Can't you see, I'm Frederick Mercury. ...whoa oh....spread your wings and fly away with me.
I love ACTION THIS DAY, BACK CHAT, enjoy DANCER even with the dated synth bass, the solo is killer. LAS PALABRAS DE AMOR is pretty damn good, but the icing on the cake is COOL CAT.
What an atmospheric swanky song. Best cut on the album.
Under pressure is a great song, but it's basically tethered to the album/sessions. ...with its initial release having been quite a ways away
MisterCosmicc · Member since
I was never bothered by a Queen single being released well-ahead of an album.
Ziggy_SD · Member since
I actually consider your reason one of the album's weaknesses.
As mentioned above, the band's appeal was that all four members contributed something unique to the Queen project. The fact that a member of a band that wasn't the lead singer could handle lead vocal on a song still amazes me!
On a side note, why does Hot Space still offend people? Not that I was old enough to get an idea of the effect it had at the time, but consider the following:
- It was the early 80s;
- Synthesizers were the shit;
- The emerging electrofunk sound out of New York was the future
- Queen were an adventurous band;
As if Hot Space wasn't gonna happen...
Sebastian · Member since
The problem wasn't that they were following trends. The problem was that they did so with a mediocre record.
When they did an epic album with prog-rock influences (coincidentally, just when 'Dark Side of the Moon' was relatively new), they did a great job. It sold poorly, but it was excellent.
When they toned down the over-layered arrangements (just when punk was taking over and multi-part harmonies had gone out of style), they came up with an excellent album, which outsold everything they'd done before that.
Even later on, when Brian and Frederick did a tribute to Jeffrey Beck's 'Where Were You', they did so with a well-thought composition and a proper track. Whether or not 'Bijou' is as good as Beck's song is up to personal opinion, but they did work hard on it and it showed.
'Hot Space' took them a lot longer and cost them a lot more than 'Queen II' but it was quite poorly executed. They had a great drummer but largely replaced him (on the first side) with horrible computerised programming; they had a great bassist but largely replaced him (on the first side) with cheesynths. That was the problem.
Queen did songs in different styles, and sometimes they did a marvellous job with them (skiffle, waltz, piano ballad), sometimes they did a mediocre job ('Hot Space').
matt z · Member since
Who is this Jeffrey Beck fellow?
Was he the fellow that played on those Franklin Zappathowitz albums?
Or might you be referring to well known Geoffrey Arnold the guitar virtuoso?
Sebastian · Member since
You're right - Geoffrey Beck. Zappa, as far as I know, was actually named 'Frank'.
philip storey · Member since
Hot Space tracks worked well in the live set I thought the the band were great at Milton Keynes ,I really enjoyed the day.
philip storey · Member since
Hot Space tracks worked well in the live set I thought the the band were great at Milton Keynes ,I really enjoyed the day.
mike hunt · Member since
yes they did Phil....Makes me wonder if they recorded it differently, and worked on some of the lyrics how good it could of been...
MisterCosmicc · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
'Hot Space' took them a lot longer and cost them a lot more than 'Queen II' but it was quite poorly executed. They had a great drummer but largely replaced him (on the first side) with horrible computerised programming; they had a great bassist but largely replaced him (on the first side) with cheesynths. That was the problem.
Queen did songs in different styles, and sometimes they did a marvellous job with them (skiffle, waltz, piano ballad), sometimes they did a mediocre job ('Hot Space').[/QUOTE]
Usually I agree with you, but I wouldn't say that because they used those that it makes the tracks mediocre.
aristide1 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
Queen did songs in different styles, and sometimes they did a marvellous job with them (skiffle, waltz, piano ballad), sometimes they did a mediocre job ('Hot Space').[/QUOTE]
I thought the aim of your encyclopedic quests is a better understanding of the music, not just a desperate collection of facts. I am truly disappointed by your comment.
brians wig · Member since
What I miss from later albums is the LACK of a track sung by Roger.
Sebastian · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]MisterCosmicc wrote:[/b]
Usually I agree with you, but I wouldn't say that because they used those that it makes the tracks mediocre.[/QUOTE]
I gave the wrong impression if I came across as saying using synths and machines renders a work mediocre. Using them so basically and so lazily is what renders it lacklustre.
[QUOTE] [b]aristide1 wrote:[/b]
I thought the aim of your encyclopedic quests[/QUOTE]
What made you think such nonsense? These aren't encyclopaedic quests, by the way...
[QUOTE] [b]aristide1 wrote:[/b]
a better understanding of the music[/QUOTE]
Better than what? Either way, understanding that 'Hot Space' is mediocre (and not because of the styles explored) doesn't require a PhD.
[QUOTE] [b]aristide1 wrote:[/b]
not just a desperate collection of facts.[/QUOTE]
Collections of facts are inanimate and, as such, cannot ever be desperate. You've got it completely wrong there - not the first time!
[QUOTE] [b]aristide1 wrote:[/b]
I am truly disappointed by your comment.[/QUOTE]
So?
MisterCosmicc · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
I gave the wrong impression if I came across as saying using synths and machines renders a work mediocre. Using them so basically and so lazily is what renders it lacklustre.
[/QUOTE]
