Freddie Mercury-Send In The Clowns

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]Its great to just chat and not get any crap slagging my posts off like what Brenski does to look clever.[/QUOTE]don't worry - I won't let you down Gezza. Here you go.....

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]Ta dah! yes i love Body Language because its got a good tune to it
sure it lacks Brians guitar but we have all the other Queen albums for that!
[/QUOTE] other albums? like Innuendo? Ta-da!!!

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b] As for " Real Wizard" picking faults out with my selection of Queen albums,
we all have our own personal choice of likes and dislikes but hey, its still Queen! So after all the shitty posts Wizard has gave me, do yourself a favour and look what you have said, you have actually moaned because i like a different album to you![/QUOTE] he didn't pick fault, moan and it wasn't a shitty post. he said:
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b] ^ quite possibly.
But hey, people are funny. My aunt likes Wings more than The Beatles.[/QUOTE] which is a direct reference to the old saying "nowt as queer as folk" - meaning "it takes all sorts" ie everyone is different. the example he gave quite clearly demonstrated the fact that he recognizes that people can have different tastes - which is why there such is a thing as majority and minority. Otherwise we'd all be the same and that'd be dull.

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]Personally when he said his mother prefers Wings to the Beatles, thats personal choice again, were all different with our OWN choices, get it? (probably not) but keep trying.[/QUOTE] he didn't. he said AUNT. your attention span is severely lacking in something. If you intend to quote someone. get it right.

Seriously, can you guys take this off-topic nonsense elsewhere? I made a topic just for that purpose now: http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1392170/gerry-gillickers-a-k-a-the-madness-topic.aspx?anchor=0 This is the Serious Discussion subforum..."SERIOUS discussion on the greatest band in the land"

Back to your regular topical programming folks...

Any chance of getting these newly leaked Freddie tapes in FLAC? :P

[QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b]

Any chance of getting these newly leaked Freddie tapes in FLAC? :P[/QUOTE]

You can download the full tape in FLAC from the link Chief Mouse shows in the first pages.

EDIT:
Here you can download it: http://www.mijnbestand.nl/share.php?key=MEOR77RXIAJJ

Oh I missed that! Thanks BETA :)

Well, this guy has SERIOUS taste issues, SERIOUS anger issues and a SERIOUS persecution complex...

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]Well, this guy has SERIOUS taste issues, SERIOUS anger issues and a SERIOUS persecution complex...[/QUOTE]

lol

love the fact that the "Gezza/Jeffa" thread went to 17 bloody pages...
angry loony and pee-brained-feck, shouting at pigeons and passers-by....fucking love it

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

The Show Must Go On isn't classic Queen?
[/QUOTE]

For the sake of argument, I want to reply to this one: I don't think TSMGO is classic Queen. Sure, it does have some of the classic traits, namely the vocal and guitar harmonies, but other than that, it would've been quite out of place on a seventies album considering:

* It was recorded with a metronome.
* It's got programmed drums alongside the acoustic ones.
* It lacks a 'live' backing track.
* There's no piano or acoustic guitar.
* Drums are set up, tuned and mixed very differently.
* It's synth-based.
* Lyrics aren't fairy tale thingies or straightforward love songs.

Now, I don't mean *every* song in the 70's had those aspects, but those were part of the 'classic' Queen sound.

TSMGO, and the Innuendo album as a whole (with some exceptions) was not a return to the 'classic' Queen at all IMO. It was more of an evolution of the 'new' Queen including a bit more emphasis on the aspects that survived all the changes and experiments, namely the anthem-like vocals (of which there are examples on every single album), the sonic volcano of John and Roger, and the multi-tracked guitar harmonies.

It's a marvellous song and probably a top 10 of their catalogue, but in terms of being 'classic' Queen it's not even top 50 IMO, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

It's better than anything they did after Under Pressure.
[/QUOTE]

That's quite subjective. I personally rate WIAWI higher, but they're both marvellous anyway. By the way, I would consider WIAWI to be closer to 'classic' Queen than TSMGO despite the synths (but they've both got loads of synths anyway).

Your lyrics-criticism aside, those are all production and arrangement points, not compositional. I think you are wrong in considering the production a vital part of what makes Queen-songs Queen-songs. They're not ABBA, ffs.

Well, reading most of these posts one thing is for sure. Queen funs are passionate people.
Freddie would have been proud!

[QUOTE]

I have to agree. It's one thing to measure the differences and similarities between two things, but you also need to weigh up which of those things are important and which aren't. The fact that it doesn't have an acoustic guitar for example is, imo, irrelevant. TSMGO has that "classic Queen" sound because it is ambitious, dramatic and multi-layered -- which are the main things I equate with the classic Queen period.  

[b]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/b]
[b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote: [/b] Your lyrics-criticism aside, those are all production and arrangement points, not compositional. I think you are wrong in considering the production a vital part of what makes Queen-songs Queen-songs. They're not ABBA, ffs.[/QUOTE]

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


* It was recorded with a metronome.
* It's got programmed drums alongside the acoustic ones.
* It lacks a 'live' backing track.
* There's no piano or acoustic guitar.
* Drums are set up, tuned and mixed very differently.
* It's synth-based.
* Lyrics aren't fairy tale thingies or straightforward love songs.

[/QUOTE]

So using this list as a guide we can deduce that nothing recorded after 1979 is classic Queen.

Another thing that is worthy of note. In an interview in 1980 in International Musician RT gives a very descriptive account of the way he and Roy Thomas Baker used to construct drum loops on which the Bass and Rhythm guitars were recorded because that alway gave a perfect timed track to work too. In the interview he was saying that that is how most of Fun In Space was tracked too. Drum fills etc were added later. So does that mean that mean there are no classic Queen tracks according to the rules of the list

Yeah, loops were used sometimes for the Jazz album, but in general, Queen in the 70s recorded without metronomes, that's easy to check and confirm.

There's nothing wrong with a track not being 'classic' Queen, as it doesn't make it any better or worse than one that is.

In compositional terms, 'Show Must Go On' is not too similar to 70's Queen tracks either. At least, not more so than the average 80's or 90's track.