Hi guys, It's my first post here :) I was just looking for some advice on where and which and what to buy in terms of starting my Queen collection... I've grown up a big Queen fan and am wanting to finally start buying the albums. It seems to me, the logical thing would be to buy the new 2011 remasters... although I have heard some gripes and grumbles about sound clarity/quality mixing but the general consensus is that these are great and having heard (some of) them myself, I'd agree. Although is it worth buying these CDs in boxset form or separately or what... any advice on buying these great albums and starting/completing my Queen collection would be great.
Thanks a lot!
Thistle · Member since
Personally, I'd go for the Japanese remasters from 2001 in card sleeves....the mini lp ones.....they look great and sound great too. If you're hellbent on the 2011 set, the box is the way to go, IMO.
mooghead · Member since
If you can afford a box set, get a box set!! The sound 'differences' between the issues are only really relevant if you have high end equipment or are one of these people with no life who converts the music into wave forms so they can 'see' the differences.
Maybe buy a single issue from each set and buy the box of the one YOU prefer the sound of. Not sure if the Hollywood Records releases came in a box set but they sound great to me.
Ghostwithasmile is BACK! · Member since
You can buy the boxset here in Holland (online) for only 130 euro's with the complete set of 15 doubke cd's.
drmurph · Member since
Get on ebay and you can pick up all the albums on CD for next to nothing,
Depending on which songs first sucked you in, Greatest hits 1 (70s) or Greatest hits 2 (80s) would determine the purchase order I guess.
If your favouites are 80s numbers, I'd get The Works or Innuendo (Yes, 90s I Know), I'd probably buy Hot Space last.
If your favouites are 70s numbers, I'd get A Day at the Races or Sheer Heart Attack (what... instead of A Night at the Opera? (though that and The Game would be good too.)
Don't know if this is the kind of thing you want to know or not, but I envy you to an extent if you're still to discover some of the amazing stuff on the albums. I still remember my obsession with Queen II, so different from the 80s Queen I first knew.
waunakonor · Member since
Wait, you're buying Queen? Good luck with that.
matt z · Member since
Ditto that. I envy you a lil too...
"Back in my day" I saved cash from lunch money s nd bought them starting w greatest hits (Hollywood) and then ROC KS
Having only heard live killers prior on cassette early in life (dreamers ball is a big reason I play guitar)
Followed to my memory:
ANATO
A KIND OF MAGIC
NEWS OF THE WORLD
The works
INNUENDO
LIVE KILLERS
FLASH
THE MIRACLE
HOT SPACE
THE GAME
ADATR (along with QUEEN, QUEEN II, JAZZ in the cruddy hollywood boxed set)....
...unreleased photos my ass.
New essay my ass! (Written by some mtv moron in the trl era)
Get em individually or the new sets.
5 ALBUMS for sixty bucks or less is definitely worth it
(If u don't have em already)
MIH (was amazed i skipped that one
master marathon runner · Member since
Buy them in chronological order mate and get to know each album before moving onto the next. It may seem drawn out this way , but you'd get a profound sense of how Queen developed and matured.
Enjoy.
gastelllo · Member since
I think best idea to start with 2012 Japan SACDs. Skip CDs at all.
the dude 1366 · Member since
The 2011 remasters are a complete ripoff! The whole industry claims they use the newest technology to remaster etc.. But then they compress the dynamics all to shit and make it all pointless. Google "loudness war" and you will see what I mean. The new SACD's are the same as the 2011 remasters and I got ripped off on that too. This isn't some geek audiophile thing. It is actually fatiguing to the ears and it's hard to listen for more than a few songs.
Look for 1st pressings (non-remastered), 1993-94 remasters, MFSL, DCC. Even the Hollywood remasters from 1991 are better than the shit remasters of 2011. I learned this all the hard way. The 2011 remasters appear good at first. But they actually hurt the ears after a while.
I'm sure someone will attack me for saying this. But this isn't an attack on anyone here or against Queen. This is the industry that forces engineers to master "loud".
Saint Jiub · Member since
Unless you are an audiophile, I would not worry about negative opinions of a few hard-core people.
Unless you are a bigger fan of 1980's and later Queen, I would go with the box set of the 1st five albums, but I am biased as I became a big fan when Bo Rhap was first released as a single in 1975. I would argue that four of the first five albums are easily among Queen's six best albums (out of 15 total).
john bodega · Member since
"The sound 'differences' between the issues are only really relevant if you have high end equipment or are one of these people with no life who converts the music into wave forms so they can 'see' the differences"
In a perfect world? Sure!
Gotta say, it's very easy to be bitten hard for assuming that reissues will sound basically alright and that they're worth buying. I gave the most recent re-release of War of the Worlds (the 70's version) a spin, and it's awful. No other word for it - the mastering during some of the louder sections is as ugly as fucking sin. Until I find my old CD copy, I'm stuck with this version unfortunately.
Can't comment on Queen re-releases because I haven't got any, but I had a similar experience with some of the Beatles ones a couple of years ago. Not sure if the whole set was fucked, but some of the songs just sounded for all intents and purposes like some idiot had jammed them through a brickwall limiter and said "right, this is ready for 2009 audiences".
I guess that's modern mastering for you.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]the dude 1366 wrote:[/b]
Even the Hollywood remasters from 1991 are better than the shit remasters of 2011.
[/QUOTE]
The loudness war thing is obviously an issue, but there still were many improvements. There are all kinds of clicks and flaws in the sound that were removed, like Freddie's mic popping in the first verse of It's Late.
TyphoonTip · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]the dude 1366 wrote:[/b]
Even the Hollywood remasters from 1991 are better than the shit remasters of 2011.
[/QUOTE]
The loudness war thing is obviously an issue, but there still were many improvements. There are all kinds of clicks and flaws in the sound that were removed, like Freddie's mic popping in the first verse of It's Late.
[/QUOTE]
I would much rather the occasional flaw than a continual loss of dynamics. Aside from QII, I found the 2011 remasters a real disappointment.
I have to say, I find it surprising that anyone is recommending the 01/04 Japanese mini LPs. To my ears they are utterly woeful. Some being completely unlistenable.
But then again, to each his own.
tomchristie22 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]TyphoonTip wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]the dude 1366 wrote:[/b]
Even the Hollywood remasters from 1991 are better than the shit remasters of 2011.
[/QUOTE]
The loudness war thing is obviously an issue, but there still were many improvements. There are all kinds of clicks and flaws in the sound that were removed, like Freddie's mic popping in the first verse of It's Late.
[/QUOTE]
I would much rather the occasional flaw than a continual loss of dynamics. [/QUOTE]
I'm conflicted with this - sound errors like that, while they are errors, are still part of the original recording. I'm not sure if altering that is fine by me. I suppose, since it's an error in mastering and recording rather than the performance itself, it's not really the same sort of thing as George Lucas going back and tampering with the Original Star Wars films, for instance, but it still kind of bothers me. I don't know
