Some additional chords especially in the verses might have helped, the song does not have a very exciting chord progression, it's very static. I don't think it was a song, where Roger put a lot of effort in.
A good song even works when it's just played on an acoustic guitar. So you can add more echo or compress it to death, it won't become a masterpiece.
This song always sounds a bit 'flat' and 'hollow' to me.
I do like the song but the song lacks of body, it sounds dry and flat, although you can feel the low of the basedrum you can't really hear the bass.
Soundfreak wrote: A good song even works when it's just played on an acoustic guitar.
You can't say that. It's like saying every African prefers a spear to a walking stick, a meaningless generalization. Some songs, for instance "The Trial" by Pink Floyd, are absolutely great, but need a more dense arrangement to work. Similarly, any modal song will sound frankly boring when played on a solo guitar, but might work wonderfully with, say, a quartet.
ThomasQuinn wrote: Soundfreak wrote: A good song even works when it's just played on an acoustic guitar.
You can't say that. It's like saying every African prefers a spear to a walking stick, a meaningless generalization. Some songs, for instance "The Trial" by Pink Floyd, are absolutely great, but need a more dense arrangement to work. Similarly, any modal song will sound frankly boring when played on a solo guitar, but might work wonderfully with, say, a quartet.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
If you heard the Wall demos you will know "The Trial" just played with a piano - and it works. And it would also work with an acoustic guitar.
We are talking here about popsongs, not epic or ethnic works that were just composed for certain instruments or sounds.
I still disagree with you. I don't think the demo for The Trial works too well, too be honest. And I will firmly stand by the simple fact that instrumentation and the division of voices are fundamental aspects of a song, not ancillary notions.
ThomasQuinn wrote: I still disagree with you. I don't think the demo for The Trial works too well, too be honest. And I will firmly stand by the simple fact that instrumentation and the division of voices are fundamental aspects of a song, not ancillary notions.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Sure you can't do the operatic part of Bohemian Rhapsody on an acoustic guitar.
But the common theory, that a good song even works on an acoustic guitar (it's sadly not my invention) was underlined by the "unplugged" movement of the 90s. Also not to forget that most songs even start their life on an acoustic guitar.
Proper Instrumentation can make or break the song, but IMO if the song is shit from start, the best instruments and arrangements can do very little for it. (No that I'm saying that Calling All Girls is shit).
I'm talking rock-pop songs here.
I remember seeing an interview with Kirk Hammett around the time when I started playing guitar. He said that whatever you played had to sound right in an acoustic guitar before you played it in an electric guitar with tons of distortion and effects. Of course these effects (and all sound engineering/production values) exist for a reason, but I guess my point is that there must be some key elements or basis of a song for there to be a song on the first place.
Also, I'm sure you can find an acoustic version of Bohemian Rhapsody in YouTube that includes the opera section and sounds great. EDIT: I found this one: link.
That song has a million chords and the main melody is a very distinguishable part of them, which makes it very easy to follow and enjoy, even without dozens of voices on top of it.