Queen II - the "missing bits"

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]The Ghost of Lester Burnham wrote:[/b]

I asked Greg about this a few years ago. He said it's all the work of an overactive imagination, and definitively untrue.[/QUOTE]

Considering this is GB we're talking about, that's basically a full confirmation, right?[/QUOTE]
but GB has only recently confirmed they've found some bits for the LK boxset...so clearly he doesn't know everything they have.

I was really just having a dig at Greg's less-than-stellar track record for accuracy, but if we're going to be serious about it then, yes, you're quite right.

In 1998 Brian's interview, when asked about unreleased songs, he answered that there are few rough songs from the early albums.

In the same interview he suggested better buy QUEEN II than the new compilation album (Rocks).

brENsKi, re:

>but GB has only recently confirmed they've found some bits for the LK boxset

Were they discoveries of tapes that he knew they had because they'd been listed on his archive list from a few years back?

I beieve Greg is still of the opinion that TFFMS was never performed live, too......

Though Brian may well have been thinking of the likes of Hangman, Silver Salmon, Polar Bear, Feelings.

Looking at GB's comment on Brian's soapbox, seems like if anything these 'lost tracks' were at best short demos of riffs, chord progressions, etc. With names given to remember them by.

Anyone who is a musician will recognise this, I've done it a lot. Record a short riff or piano part and call it "heavy mood" or "missing link" or whatever for future reference. Something that fits the piece. Fly by Night and Deep Ridge sound exactly like basic titles for something "light" and something "deep".

Could be wrong but that OP smells very fishy to me. As for the original thread, one page of discussion and then twenty pages of bitching and arguing about "fanthology"...

[QUOTE] [b]dudeofqueen wrote:[/b]

brENsKi, re:

>but GB has only recently confirmed they've found some bits for the LK boxset

Were they discoveries of tapes that he knew they had because they'd been listed on his archive list from a few years back?

I beieve Greg is still of the opinion that TFFMS was never performed live, too......[/QUOTE]

Whilst he often confirms that something definitively “doesn’t exist” - the only thing that he can officially confirm is that something isn’t held in the archives....he doesn’t know what is held in private collections, tv stations etc etc

cmsdrums, re:

>the only thing that he can officially confirm is that something isn’t held in the archives....he doesn’t know what is held in private collections,

He was incredibly quick to deny the existance of much of what John S Stuart (no more honourable or reliable collector has there been...) had in his posession

[QUOTE] [b]dudeofqueen wrote:[/b]cmsdrums, re:

>the only thing that he can officially confirm is that something isn’t held in the archives....he doesn’t know what is held in private collections,
He was incredibly quick to deny the existance of much of what John S Stuart (no more honourable or reliable collector has there been...) had in his posession[/QUOTE]
exactly

It's all utter bollocks.

http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1246544/no-subject.aspx
http://brianmay.com/brian/letters/lettersaug09a.html (go to the 6th of August)

To the guy who mentioned the passing of John S. Stuart, they may want to clarify they mean that John, because when reading that post, I first panicked because I thought John Deacon recently passed away and I didn't even know.

About the "The Game being conceived as a double album" thing, did it occur to anyone that Queen were probably working on both "The Game" and "Flash Gordon" (which, let's not forget, was released six months later) at the same time, and that the "other half" of the supposed double album is just Flash Gordon?

Interesting. The fact that at least two 'Flash Gordon' tracks are confirmed to have been demo'd in Munich during sessions for 'The Game' seems to support that theory.

[QUOTE] [b]Bike It 80 wrote:[/b]About the "The Game being conceived as a double album" thing, did it occur to anyone that Queen were probably working on both "The Game" and "Flash Gordon" (which, let's not forget, was released six months later) at the same time, and that the "other half" of the supposed double album is just Flash Gordon?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]Interesting. The fact that at least two 'Flash Gordon' tracks are confirmed to have been demo'd in Munich during sessions for 'The Game' seems to support that theory.[/QUOTE]

Yes. I think one was "Football Fight" and the other may have been "Kiss". There's also some other curios.

"It's A Beautiful Day" and "Human Body" were smack bang in the middle of the Game sessions, with "Sandbox" being toward the end. When considering that some of the demos/early rough mixes may have been longer tracks, the existing 36 minute run time may have stretched over the 1hr limit for single LPs. So a "short" double may have been the thought process.

Two questions:
> Could those early "Flash" tracks have been possible considerations for the mooted (double) Game LP?
> Could any of Roger's early "Fun In Space" demos/ideas have been slated for inclusion?

I'm thinking the Game was definitely conceived as a double, and then other demands forced a re-think.

But what would their motivation be to have a double?

[QUOTE] [b]Martin Packer wrote:[/b]But what would their motivation be to have a double?[/QUOTE]

Because that's what many big bands/artists do - at the "mature" point of their studio careers - a few examples:

Beatles: White Album (1968)
Led Zep: Physical Graffiti (1975)
ELO: Out of the Blue (1977)
The Who: Quadrophenia (1973)
Pink Floyd: The Wall (1980)
Bruce Springsteen: The River (1980)
Stevie Wonder: Songs In The Key Of Life
Fleetwood Mac: Tusk (1979)
Bob Dylan: Blonde On Blonde (1966)
Jimi Hendrix Experience: Electric Ladyland (1968)

that's just a small number...and how many of those fit nicely into that 6-8yr recording career window?