| Deacon Fan 10.02.2008 13:39 |
Perhaps not 100% technically accurate to the original, but then neither was the karaoke mix ;) I spent all morning trying to get it just right. I don't plan on redoing the karaoke nor the original, but here's the first really good (if I may say so) true instrumental. Thanks of course to Mr. Chute for the files. flac (26 MB): link mp3 (13 MB): link (see later posts for 2nd versions) |
| Adam Baboolal 10.02.2008 15:25 |
Very nicely done, J. My only question is about the solo guitar. It sounded a little...on it's own. Maybe it was too thin sounding, but it didn't quite sit right in the mix. Everything else was pretty cool, though. Adam. |
| John S Stuart 10.02.2008 15:35 |
Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro? |
| Deacon Fan 10.02.2008 15:38 |
I think you're right about the solo. I struggled to get it to where it was loud enough on top of the backing guitars during that section and I'm afraid I over-compensated ;) I'll play around with it some more later and if I can improve it I'll upload a new version :) |
| Deacon Fan 10.02.2008 15:41 |
John S Stuart wrote: Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro?Well, it's actually complete as far as the instrumental part is concerned. If you listen closely to the original, you'll see that's where the piano actually starts, so I stuck with that. The count-in would leave a long silence :) Could use the whole piano intro I suppose.. I'll think about it ;) |
| John S Stuart 10.02.2008 15:47 |
J7 wrote:I agree with you, but, and I know it's just me, when I heard the 'Official edited 7" single', it grated because it just did not 'fit right' against the image in my head.John S Stuart wrote: Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro?Well, it's actually complete as far as the instrumental part is concerned. If you listen closely to the original, you'll see that's where the piano actually starts, so I stuck with that. The count-in would leave a long silence :) Could use the whole piano intro I suppose.. I'll think about it ;) At least with a full piano intro - it would sound more complete to my ears. That is not knocking your mix, just saying that it sounds 'weird' (to me) without it. |
| inu-liger 10.02.2008 16:03 |
John S Stuart wrote:John, perhaps if you'll let me hear that 7" version I could recreate it in high-quality form for you, both karaoke/instrumental and vocal versions ;)J7 wrote:I agree with you, but, and I know it's just me, when I heard the 'Official edited 7" single', it grated because it just did not 'fit right' against the image in my head. At least with a full piano intro - it would sound more complete to my ears. That is not knocking your mix, just saying that it sounds 'weird' (to me) without it.John S Stuart wrote: Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro?Well, it's actually complete as far as the instrumental part is concerned. If you listen closely to the original, you'll see that's where the piano actually starts, so I stuck with that. The count-in would leave a long silence :) Could use the whole piano intro I suppose.. I'll think about it ;) |
| John S Stuart 11.02.2008 09:15 |
<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:"No, no, no, no, no no no..."John S Stuart wrote:John, perhaps if you'll let me hear that 7" version I could recreate it in high-quality form for you, both karaoke/instrumental and vocal versions ;)J7 wrote:I agree with you, but, and I know it's just me, when I heard the 'Official edited 7" single', it grated because it just did not 'fit right' against the image in my head. At least with a full piano intro - it would sound more complete to my ears. That is not knocking your mix, just saying that it sounds 'weird' (to me) without it.John S Stuart wrote: Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro?Well, it's actually complete as far as the instrumental part is concerned. If you listen closely to the original, you'll see that's where the piano actually starts, so I stuck with that. The count-in would leave a long silence :) Could use the whole piano intro I suppose.. I'll think about it ;) |
| Deacon Fan 11.02.2008 14:13 |
LOL! By the way I look forward to hearing inu-liger's mixes because his Killer Queen mixes are fantastic :) For you, John, here is a version which includes the full piano intro. There is some Freddie guide vocal leakage which I can't remove, though I did remove two little static clicks. flac: link mp3: link And both of these also include my attempts to balance the guitars a little better as well as some other minor adjustments (I suppose I'll find out later I've ruined something else!) But below is the version I prefer, without the extra piano. flac: link mp3: link |
| John S Stuart 11.02.2008 14:57 |
J7 wrote: For you, John, here is a version which includes the full piano intro... below is the version I prefer, without the extra piano...Respectfully, I have to disagree; Even with the vocal leakage, I think I prefer the full piano version intro - as it gives me an introductory reference point. However, it was a good idea to upload both versions, as it now gives the 'consumer' a choice as to which one they prefer. I especially like the timpani section in the middle. On the official version, it seems to have got lost somewhere underneath the pyramid of vocals. For a fuller audience appreciation, perhaps you need to complete this set with a full 'balanced guitars with piano intro' also! |
| Deacon Fan 11.02.2008 16:01 |
Ahh, I knew I sucked at explaining things ;) All of what I uploaded today does include the balanced guitars too. They're identical except for the intros. Having now listened to all of these through speakers now I must say they sound rather flat. I should have done some EQ work. I'm cursed with brand new headphones which make everything sound good regardless ;) Oh well, it's just for fun anyway. Except for playing around with these two 'leaked' songs, I've never remixed from multi-tracks before. The guitars were the most difficult for me. Being spread across no less than half of the tracks, getting anything remotely similar to the official version was pure hell. |
| inu-liger 12.02.2008 00:25 |
John S Stuart wrote::(<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:"No, no, no, no, no no no..."John S Stuart wrote:John, perhaps if you'll let me hear that 7" version I could recreate it in high-quality form for you, both karaoke/instrumental and vocal versions ;)J7 wrote:I agree with you, but, and I know it's just me, when I heard the 'Official edited 7" single', it grated because it just did not 'fit right' against the image in my head. At least with a full piano intro - it would sound more complete to my ears. That is not knocking your mix, just saying that it sounds 'weird' (to me) without it.John S Stuart wrote: Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro?Well, it's actually complete as far as the instrumental part is concerned. If you listen closely to the original, you'll see that's where the piano actually starts, so I stuck with that. The count-in would leave a long silence :) Could use the whole piano intro I suppose.. I'll think about it ;) Nobody trusts me. |
| ern2150 12.02.2008 01:27 |
<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:Silly, he's doing a Trott!John S Stuart wrote::( Nobody trusts me.<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:"No, no, no, no, no no no..."John S Stuart wrote:John, perhaps if you'll let me hear that 7" version I could recreate it in high-quality form for you, both karaoke/instrumental and vocal versions ;)J7 wrote:I agree with you, but, and I know it's just me, when I heard the 'Official edited 7" single', it grated because it just did not 'fit right' against the image in my head. At least with a full piano intro - it would sound more complete to my ears. That is not knocking your mix, just saying that it sounds 'weird' (to me) without it.John S Stuart wrote: Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro?Well, it's actually complete as far as the instrumental part is concerned. If you listen closely to the original, you'll see that's where the piano actually starts, so I stuck with that. The count-in would leave a long silence :) Could use the whole piano intro I suppose.. I'll think about it ;) |
| inu-liger 13.02.2008 02:36 |
ern2150 wrote:What's a Trott?<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:Silly, he's doing a Trott!John S Stuart wrote::( Nobody trusts me.<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:"No, no, no, no, no no no..."John S Stuart wrote:John, perhaps if you'll let me hear that 7" version I could recreate it in high-quality form for you, both karaoke/instrumental and vocal versions ;)J7 wrote:I agree with you, but, and I know it's just me, when I heard the 'Official edited 7" single', it grated because it just did not 'fit right' against the image in my head. At least with a full piano intro - it would sound more complete to my ears. That is not knocking your mix, just saying that it sounds 'weird' (to me) without it.John S Stuart wrote: Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro?Well, it's actually complete as far as the instrumental part is concerned. If you listen closely to the original, you'll see that's where the piano actually starts, so I stuck with that. The count-in would leave a long silence :) Could use the whole piano intro I suppose.. I'll think about it ;) |
| Deacon Fan 13.02.2008 17:47 |
Final version (LOL) flac: link mp3: link Sorry John, no extra intro on this one. I think I've finally got it the way I want it. But I'll listen again after a nap and who knows? |
| Mr Mercury 13.02.2008 19:02 |
<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:Jim Trott - a charactor from a show called Vicar Of Dibley. He had a kind of speech impediment when it came to saying "no". Heres an exampleern2150 wrote:What's a Trott?<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:Silly, he's doing a Trott!John S Stuart wrote::( Nobody trusts me.<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:"No, no, no, no, no no no..."John S Stuart wrote:John, perhaps if you'll let me hear that 7" version I could recreate it in high-quality form for you, both karaoke/instrumental and vocal versions ;)J7 wrote:I agree with you, but, and I know it's just me, when I heard the 'Official edited 7" single', it grated because it just did not 'fit right' against the image in my head. At least with a full piano intro - it would sound more complete to my ears. That is not knocking your mix, just saying that it sounds 'weird' (to me) without it.John S Stuart wrote: Sounds as though there has been a bit chopped off from the start. Would this have benefited from the 1 - 2- 3 - 4 intro?Well, it's actually complete as far as the instrumental part is concerned. If you listen closely to the original, you'll see that's where the piano actually starts, so I stuck with that. The count-in would leave a long silence :) Could use the whole piano intro I suppose.. I'll think about it ;) link |
| John S Stuart 13.02.2008 19:33 |
J7 wrote: Final version (LOL)... Sorry John, no extra intro on this one. I think I've finally got it the way I want it.J7: That is fine. Thank you. I have no problem with that. I am really happy with the full piano intro mix you did for me - so I really appreciate the time and effort you took over it. However, that does not mean that you have to agree with me. But, as I said before, at least you have created an option whereby those like me who prefer the fuller version have not been missed out. That is what I think the spirit of Queenzone is all about. So again, thanks for the mix - but, it is good that we can agree to differ! |