Golden Salmon's Innuendo Collection

Ale Solan wrote:

The content it's the same, there are no differences musically speaking. Queen didn't record two different demos (as far as we know)

Same content musically speaking, definitely. However, there's an extra 2-3 seconds at the end of the 4:24 track that are not present in the nearly complete track. We just can't ignore that, whether we call it a different version, source or whatever.


I'm going to document it like this, hopefully most can agree with this explanation:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

09 Self Made Man (convention audience recording, cut outro) (4:18) *
10 Self Made Man (cut intro, full outro, rough transfer - from Ale Solan) (4:24) *
11 Self Made Man (nearly complete, outro fades out early, equalized, best quality) (4:46) *

* All “Self Made Man” files feature significant differences, which aren't properly documented anywhere. I’ve included waveform and spectrogram comparisons (all tracks lined up with added silence) so that you can see the differences among them. The convention recording misses most of the outro. The rough recording misses most of the intro but features a full volume outro that’s lost in the otherwise complete, best quality equalized source. A widely spread 4:38 recording also exists, but it's a sort of fake version with an outro excerpt merged with the cut intro, as if it was an attempt to restore what's missing.

Again Golden Salmon, there are no several versions of the demo, Queen recorded (as far as we know) just one version of this song. The differences you mention are no significant, anyone can edit out an intro or outro o rise up the volume of any part and spread several versions like they are original on itselves.

If we'd have to document a version, let's say it should be a 4:48 minutes version which isn't available publicly so far. Let's not confuse people with 24 different versions of nothing.

^It's been a while since I'm not talking about versions, but sources. And we can't document a source we don't have.

Thank you.

Golden Salmon wrote:

Ale Solan wrote:

Self Made Man was edit by someone in here, can't remember who, there are not two versions, just one.

Can you please provide your source? I mean, the differences are there. The genuine audience recording (2001) does not match the rougher, hiss-ridden version (2005), but it does match the complete, very clear sound, high quality version. There are details you can't just fake, such as the different volume levels on top of at least one extra detail you can hear in the intro (a sort of guitar twang in the 2005 version not present in the others). If someone really did engineer the audio in the high quality version, they do deserve some special recognition and I'm ready to eat crow in that case.

I don't have a source on it being fan made, but the rough quality one is definitely just an edit of the higher quality one. Compare the first "loop" of the intro of the rough quality version, then listen from 4:14 on your file of the higher quality one. Exact same percussion, keyboards, guitar twang, etc.

It seems to me that the rough version is just an edit created using by compressing the audio a bit and cutting some bits of the outro to create a new intro.

EDIT: Managed to miss the entire second page, whoops...

Golden Salmon wrote:

^It's been a while since I'm not talking about versions, but sources. And we can't document a source we don't have.

It seems like you're new at this... you don't document a source of a demo but a version.

Ale Solan wrote:

Golden Salmon wrote:

^It's been a while since I'm not talking about versions, but sources. And we can't document a source we don't have.

It seems like you're new at this... you don't document a source of a demo but a version.

Wow, this board is so buggy. Reposting:

Ale Solan wrote:

Golden Salmon wrote:

^It's been a while since I'm not talking about versions, but sources. And we can't document a source we don't have.

It seems like you're new at this... you don't document a source of a demo but a version.

May I ask for the reason behind the condescending tone? I'd love for this to be a healthy debate and you don't seem to actually follow what I'm posting, yet you write everything off as if I were clueless. Mind you, I'm no elite collector and never claimed to be, so I'd appreciate a more constructive approach rather than the edgy attitude. I'm doing this for fun and also to find out the truth, I don't think there's a need or point to offend anyone.

Golden salmon: You will find that no matter what you present on here it will always get slated and people will say nasty things.
i have come to the conclusion that not many are REAL Queen fans on here they are just people who come for a pop at those of us who really are passionate about the band.

it's an idea...look and tell me

Great job! Thanks

ataqueen wrote:

it's an idea...look and tell me

Haha, thank you! If you really want to create any artwork for this we can come up with better text, or you can simply omit it and just include the tracklists.

I know it is very lame, but again, I did this for fun. Here you have the "artwork" I did for track icons and PDF document, with a golden salmon instead of the original banana.

<a href="http://es.tinypic.com?ref=2w7etc6" target="_blank"><img src="http://i67.tinypic.com/2w7etc6.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a>

grazie

thank you

another idea.....