mouth of Fred. Therefore it seemed to
me this time nice am the other major driver in eheel a hat word to Paten,
guitarist wish me dihah> passed it, ran it any wonder ivan the part of Fred,
which does not seem to understand why I do not had chosen for him. That
characterizes at least the real wheel. May was prepared immediately tu speak to
me and was very soon .. •, that he is still a simple, modest, friendly and
above tall boy remained. This balance was made between the two concerts.
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Q: You are quite often lately, h2? "
A: Yes, the second kcer within one year. We feel that Europe the last two
years has become very important to us. There are so many records worldwide and
we have so many fans that we really should be, I think It's always very nice to
play in Europe. Many people think that we are here for years at the top, but that is not so. The album A Night At The Opera hceft time it sold well, but it might as well be a fluke. The Races A Day by Ar and News
of the World have our toilet positic tremendous popular sup-dig reinforced, not
only in Europe mau (especially in America where we najatir a tour uitertit guceetivolle gedatin Itebben. The situatle is
at the moment so, that News of the World by far the best selling album. Even in
France, where in the past we have little to fry arrived, has that record quite sold during
this tour hehhe we first France in the tour schedule with them. There We are all four very happy, because it is
more central bevcstiging that our music on the right track. Many more people
believe in us today. "
COMBI-HIT
Q: Hei took a long time for you a solid foot in the door got in America.
A: "Yes, it's been a slow development. It is simply very difficult to truly there among the established
names to penetrate. There are many groups in America while we still ko-men from
abroad too.
It takes a lot of time and effort to do the entire American audience, and as you will understand we have our commitments elsewhere. Our final breakthrough is closely related to the fact that the single "We Are
77te Cltampions with on the other hand, We Will Rock You, two A-sides is a big
hit and was thereby News of the World was running great. But I must tell it to,
that Europe is in fact the area is difficult to conquer. This is sometimes
underestimated, I think. "
Q: Domestically, things get a little less, I'm told.
A: "That's right. In England it is still A! ORDER At Opera our rhe hest-selling album. WC wool have many fans, but the last eighteen years much has happened in the field of music in England and that has surely worked as a barrier for many groups. Of course it is jam-mer, but I do not worry about it. It'll be back. I hope. "
Q: And what about all those rumors about the breakup of Queen?
A: "All nonsense and nonsense. The English press was busy again. Look, like hundreds of other
groups we have such bad experiences with the English press, that we no more
interviews with them. And because she wanted to write about us, but they think
everything is so negative and preferably also possible. There is simply no
truth at all. You should never believe what you read in the English music
magazines. "
Q: Are there might be plans in the solo band?
A: "Not really .. We all four hebbeb sometimes the idea of being a solo album would like to
make, but first we have the z6 pressure, there is no time for one-way, and
second, the musical situation within the group 16, we all four have a full
ownership. Everyone writes his own songs, submits it to the others and then
choose whether applicable things .... MTzItten for a ifigf! SISPeremOftli gene.
Of course we all four songs, which so far always been rejected by four of us,
but that can up-tion instead of a solo album maybe in the future following a
best-album Queen appear. "
Q: Why you never write songs together?
A: "We simply have our way of working. Each takes his share, but it is true that every song
by all groups is _gearrangeerd so it will: as a Queen song recognizable. We
each have very different ideas about music, you should know and it's rarely
happened that we really have written a song together-am. Songs like "Stone
Cold Crazy Liar, and come the closest to. I myself do not consider it possible
that in future we will still be writing together. "
Q: But the individual contributions have far-caused a large variation in music.
A: "Yes, that's true and I think that's very good. For example, I never could write songs sank
von Roger DLE. variation by which we are a grimt% language audience. No
disadvantage IR structure. eng corpse people have certain pre-approved numbers
or regret it, but yes, you can not please everyone, "
Q: Maybe if you would compose together.
A: "Maybe, but it could also be that nobody likes us more. As we do now we are very satisfied."
EMOTIONAL PLM,
Q: Do you sometimes. the early days of Queen?
A: 'Certainly. The first few years we've been through so much. We were already busy with a number
of songs, and we were able to make the first album. Those disturbances, the
songs and so although we t'oen not as good as it could play and studio
technique also was not at such a high level, it is a spon-neous representation
of x% ate when in us alive. And then came the second album and I'm really proud of. We have limited agents can
extract so much that for me a milestone in my career has become. Queen II is my main Queen album and it is also the only home that I sometimes turn. It is a very emotional and I would record him best sometimes ppnielyv.f Lom, vill gri
Q: My hebje blessing.
A: "Well, of course there are plenty of reasons not to do it. . However, last year the song Keep Yourself Allve in a new version included one, which was intended as a single for the U.S. market, but since We Are The Champions went so well, we only board up the miss. Maybe we will take the picture off or sometimes we put it on an album. It's become a very good performance 'and it has strengthened me in my mind that the production of' first album is actually not very well. "
Q: Do not you think you from Sheer Heart Attack konsessies have done great favor to the general public?
A: Thhhh .... No, not really. Veór Sheer / Kart Attack in fact we had no audience, and when we Killer
Queen Sheer! Kart Attack have received considerable response, we started
writing for this audience. We've never got-you-targeting the general public and
I do not think we'll mersjele-music. Our audience is just really big, and it is
soon associated mud kommendes I think that iilot sr konsessilot liebben done.
Look, MI Queen II pete again we could loose some album coming up, so &
Sheer Art Attack was a new step in our development. We do not know in advance
that that record would be a success? Because it was the case, we decided from
that moment for our audience to write and that is our particular appreciated.
We still do what we want, not what the public wants. "
Q: But I heard recently that Freddie was quite taken by the rule-the disco craze.
A: "Is that so? I do not know. He likes the Bee Gees pretty good, I think, but I think it is also
called ear-dig: Maybe we also do a disco number, you never know. But if that
happens, we do it because we enjoy it and not because it is popular at the
moment happened. "
Q: This is clearly working hard to designate.
A: "Yes, you'll have me believe."
GEORGE FORMBY
Q: Tell me abou
Recently Netherlands eerisvereerd again with a two-day visit of the world band Queen. The previous
visit was not even a year ago and the statement seems justified that the band
led by Freddie Mercury made entirely in our cozy swamp delta in the ne. Last
year you could get another chapter Ciriiii-Queen of the vicissitudes of the
four reading, recorded from the beautiful mouth of Fred. Therefore it seemed to
me this time nice am the other major driver in eheel a hat word to Paten,
guitarist wish me dihah> passed it, ran it any wonder ivan the part of Fred,
which does not seem to understand why I do not had chosen for him. That
characterizes at least the real wheel. May was prepared immediately tu speak to
me and was very soon .. •, that he is still a simple, modest, friendly and
above tall boy remained. This balance was made between the two concerts.
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Q: You are quite often lately, h2? "
A: Yes, the second kcer within one year. We feel that Europe the last two
years has become very important to us. There are so many records worldwide and
we have so many fans that we really should be, I think It's always very nice to
play in Europe. Many people think that we are here for years at the top, but that is not so. The album A Night At The Opera hceft time it sold well, but it might as well be a fluke. The Races A Day by Ar and News
of the World have our toilet positic tremendous popular sup-dig reinforced, not
only in Europe mau (especially in America where we najatir a tour uitertit guceetivolle gedatin Itebben. The situatle is
at the moment so, that News of the World by far the best selling album. Even in
France, where in the past we have little to fry arrived, has that record quite sold during
this tour hehhe we first France in the tour schedule with them. There We are all four very happy, because it is
more central bevcstiging that our music on the right track. Many more people
believe in us today. "
COMBI-HIT
Q: Hei took a long time for you a solid foot in the door got in America.
A: "Yes, it's been a slow development. It is simply very difficult to truly there among the established
names to penetrate. There are many groups in America while we still ko-men from
abroad too.
It takes a lot of time and effort to do the entire American audience, and as you will understand we have our commitments elsewhere. Our final breakthrough is closely related to the fact that the single "We Are
77te Cltampions with on the other hand, We Will Rock You, two A-sides is a big
hit and was thereby News of the World was running great. But I must tell it to,
that Europe is in fact the area is difficult to conquer. This is sometimes
underestimated, I think. "
Q: Domestically, things get a little less, I'm told.
A: "That's right. In England it is still A! ORDER At Opera our rhe hest-selling album. WC wool have many fans, but the last eighteen years much has happened in the field of music in England and that has surely worked as a barrier for many groups. Of course it is jam-mer, but I do not worry about it. It'll be back. I hope. "
Q: And what about all those rumors about the breakup of Queen?
A: "All nonsense and nonsense. The English press was busy again. Look, like hundreds of other
groups we have such bad experiences with the English press, that we no more
interviews with them. And because she wanted to write about us, but they think
everything is so negative and preferably also possible. There is simply no
truth at all. You should never believe what you read in the English music
magazines. "
Q: Are there might be plans in the solo band?
A: "Not really .. We all four hebbeb sometimes the idea of being a solo album would like to
make, but first we have the z6 pressure, there is no time for one-way, and
second, the musical situation within the group 16, we all four have a full
ownership. Everyone writes his own songs, submits it to the others and then
choose whether applicable things .... MTzItten for a ifigf! SISPeremOftli gene.
Of course we all four songs, which so far always been rejected by four of us,
but that can up-tion instead of a solo album maybe in the future following a
best-album Queen appear. "
Q: Why you never write songs together?
A: "We simply have our way of working. Each takes his share, but it is true that every song
by all groups is _gearrangeerd so it will: as a Queen song recognizable. We
each have very different ideas about music, you should know and it's rarely
happened that we really have written a song together-am. Songs like "Stone
Cold Crazy Liar, and come the closest to. I myself do not consider it possible
that in future we will still be writing together. "
Q: But the individual contributions have far-caused a large variation in music.
A: "Yes, that's true and I think that's very good. For example, I never could write songs sank
von Roger DLE. variation by which we are a grimt% language audience. No
disadvantage IR structure. eng corpse people have certain pre-approved numbers
or regret it, but yes, you can not please everyone, "
Q: Maybe if you would compose together.
A: "Maybe, but it could also be that nobody likes us more. As we do now we are very satisfied."
EMOTIONAL PLM,
Q: Do you sometimes. the early days of Queen?
A: 'Certainly. The first few years we've been through so much. We were already busy with a number
of songs, and we were able to make the first album. Those disturbances, the
songs and so although we t'oen not as good as it could play and studio
technique also was not at such a high level, it is a spon-neous representation
of x% ate when in us alive. And then came the second album and I'm really proud of. We have limited agents can
extract so much that for me a milestone in my career has become. Queen II is my main Queen album and it is also the only home that I sometimes turn. It is a very emotional and I would record him best sometimes ppnielyv.f Lom, vill gri
Q: My hebje blessing.
A: "Well, of course there are plenty of reasons not to do it. . However, last year the song Keep Yourself Allve in a new version included one, which was intended as a single for the U.S. market, but since We Are The Champions went so well, we only board up the miss. Maybe we will take the picture off or sometimes we put it on an album. It's become a very good performance 'and it has strengthened me in my mind that the production of' first album is actually not very well. "
Q: Do not you think you from Sheer Heart Attack konsessies have done great favor to the general public?
A: Thhhh .... No, not really. Veór Sheer / Kart Attack in fact we had no audience, and when we Killer
Queen Sheer! Kart Attack have received considerable response, we started
writing for this audience. We've never got-you-targeting the general public and
I do not think we'll mersjele-music. Our audience is just really big, and it is
soon associated mud kommendes I think that iilot sr konsessilot liebben done.
Look, MI Queen II pete again we could loose some album coming up, so &
Sheer Art Attack was a new step in our development. We do not know in advance
that that record would be a success? Because it was the case, we decided from
that moment for our audience to write and that is our particular appreciated.
We still do what we want, not what the public wants. "
Q: But I heard recently that Freddie was quite taken by the rule-the disco craze.
A: "Is that so? I do not know. He likes the Bee Gees pretty good, I think, but I think it is also
called ear-dig: Maybe we also do a disco number, you never know. But if that
happens, we do it because we enjoy it and not because it is popular at the
moment happened. "
Q: This is clearly working hard to designate.
A: "Yes, you'll have me believe."
GEORGE FORMBY
Q: Tell me abou
IanR
GEORGE FORMBY
Q: Tell me about your musical background and preferences.
A: "I love a lot
of forties and fifties jazz and blues and I also think the twenties and
thirties cabaret-style music, where Freddie dot on as k. nice. Someone
Oliágorsc0 "milsrispiterrewemets-on, what he did in his day was very
special. And now .- Oh, I can not listen to music as often as I would like. I
think Kansas, for example, a good
band: stick- the musicians, well thought out music. and some good guys too. Wc
have in the past, I do agree with them but I'm very happy for them that it is
now "going so well, even in Europe. 0 yes, I just
them to record an album of note-Donegan Lonnic worked: the great hero of my
youth. That was a lovely experience, because I knew all his music and I felt
very honored mc. "
Q: What was that to do with the solo single from Roger?
A: "Roger felt
very frustrated at a given moment. The band then had some business difficulties
with John Reid, our former manager and Roger wanted to record some for themselves.
It was not initially intended that the picture would be released, but there
were several people at a very good song von den, and when he has to talk and
yet leave an opinion. "
Q: Lloe did you know?
A: "Prlititi. I
find such things eng tired L011111-MI, 11 Llop, E, 111 bid. IIIIIII: 11 KHP
tocii mutje just heals and eventually left a good influence on him sound.
"
Q: Finally, there are already 201 konArete plan. • • s
regarding the next album?
A: "Yes and no.
We go straight after Lure record and this time before we go to France.
As for the compositions is still unknown, we do have loose ideee: n, but there
is no song komplect written. This is the sludio though. About these ideas, I
can not sentence-nigs say let his idea and only. "
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
After leaving the interview Brian May gallop to the
Keukenhof, break it in two and half hours to walk around and up to eight flower
bulbs to buy for his garden. Front where a nice idea, but I betwij-bright if he
will ever come true. His wife, she with extra attention 'care. A nice guy, is
Brian May.
Kees Baars
Q: Tell me about your musical background and preferences.
A: "I love a lot
of forties and fifties jazz and blues and I also think the twenties and
thirties cabaret-style music, where Freddie dot on as k. nice. Someone
Oliágorsc0 "milsrispiterrewemets-on, what he did in his day was very
special. And now .- Oh, I can not listen to music as often as I would like. I
think Kansas, for example, a good
band: stick- the musicians, well thought out music. and some good guys too. Wc
have in the past, I do agree with them but I'm very happy for them that it is
now "going so well, even in Europe. 0 yes, I just
them to record an album of note-Donegan Lonnic worked: the great hero of my
youth. That was a lovely experience, because I knew all his music and I felt
very honored mc. "
Q: What was that to do with the solo single from Roger?
A: "Roger felt
very frustrated at a given moment. The band then had some business difficulties
with John Reid, our former manager and Roger wanted to record some for themselves.
It was not initially intended that the picture would be released, but there
were several people at a very good song von den, and when he has to talk and
yet leave an opinion. "
Q: Lloe did you know?
A: "Prlititi. I
find such things eng tired L011111-MI, 11 Llop, E, 111 bid. IIIIIII: 11 KHP
tocii mutje just heals and eventually left a good influence on him sound.
"
Q: Finally, there are already 201 konArete plan. • • s
regarding the next album?
A: "Yes and no.
We go straight after Lure record and this time before we go to France.
As for the compositions is still unknown, we do have loose ideee: n, but there
is no song komplect written. This is the sludio though. About these ideas, I
can not sentence-nigs say let his idea and only. "
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
After leaving the interview Brian May gallop to the
Keukenhof, break it in two and half hours to walk around and up to eight flower
bulbs to buy for his garden. Front where a nice idea, but I betwij-bright if he
will ever come true. His wife, she with extra attention 'care. A nice guy, is
Brian May.
Kees Baars
kozlorf
It is my first post on this forum, but being a long time Queen fan and somehow interested in recording/production techniques I find this particular topic - and the approach of analysing the way the long lost retake was recorded - pretty much interesting.
First of all, I am strongly convinced that the retake couldn't have been recorded during the Queen I or Queen II sessions. The drum sound on those two albums is much more dull, esp. the snare-drum (I had a quick run through all the tracks and the only exceptions here were The Night Comes Down - for obvious reasons - and somehow The Loser In The End) - while the lost retake brings up a much more fresh drum sound.
I might be guessing here, but I also think that these two albums had the drumset recorded with a limited number of microphones, while the lost retake seems to have each drum being given a separate mike - it's pretty apparent in the solo. However the same impression comes up when listening to Brighton Rock, so this trace ends up here.
(actually, the impression of this retake sounding much "newer" than the Queen I record has for me been already a strong contradiction to the information that it was recorded in ca. 1972 when I first heard it from the Hollywood remaster years ago)
My personal feeling is that what Brian said in the Dutch interview should be considered a main path one should follow. I would actually be surprised if the lost retake was recorded during or after the Night At The Opera sessions. My first thought was that the guys could have recorded it during the News Of The World session given the fact that they were making and producing it by themselves, and having the studio all for themselves for doing such off-shot stuff. And - on contrary - even if they were given the opportunity to use the studio freely during the ANATO sessions already, recording a new take of an old song wasn't really what was expected from them at that time. But later I found the bass sound on NOTW rather thick and prominent, while the bass in lost retake is rather quiet hidden, so here came my doubts that it was recorded during NOTW sessions.
I have started comparing the sound of some particular songs to the lost retake, and the closest I found was actually White Man from ADATR. I wouldn't be surprised if someone has been mistaken now while releasing the 40 Anniv. issues and putting the retake on ANATO rather than ADATR. Also, since Brian's interview has been done during the NOTW tour, him saying "last year" could mean ADATR too. The lost retake also seems to be a thing done in one hour just for fun (like a studio warm-up before sessions).
First of all, I am strongly convinced that the retake couldn't have been recorded during the Queen I or Queen II sessions. The drum sound on those two albums is much more dull, esp. the snare-drum (I had a quick run through all the tracks and the only exceptions here were The Night Comes Down - for obvious reasons - and somehow The Loser In The End) - while the lost retake brings up a much more fresh drum sound.
I might be guessing here, but I also think that these two albums had the drumset recorded with a limited number of microphones, while the lost retake seems to have each drum being given a separate mike - it's pretty apparent in the solo. However the same impression comes up when listening to Brighton Rock, so this trace ends up here.
(actually, the impression of this retake sounding much "newer" than the Queen I record has for me been already a strong contradiction to the information that it was recorded in ca. 1972 when I first heard it from the Hollywood remaster years ago)
My personal feeling is that what Brian said in the Dutch interview should be considered a main path one should follow. I would actually be surprised if the lost retake was recorded during or after the Night At The Opera sessions. My first thought was that the guys could have recorded it during the News Of The World session given the fact that they were making and producing it by themselves, and having the studio all for themselves for doing such off-shot stuff. And - on contrary - even if they were given the opportunity to use the studio freely during the ANATO sessions already, recording a new take of an old song wasn't really what was expected from them at that time. But later I found the bass sound on NOTW rather thick and prominent, while the bass in lost retake is rather quiet hidden, so here came my doubts that it was recorded during NOTW sessions.
I have started comparing the sound of some particular songs to the lost retake, and the closest I found was actually White Man from ADATR. I wouldn't be surprised if someone has been mistaken now while releasing the 40 Anniv. issues and putting the retake on ANATO rather than ADATR. Also, since Brian's interview has been done during the NOTW tour, him saying "last year" could mean ADATR too. The lost retake also seems to be a thing done in one hour just for fun (like a studio warm-up before sessions).
Djdownsy
You have a very good point, but what you are forgetting is that, production-wise, LLRT sounds very similar to 'Mad The Swine', particularly the snare, which, as you pointed out, is much duller on 'I' &'II'. However, if you listen to 'SHA' and 'ANATO', which is where the claims for conception of this recording lie, the drum production is completely different, also, guitar wise, the LLRT doesn't have the same 'phased sound' present on 'SHA', 'ANATO', or even 'Queen II', I don't think these fellas had perfected that sound yet.
On such a breathless night is this, upon my brow, the lightest kiss, i walk alone.
On such a breathless night is this, upon my brow, the lightest kiss, i walk alone.
kozlorf
Well indeed, Mad The Swine as we know it also seems to have a brighter and fresher sound that I and II - but my guess is that it is mostly because the mix we know was done in 1991, and it actually seems that David Richards has put there as much as possible to make it sound good.
Actually, the same thing may be with the LLRT - the proper mix could have been done in early 90ties as well, since it's when the track surfaced.
But still, when I listen to Mad The Swine and consider the snare drum as the main referrence, I think it's the same kind of dull sound as on Queen I only remixed and brightened - while LLRT still sounds much fresher.
On the other hand, I would conider the Silver Salmon recording as also having the fresh and bright drum sound similar to LLRT - so indeed that would either make my previous considerations pointless - or... maybe Silver Salmon recording is also not that old as we have thought? ;)
Actually, the same thing may be with the LLRT - the proper mix could have been done in early 90ties as well, since it's when the track surfaced.
But still, when I listen to Mad The Swine and consider the snare drum as the main referrence, I think it's the same kind of dull sound as on Queen I only remixed and brightened - while LLRT still sounds much fresher.
On the other hand, I would conider the Silver Salmon recording as also having the fresh and bright drum sound similar to LLRT - so indeed that would either make my previous considerations pointless - or... maybe Silver Salmon recording is also not that old as we have thought? ;)
Benn
I can't really believe that they would bother to re-record KYA in 1975.
What band in their right mind would bother to re-record a track for official release that, by 1975, had already been around for 4 years? And, given that the band were successful in the charts by then both in the UK AND the USA, why would they risk ridicule by re-issueing a song that failed?
All this sounds to me like another complete and utter fuck up by the bods at QPL who haven't bothered to properly check their facts.
What band in their right mind would bother to re-record a track for official release that, by 1975, had already been around for 4 years? And, given that the band were successful in the charts by then both in the UK AND the USA, why would they risk ridicule by re-issueing a song that failed?
All this sounds to me like another complete and utter fuck up by the bods at QPL who haven't bothered to properly check their facts.
Sebastian
> What band in their right mind would bother to re-record a track
Many, many, many of them.
> by 1975, had already been around for 4 years?
Not really. For the public, it'd only been around for 2.
> And, given that the band were successful in the charts by then both in the UK AND the USA, why would they risk ridicule by re-issueing a song that failed?
I order not to have it fail again. Bowie scored No 1 in the UK with the re-issue of Space Oddity around the same time.
Many, many, many of them.
> by 1975, had already been around for 4 years?
Not really. For the public, it'd only been around for 2.
> And, given that the band were successful in the charts by then both in the UK AND the USA, why would they risk ridicule by re-issueing a song that failed?
I order not to have it fail again. Bowie scored No 1 in the UK with the re-issue of Space Oddity around the same time.
rhyeking
It's fairly common for bands and artists to re-record and re-release older tracks, especially if they either failed before or were hugely successful. Or if the band wants to try something different with the song. And we're not talking bands with one-hit wonders trying to milk their one great song. Bowie (multiple times), Peter Gabriel, U2, Barenaked Ladies, Mike Oldfield, Pet Shop Boys...the list goes on and on....they've all done it.
Benn
Sebastian, re:
>> What band in their right mind would bother to re-record a track
>Many, many, many of them.
Clearly, then, those with no decent new material or those who were uncertain that their "current" material would sell then...... Either way, it smacks, to me, of laziness. When The Who re-released "Substitute" in 1976, they didn't need to bother re-recording it - they were absolutely confident that the originally recorded (10 year old) version could still cut the mustard in the climate of the time.
>> by 1975, had already been around for 4 years?
>Not really. For the public, it'd only been around for 2.
Wrong. The public had been exposed to it in the live set for a good 4 years and certainly by 1975, the song had become stale.
>> What band in their right mind would bother to re-record a track
>Many, many, many of them.
Clearly, then, those with no decent new material or those who were uncertain that their "current" material would sell then...... Either way, it smacks, to me, of laziness. When The Who re-released "Substitute" in 1976, they didn't need to bother re-recording it - they were absolutely confident that the originally recorded (10 year old) version could still cut the mustard in the climate of the time.
>> by 1975, had already been around for 4 years?
>Not really. For the public, it'd only been around for 2.
Wrong. The public had been exposed to it in the live set for a good 4 years and certainly by 1975, the song had become stale.
kozlorf
The other "uncommon" thing in the lost retake are the "keep on the bright side" lyrics just by the end of the song. This might be a very weak path to follow, but what comes to my head is:
1. Does such lyrics appear on any other know version of the song?
2. (since my native language is not English this might be somehow silly, but:) Did this quote exist in common English language before it was somehow popularised by either Star Wars and Monty Python in second half of the 70ties?
1. Does such lyrics appear on any other know version of the song?
2. (since my native language is not English this might be somehow silly, but:) Did this quote exist in common English language before it was somehow popularised by either Star Wars and Monty Python in second half of the 70ties?
Sebastian
> Clearly, then, those with no decent new material or those who were uncertain that their "current" material would sell then......
Not really. There are loads and loads of reasons besides (or in place of) laziness or lack of faith. Brian was often vocal about Keep Yourself Alive never having the magic he felt it should have had; by the time they recorded it for the first album, they were stuck to working downtime and being assigned whoever was engineering and producing that particular day (i.e. who'd been booked by another act for a session that got cut short). It's completely reasonable that, once they had freedom and enough resources to do it properly, they gave it another go. It's also fair considering they obviously liked the song (and with good reason) and probably wanted to get it done the way they wanted. It's NOT lazy or mediocre to do that.
> When The Who re-released "Substitute" in 1976, they didn't need to bother re-recording it - they were absolutely confident that the originally recorded (10 year old) version could still cut the mustard in the climate of the time.
The Who already had enough control by the time they hit Olympic Studios in early '66 for that particular song. Pete was producing it, and even Keith's stoned performance was perfect for what they needed. They were pleased with it, so there was no reason to re-record it. For that same reason, Queen probably wouldn't re-record Bo Rhap in 1980 (that they had more money, a studio of their own and 48-track technology as opposed to 24-), as they'd gotten it right the first time.
But Keep Yourself Alive was another story: they were a new act, working downtime (something along the lines of 'hey, Bowie left early, come and record a little until the cleaners come!'). Drums in particular were a nightmare for them, as they hadn't got enough time to set them up properly, and often had to stick with the studios' own kit (which in music terms is like dating a girl who, literally, gets touched by anyone and everyone), the studios' then miniature drum booth (the antithesis of Roger's big and deep sound at the time), etc. They were pressured by the record company to finish it soon and the Mike Stone mix became the 'next best thing', but still not what they wanted. There's nothing wrong with trying to capture (as opposed to re-capture, because it wasn't there in the first place) the magic they wanted.
> The public had been exposed to it in the live set for a good 4 years and certainly by 1975, the song had become stale.
Back then, live sets meant very little to the record buying population. Pre-You Tube, pre-heaps of bootlegs, those songs (and others like Hangman or Stone Cold Crazy [played live four years before being released]) were only known (i.e. heard once or twice, not enough for them to learn the lyrics by heart) to the few hundreds or couple thousands who had attended the concerts.
For the remaining 99.99% of the record-buying population, a song became public when it was officially released and/or broadcast on the radio. And by that definition, for 99.99% of the public, Keep Yourself Alive did not exist until July 1973.
Not really. There are loads and loads of reasons besides (or in place of) laziness or lack of faith. Brian was often vocal about Keep Yourself Alive never having the magic he felt it should have had; by the time they recorded it for the first album, they were stuck to working downtime and being assigned whoever was engineering and producing that particular day (i.e. who'd been booked by another act for a session that got cut short). It's completely reasonable that, once they had freedom and enough resources to do it properly, they gave it another go. It's also fair considering they obviously liked the song (and with good reason) and probably wanted to get it done the way they wanted. It's NOT lazy or mediocre to do that.
> When The Who re-released "Substitute" in 1976, they didn't need to bother re-recording it - they were absolutely confident that the originally recorded (10 year old) version could still cut the mustard in the climate of the time.
The Who already had enough control by the time they hit Olympic Studios in early '66 for that particular song. Pete was producing it, and even Keith's stoned performance was perfect for what they needed. They were pleased with it, so there was no reason to re-record it. For that same reason, Queen probably wouldn't re-record Bo Rhap in 1980 (that they had more money, a studio of their own and 48-track technology as opposed to 24-), as they'd gotten it right the first time.
But Keep Yourself Alive was another story: they were a new act, working downtime (something along the lines of 'hey, Bowie left early, come and record a little until the cleaners come!'). Drums in particular were a nightmare for them, as they hadn't got enough time to set them up properly, and often had to stick with the studios' own kit (which in music terms is like dating a girl who, literally, gets touched by anyone and everyone), the studios' then miniature drum booth (the antithesis of Roger's big and deep sound at the time), etc. They were pressured by the record company to finish it soon and the Mike Stone mix became the 'next best thing', but still not what they wanted. There's nothing wrong with trying to capture (as opposed to re-capture, because it wasn't there in the first place) the magic they wanted.
> The public had been exposed to it in the live set for a good 4 years and certainly by 1975, the song had become stale.
Back then, live sets meant very little to the record buying population. Pre-You Tube, pre-heaps of bootlegs, those songs (and others like Hangman or Stone Cold Crazy [played live four years before being released]) were only known (i.e. heard once or twice, not enough for them to learn the lyrics by heart) to the few hundreds or couple thousands who had attended the concerts.
For the remaining 99.99% of the record-buying population, a song became public when it was officially released and/or broadcast on the radio. And by that definition, for 99.99% of the public, Keep Yourself Alive did not exist until July 1973.
rhyeking
I wouldn't necessarily call every case of re-recording a song "laziness." Certainly some bands and artists are milking the success of a particular track., no question, but other artists sometimes feel that perhaps an earlier recording didn't convey what they felt the song should. Or, the meaning for the song changed for them and they want to reflect this new point of view in an updated recording. Or, they just like the song and are having a go at some new ideas. If the artists' overall output is sufficient in diversity, quality and longevity, I don't see anything wrong with the occasional look back to re-record older material. It seems, if the LLRT does date from 1975, that Queen were still unhappy with the original version and still though they had a potential hit on their hands. Somewhere along the line, they (or Elektra Records) changed their minds and stuck with the original. Who knows, the re-recording could've been a huge hit in the States.