Freddie's Final Vocal Confirmed (?)

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]

Some people desperately want to believe it, even if the overwhelming amount of evidence suggests otherwise.[/QUOTE]

This is true, but for people to believe what is said on this topic by the official reports, then we have to conclude that everybody else was/is lying. There is no other way, because i don´t believe the theory that the memory is playing tricks on them all. Maybe one could have been wrong, but not everybody.
So, i still believe that when someone says that Freddie sang until the last weeks of his live i see this time frame as October/November 1991. Six months is not the "last" weeks by any standard.

I can live with the fact that Press releases like to embellish things to public, but apart from the press releases we have people that were very intimate of Freddie during that period saying the exactly same thing. And in other cases we have people stating exactly the opposite of this, like David Richards who says that the last song recorded was "A winters Tale". This, to me means, that not everybody was in the studio at the same time, and is very possible that some sessions happened with only the people present in the studio being aware of it, and not everything was found or was simply not cataloged. For example a later session being recorded in a tape already cataloged with another date? i don´t know if this is possible, but this is not case closed yet because there are a lot of loose ends concerning this issue.

I believe Brian May experience on this subject. But one must ask, if Freddie wasn´t well enough to sing one last verse, how could he went back to London and film the "TATDOOL" video? Not only that, he insisted that he wanted to repeat the last shot of that video. Not bad for a man who wasn´t able to get back to the studio to finish singing Mother Love a week or two before.
I´ll say this respecting Freddie state at the time, because i know that some days are better than others, but something isn´t right with the reports.

My ears also tells me that there little chance that "A winters tale" was recorded at the same time as "Mother Love", because it´s clear that Freddie´s voice is different in ML. Again, maybe it was due to the disease (a cold or something else) or simply he was in character like he did for the "I´m going slightly Mad" song. It could be, but for me the difference between "ML" and "AWT" is the same between "AWT" and "TATDOOL". There seems to be a natural fading of the voice that takes more than just a few days.

Jim Hutton stated that Freddie recorded "A winters Tale" in late 1990. I mean, i believe that people might be confused about dates, but people don´t get confused between Christmas time and other times of the year. So, what was Jim talking about when he remembered Freddie singing this song? Was Freddie demoing this song? I mean, Freddie wrote a winters tale in 1990 but he waited until May 1991 to record it? Even when he wasn´t expected to finish the Innuendo sessions?

These, and other questions deserve to be thought about , before we disregard everything everybody else is saying about this, and then we can get to a definitive conclusion, but not before that.

On a side note, this discussion reminds me a bit about Titanic. People who survived it said that the ship broke in two. Scientists kept saying that it wasn´t possible for a ship like that to break in two. Memory was playing tricks on the survivers due to trauma, they said. Then, when they finally found Titanic, they discovered that it was split in two.

I will always believe people´s experience above everything else, unless they´re not worthy of my belief in them, wich until now i don´t have reasons to do so. At least to the ones mention in this thread that were with Freddie until the very end.

Can i be wrong? Absolutely, but i´m only choosing to believe that there´s a bit of truth in every story.

And to finish this off, i just say that in the past, the official information was the one proven wrong, and only due to detective work made by fans, we got the right story. Remember when Greg Brooks stated that the Knebworth concert -AUDIO- wasn´t recorded full? They didn´t have the tapes. That was until some fan spotted the tapes at the Genesis studio and photographed it, and then and only then we were told the true story - audio tapes of the full concert do exist!

Cheers, and Merry Xmas

@ MrQueenFan

David Richard said that "A winter tale" was the last song Freddie has written for MIH. The last song he recorded was "Mother Love".

There's documented evidence of David saying the last one was AWT (e.g., on the interview available on DRF's channel), and evidence of David saying the last one was ML (e.g., CotW docu, and the '95 German RS interview). It's not his fault to forget about the exact order when it comes to sessions which were, by his own admission, happening more or less at the same time. Fans loyally and obsessively remember which song was where and all that, but little do the actual artists care about being exact on those details. There's audio evidence of Brian, as early as 1978, referring to 'Love of My Life' as a song from either 'Sheer Heart Attack' or 'A Day at the Races.'

Artists also embellish things, the same way the press does. 'Freddie sang this bit when he just had a few weeks left to live' is perfectly understandable as, again, 28-30 weeks are 'just a few' in the context of a 45-year-long life. It's part of their job description, as more publicity generates more sales, simple as that. Witness recollection is extremely unreliable, especially after all these years and especially compared to other sources. Had there been an actual video of the 'Titanic' either splitting in half or not, that would've been far more accurate than both victims' statements and scientists' hypotheses. Science marches on, after all, and what one day is universally accepted can easily be debunked by just one person later on. It happens with 'serious business' things such as realising smoking is actually bad for your health, or realising the earth's not flat, so of course it can also happen when it comes to the 'legend' of a wheelchair-bound near-flatlining Freddie still singing in October.

Dates on the original tracksheets beat witness recollections, as those recorded data (assuming they had the sense of writing down the right dates and all that) are impervious to memory deterioration or marketing-fuelled fabrication.

Freddie took part on the 'Days of Our Lives' footage in London because he, well, lived in London. Miming to a song while reading lyrics written on A2 cardboard is far less demanding than actually singing. I completely agree that *that* Freddie could've probably recorded more had he had the chance but what the evidence suggests is that he did not get it. They'd scheduled some more recordings in August but perhaps by then (three months after the 'Days of Our Lives' video shooting) his health had worsened to the point of changing plans.

The actual events we will never know for sure, and there'll still be loads of 'maybes' and 'what ifs'. However, both logic and serious evidence strongly suggest that was it (Fred-wise) in May '91.

Jim's book says Fred wrote AWT that winter. Winter goes from December to February, so it could've easily fitted the January 1991 timeline for a recording. There's tracksheet evidence that Fred did more sessions for that song in early May, but it doesn't mean *at all* that he replaced all the vocals. For all we know, he could've just changed a few words around and the main 'bunch' could come from January, thus accounting for the tone and timbre dissimilarities between AWT and ML.

The problem with saying there is nothing left is that Queen are saying there is another album coming out next year. Unless people don't believe this is actually going to happen, then the question can be asked where are any "new" tracks on the expected release coming from? They could well be tracks from earlier recording sessions. No one can dispute that. But with the "official" story changing so often, is it any wonder that some of us have been speculating about exactly how much material still remains to be released?

Just to remind people that it was actually Roger and Brian who were the ones that reignited this issue last year when they said that they were going to go back into the studio and work on the material that was still left over and put an album together. I'm sure just about everybody had given up hope of more material with Freddie on it coming out before that. I know I certanly had. I mean cripes!, it was 17 years since MIH at that point! (now 18!).

Next it was off again and Roger was talking about not wanting to be involved in a "bottom scraping exercise". Yet now, only around 12 months later, he and Brian have "suddenly" discovered more tracks which, according to Roger in the recent Toronto Sun article (check the Queen Announcement thread!), aren't even demos!

In these circumstances, there is little doubt in my mind that last year's announcement was for promotional purposes to get fans like us talking about the possiblity of more Freddie material. And it has certainly worked!

If next year's album does materialise at some stage, which seems almost certain now, it will be the second time that we will have been told that there is nothing left in the cupboard (the third if you include Roger's "bottom scraping" comments from last year) only to find that there was indeed more material left. So given that even the official sources have been so unreliable in this regard, is it any wonder that some people are now wondering how much material is really left?

Having said that, the given the factual uncertainties we are faced with, it might well be that it is the nature of certain people to think "the glass is half full" whereas for others "the glass is half emply". However, the truth is that the details and actual facts of the matter still remain to be completely resolved.

Being a "glass half full" kind of person, I know that I suspected that Roger's "bottom scraping exercise" comments would not be the end of the matter and said so on this forum at the time, when the overwhelming sentiment was the belief that what Roger said finally confirmed that this had to be it.

So the question I would therefore ask each of you is what did you write on here when Roger made those comments? Did you say "right that's definitely it now!" and "there's definitely no more" or like me, did you basically say "yeah nah"?

Then the next question I would ask is were the "yaysayers" right because it's just the way they are and they were just lucky or were they right because they saw through Roger's "bottom scraping exercise" comments and correctly interpreted them as just being promotional spin?

As you say, the most logical possibility is that whatever they're using on the next posthumous project is going to come from earlier sessions. It's not like they haven't done it before ... 72.73% of 'Made in Heaven' is made up of songs which were written and (Fred-wise) recorded in the 80's.

Early albums have a lesser (but still existing) chance of containing usable unreleased songs. For 'Queen II', it took them less than a month to record 11 songs (that we know of), while on 'Sheer Heart Attack' it took them three months for 13 tracks ... granted, Brian was ill and some of the songs were more complex so that takes longer, but it'd also give them enough time to maybe try out some ideas that weren't included (e.g., the title track, later revived on 'News of the World').

That means that the material to be used on the new 'MiH' most likely comes from July 1974 onwards. It makes perfect sense that *all* of Fred's recordings on that hypothetical new MiH come from the July 1974 - May 1991 time-frame, with an overwhelming majority being actually from July 1974 to November 1990 (i.e., 97.04% of the previously mentioned era).

It would certainly seem to make more sense Sebastian. I mean the period from 1974 through to May 1991 is most of the band's career and during which Freddie was definitely in better health than he was during those last few months, So it would make sense that this would be where any unreleased material would come from.

Having said that, it will be still be interesting to see what the truth of the matter is when the new album is actually released next year, Hopefully it won't be delayed in this respect as we have already been waiting too long! (whether we knew it or not....lol!)

I seem to remember a Freddie interview to promote the album "ANATO" where Freddie stated that he had lot´s of material donne for SHA that wasn´t used. I´ll have to check later if i still have this magazine to confirm this, but i´m pretty sure about this. I´m just not sure if it was written or recorded.

After discover that "Too Much Love Will Kill You" MIH is exactly the same version that was recorded for the miracle album, i´m led to believe that they must have lots of complete songs waiting to be released from other albums as well.

According to Brian May, when they had almost finished recording the "Works" album, they "..threw off so much because there wasn´t room for it...". And it makes perfect sense. Most bands record more than 12 songs to choose the best for the record, and with Queen, this makes perfect sense. Not just demos, but real songs. And Brian says "... we threw off so much...". Now the question is, how much is so much?
I´d say at least three complete songs. At least in my book :-)

Here´s the link of Brian. It starts at 2:50 sec:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf_2OxL24jA

Now, was Brian´s mind playing tricks on him? Of course not, because the others were there also, and it was very fresh in his/their memory. So, there´s two options:

- The tapes are only starting to appear now, like Brian states (last couple of years), or;
-They simply don´t want fans to know about it, maybe to surprise the fans, or to not receive questions or pressure about it.

Either way, in Brian words, for the works only there is at least more than one complete song. Brian clearly states that they were almost finished recording the album. I´m pretty sure that there are some songs left out of the "Game" album too, considering how small that album is.

@Sebastian.

That was a great reply and i´m certainly not judging the veracity of what Justin stated here as facts. I´m just telling that if we take all the loose ends here, maybe we´ll get somewhere, as i believe we did already.
I won´t judge other people´s memory, but myself i have a great memory about things, so i expect people to have the same memory.

In the case of Titanic, even if i was a scientist i would still consider the possibility that more than 700 people couldn´t all be wrong. I don´t have a thing against scientists, i´m only stating that people´s experience must be taken into consideration- at least when there´s clearly more than one with the same memories. But if i remember correctly the majority of people who survived were women, and maybe this explains something.

The reason i say this about people that took REAL care of Freddie it´s because you don´t forget certain things, mainly due to the symptoms that he started to present. Now, there´s 22 years past his death, but i´m pretty sure that Peter knew when Freddie started to limb and all of the other symptoms dates. I know this from real life experience, that when you´re taking care of someone with an illness you´ll remember this stuff. And if you know that he´s on a time limit - like they all knew - then they´re gonna cherish those memories for ever- like time spent by the lake, christmas, and so on.

But this is me, i know that everybody is different and i don´t want to offend anyone by calling liars to people but i find hard to believe that everybody is confused. It can happen, and i leave it at that.

To put this to rest, what i´m really trying to say is:
If i was a researcher really interested in getting this thing right i would first look at the dates on the tapes, like Justin did. Then, i would compare what i´d discovered with what people remember. And then if there was discrepancy like it seems to be, i would talk to those people- if i could have access to them- like they do. They might not remember the exact dates, but can they remember if it was near the summer or winter? Can Brian remember if it was before or after his his guitar legends show in Spain October 1991.
There´s lots of small things that can indicate the correct dates if people only ask the right questions to the right persons. And then if it was really May 91 like it seems to be the case, great! That´s all i mean.

Songs they'd initially planned for 'The Works' but which were discarded, theoretically in different stages of completion:

* 'I Go Crazy', which we all know what they did to.
* 'Man on Fire'
* 'Man-Made Paradise'
* 'Let Me in Your Heart Again' (IIRC)
* 'Another Piece of My Heart', which we also know what happened with.

Regarding '700 people can't all be wrong,' actually, they can: at one point most people (far more than 700) believed the earth was flat (and no, it wasn't Columbus who first realised that wasn't the case). Very often a person's memory is influenced by someone else's, and the brain makes a similar connexion between a false/imprinted recollection and a true one, so there's no way to tell if they're being honest, if they're purposely lying, if they're saying something inaccurate but under good faith and honest belief that's how it is, etc.

What Justin found about 'Mother Love' is quite conclusive, especially if the contents of those multi-tracks match the finished version. There's no way around it: if that's the case (and AFAIK, it is), then Fred didn't record any vocal for ML after May 1991, simple as that. Now, we could still theorise about more recordings later on, yielding hitherto unreleased material, etc., but Occam's Razor dictates a much simpler solution: he stopped recording six months before he died, and statements implying or outright saying otherwise are a product of either marketing or wishful thinking or misrecollections or a combination of those.

I went and looked up the definition of Occam's Razor just to make sure my understanding of the principle was accurate. The definition from Wiki is here > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor. Basically, as I understand it, it says that in the absence of support for more complicated theories, the simplest solution is often the best one and is the one to go with.

So applying this principle to this issue of Freddie's final recordings, the sourced reels we have now been told about do suggest that the formal recording process ended with Mother Love. Supporting this, we also have Brian saying that Mother Love had to be finished off by himself and Roger because Freddie never came back to the studio.

Other than that, we have some verbal evidence from Phoebe that Freddie continued to record right up to about a month before his death when he could no longer sing anymore and we also have the band describing how Freddie asked the band to write any lines at all and he would sing them as the end drew near.

However, we don't have any other objective evidence to support these last two contentions like the recording dates on a can for Mother Love. Although Justin does warn us about being too black and white about these things and was even "horrified" when The Real Wizard discounted Phoebe's evidence that Freddie continued recording right up to the month before his death.

However, without any further evidence to support Phoebe's statement or the band's statement that Freddie asked his bandmates to give him lines to sing, Occam's Razor, or indeed the "doctrine of conservatism" for that matter, would seem to indicate that we can only expect any material to exist up until May 1991. And assuming the material provided next year doesn't suggest something different in that respect, then I think that would have to be the "truth" that it would be sensible to settle for moving forward into the future.

Mind you, given the ongoing inconsistencies in what has been said by Brian and Roger in the past, right up to just recently, I wouldn't be at all surprised if one day in the not too distant future, they do come out once again and say something like "Wow! We have just found this cache of previously unheard of vocal recordings by Freddie", which we might be able to do something with.

In those circumstances, those rumours of multiple albums being left in the can (from whatever period) might ultimately turn out to be accurate. And if that does turn out to be the case, then it should remembered that saying this is your last one often seems to do wonders for sales. Just look at the number of farewell tours that certain artists like Kiss have had over the years! Gee! They've even gone back to putting out albums again in the last few years.

And if other music does does ultimately turn out to exist, I will be one fan that will not be complaining. As each new discovery feels to me to some extent like Freddie is still there along with the others, putting out albums for their fans.

[QUOTE] [b]Heavenite wrote:[/b]
So applying this principle to this issue of Freddie's final recordings, the sourced reels we have now been told about do suggest that the formal recording process ended with Mother Love. Supporting this, we also have Brian saying that Mother Love had to be finished off by himself and Roger because Freddie never came back to the studio.

Other than that, we have some verbal evidence from Phoebe that Freddie continued to record right up to about a month before his death when he could no longer sing anymore and we also have the band describing how Freddie asked the band to write any lines at all and he would sing them as the end drew near.
[/QUOTE]

I don't see how these two statements would contradict each other, because I don't think that Phoebe has defined the quality of the recordings he's talking about.

It's entirely possible that Mother Love was the last time Freddie was recording with professional studio equipment, but he could still have been recording at his home months later. He could have been singing (or playing) rough ideas onto a cassette recorder lying on the bed.

It doesn't mean that any of the material could be transformed into commercial songs, but I suppose it's also possible that after 20 years of technological development it would be easier to make these home recordings sound like proper recordings?

AFAIK, what Peter Freestone said was that Freddie'd definitely visited the studios in October, but he didn't say at any point that he'd definitely recorded. In fact, he safely cleared up he wasn't there so he didn't know exactly what'd happened and what, if anything, had been recorded. So it's not as if he's actively contradicting the established chronology.

Maybe they should dig up Freddie's coffin to see if he's done any recordings with a portable cassette recorder while dead? After all, the fact that we aren't aware of any cases where a dead person has sung songs doesn't mean it's 100% impossible - people once believed that the Earth was flat, similarly everyone may now only *believe* that the dead can't sing. So should they check the coffin, just in case?

Reading these boards is kind of depressing and I have to stop it because people are so terribly stuck in the past... desperately wishing to get one more album from a person who died long ago. Must remind oneself that there are actually bands out there that don't have to resort to archaelogical diggings to release a new album.

There is nothing to suggest that another Freddie Mercury album could emerge, much less that one should. If there is even one unheard, good and proper song in the archives - which is unlikely - I suppose it might be nice to hear it on some anthology, but anything more than that is just wishful longing for the past, macabre barrel-scraping and sad attempt from B & R to stay in headlines.

Must-try-to-move-on...

He was cremated...

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]

Regarding '700 people can't all be wrong,' actually, they can: at one point most people (far more than 700) believed the earth was flat (and no, it wasn't Columbus who first realised that wasn't the case). Very often a person's memory is influenced by someone else's, and the brain makes a similar connexion between a false/imprinted recollection and a true one, so there's no way to tell if they're being honest, if they're purposely lying, if they're saying something inaccurate but under good faith and honest belief that's how it is, etc.

[/QUOTE]

This is where i totally disagree with you!
700 people looking at a ship that big breaking in two cannot be wrong. You can´t compare it with the belief that the Earth was flat, because once people experienced that it was not, the belief changed. People didn´t believe that Titanic broke in two- they knew it, because they saw it, and it was only when a researcher took that into account and started looking for debris instead of looking for the ship itself, that it was found. And guess what?- It was break in two.
I respect your point of view, but we´re talking about different things here.

I´m willing to put this to rest for now, because i don´t know what Phoebe said about this or the context - only what i see here, so i will continue this research in a more private way.

This may not have been the actual subject, but: it was already known in classical antiquity that the earth was round, and in fact, its circumference was pretty accurately calculated almost 2000 years before Columbus' voyage opened what we call the Early Modern Era. The widely-held assumption that people in the Middle Ages believed that the earth was flat is nothing more than a 19th century misunderstanding of the primitive style of perspective used in late-classical and medieval maps.

As for the point at hand, if I may point out that I am an historian by training and have won academic awards in that field and as such have a level of authority on this subject: the mere quantity of sources can never be more than a circumstantial indication of veracity. The key factors are the proximity of the author of a source to the thing he/she is describing, the motivation behind the creation of the source, the length of time between the events described and the making of the description, the consistency of descriptions by the same author and then the correspondence with other sources.