Not the sound, they kind of did a good job with the overdubs given the tiredness of Freddie's voice. They're noticeable but not egregious.
No, I mean the visuals. The shot changes every three seconds, more frequently on some songs. Yes Brian, Roger and John all deserved to get in on the act and it wasn't the Freddie show but I can't help thinking that you have perhaps the world's greatest front man ever in front of 72,000 fans and ever two or three seconds we get a shot of Roger's back and side playing the drums. It's so frustrating.
Even during Radio Ga Ga the camera moved about so much you couldn't even really tell if the audience were even doing the hand clap thing. Given that was arguably the most iconic 'live' song Queen had, certainly insofar as audience participation was concerned, it's as if they chose to ignore it on the basis that it'd be unfair if we don't see Brian for more than 4 seconds.
You get dizzy watching it and they miss probably 80% of Freddie's performance and interaction with the crowd.
Costa86 · Member since
I agree.
One of the part's where I think they could really have done a better job is the beginning, when Freddie first appears on stage just as One Vision starts. The crowd literally went mad with the cheering as soon as they saw Freddie, but somehow this didn't emerge well in the video. The enthusiam of the crowd just wasn't showcased to the full. They just showed one or two really brief and badly placed shots of the crowd raising their hands.
matt z · Member since
Well. I'm not sure if this was the case overseas but in the USA the film was distributed by Hollywood Records and they enhanced some of the visuals with weird swirling visuals. In particular during Brian's IAKOM solo.
Was this also done on overseas releases?
Bo Alex · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]matt z wrote:[/b]
Well. I'm not sure if this was the case overseas but in the USA the film was distributed by Hollywood Records and they enhanced some of the visuals with weird swirling visuals. In particular during Brian's IAKOM solo.
Was this also done on overseas releases? [/QUOTE]
I think that's the edit of the old VHS release. I had a pirate copy.
k-m · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Snackpot wrote:[/b]
Not the sound, they kind of did a good job with the overdubs given the tiredness of Freddie's voice. They're noticeable but not egregious.
No, I mean the visuals. The shot changes every three seconds, more frequently on some songs. Yes Brian, Roger and John all deserved to get in on the act and it wasn't the Freddie show but I can't help thinking that you have perhaps the world's greatest front man ever in front of 72,000 fans and ever two or three seconds we get a shot of Roger's back and side playing the drums. It's so frustrating.
Even during Radio Ga Ga the camera moved about so much you couldn't even really tell if the audience were even doing the hand clap thing. Given that was arguably the most iconic 'live' song Queen had, certainly insofar as audience participation was concerned, it's as if they chose to ignore it on the basis that it'd be unfair if we don't see Brian for more than 4 seconds.
You get dizzy watching it and they miss probably 80% of Freddie's performance and interaction with the crowd.[/QUOTE]
Quite accurate apart from one detail. The audio sucked too.
JackTorrance · Member since
Brian's guitar sounds too thin to me. Other concert-releases have a better and heavier guitar sound.
I don't like Wembley. Queen's performance overall is OK, but it's one of the worst Magi Ctour shows. It's not because of Freddie's voice, Knebwordth has Freddie in even lesser vocal shape, but he is much better and the badn sounds mucht tighter. Maybe the nerves. Wembley (Friday) is just so much better than the Friday.
For me, Live At The Bowl is by far the best official concert release from the 80's and 10 times better than Wembley Saturday.
Sue Dounim · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]JackTorrance wrote:[/b]
For me, Live At The Bowl is by far the best official concert release from the 80's and 10 times better than Wembley Saturday.[/QUOTE]
I agree completely with this. I'd go so far as to say it's better than Rock Montreal as well. The setlist for that is devoid of all the songs unique to the Game tour and Freddie's pissed off. Back to Wembley, it's got it's problems but its still decent. It was good enough to make me want more live Queen stuff. If you wanna talk poor mixing look no further than Hungarian Rhapsody. All bass and it's dry as all get-out.
popy · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Snackpot wrote:[/b]
Not the sound, they kind of did a good job with the overdubs given the tiredness of Freddie's voice. They're noticeable but not egregious.
No, I mean the visuals. The shot changes every three seconds, more frequently on some songs. Yes Brian, Roger and John all deserved to get in on the act and it wasn't the Freddie show but I can't help thinking that you have perhaps the world's greatest front man ever in front of 72,000 fans and ever two or three seconds we get a shot of Roger's back and side playing the drums. It's so frustrating.
Even during Radio Ga Ga the camera moved about so much you couldn't even really tell if the audience were even doing the hand clap thing. Given that was arguably the most iconic 'live' song Queen had, certainly insofar as audience participation was concerned, it's as if they chose to ignore it on the basis that it'd be unfair if we don't see Brian for more than 4 seconds.
You get dizzy watching it and they miss probably 80% of Freddie's performance and interaction with the crowd.[/QUOTE]
So go watch Live Aid. On it we only see Brian, Roger and John because they are close and in the same stage as Freddie. If Freddie was in a corner and the band on the other corner, we might not even have video footage of the rest of the band besides Freddie.
What i don't like about Wembley is the lack of a camera filming when Freddie and Brian go to the front of the stage and the only angles we get are from behind them or from the sides, rarely we get front angle shots. Because of that lack of a front camera, Gavin Taylor completly misses Brian TYMD or Boh Rhap solos for example, only managing to get side cameras to film it.
winterspelt · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]JackTorrance wrote:[/b]
Brian's guitar sounds too thin to me. Other concert-releases have a better and heavier guitar sound.
[/QUOTE]
Brian didnt used his regular rig, that's why the guitar sound is so different.
[QUOTE] [b]matt z wrote:[/b]
Well. I'm not sure if this was the case overseas but in the USA the film was distributed by Hollywood Records and they enhanced some of the visuals with weird swirling visuals. In particular during Brian's IAKOM solo.
Was this also done on overseas releases? [/QUOTE]
I remember them, they were awful!
That "enhancement" (?) was done only on the VHS. They removed those effects in the DVD release.
Biggus Dickus · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]winterspelt wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]JackTorrance wrote:[/b]
Brian's guitar sounds too thin to me. Other concert-releases have a better and heavier guitar sound.
[/QUOTE]
Brian didnt used his regular rig, that's why the guitar sound is so different.
[QUOTE] [b]matt z wrote:[/b]
Well. I'm not sure if this was the case overseas but in the USA the film was distributed by Hollywood Records and they enhanced some of the visuals with weird swirling visuals. In particular during Brian's IAKOM solo.
Was this also done on overseas releases? [/QUOTE]
I remember them, they were awful!
That "enhancement" (?) was done only on the VHS. They removed those effects in the DVD release.
[/QUOTE]
Haha I remember those horrendous visual effects as well as the slowed down bits from that old VHS version I used to watch as a kid. Also the bloody VHS wasn't the full show. Of course I didn't know that at that time.
liam · Member since
However, it is much better than new concert releases. I can't believe how fast the editing is on new releases.
Biggus Dickus · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]liam wrote:[/b]
However, it is much better than new concert releases. I can't believe how fast the editing is on new releases.[/QUOTE]
^^ Yeah some new releases can be epilepsy inducing. One of the worst is Death On The Road by Iron Maiden. I've never had a problem with Wembley's editing, it's not too fast for me. I much more dislike stuff like Earls Court 1977, the editing is so slow and boring and the camera angles aren't that good.
Tlr · Member since
Seems to be a thing with Queen productions. Just about everything every documentary is a series of three second clips spliced together. It was particularly bad in the DoRo stuff but persists today. What's wrong with having the same person on screen for a few minutes, relaying an anecdote un interrupted?!
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Tlr wrote:[/b]
Seems to be a thing with Queen productions. Just about everything every documentary is a series of three second clips spliced together. It was particularly bad in the DoRo stuff but persists today. What's wrong with having the same person on screen for a few minutes, relaying an anecdote un interrupted?![/QUOTE]
It should be noted that DoRo only do that kind of thing in their work with Queen - their work for other artists is of much higher quality. Which begs the question - is Queen / their management responsible for those dodgy calls?
*goodco* · Member since
Most (all?) concert videos seem to be directed by those with the attention span of a squirrel.
Or they are unfamiliar with the song, and are obsessed as to whether band members had a manicure that day.
Most BoRhap live vids stink. With all the mood lighting that took place during the song, let's just show Freddie's face. Let's show just John after the band reappears on stage. And then show Freddie sweating. Wembley's 'Radio' could have been terrific. On and on.......
I recently tried to watch a Dream Theater concert that was a present. Superb musicians. Some very good lighting. Who do I focus on at various moments, or view all four? Nope, gotta see if Rudess' or Petrucci's finger nails are clean.
