The Real Wizard wrote:
Because the radio wasn't nearly as formulaic in 1975 as it was by the 80s, or even 1978... Risks could pan out in 75, but it was completely out of the question by 84. If you didn't conform, you weren't played, end of.
That's indeed a great point and one I hadn't thought of. Not to dismiss how valuable Bo Rhap was, but it seems that the whole 'everybody collectivelly begged them not to release it' might've been blown out of proportion to contribute to the myth, same as the 180 voices, being the first video, three solid weeks of recording, 16-track ... all of which have been all but debunked and all of which still stem from a fact which was initially true.
It was still a risk, of course, and a big risk at that, but not the massive 'against the grain' challenge it's often presented as by the media and the fans. 'Hey Jude' had set a precedent for a largely successful really long single, 'I'm Not in Love' had been No 1 earlier that year and it was also long and with plenty of overdubs (though that one they did edit for the single version).
So perhaps a song like 'Bo Rhap' had a chance of one in a thousand to top the charts in 1975, but in 1984 it would've been one in a million... add to it the fact Queen were still relatively unknown in '75 (they'd had a minor local hit and a medium-sized international one) so they hadn't been typecast yet.
cmsdrums wrote:
As soon as the 2011 mix came out I also pointed out on Brian's Soapbox that Josh had missed one bass drum beat in the restore (and I'm confident it's a missed beat rather than Roger not playing it originally), he replied in a very rude and condescending manner, and then his post was removed a day or two later!
I remember that and I resent not having printscreened that before they took it away. I don't think Brian had anything to do with it or even knew about it, but if that's the case then it shows again how some (not all) of the people who work for QP are simply unfit for that job in terms of basic human decency and manners. Prenter's been demonised for keeping Fred sheltered and deliberately filtering communication on both directions, but those who often pan him nowadays are surrounded by some people who are more or less doing the same thing.
dysan wrote:
So yeah, a conscious decision to mix it out.
The aforementioned rude response and swift removal of it back in 2011 contradicts that conclusion ... which doesn't mean you're wrong: most likely, the QP employee in question was wrong and perhaps one of the reasons why they had to delete it was that they were making a factual statement about the original mix, which they did not witness as they entered the Queen organisation much, much later.