First of all, I'm not Mr Magic Tour expert, because I'm a woman and I can only be Miss Magic Tour expert.
Apologies. :)
Second, I remember I've asked why this show is so debated. It can't be both crap and masterpiece at the same time. Either it's good, either it's crap... The truth is it's not crap. The second Wembley night had more feeling in it... it says it all. Music (and art) are more about feeling than about technical perfection, in my opinion.
Is there no such thing as a gray area between masterpiece and crap? This has been discussed many times before, the the general consensus between people who have heard many Magic Tour concerts is that the show was technically/musically not the best of the tour, but in terms of audience, atmosphere, and stage show, it was probably the best. It's amazing how many people haven't been able to understand this division between aspects of a concert; and I hope you're not the next one, as you seem to have a good head on your shoulders.
I didn't say the Wembley second night is Queen's best gig, I just said Queen themselves tend to look at it as their best. It's their opinion, not mine. If I had seen all the other Magic Tour shows, I'd have provided you with my precious opinion. I said only that I liked this concert more than their other releases, you can't kill me for that, right?
Of course not. But when one has listened to 250 concerts, I think they can give a more objective opinion in regards to comparison to other shows than one who has heard less than ten.
Again, Queen praise the concert, because in many aspects, it is indeed one of their greatest concerts. They're able to talk about it so much because it's commercialized, and therefore people know it well. If Wembley wasn't filmed for release, you wouldn't see Brian talking about it, because not many people would care!