Saint Jiub
As i generally have poor taste, it should be no surprise that I love Don't Try Suicide. :)
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Sebastian
[QUOTE] [b]mooghead wrote:[/b]
You wrote 'performance' when you meant 'production'[/QUOTE]
No, I didn't. Had I meant production, I would've written production. Production was fine. Performance was sub-par.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
... the band weren´t in the studio at the same time for most of it. And in some songs it showed![/QUOTE]
There's only one song on the first side featuring all four band members; and there's only one song on the second side not to feature all four band members.
You wrote 'performance' when you meant 'production'[/QUOTE]
No, I didn't. Had I meant production, I would've written production. Production was fine. Performance was sub-par.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
... the band weren´t in the studio at the same time for most of it. And in some songs it showed![/QUOTE]
There's only one song on the first side featuring all four band members; and there's only one song on the second side not to feature all four band members.
Mr.QueenFan
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
... the band weren´t in the studio at the same time for most of it. And in some songs it showed![/QUOTE]
There's only one song on the first side featuring all four band members; and there's only one song on the second side not to feature all four band members.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the impression i got from Mack´s words was that even in the songs they were all featured, they weren´t there in the studio at the same time.
-----------------------------------------
By the way Sebastian, have you ever thought about comprising your posts - about statistics, studios used, pianos, etc - on a PDF file and share it here with us. I know it´s out there for those who want to read it, but it would be good to have all that information featured in one place.
Or you could write your own book about Queen, and sell it. I´m prety sure many people in Queen comunity share the same feeling when i say that we would be proud to buy your book. At least you have passion, and you do your research. And it seems that you like doing it, which is very important.
All the information you already have about Queen shouldn´t go to waste. And even if you don´t have the support of QP, don´t let that stop you! I think that it´s only natural that you write a book about Queen.
I know you didn´t ask for my opinion, but here it is :-)
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
... the band weren´t in the studio at the same time for most of it. And in some songs it showed![/QUOTE]
There's only one song on the first side featuring all four band members; and there's only one song on the second side not to feature all four band members.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the impression i got from Mack´s words was that even in the songs they were all featured, they weren´t there in the studio at the same time.
-----------------------------------------
By the way Sebastian, have you ever thought about comprising your posts - about statistics, studios used, pianos, etc - on a PDF file and share it here with us. I know it´s out there for those who want to read it, but it would be good to have all that information featured in one place.
Or you could write your own book about Queen, and sell it. I´m prety sure many people in Queen comunity share the same feeling when i say that we would be proud to buy your book. At least you have passion, and you do your research. And it seems that you like doing it, which is very important.
All the information you already have about Queen shouldn´t go to waste. And even if you don´t have the support of QP, don´t let that stop you! I think that it´s only natural that you write a book about Queen.
I know you didn´t ask for my opinion, but here it is :-)
Mr.QueenFan
[QUOTE] [b]Panchgani wrote:[/b]
As i generally have poor taste, it should be no surprise that I love Don't Try Suicide. :)[/QUOTE]
Or maybe it´s me with the poor taste :-)
One thing i´m sure, after hearing "Don´t try suicide" i just want to forget Freddie´s advice :-)
As i generally have poor taste, it should be no surprise that I love Don't Try Suicide. :)[/QUOTE]
Or maybe it´s me with the poor taste :-)
One thing i´m sure, after hearing "Don´t try suicide" i just want to forget Freddie´s advice :-)
Chief Mouse
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
... the band weren´t in the studio at the same time for most of it. And in some songs it showed![/QUOTE]
There's only one song on the first side featuring all four band members; and there's only one song on the second side not to feature all four band members.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the impression i got from Mack´s words was that even in the songs they were all featured, they weren´t there in the studio at the same time.
-----------------------------------------
By the way Sebastian, have you ever thought about comprising your posts - about statistics, studios used, pianos, etc - on a PDF file and share it here with us. I know it´s out there for those who want to read it, but it would be good to have all that information featured in one place.
Or you could write your own book about Queen, and sell it. I´m prety sure many people in Queen comunity share the same feeling when i say that we would be proud to buy your book. At least you have passion, and you do your research. And it seems that you like doing it, which is very important.
All the information you already have about Queen shouldn´t go to waste. And even if you don´t have the support of QP, don´t let that stop you! I think that it´s only natural that you write a book about Queen.
I know you didn´t ask for my opinion, but here it is :-)
[/QUOTE]
I would buy it :-)
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
... the band weren´t in the studio at the same time for most of it. And in some songs it showed![/QUOTE]
There's only one song on the first side featuring all four band members; and there's only one song on the second side not to feature all four band members.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the impression i got from Mack´s words was that even in the songs they were all featured, they weren´t there in the studio at the same time.
-----------------------------------------
By the way Sebastian, have you ever thought about comprising your posts - about statistics, studios used, pianos, etc - on a PDF file and share it here with us. I know it´s out there for those who want to read it, but it would be good to have all that information featured in one place.
Or you could write your own book about Queen, and sell it. I´m prety sure many people in Queen comunity share the same feeling when i say that we would be proud to buy your book. At least you have passion, and you do your research. And it seems that you like doing it, which is very important.
All the information you already have about Queen shouldn´t go to waste. And even if you don´t have the support of QP, don´t let that stop you! I think that it´s only natural that you write a book about Queen.
I know you didn´t ask for my opinion, but here it is :-)
[/QUOTE]
I would buy it :-)
Sebastian
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
Yes, but the impression i got from Mack´s words was that even in the songs they were all featured, they weren´t there in the studio at the same time.
[/QUOTE]
Yes but that applies to virtually every album. When they recorded live backing tracks they were together for that (and more often than not said backing tracks featured three our of four members), otherwise they'd work on overdubs separately. There's a reason why most of their albums were recorded at various studios, etc.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
By the way Sebastian, have you ever thought about comprising your posts - about statistics, studios used, pianos, etc - on a PDF file and share it here with us. I know it´s out there for those who want to read it, but it would be good to have all that information featured in one place.
[/QUOTE]
It's a great idea and one I've been toying with, literally, for years. Now, the problem, besides my recurring procrastination, is quality control. While not being able to prove 'everything' is not the same as not being able to prove 'anything', the amount of information that I've got which is not supported by sound evidence largely overshadows the little bits and pieces that are. That doesn't mean, as some people annoyingly put it, that all I do is guess or speculate, but it does mean indeed that the margin of error is still quite broad, and it wouldn't really be fair to publish it at this point. But of course, when (if?) I've gathered enough to make something worth reading, then surely I will. Whenever that is.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
Or you could write your own book about Queen, and sell it.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure of how feasible such a project would actually be. Not being in any way close to the band, I can't offer any exclusive information. All I've gathered comes from the same sources anybody with the albums or an internet connexion can have access to. Counting how many concerts they played in Ireland or Yugoslavia is something anyone with a basic arithmetic knowledge can do, so why should I charge for delivering those figures?
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
I´m prety sure many people in Queen comunity share the same feeling when i say that we would be proud to buy your book.
[/QUOTE]
I'm sure many of my detractors would buy it just to criticise it, which from a financial perspective is also positive.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
I know you didn´t ask for my opinion, but here it is :-)
[/QUOTE]
Your opinion, and anybody else's, is always welcome.
Yes, but the impression i got from Mack´s words was that even in the songs they were all featured, they weren´t there in the studio at the same time.
[/QUOTE]
Yes but that applies to virtually every album. When they recorded live backing tracks they were together for that (and more often than not said backing tracks featured three our of four members), otherwise they'd work on overdubs separately. There's a reason why most of their albums were recorded at various studios, etc.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
By the way Sebastian, have you ever thought about comprising your posts - about statistics, studios used, pianos, etc - on a PDF file and share it here with us. I know it´s out there for those who want to read it, but it would be good to have all that information featured in one place.
[/QUOTE]
It's a great idea and one I've been toying with, literally, for years. Now, the problem, besides my recurring procrastination, is quality control. While not being able to prove 'everything' is not the same as not being able to prove 'anything', the amount of information that I've got which is not supported by sound evidence largely overshadows the little bits and pieces that are. That doesn't mean, as some people annoyingly put it, that all I do is guess or speculate, but it does mean indeed that the margin of error is still quite broad, and it wouldn't really be fair to publish it at this point. But of course, when (if?) I've gathered enough to make something worth reading, then surely I will. Whenever that is.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
Or you could write your own book about Queen, and sell it.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure of how feasible such a project would actually be. Not being in any way close to the band, I can't offer any exclusive information. All I've gathered comes from the same sources anybody with the albums or an internet connexion can have access to. Counting how many concerts they played in Ireland or Yugoslavia is something anyone with a basic arithmetic knowledge can do, so why should I charge for delivering those figures?
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
I´m prety sure many people in Queen comunity share the same feeling when i say that we would be proud to buy your book.
[/QUOTE]
I'm sure many of my detractors would buy it just to criticise it, which from a financial perspective is also positive.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
I know you didn´t ask for my opinion, but here it is :-)
[/QUOTE]
Your opinion, and anybody else's, is always welcome.
cmsdrums
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]mooghead wrote:[/b]
You wrote 'performance' when you meant 'production'[/QUOTE]
No, I didn't. Had I meant production, I would've written production. Production was fine. Performance was sub-par.
.[/QUOTE]
I'd say the 'performance' was not sub-par - it was fine, because what they actually played has no mistakes, but what was sub-par/lacking in a lot of the work in that 81-86 period is 'inspiration' and 'desire'.
[QUOTE] [b]mooghead wrote:[/b]
You wrote 'performance' when you meant 'production'[/QUOTE]
No, I didn't. Had I meant production, I would've written production. Production was fine. Performance was sub-par.
.[/QUOTE]
I'd say the 'performance' was not sub-par - it was fine, because what they actually played has no mistakes, but what was sub-par/lacking in a lot of the work in that 81-86 period is 'inspiration' and 'desire'.
Sebastian
There are quite a few parametres to define 'sub-par' other than alleged absence or presence of mistakes.
A synth-generated bass-line is sub-par, in my opinion, when compared to the work of an actual professional bass player. There, alone, almost half of 'Hot Space' is already sub-par, not even factoring in drum computers, looped sequences, arpeggiators and so on. There's nothing wrong with technology, as long as it doesn't overtake the human element.
There's a reason why people still go and see orchestras rather than just hearing a (mistake-less) midi of the same pieces on a sampler.
A synth-generated bass-line is sub-par, in my opinion, when compared to the work of an actual professional bass player. There, alone, almost half of 'Hot Space' is already sub-par, not even factoring in drum computers, looped sequences, arpeggiators and so on. There's nothing wrong with technology, as long as it doesn't overtake the human element.
There's a reason why people still go and see orchestras rather than just hearing a (mistake-less) midi of the same pieces on a sampler.
thomasquinn 32989
[QUOTE] [b]mooghead wrote:[/b]
"but they got ruined by sub-par performance."
You wrote 'performance' when you meant 'production'[/QUOTE]
There's more to it than production. Performance is also an issue, and so is arrangement. Queen were sometimes just going through the motions.
"but they got ruined by sub-par performance."
You wrote 'performance' when you meant 'production'[/QUOTE]
There's more to it than production. Performance is also an issue, and so is arrangement. Queen were sometimes just going through the motions.
cmsdrums
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
There are quite a few parametres to define 'sub-par' other than alleged absence or presence of mistakes.
A synth-generated bass-line is sub-par, in my opinion, when compared to the work of an actual professional bass player. There, alone, almost half of 'Hot Space' is already sub-par, not even factoring in drum computers, looped sequences, arpeggiators and so on. There's nothing wrong with technology, as long as it doesn't overtake the human element.
There's a reason why people still go and see orchestras rather than just hearing a (mistake-less) midi of the same pieces on a sampler.[/QUOTE]
I absolutely agree that having a synth bass when it could be played by a bassist like Deacon is indeed 'sub-par', but again I would say that isn't a 'performance' issue (something like Staying Power is played/programmed ok), but the problem lies in them actually choosing to use a synth in the first place.
I suppose we're debating semmantics though, and essentially we are in agreement.
Performance is far more a quality issue for me from a drumming point of view on tracks such as 'It's a Hard Life', 'One Vision' and others - the drums are real, so the right decision was made to use them above programmed ones, but Roger's choice of what to play really is 'going through the motions' and is mostly uninspiring. I know the style of music and songwriting changed, but when I listen to his playing across older tracks like 'the Fairy Feller's Master Stroke', 'It's Late', 'Killer Queen', Flick of The Wrist' etc.. there are lovely little touches that he thought about such as sizzled hi hat fills, thundering tom rolls, cymbal catches and the like, but this is all sorely not even contemplated in the 80s on the occasions he actually got to play on tracks!
There are quite a few parametres to define 'sub-par' other than alleged absence or presence of mistakes.
A synth-generated bass-line is sub-par, in my opinion, when compared to the work of an actual professional bass player. There, alone, almost half of 'Hot Space' is already sub-par, not even factoring in drum computers, looped sequences, arpeggiators and so on. There's nothing wrong with technology, as long as it doesn't overtake the human element.
There's a reason why people still go and see orchestras rather than just hearing a (mistake-less) midi of the same pieces on a sampler.[/QUOTE]
I absolutely agree that having a synth bass when it could be played by a bassist like Deacon is indeed 'sub-par', but again I would say that isn't a 'performance' issue (something like Staying Power is played/programmed ok), but the problem lies in them actually choosing to use a synth in the first place.
I suppose we're debating semmantics though, and essentially we are in agreement.
Performance is far more a quality issue for me from a drumming point of view on tracks such as 'It's a Hard Life', 'One Vision' and others - the drums are real, so the right decision was made to use them above programmed ones, but Roger's choice of what to play really is 'going through the motions' and is mostly uninspiring. I know the style of music and songwriting changed, but when I listen to his playing across older tracks like 'the Fairy Feller's Master Stroke', 'It's Late', 'Killer Queen', Flick of The Wrist' etc.. there are lovely little touches that he thought about such as sizzled hi hat fills, thundering tom rolls, cymbal catches and the like, but this is all sorely not even contemplated in the 80s on the occasions he actually got to play on tracks!
Sebastian
Yeah, it's about semantics so I agree to disagree. For me, the choice of using certain instrument instead of another is part of the performance.
That's why, for me, a song like 'I'm Going Slightly Mad' has the best possible use of synth-bass. What kind of use? Switching it off and getting a real bass instead!
That's why, for me, a song like 'I'm Going Slightly Mad' has the best possible use of synth-bass. What kind of use? Switching it off and getting a real bass instead!
miraclesteinway
regarding the original question as to whether John wrote all of You and I?
My conjecture is that he wrote the words, chords, and an outline of the melody he wanted (either by writing it down or singing it to Freddie), and all four members contributed to the arrangement.
Brian had said somewhere (and I know Brian gets things wrong....) that it tended to be that whoever brought the song to the band in the first place, or whoever wrote the lyrics (I can't remember exactly what he said) was regarded as the writer, even if other members had contributed quite a lot more.
Is it possible that John could have written and arranged it? Absolutely. It's possible and even likely given that he did work as part of the band who produced all these massively complex numbers on the previous albums. He could easily have pushed his boundaries there.
I think it is likely though that everyone contributed. Brian contributed the solo in Bohemian Rhapsody - as far as we know the melody is his, but of course the chord sequence is Freddie's. In Brian's mind that still made it Freddie's song and not a Mercury-May number. In Seven Seas of Rhye, Brian actually wrote the G major middle section, but Freddie claimed the right to be named as the writer for the whole song, and I think Brian didn't really like that (it was on Days of Our Lives documentary I seem to remember).
My conjecture is that he wrote the words, chords, and an outline of the melody he wanted (either by writing it down or singing it to Freddie), and all four members contributed to the arrangement.
Brian had said somewhere (and I know Brian gets things wrong....) that it tended to be that whoever brought the song to the band in the first place, or whoever wrote the lyrics (I can't remember exactly what he said) was regarded as the writer, even if other members had contributed quite a lot more.
Is it possible that John could have written and arranged it? Absolutely. It's possible and even likely given that he did work as part of the band who produced all these massively complex numbers on the previous albums. He could easily have pushed his boundaries there.
I think it is likely though that everyone contributed. Brian contributed the solo in Bohemian Rhapsody - as far as we know the melody is his, but of course the chord sequence is Freddie's. In Brian's mind that still made it Freddie's song and not a Mercury-May number. In Seven Seas of Rhye, Brian actually wrote the G major middle section, but Freddie claimed the right to be named as the writer for the whole song, and I think Brian didn't really like that (it was on Days of Our Lives documentary I seem to remember).
Sebastian
[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]
In Seven Seas of Rhye, Brian actually wrote the G major middle section.[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily. He said he put the bit in the middle but he didn't specify which one it was.
In Seven Seas of Rhye, Brian actually wrote the G major middle section.[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily. He said he put the bit in the middle but he didn't specify which one it was.
onedunpark
Can't see an option to quote for some reason so the following was posted by "cmsdrums" and I wholeheartedly agree.
=====
Performance is far more a quality issue for me from a drumming point of view on tracks such as 'It's a Hard Life', 'One Vision' and others - the drums are real, so the right decision was made to use them above programmed ones, but Roger's choice of what to play really is 'going through the motions' and is mostly uninspiring. I know the style of music and songwriting changed, but when I listen to his playing across older tracks like 'the Fairy Feller's Master Stroke', 'It's Late', 'Killer Queen', Flick of The Wrist' etc.. there are lovely little touches that he thought about such as sizzled hi hat fills, thundering tom rolls, cymbal catches and the like, but this is all sorely not even contemplated in the 80s on the occasions he actually got to play on tracks!
=====
As far as I'm concerned, and in fairness this belongs to another thread, I think that in the early days there was an intention and commitment by the band to play to the best of (and beyond) their ability and show the world just how magnificent they were. Their individual musicality was magical and collectively they were a joy to listen to. As "cmsdrums" and "Sebastian" both suggest, their input as musicians with respect to "real" instruments was incredible.
I'm not so sure how contentious a point it is to say that by the 80's they were far more about spectacle and event and less interested in being musically challenged or interesting. I'm probably completely on my own here but I haven't voluntarily listened to anything post-Game in the last 20 years, as i just think they became more about spectacle and less about music. The ratio of gold-to-turd went almost perfectly from one to the other when viewing their career output as far as I'm concerned.
The video aside, that the band that released the early material could also release I Want To Break Free/The Miracle (specifically the song, but equally largely the whole album) staggers me. Utter Euro-Pop shite.
I just think the availablity of/dependance on non-analog instruments made them lazy and far less interesting for me to listen to.
I'm getting old, I suppose. Sorry for the thread hijack.
Getting back to the thread, Deaky's bass-work on You And I is so subtle and musically magnificent, as it is throughout the album. Getting back to my earlier post in this thread which I don't think was ever really discussed before, the fact that it never made Forever is absolutely criminal and a clear sign of the extent to which he is marginallised, by choice to a degree perhaps - but certainly by the other two. "He still enjoys the cheques" says RT. There's a statement that lacks class and is utterly unnecessary
Hmm, that largely sums up their output as an Organisation since Deaky decide to step back from it (and i accept that he was - musically - culpable for IWTBF and some of the rest before it's pointed out !! )
Rant over. Going back to my red wine.
=====
Performance is far more a quality issue for me from a drumming point of view on tracks such as 'It's a Hard Life', 'One Vision' and others - the drums are real, so the right decision was made to use them above programmed ones, but Roger's choice of what to play really is 'going through the motions' and is mostly uninspiring. I know the style of music and songwriting changed, but when I listen to his playing across older tracks like 'the Fairy Feller's Master Stroke', 'It's Late', 'Killer Queen', Flick of The Wrist' etc.. there are lovely little touches that he thought about such as sizzled hi hat fills, thundering tom rolls, cymbal catches and the like, but this is all sorely not even contemplated in the 80s on the occasions he actually got to play on tracks!
=====
As far as I'm concerned, and in fairness this belongs to another thread, I think that in the early days there was an intention and commitment by the band to play to the best of (and beyond) their ability and show the world just how magnificent they were. Their individual musicality was magical and collectively they were a joy to listen to. As "cmsdrums" and "Sebastian" both suggest, their input as musicians with respect to "real" instruments was incredible.
I'm not so sure how contentious a point it is to say that by the 80's they were far more about spectacle and event and less interested in being musically challenged or interesting. I'm probably completely on my own here but I haven't voluntarily listened to anything post-Game in the last 20 years, as i just think they became more about spectacle and less about music. The ratio of gold-to-turd went almost perfectly from one to the other when viewing their career output as far as I'm concerned.
The video aside, that the band that released the early material could also release I Want To Break Free/The Miracle (specifically the song, but equally largely the whole album) staggers me. Utter Euro-Pop shite.
I just think the availablity of/dependance on non-analog instruments made them lazy and far less interesting for me to listen to.
I'm getting old, I suppose. Sorry for the thread hijack.
Getting back to the thread, Deaky's bass-work on You And I is so subtle and musically magnificent, as it is throughout the album. Getting back to my earlier post in this thread which I don't think was ever really discussed before, the fact that it never made Forever is absolutely criminal and a clear sign of the extent to which he is marginallised, by choice to a degree perhaps - but certainly by the other two. "He still enjoys the cheques" says RT. There's a statement that lacks class and is utterly unnecessary
Hmm, that largely sums up their output as an Organisation since Deaky decide to step back from it (and i accept that he was - musically - culpable for IWTBF and some of the rest before it's pointed out !! )
Rant over. Going back to my red wine.
Oscar J
Some great posts on here, loving this.