dysan
To be honest, when I had Rare Live in '89 I was young enough to think they were just making it all up on the spot. Such is the magic of being a kid.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Sam99 wrote:[/b]
Thanks very much Bob, you really do have a lot of musical depth, I really learn from your posts.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE] [b]dysan wrote:[/b]
To be honest, when I had Rare Live in '89 I was young enough to think they were just making it all up on the spot. Such is the magic of being a kid.[/QUOTE]
These two posts make me feel like the Grinch who stole Christmas.
Maybe ignorance is bliss. But it sure is fun listening critically and learning.
Thanks very much Bob, you really do have a lot of musical depth, I really learn from your posts.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE] [b]dysan wrote:[/b]
To be honest, when I had Rare Live in '89 I was young enough to think they were just making it all up on the spot. Such is the magic of being a kid.[/QUOTE]
These two posts make me feel like the Grinch who stole Christmas.
Maybe ignorance is bliss. But it sure is fun listening critically and learning.
dysan
Of course.
Supersonic_Man89
Surprised no one's mentioned the Spread Your Wings demos/BBC versions... loving the jam at the end of those!
MemeOverlord69
Brighton Rock from the Jazz Tour always contains nice 4 minute jams in there somewhere. Brian, John, and Roger all do their thing and play off each other. Complete improvisation. Vancouver 1978 and Osaka 1979 showcase this quite well.
cmsdrums
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
Queen were not a jam band. If you want to hear a jam band, listen to Zeppelin or the Grateful Dead.
Jamming is often high risk, high reward. When Zeppelin were clean and focused at their peak, their jams would be glorious and they could do no wrong (example, Europe 1973). When they weren't (most of 1975-80), they were a mess (Page, mostly - see: heroin). And they just got less hungry, as being labelled the best band in the world can do that to you. But I digress. This thread is about Queen.
Even on the best of nights, Queen's jams in tunes like Liar and Brighton Rock were high energy but didn't really go anywhere. And it's fine, because it didn't need to. For a few minutes per night they could vamp on a couple chords and let it rip. But they just couldn't compare to, say, Pink Floyd, who played most of their songs differently from night to night with regularity and ease. The Allman Brothers Band and Phish are also good examples of this. More recent examples are Gov't Mule and Umphrey's McGee. They're just leagues beyond whatever Queen considered improvisation in their day.
But of course this isn't a bad thing. Queen were about the presentation, and as the years went on they were less musically inventive and took less risks. When you saw Queen back then just once on a tour, you knew you were seeing a fantastic band. But if we listen back to the bootlegs even as early as 1974, every night was nearly the same. There's a reason why they rehearsed for weeks and rarely went off script. They were at their best in the studio when they spent months composing and refining their arrangements.
But this isn't really a criticism - it's just a different methodology. There's a reason why Queen are seen an innovator in arena/stadium rock. They wrote the book on production by marrying rock with musical theatre. Their MO was just completely different.
[/QUOTE]
Can't argue with any of that Sir - well put.
Queen were not a jam band. If you want to hear a jam band, listen to Zeppelin or the Grateful Dead.
Jamming is often high risk, high reward. When Zeppelin were clean and focused at their peak, their jams would be glorious and they could do no wrong (example, Europe 1973). When they weren't (most of 1975-80), they were a mess (Page, mostly - see: heroin). And they just got less hungry, as being labelled the best band in the world can do that to you. But I digress. This thread is about Queen.
Even on the best of nights, Queen's jams in tunes like Liar and Brighton Rock were high energy but didn't really go anywhere. And it's fine, because it didn't need to. For a few minutes per night they could vamp on a couple chords and let it rip. But they just couldn't compare to, say, Pink Floyd, who played most of their songs differently from night to night with regularity and ease. The Allman Brothers Band and Phish are also good examples of this. More recent examples are Gov't Mule and Umphrey's McGee. They're just leagues beyond whatever Queen considered improvisation in their day.
But of course this isn't a bad thing. Queen were about the presentation, and as the years went on they were less musically inventive and took less risks. When you saw Queen back then just once on a tour, you knew you were seeing a fantastic band. But if we listen back to the bootlegs even as early as 1974, every night was nearly the same. There's a reason why they rehearsed for weeks and rarely went off script. They were at their best in the studio when they spent months composing and refining their arrangements.
But this isn't really a criticism - it's just a different methodology. There's a reason why Queen are seen an innovator in arena/stadium rock. They wrote the book on production by marrying rock with musical theatre. Their MO was just completely different.
[/QUOTE]
Can't argue with any of that Sir - well put.