Stuart, interesting list again...
What about an mp3 of something really rare you got please? I'm sure that sample of joy would get everybody crazy
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Additional Thanks/contributions: I have edited the above accordingly to include this new information, so thanks for the help there. Rather than create a new seperate thread for each acknowledgement - I will highlight my "thanks" in here... and edit in here when needed. (So watch this space).
Queen: Unreleased De Lane Lea Demo Tape, October 1971 – February 1972
(Edit: Lester Burnham... five demos at De Lane Lea Studios were recorded on September 18, 1971 - Good shout Lester - but personally I think this would have taken longer considering that Queen were only allowed to use "downtime" - however the fact that it was recorded ABOUT this time is a great help).
Any other thoughts about this one?
Queen: Unreleased De Lane Lea Demo Tape, October 1971 – February 1972
(Edit: Lester Burnham... five demos at De Lane Lea Studios were recorded on September 18, 1971 - Good shout Lester - but personally I think this would have taken longer considering that Queen were only allowed to use "downtime" - however the fact that it was recorded ABOUT this time is a great help).
Any other thoughts about this one?
Pim Derks:
Trident One-sided 10" acetates:
Hangman
Rock 'n roll (Jailhouse Rock)
Jesus
Keep Yourself Alive
Does this mean that a studio-version of Hangman exists?
Yes it does - but a copy has NOT been "found" by Greg or QP. These acetates were sold on the open market about 20 years ago.
I think I need to explain here a little about acatete pressings. simply, acetates are "works of reference" recorded on disc, of a night's session in the studio. These tracks may (or may not be) recorded on master tape (EG Many Beatles acetates DO not exist as master recordings - and there is a great Beatles bootleg called - surprisingly enough - "Unreleased Acetates"!).
These discs (depending on how many are cut) are usually retained by the band - or their producers/engineers etc.
I have no idea of how many "Hangman" acetates were cut, but there is a world of difference between "can't be found - and - does not exist".
Remember, I am writing what "I" KNOW about. The exciting thing for me is to find out about what I do NOT know about!
Trident One-sided 10" acetates:
Hangman
Rock 'n roll (Jailhouse Rock)
Jesus
Keep Yourself Alive
Does this mean that a studio-version of Hangman exists?
Yes it does - but a copy has NOT been "found" by Greg or QP. These acetates were sold on the open market about 20 years ago.
I think I need to explain here a little about acatete pressings. simply, acetates are "works of reference" recorded on disc, of a night's session in the studio. These tracks may (or may not be) recorded on master tape (EG Many Beatles acetates DO not exist as master recordings - and there is a great Beatles bootleg called - surprisingly enough - "Unreleased Acetates"!).
These discs (depending on how many are cut) are usually retained by the band - or their producers/engineers etc.
I have no idea of how many "Hangman" acetates were cut, but there is a world of difference between "can't be found - and - does not exist".
Remember, I am writing what "I" KNOW about. The exciting thing for me is to find out about what I do NOT know about!
I can't be sure, but what do you think of Mad The Swine from the In Nuce cd? Excluding the reverse stereo of the Nuce track - surely there are differences between this mix and the official release. Ideas?
Peace,
Adam.
Peace,
Adam.
Queen: Unreleased De Lane Lea Demo Tape, October 1971 – February 1972
(Edit: Lester Burnham... five demos at De Lane Lea Studios were recorded on September 18, 1971 - Good shout Lester - but personally I think this would have taken longer considering that Queen were only allowed to use "downtime" - however the fact that it was recorded ABOUT this time is a great help).
Any other thoughts about this one?
Agreed, as the band were notorious for being perfectionists, so it's highly unlikely that it took them only one day to get five songs done - look how long it took them to get their first album out! So, sessions probably STARTED on this day, but probably extended into October.
a question, is or isn't the 1991 "Mad The Swine" release a remix, you have it listed as the US 1991 3:23 Remix, and then state the 1991 release is NOT a remix, I'm a bit confused about that.
Circles was a Brian collaboration with Heavy Metal Band Quartz (produced by Tony Iommi). It never made it on the debut album (if you listen you know why) but instead it was released as a B-side. For the re-issue of the album, however, it was included.
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=17764
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=17764
Chaka: 1991 "Mad The Swine" release a remix, you have it listed as the US 1991 3:23 Remix, and then state the 1991 release is NOT a remix, I'm a bit confused about that.
It is confusing isn't it - it's all to do with the interpretation of "remixing".
When "Mad The Swine" was first released in 1991, it was delivered as a "remix" on the Hollywood re-issues. (Same as "Seven Seas Of Rhye" and Rick Ruben's "We Will Rock You").
I am sure that "Mad The Swine" was "tweaked" (more to Roger's satisfaction - but I can not prove that - that is a guess), but I would argue more "remastered" than "remixed". Does that make sense?
To dig myself into a deeper hole, I am sure that they could "lift the drums" or "lower the guitar" BUT (and here is the big bit) it was the original releasable take used - and it was "equallised" TRUE to the original cut.
But before I am accused of "Blagging" are there any engineers who could help me out here - to get my meaning across in a more articulte fashion?
Adam: I have NOT listened to the official "Mad The Swine" and the "In Nuce" versions in an academic "bench-test" sense. One is official - the other is a bootleg. That is all I know. But I set you a challenge. (This is a serious request!).
Why don't you conduct a "bench-test" and return your findings back to this thread? I would be genuinely interested. I may be wrong - but I think the bootleg is the "untweaked" version - and the official release the "remixed" version - would that be correct?
It is confusing isn't it - it's all to do with the interpretation of "remixing".
When "Mad The Swine" was first released in 1991, it was delivered as a "remix" on the Hollywood re-issues. (Same as "Seven Seas Of Rhye" and Rick Ruben's "We Will Rock You").
I am sure that "Mad The Swine" was "tweaked" (more to Roger's satisfaction - but I can not prove that - that is a guess), but I would argue more "remastered" than "remixed". Does that make sense?
To dig myself into a deeper hole, I am sure that they could "lift the drums" or "lower the guitar" BUT (and here is the big bit) it was the original releasable take used - and it was "equallised" TRUE to the original cut.
But before I am accused of "Blagging" are there any engineers who could help me out here - to get my meaning across in a more articulte fashion?
Adam: I have NOT listened to the official "Mad The Swine" and the "In Nuce" versions in an academic "bench-test" sense. One is official - the other is a bootleg. That is all I know. But I set you a challenge. (This is a serious request!).
Why don't you conduct a "bench-test" and return your findings back to this thread? I would be genuinely interested. I may be wrong - but I think the bootleg is the "untweaked" version - and the official release the "remixed" version - would that be correct?
ok I understand that; it's not that the original music was changed much (or at least not to the degree as the other Hollywood Records remixes), it's that the production (I guess particularly the drum sound was changed).
From the Quen I rare stuff I only have got "In The Beginning"
and spaking about "Circles" you mean the song by Brian May & Iommmi Quartz?
and spaking about "Circles" you mean the song by Brian May & Iommmi Quartz?
It was already posted, try reading the thread.
Chaka: "...it's not that the original music was changed much.. it's... the production (I guess particularly the drum sound was changed)".
Yes - exactly. That is what I meant to say. Some could argue that this is still a "remix" - but it was only "remixed" in the sense of production and equalisation (so essentially it is still the same track).
However, the "Seven Seas Of Rhye - remix" is (again arguably) a totally diferent song from the original.
That - is the extent of my knowledge - so perhaps Seb would be better to take over the answer from here.
Yes - exactly. That is what I meant to say. Some could argue that this is still a "remix" - but it was only "remixed" in the sense of production and equalisation (so essentially it is still the same track).
However, the "Seven Seas Of Rhye - remix" is (again arguably) a totally diferent song from the original.
That - is the extent of my knowledge - so perhaps Seb would be better to take over the answer from here.
Pim Derks:
Trident One-sided 10" acetates:
Hangman
Rock 'n roll (Jailhouse Rock)
Jesus
Keep Yourself Alive
Does this mean that a studio-version of Hangman exists?
Yes it does - but a copy has NOT been "found" by Greg or QP. These acetates were sold on the open market about 20 years ago.
I think I need to explain here a little about acatete pressings. simply, acetates are "works of reference" recorded on disc, of a night's session in the studio. These tracks may (or may not be) recorded on master tape (EG Many Beatles acetates DO not exist as master recordings - and there is a great Beatles bootleg called - surprisingly enough - "Unreleased Acetates"!).
These discs (depending on how many are cut) are usually retained by the band - or their producers/engineers etc.
I have no idea of how many "Hangman" acetates were cut, but there is a world of difference between "can't be found - and - does not exist".
Remember, I am writing what "I" KNOW about. The exciting thing for me is to find out about what I do NOT know about!
Do you have the Hangman acetate? No, I'm not going to ask for an mp3, I'm not an idiot. I just want to find out if there is an acetate of that song that we know for sure isn't destroyed.
I just wonder what people thought of Queen the album when it first came out. I have to say it is of a far higher quality than any other debut album, even from those artists who had ever so much more help from producers.
(Even with Queen I suspect the band made most of the decisions. Or gave the nominal producers a very good run for their money.)
And to consider that it was made in less than ideal conditions is doubly impressive. For example Great King Rat would've been great played simply. As it was they took a lot of care with it and made it so much better.
(I actually only came across Queen with Killer Queen, so I have no direct experience of them in 1973 when Queen came out.)
(Even with Queen I suspect the band made most of the decisions. Or gave the nominal producers a very good run for their money.)
And to consider that it was made in less than ideal conditions is doubly impressive. For example Great King Rat would've been great played simply. As it was they took a lot of care with it and made it so much better.
(I actually only came across Queen with Killer Queen, so I have no direct experience of them in 1973 when Queen came out.)
would I be correct in guessing this is a typo and the BBC Session track has nothing to do with a Smile live performance?