Hot Space

Ok, im just putting this post up to hear peoples opinions on 'Hot Space'. Do you love it, or do you think its the nadir of their career? Is there a song you love but maybe something you despise on the album? I want peoples honest opinions on this.

Oh, brother, you're about to rattle a hornet's nest that's been kicked repeatedly. Prepare for an onslaught of "like it" and 'hate it" posts.

I like Hot Space.

My humble opinion is that it's a better album than it gets credit for. It's a sincere effort, but the response it got would have you believe the recording of this album is right up there with running over puppies.

The reasons people hate it are the abundance of disco-funk-synth-ness throughout and the lack of straight-up guitar rock. It's a common complaint too that Freddie was so influenced by the gay club scene that he let it influence his work too much between this album and Mr. Bad Guy. Really, though, Roger and John were just as much a party to the synth and funk sounds permeating this album, as they'd been dabbling in such styles outside of Queen as well (see Fun In Space, Hilary Hilary and Picking Up Sounds). Funky-disco-pop was a result New Wave, Disco and Dance music of the time and frankly a lot of their contemporaries were influenced by it. Bowie was between his Ashes To Ashes album and Let's Dance. Billy Squire's Emotions In Motion is another prime example. Both of these men were close to Queen, as was Michael Jackson, the King of Pop, who worked with Freddie in the early '80s too.

Going back to Roger, he's been getting funky since 1977, with "Fight From The Inside," "I Wanna Testify" and "Turn On The TV," not to mention feeling the disco fever with "Fun It" long before John wrote "Another One Bites The Dust."

No, Hot Space was not created in a vacuum. It was the product of many internal and external influences of the time in the form of music that was affecting many artists and bands of the period, and of interests dating back years. It was an approach they'd been nurturing for a long time and is the culmination of growing ideas, not a new direction happened upon spontaneously.

I'm generalizing now, but it's a style of music many people don't like and they'll spend many posts trying to justify why Queen should never have committed to it so fully, rather than admit that its their taste in music that doesn't allow for them to accept it from Queen, or even like it. One of their favourite bands made an album they hated and it embarrasses their fandom sensibilities.

I'll close by saying please don't take my previous generalization too seriously. I'm not saying anyone is wrong for not liking this album, it just gets outrageous how vehemently people try to justify it.

I am a fan of hot space, i like the fact that its different from other Queen albus as it shows they were not afraid to do diversfy from the norm and it did quite well in the album charts in the UK, got to number 4 so hardly a disaster

I wonder what bonus tracks QPL would or should provide to entice people to buy the re-issue / remaster of this album.

tcc wrote: I wonder what bonus tracks QPL would or should provide to entice people to buy the re-issue / remaster of this album.

Obvious ones like Soul Brother, something from Milton Keynes probably and maybe even Feel Like. Don't expect any rare stuff. Maybe an acapella version of one of the HS songs.

Oh not again!
Queen are brilliant. Queen are diverse. Hot Space was great because it was Queen. We accept it as part of the full Queen package. If anybody hates this album then perhaps they are not truly and fully sold on the Queen concept.

.
Master Marathon Runner

I'm firmly of the opinion that Hot Space is one of Queen's better efforts.  Obviously not in the first 5 album bracket, but certainly better than anything they managed to put out between 1983 & 1990.

Hot Space suffers from poor mixing in my opinion - the whole thing is too thin sounding; Brian plays some exemplary rythm and lead parts but they are buried in amongst the synth and various other bits and pieces like electronic horn sections.  Listening to any of the Hot Space songs that were given an airing on the live stage, always set me to wondering just how it was that the USA didn't pick up on it as being an album that was a realdeparture from ANYTHING any other rockband was doing at the time or had done before.

It was the final example of Queen being dangerous and taking a big chance; after this they would become (and remain) record company executive's playthings charged with producing nothing more than singles that would make the top 10.  Queen would never again regain their rock roots.

Just let the rhythms tickle your butt and groove baby! Funky horns, slinky bass lines, great marriage between r'n'b and rock on Back Chat, awesome guitar solo on Put Out the Fire, beautiful lyrics and chorus on Las Palabras, Under Pressure etc. OK, so there's Body Language but Innuendo has Delilah too! Just a fun album that gets hammered unnecessarily. Like Freddie siad "If you don't like it, fuckin go home!"

Cheers

There are no electronic horns on the album.

Now, I personally think it's an OK album, but it could've been way way way better. And no, it's not a matter of style: there are loads of wonderful funk, disco and pop albums, Hot Space is NOT one of them. It's a matter of the band working at 10% of their abilities a lot of the time. Brian was not an expert pseudo-baroque composer, yet his 'Procession' is a wonderful effort. Brian was not an expert disco composer, and 'Dancer' is not that bad, yet the way it was recorded is annoyingly amateurish for four musicians of such calibre.

It's, as I said, like the time Michael Jordan retired from basketball and played baseball for a while. A lot of people preferred his basketball career. Does it mean they hated baseball? For the most part, I'm sure they didn't. Does it mean they were rabid anti-White Socks fascists willing to pour salt on the eyes of anybody with a cap and a bat? For the most part, I'm sure they weren't. It simply means, for the most part (including Jordan himself, as he eventually returned to basketball), that they knew that when it came to baseball, he was average; when it came to basketball, he was arguably the best one ever.

Same for Queen: when it comes to playing human bass, John's great and underrated; when it comes to programming synth bass, neither Roger nor Brian nor Freddie nor John are on a very high league. Same for Roger vs drum-machines, Brian's epic solos vs funky scat rhythm playing (which he admittedly had a lot of problems getting right), Freddie's beautiful piano playing vs amateurish synth pads... they were way outside their comfort zone, and THAT was the problem.

Thriller, on the other hand, had a producer who lived and breathed those styles; a performer/composer who'd grown up with R&B and the like; several keyboardists who, unlike Freddie, were synthesiser experts; a slap bassist who had far far far more experience than John on that; several guitarists who'd been playing funky rhythms for years and had a much better grasp on the nuts and bolts of the related syncopations, scat, etc.

Getting Ndugu Chancler to play Brighton Rock would've been an epic fail, as he was not used to that style. Same for Louis Johnson to play Save Me, for Greg Phillinganes to play the Bo Rhap piano or for Dean Parks to play Dead on Time or Tie Your Mother Down.

People tend to be so divided by the Hot Space album, and a lot of them tend to pigeonhole each other. Not everybody who likes Hot Space is an arse-licking stepford who would get a multiple orgasm with anything the Queen members recorded; and not everybody who dislikes Hot Space is a bitter narrow-minded fascist willing to burn alive anybody who records a song that's not heavy metal.

Some people dislike Hot Space because of the style. Some people dislike Hot Space because of homophobic traits. Some people dislike Hot Space because they think it's 'cool' to dislike it. Some people dislike Hot Space because they think live versions are far stronger.

But some people have NO problem with the genre, NO problem with the style, NO problem with the alleged gayness (if there's such thing) of the music, NO problem with the producer, NO problem with the lack of distorted guitars (compared to Queen II, for instance), but STILL regard Hot Space as a sub-par effort for a band that could, and many times did, way way way better.

Some really good, well thought out and well explained sensible points made here.

I like it - although it's not my favourite of theirs I prefer it to A Kind of Magic (even though that has more 'hit singles' and some great songs, it sounds very sterile to me, even more so that Hot Space).  For me, Staying Power is great (thought could have had far greater dynamics and power), and I've always liked Dancer and think that that tracks actually succeeds far more than the rest in what they may have been looking to achieve.

Hot Space is very much a product of its time - perhaps they did get sucked into thinking that sound was the way to go, and got influenced by the dance/disco/funk scene in the US at the time.  Some very good songs, let down by the choice of arrangements and production (which was very unusual for Queen at that point). 

The one thing that surprises me is that the whole album is quite narrow sound and style wise - yes we have extremes from Body Language to Put Out The Fire, but somehow the difference between the styles doesn't stand out as much here as, say, between Seaside Rendevous and I'm In Love With My Car from ANATO.  Everything seems to fit into a certain era sound wise, and doesn't seem to cover as much ground as you would expect a Queen album to. (whereas The Game, to me, still sounds contemporary as if it could have been recorded yesterday).

However, I certainly don't look on it as a 'separate entity' to the rest of their catalogue like some people do.

Hot Space is one of my all time favorite Queen albums.  It's sad that it received such negative press the first time around because I believe had it been released just a couple years later, it would have been a great success.  And I agree with an earlier post that this album was not Queen's first "attempt" if you will, at making funk music.  One of the things I love best about Queen is their ability to make all kinds of music...and make it well!

master marathon runner wrote: Oh not again!
Queen are brilliant. Queen are diverse. Hot Space was great because it was Queen. We accept it as part of the full Queen package. If anybody hates this album then perhaps they are not truly and fully sold on the Queen concept.

.Master Marathon Runner
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

i hate it...and i was "sold on the original queen concept"....lonnnnnnnngggg before YOU were born (1974)....how dare you imply that anyone who isn't a f**king sychophant about every bit of sh*t that queen produce isn't a true fan.....
imo - hot space, the works and akom suck...and blow

sad fact is, that from after the game...until freddie was almost dying...queen did nothing really worth listening to...

FatBottomedKillerQueen wrote:

"One of the things I love best about Queen is their ability to make all kinds of music...and make it well!"

-Me too!
I think Hot Space is a nice and funky album, with Cool Cat, Action This Day, Back Chat, Under Pressure and Staying Power. I enjoy the live versions even more, I think...

Everyone always slams on "Body Language"...to *me* it's one of the best songs on the album(along with "Staying Power" and "Under Pressure").

I believe 'True Fandom' is a fallacy.

Expert knowledge of Queen does not make one a True Fan. (i.e. "I know every single they ever released worldwide! So there!")

Longevity of appreciation of Queen does not make one a True Fan. (i.e. "I saw Queen in 1972! So there!") 

Nor does the more recent discovery of Queen make on a True Fan.

Level of appreciation (from "hate" to "like" to "love") applied individually or collectively to Queen and related works does not make one a True Fan. ("I love album X, album Y is alright and everything after album Z is God-awful!")

There is no such thing as a True Fan, because every fan is different and appreciates Queen for different, often very personal reasons. The fallacy lies in trying to quantify appreciation and use it as a yardstick for "who is more right.".

Knowledge should be encouraged. Discussion should be fed. Different points of view should be celebrated. 

I'm reminded of the Supertramp lyrics from "Child Of Vision": "We have no reason to fight, cos we both know that we're right..."

Just my opinion.