John, forgive me for asking again, but what is 'Whipping Boy' in your original post about the Hot Space sessions?
And for EddieVanHalen (I think) who asked about Lullabies With A Difference, it was a tribute album culled together by (I believe) Joan Armatrading in 1998, with Brian contributing 'My Boy', which apparently was recorded in 1982.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
"John, forgive me for asking again, but what is 'Whipping Boy'..." As far as I know an unreleased instrumental which may (or may not have been) the basis for below.
"Lullabies With A Difference: a tribute album culled together by (I believe) Joan Armatrading in 1998, with Brian contributing 'My Boy', which apparently was recorded in 1982".
Correct - except "My Boy" began life from the "Hot Space" sessions as a Queen track. (This may mean a Brian solo submitted as a Queen track). Personally, I am conviced they are the same, and that very little was done to create a "release" version.
But now that Brian is so available, you can always ask him! (A serious point - he always seem to reject my questions!).
Deacon Fan... Revisited (or Jeffrey, Geoffry, Guitar Hero or whatever) rather than write from envy, make me a serious cash offer now, and I will sell you my entire collection. All I ask is that you pay - what I paid. If you want it - you can have it. Lock, stock and two smoking barrels.
You can then either denote the bits to the Queenzone hub, Wullie Nelson or use as ashtrays for motorcycles. That is what you want is it?
Rather than perpetually criticse, why not open your wallet instead of your mouth? If you want it - give me call.
"Lullabies With A Difference: a tribute album culled together by (I believe) Joan Armatrading in 1998, with Brian contributing 'My Boy', which apparently was recorded in 1982".
Correct - except "My Boy" began life from the "Hot Space" sessions as a Queen track. (This may mean a Brian solo submitted as a Queen track). Personally, I am conviced they are the same, and that very little was done to create a "release" version.
But now that Brian is so available, you can always ask him! (A serious point - he always seem to reject my questions!).
Deacon Fan... Revisited (or Jeffrey, Geoffry, Guitar Hero or whatever) rather than write from envy, make me a serious cash offer now, and I will sell you my entire collection. All I ask is that you pay - what I paid. If you want it - you can have it. Lock, stock and two smoking barrels.
You can then either denote the bits to the Queenzone hub, Wullie Nelson or use as ashtrays for motorcycles. That is what you want is it?
Rather than perpetually criticse, why not open your wallet instead of your mouth? If you want it - give me call.
Amazing! Just listening to 'My Boy' now, and it would've been an ideal track to close Hot Space. Shame about that loss.
Thanks for your answers so far.
But JSS what do you think about my comment that the Freddie vs Michael version of There must be more to life was recorded before the Queen and Freddie solo versions?
The version of There must be more to life that we all know from Freddie solo sounds like it was created somewhere in between The Works and A Kind Of Magic.So If a Queen version exists and it was recorded during The Works then it should sound really different from the one that Freddie did solo at least that's what I think.
This stuff is so interesting to talk about, and to debate about.
Please do keep your comments coming :-)
But JSS what do you think about my comment that the Freddie vs Michael version of There must be more to life was recorded before the Queen and Freddie solo versions?
The version of There must be more to life that we all know from Freddie solo sounds like it was created somewhere in between The Works and A Kind Of Magic.So If a Queen version exists and it was recorded during The Works then it should sound really different from the one that Freddie did solo at least that's what I think.
This stuff is so interesting to talk about, and to debate about.
Please do keep your comments coming :-)
Thanks for your answers so far.
But JSS what do you think about my comment that the Freddie vs Michael version of There must be more to life was recorded before the Queen and Freddie solo versions?
The version of There must be more to life that we all know from Freddie solo sounds like it was created somewhere in between The Works and A Kind Of Magic.So If a Queen version exists and it was recorded during The Works then it should sound really different from the one that Freddie did solo at least that's what I think.
This stuff is so interesting to talk about, and to debate about.
Please do keep your comments coming :-)
The production qualities between The Works and Mr. Bad Guy are minimal - no surprise, as they were both co-produced with Mack, so I think Freddie was trying to get a Queen sound without actually using Queen. On that note, I think you could easily remove any Freddie track on The Works and replace it with There Must Be More To Life Than This.
However, if the band got their hands on it, it would undeniably have that traditional Queen sheen on it, which is what is so fascinating to me.
And is it just me, or does It's A Hard Life sound remotely similiar to Love Me Like There's No Tomorrow?
EddieVH: "what do you think about my comment that the Freddie vs Michael version... was recorded before the Queen and Freddie solo versions?"
I would tend to agree with you based on the fact that the MJ/FM version sounds like it is being "born" as we listen. It certainly is not the full blown Freddie (or for that matter Queen versions - which are supposed to be pretty identical. I know Seb may argue a differing view if he had the tapes, but for all extents and purposes they are basically the same).
So where does that leave us Eddie? I supose you could say that we are all "correct" because the song went through a number of changes.
The "Germ" of the idea begins as you suggest. The Queen version is "properly" recorded and mixed at a studio (perhaps the works sessions). This proper version is dropped at the last minute, so Freddie returns to re-work yet again on the track (not the MJ demos - but a reworking of the Queen thing) during his solo spell.
I agree that it is fascinating - but that is about the best I can do, and between us, I do not think that we would be that far from the truth.
I would tend to agree with you based on the fact that the MJ/FM version sounds like it is being "born" as we listen. It certainly is not the full blown Freddie (or for that matter Queen versions - which are supposed to be pretty identical. I know Seb may argue a differing view if he had the tapes, but for all extents and purposes they are basically the same).
So where does that leave us Eddie? I supose you could say that we are all "correct" because the song went through a number of changes.
The "Germ" of the idea begins as you suggest. The Queen version is "properly" recorded and mixed at a studio (perhaps the works sessions). This proper version is dropped at the last minute, so Freddie returns to re-work yet again on the track (not the MJ demos - but a reworking of the Queen thing) during his solo spell.
I agree that it is fascinating - but that is about the best I can do, and between us, I do not think that we would be that far from the truth.
Deacon Fan... Revisited (or Jeffrey, Geoffry, Guitar Hero or whatever) rather than write from envy, make me a serious cash offer now, and I will sell you my entire collection. All I ask is that you pay - what I paid. If you want it - you can have it. Lock, stock and two smoking barrels.
You can then either denote the bits to the Queenzone hub, Wullie Nelson or use as ashtrays for motorcycles. That is what you want is it?
Rather than perpetually criticse, why not open your wallet instead of your mouth? If you want it - give me call.
For the record I've never been Geoffry or Guitar Hero.
Your offer is great, but I'm afraid I'm just a simple man and whatever price that may be would be way beyond my means. What a shame that the fans who would most enjoy such recordings are denied the opportunity for financial reasons. Perhaps all of the real fans at Queenzone could chip in and pay you your price for letting us poor souls hear your precious tapes and minidiscs.
Exactly how much would you charge to become a decent, kind, sharing person? Maybe Richard can organize a fund to buy these recordings from one greedy individual for the good of all the rest of us?
But you did accidently bring up a good point. What fun are you having sitting there alone (excuse me, with the chosen few) with such recordings? You can't engage in too much interesting chat with fans about things they aren't allowed to hear. That's why I question your motives for hanging around here. If you enjoy spouting your detailed knowledge so much, make a website with all the info.. just simple text is all that's necessary. Maybe one of your ass-kissing followers will offer to compile this info for ya.
Oh, and incidently.. if I did have the means, the first thing I'd do personally is put it all on CD for myself, and send the originals off to Queen Productions with the stipulation that I'd be sharing them with anyone interested, at fairly decent quality in exchange.
Er...if QP weren't willing to buy (or find) this material, why should someone that *chose* to do so, for their own benefit (and I assume with no thought that one day there may be either a market for such material, or people who may expect to be given copies for free) and personal pleasure then be obligated to hand that over to QP?
Especially if (allegedly) previous material loaned to QP had mysteriously leaked out while in their possession?
Damn...I was trying to stay out of all this until it all calmed down.
Especially if (allegedly) previous material loaned to QP had mysteriously leaked out while in their possession?
Damn...I was trying to stay out of all this until it all calmed down.
Here's a wonderful example of how some collectors reward fellow fans while getting to keep their original tapes:
http://members.cox.net/myedits/Creating_Gypsy.mp3
(9.80 MB, 128 kbps, 10:42)
I edited this together from a rather long (I wanna say 40 minutes?) reel which was posted in a newsgroup, of Stevie Nicks, Lindsay Buckingham and crew beginning work on her song 'Gypsy' for Fleetwood Mac. It's really fascinating to hear these demo sessions, how different instruments and tempos were tried.
Anyway, I edited this just to show what one might expect from collectors... I have the full length session on disc somewhere, as well as a session for 'Rhiannon'. I believe the original files were 192 kbps, this is 128 cuz I can only fit 10 MB on my webspace and I added the unedited finished version from their boxed set at the end. Neat stuff!
http://members.cox.net/myedits/Creating_Gypsy.mp3
(9.80 MB, 128 kbps, 10:42)
I edited this together from a rather long (I wanna say 40 minutes?) reel which was posted in a newsgroup, of Stevie Nicks, Lindsay Buckingham and crew beginning work on her song 'Gypsy' for Fleetwood Mac. It's really fascinating to hear these demo sessions, how different instruments and tempos were tried.
Anyway, I edited this just to show what one might expect from collectors... I have the full length session on disc somewhere, as well as a session for 'Rhiannon'. I believe the original files were 192 kbps, this is 128 cuz I can only fit 10 MB on my webspace and I added the unedited finished version from their boxed set at the end. Neat stuff!
So fucking what if it 'leaked'? Isn't the idea to get it to the fans who want to hear it? That's my point :)
Someone who feels ripped off that something leaked is exactly what I said.. greedy, in it only for the money.
Someone who feels ripped off that something leaked is exactly what I said.. greedy, in it only for the money.
Thanks Thanks Thanks for all of your answers.
I also was listening to 'It's late' this evening (sorry totally other subject), and I noticed that it actually shows remarkable resemblance to Hammer To Fall. The chord structure is very similar, but the beat and rhytm is different. Could it be that Hammer To Fall is a reworked version of It's late , or is in someway inspired on it's late?
Maybe I'm just daft and maybe it doesn't make any sense at all to you guys.
But it was just a thought I had.
I seem to think alot about songs and trying to find out how they were created.
I also was listening to 'It's late' this evening (sorry totally other subject), and I noticed that it actually shows remarkable resemblance to Hammer To Fall. The chord structure is very similar, but the beat and rhytm is different. Could it be that Hammer To Fall is a reworked version of It's late , or is in someway inspired on it's late?
Maybe I'm just daft and maybe it doesn't make any sense at all to you guys.
But it was just a thought I had.
I seem to think alot about songs and trying to find out how they were created.
Hammer to fall and It's late? well.... i don't think so. The chord progression is typical for Brian, look at Put out the fire, Dancer, All dead, Keep yourself alive, She makes me, Brighton rock, Tie your mother down, White Man, etc.
These songs are all built in a quite similar way, but I don't think they base on each other. That's the way guitarists are writing songs. They love to do it with As and Ds. Because it falls in the hand.
These songs are all built in a quite similar way, but I don't think they base on each other. That's the way guitarists are writing songs. They love to do it with As and Ds. Because it falls in the hand.
Well, to answer the original question about the Backchat solo, you certainly don't need to be Greg Brooks nor John S Stuart. All you need is to have a half-decent pair of ears.
For a start, there's definitely no backwards guitar in it all. I think you must be confusing this with Flick Of The Wrist, John.
And most importantly, it's obvious that the majority of the solo on the finished version is lifted from the 'demo' version of Backchat. The clear difference is the 10 second part on the demo between 2:30 and 2:40 (2:18 to 2:28 on the finished version) which was replaced by a later (I'd imagine) guitar take from Bri.
This isn't really surprising at all, as the majority of the common Hot Space demos are about 75% the same as the finished versions. Only a small amount of tidying up was done to these demo versions before they became the final product we know today.
In the case of Backchat, I'd imagine Bri had a few goes at the solo, and the take we hear on the demo was regarded as being the best attempt. When it came around to completely finishing off the masters, Bri (or someone) decided the middle bit of the solo needed improving a bit, and so Mr May got his guitar out again and did his thang.
For a start, there's definitely no backwards guitar in it all. I think you must be confusing this with Flick Of The Wrist, John.
And most importantly, it's obvious that the majority of the solo on the finished version is lifted from the 'demo' version of Backchat. The clear difference is the 10 second part on the demo between 2:30 and 2:40 (2:18 to 2:28 on the finished version) which was replaced by a later (I'd imagine) guitar take from Bri.
This isn't really surprising at all, as the majority of the common Hot Space demos are about 75% the same as the finished versions. Only a small amount of tidying up was done to these demo versions before they became the final product we know today.
In the case of Backchat, I'd imagine Bri had a few goes at the solo, and the take we hear on the demo was regarded as being the best attempt. When it came around to completely finishing off the masters, Bri (or someone) decided the middle bit of the solo needed improving a bit, and so Mr May got his guitar out again and did his thang.
DeaconfanRevisited... "Exactly how much would you charge to become a decent, kind, sharing person? Maybe Richard can organize a fund to buy these recordings from one greedy individual for the good of all the rest of us?"
You have NO idea what I have shared so far with the Queen community. I can guarantee - that some of the stuff in your collection has (metaphorically) my fingerprints all over it, so if it was NOT for me - your collection would be much the poorer. So please don't ask for any more freebies.
Also: I said, I would give the stuff to you - for what I paid for it. No profit margin. That is a good deal.
If a collector buys a Picasso or a Rembrandt, (or even a Disney or Simpson's cell) does that make them a selfish greedy individual?
So lets see - I purchase a Queen item (say an acetate) so I can hear it. (And I am not the only one in this 'zone who does so), So I can enjoy it. Lets say that cost me around £2-300. I deny no-one the same priviledge - if they repay me my outlying costs. I will certainly NOT pass it on for free, but I have in the past.
I bet you own copies of the "De Lane Lea demos". I bet you have copies of "Ibex". So you have NO idea what you are talking about here.
Big-mouthed, opinionated "biggest dick on Queenzone" - I won't argue - you certainly have me pegged, but "charge(ing) to become a decent, kind, sharing person... in it only for the money." I think not.
You have NO idea what I have shared so far with the Queen community. I can guarantee - that some of the stuff in your collection has (metaphorically) my fingerprints all over it, so if it was NOT for me - your collection would be much the poorer. So please don't ask for any more freebies.
Also: I said, I would give the stuff to you - for what I paid for it. No profit margin. That is a good deal.
If a collector buys a Picasso or a Rembrandt, (or even a Disney or Simpson's cell) does that make them a selfish greedy individual?
So lets see - I purchase a Queen item (say an acetate) so I can hear it. (And I am not the only one in this 'zone who does so), So I can enjoy it. Lets say that cost me around £2-300. I deny no-one the same priviledge - if they repay me my outlying costs. I will certainly NOT pass it on for free, but I have in the past.
I bet you own copies of the "De Lane Lea demos". I bet you have copies of "Ibex". So you have NO idea what you are talking about here.
Big-mouthed, opinionated "biggest dick on Queenzone" - I won't argue - you certainly have me pegged, but "charge(ing) to become a decent, kind, sharing person... in it only for the money." I think not.
With that so-called logic, anyone who pays good money for a rare painting should donate it to a museum and write it off as a tax loss.