| qrock 28.04.2010 13:34 |
Hi and here is another album to discuss about and this is the most debatable album by Queen. Some fans consider it their worst but is it really that Bad. I recently gave it a rating of 8.1. I would agree with many other fans that the first side of the album is quite disapointing particulary the worst Queen song Body Language. But the second side is much better and it's Queen for Pete's Sake, HOW BAD CAN IT BE? |
| mike hunt 28.04.2010 17:02 |
First side is better than the second IMO....Staying power, back chat, and action this day are cool tunes. The second side has one of my least favorite queen songs along with body language, and that's put out the fire. Brian's rock songs arn't working for me at this point, He'll continue this trend on the next album "the works" tear it up...... Calling all girls is another roger disapointment. On the second side life is real is decent, though far from freddie's best ballads, the words of love is solid and cool cat is real nice, love the sound of that one. Obviously under pressure is there. The album is inconsistent, but hardly horrible. It's actually a pretty fun listen. Least favorites are Dancer, body language, put out the fire and calling all girls....The rest I like. |
| Wiley 28.04.2010 17:50 |
Ok, I guess I just HAVE to post on every single Hot Space thread in the forum. Like mike said, it's a fun album. Freddie's voice is in top form and IMO the production is good. On the other hand, most people consider the songwriting subpar by Queen's standards. I guess it's lacking a GREAT song in the album's supposed 'style'. I differ in opinion with mike, as I consider Dancer and Put out the Fire some of the better tracks in there. I like the guitar work in both songs. Had this approach been applied to the rest of the 'funk' songs, the album would have been better. In my opinion, almost every single song in there would sound a lot better if you replaced the synth leads with guitars and (human) bass and increased the tempo by a few bpm's. One only has to listen to the live versions for proof. Imagine those versions plus Freddie's studio vocals! |
| ok.computer 28.04.2010 20:34 |
8.1??? How the f**k do you get to a position whereby you have .1 in the score?? |
| mike hunt 28.04.2010 21:48 |
Without question Freddie's best vocal album, aside from A night at the opera. It would have kicked ass if it was recorded like the live versions. My ratings. Staying power- 8 out of 10 Dancer- 6 out of 10 (not so bad) Back chat- 7 out of 10 (should of been heavier) Body language- 5 out of 10 (not Queen's worst song) Action this day- 7 out of 10 (Good, but better live) put out the fire- 4 out of 10 life is real- 7 out of 10 calling all girls- 5 out of 10 words of love- 9 out of 10 cool cat- 8 out of 10 under pressure- 10 out of 10 |
| jamster1111 28.04.2010 21:53 |
I think all songs on that album are great. They each have a unique flavor to them and show how diverse of a band queen was. Each of the songs are very well written but I would have to say the best are Las Palabras De Armor and Life is Real |
| skip 29.04.2010 01:39 |
"Staying Power" - Shite. "Dancer" - Shite. "Back Chat" - Shite. "Body Language" - Shite to the tenth power. "Action This Day" - Shite "Put Out the Fire" - Just o.k. "Life Is Real (Song for Lennon)" - Shite. "Calling All Girls" - Shite. "Las Palabras de Amor (The Words of Love)" - Just o.k. "Cool Cat" - Shite. "Under Pressure" - Great song. |
| The_CrY 29.04.2010 02:24 |
I recently gave this album a 6,4. I recognize what Queen was trying to do here, but it doesn't really fascinate me all that much. Especially the first half is quite dislikable with tracks like Staying Power, Back Chat and Body Language. But then Roger saves the day with two great songs Action This Day and Calling All Girls. Brian adds a good flavor with Dancer, Put Out the Fire and Las Palabras de Amor. While Freddie is very strong with his vocals, I find his songwriting not so good. Life is Real is bearable, but the others, including his collaboration with John on Cool Cat, just don't get to me. Of course, Under Pressure is another good song, but I doubt anyone here would disagree with that. I can see why people could like this album, but the style Queen is pursuing here is not among my favorites, hence my medium rating. |
| plumrach 29.04.2010 02:34 |
I like it |
| philip storey 29.04.2010 03:37 |
Hot Spppaaaccceee ,Lets Go !!!!!!! |
| philip storey 29.04.2010 03:41 |
Some people get so excited about these things, its only a bloody record !!! |
| maxpower 29.04.2010 04:07 |
In all honesty I've never classed Under Pressure as part of the Hot Space album what with being released in 1981 & part of some Greatest Hits 1 compilations across the world & plus the fact for such a well known Queen song its stuck right at the end |
| mike hunt 29.04.2010 06:52 |
maxpower wrote: In all honesty I've never classed Under Pressure as part of the Hot Space album what with being released in 1981 & part of some Greatest Hits 1 compilations across the world & plus the fact for such a well known Queen song its stuck right at the end Another stupid Queenzone post!...it's only on the bloody record stupid! |
| jamster1111 29.04.2010 08:42 |
First of all under pressure is not really part of the album, second of all if it was, it would be the worst song on there |
| Gregsynth 29.04.2010 08:55 |
skip wrote: "Staying Power" - Shite. "Dancer" - Shite. "Back Chat" - Shite. "Body Language" - Shite to the tenth power. "Action This Day" - Shite "Put Out the Fire" - Just o.k. "Life Is Real (Song for Lennon)" - Shite. "Calling All Girls" - Shite. "Las Palabras de Amor (The Words of Love)" - Just o.k. "Cool Cat" - Shite. "Under Pressure" - Great song. Skip, get your Hot Space ON! LOL |
| Gregsynth 29.04.2010 08:57 |
jamster1111 wrote: First of all under pressure is not really part of the album, second of all if it was, it would be the worst song on there =========================================== Now THAT'S something I've NEVER heard before, in my life: Under Pressure being the WORST song on Hot Space?! Haha, I need a drink now... |
| Gregsynth 29.04.2010 09:01 |
And another thing: Under Pressure IS technically a part of Hot Space: After the South American leg of The Game Tour, Queen went into the studio in June/July of 1981 and started the recording sessions for Hot Space (including Under Pressure). |
| qrock 29.04.2010 09:55 |
ok.computer wrote: 8.1??? How the f**k do you get to a position whereby you have .1 in the score?? I rated each song and did a mean. By the way that's the rating on individual songs not the album. It's by far Queen's Worst Album and the rest of their albums were rated in the 9.0 - 10 area. |
| mike hunt 29.04.2010 10:45 |
ok under pressure wasn't really a hot space song, so crazy little thing wasn't really part of the game. Afterall, the song was released in 79 while the album was 1980. The Game was also recorded at 2 different times/sessions, so i guess the game should be considered two different albums? |
| Holly2003 29.04.2010 10:50 |
Not possible of course but imagine if Under Pressure appeared on The Game instead of Coming Soon. Would've really strenthened the album, given it another hit single, and maybe made it onto the Queen top five albums (which are imo Queen 2, SHA, ANATO, ADATR & NotW). Under Pressure is a little out of place on Hot Space and I can understand why people say it doesn't really fit with the style or theme of that album |
| mike hunt 29.04.2010 11:06 |
It fits with the album....it's a pop/alterative dance tune. Though if under pressure was on the game?....That would have put the album on the all time great albums list. One song makes a huge difference. |
| prescott2811 29.04.2010 13:09 |
A strange album in any case :) but I like, not the best in Queens career. The song writing is good n the music is good. From what I think this is the album that brought dance into rock, if it wasn't for this album then no-one else would of thought of it. All the songs are good, the highlight of the album for me was Las Palabras De Armor (The words of love) what an epic love song, beautifuly written, the music is lovely, The best song on the album. It doesn't get the credit it deserves just like the rest of Hot Space. |
| peterkoz1 29.04.2010 13:27 |
Las palabras des amour was the first Queen single i bought , i could not afford the album back then and only managed to get hold of it when i started collecting Queen in 85/86 i think buy then the hysteria surrounding Queens demise in 82 due to the hot space album and popularity in the usa etc.. had gone as the works then live aid fired them back to the top of the musical leauge , so without ever knowing about Queens demise in 82 and attempt at funk etc.. , Hot Space to me was a suprising change to the so called Queen sound as i really only discovered it in 85 and even today Cool Cat sounds suprisingly fresh as it did then. 8/10 !! |
| Rubbersuit 29.04.2010 13:30 |
skip wrote: "Staying Power" - Shite. "Dancer" - Shite. "Back Chat" - Shite. "Body Language" - Shite to the tenth power. "Action This Day" - Shite "Put Out the Fire" - Just o.k. "Life Is Real (Song for Lennon)" - Shite. "Calling All Girls" - Shite. "Las Palabras de Amor (The Words of Love)" - Just o.k. "Cool Cat" - Shite. "Under Pressure" - Great song. ----------------------------------------- :) Overall, I can't argue too much with skip, but there's some value with the album because Fred's voice really is in top form. It also gets a couple extra points because these songs actually sounded good in concert (see on Fire at the Bowl) leading me to believe that the real problem is with production and awkward use of technology. My overall rating 5/10 (worst Queen album if you don't count Flash or Cosmos Sux) |
| master marathon runner 29.04.2010 14:33 |
skip wrote: "Staying Power" - Shite. "Dancer" - Shite. "Back Chat" - Shite. "Body Language" - Shite to the tenth power. "Action This Day" - Shite "Put Out the Fire" - Just o.k. "Life Is Real (Song for Lennon)" - Shite. "Calling All Girls" - Shite. "Las Palabras de Amor (The Words of Love)" - Just o.k. "Cool Cat" - Shite. "Under Pressure" - Great song. Would you consider re-assessing the songs ? Master Marathon Runner |
| Amazon 29.04.2010 14:35 |
Under Pressure is IMO one of Queen's two most overrated songs, along with WWTLF. It's a very good song, but I don't think it's a great song and I don't think it lives up its fame. The one genuinely great thing about it is the bass line, but other than that, I don't think it's at all among Queen's best songs. Regarding The Game, I don't think that having Under Pressure on it would have greatly enhanced it. I mean, yes, it's not a perfect album, and if Don't Try Suicide and the two Roger songs- or just one of them- had been replaced by far superior songs, it could have been an even better album, but I don't think that Under Pressure alone would have done it. I don't think it's a good enough song that it alone would have dramatically raised The Game's status. Anyway, I'm happy that Under Pressure isn't on it; The Game IMO is already one of the all-time great albums, and I think that Under Pressure fits Hot Space like a glove. I can't imagine Under Pressure on any album but Hot Space. |
| Holly2003 29.04.2010 15:18 |
Picture this... Side 1 1. Under Pressure --- 4:02 2. Need Your Loving Tonight — 2:48 3. Another One Bites the Dust — 3:03 4. Dragon Attack — 4:15 5. Don't Try Suicide — 3:52 Side 2 6. Play the Game — 3:32 7. Rock It (Prime Jive) — 4:32 8. Crazy Little Thing Called Love — 2:44 9. Sail Away Sweet Sister — 3:32 10. Save Me (May) — 3:42 |
| qrock 29.04.2010 16:34 |
I find it strange that many Queen fans dislike Coming Soon. It's not one of Queen's greatest songs but I think it does deserve it's place on the Game. |
| maxpower 29.04.2010 17:10 |
The point i was trying to make, was personally I never thought it fitted with the rest of the album in my humble opinion, yes if you're going to be awkward about it the same thing could be said of Crazy Little Thing Called Love ref The Game. I f Queen had not included on Greatest Hits 1, I might not have thought this for so long but they did. I know why they did it due the single being released in the USA along with Greatest Hits 1. Not wishing to sound cynical but perhaps they included it on to Hot Space to help sell more copies & just stuck on the end of the album & what with this CD/digital era it doesn't feel right. |
| Wiley 29.04.2010 17:15 |
Interesting exercise. I would just add UP to The Game and NOT remove Coming Soon. That album is too damn short! Let's try and do this the other way around. Side A Staying Power (rockier version) Action This Day Another One Bites the Dust Calling All Girls Put Out the Fire Back Chat Side B Life is Real Body Language Dancer Las Palabras de Amor Cool Cat Under Pressure |
| Setoneast 29.04.2010 17:18 |
if you listen to any live material from 1982, some of the songs from Hot space were the best live songs ever played. i.e Action and Staying Power |
| mickyparise 29.04.2010 19:34 |
Actually I hated this album when it came out, but it really grew on me threw the years. It's not that bad of a album after listening to it recently. |
| marcenciels 29.04.2010 19:35 |
Hot Space was a risky album at the time...like 5 to 10 years before it's time ? Cause that's about how much time it took me too appreciate it ;) Queen was a about trying new sounds. |
| skip 30.04.2010 00:05 |
Gregsynth wrote: skip wrote: "Staying Power" - Shite. "Dancer" - Shite. "Back Chat" - Shite. "Body Language" - Shite to the tenth power. "Action This Day" - Shite "Put Out the Fire" - Just o.k. "Life Is Real (Song for Lennon)" - Shite. "Calling All Girls" - Shite. "Las Palabras de Amor (The Words of Love)" - Just o.k. "Cool Cat" - Shite. "Under Pressure" - Great song. Skip, get your Hot Space ON! LOL I'll pass. |
| skip 30.04.2010 00:15 |
master marathon runner wrote: skip wrote: "Staying Power" - Shite. "Dancer" - Shite. "Back Chat" - Shite. "Body Language" - Shite to the tenth power. "Action This Day" - Shite "Put Out the Fire" - Just o.k. "Life Is Real (Song for Lennon)" - Shite. "Calling All Girls" - Shite. "Las Palabras de Amor (The Words of Love)" - Just o.k. "Cool Cat" - Shite. "Under Pressure" - Great song. Would you consider re-assessing the songs ? Master Marathon Runner Why? If you want me to listen to the cd again then re-assess each track you'd get the same results. I didn't like the cd since first listen. I did listen to the cd either last year or the year before, because I had forgotten a few of the songs. That was a major chore to get through. When the cd finished the thought was "this cd sucks and that's why it always collects dust." |
| Amazon 30.04.2010 00:16 |
Holly2003 wrote:"Picture this... Side 1 1. Under Pressure --- 4:02 2. Need Your Loving Tonight — 2:48 3. Another One Bites the Dust — 3:03 4. Dragon Attack — 4:15 5. Don't Try Suicide — 3:52 Side 2 6. Play the Game — 3:32 7. Rock It (Prime Jive) — 4:32 8. Crazy Little Thing Called Love — 2:44 9. Sail Away Sweet Sister — 3:32 10. Save Me (May) — 3:42" I'm not sure. Putting aside the songs themselves, why would you put Play The Game as the first song on the second side? Wouldn't it be better if, assuming Under Pressure had to open the album, it was the second track? |
| mike hunt 30.04.2010 06:49 |
Amazon wrote: Holly2003 wrote:"Picture this... Side 1 1. Under Pressure --- 4:02 2. Need Your Loving Tonight — 2:48 3. Another One Bites the Dust — 3:03 4. Dragon Attack — 4:15 5. Don't Try Suicide — 3:52 Side 2 6. Play the Game — 3:32 7. Rock It (Prime Jive) — 4:32 8. Crazy Little Thing Called Love — 2:44 9. Sail Away Sweet Sister — 3:32 10. Save Me (May) — 3:42" I'm not sure. Putting aside the songs themselves, why would you put Play The Game as the first song on the second side? Wouldn't it be better if, assuming Under Pressure had to open the album, it was the second track? I agree with amazon that UP fits only on the hot space album, but how about this for the game play the Game Dragon attack Another one bites the dust Need your loving tonight Under pressure Crazy little thing prime Jive Sail away Don't try suicide (i was pretty harsh on this one, but it's still a cool tune because of the middle section) Save me |
| mike hunt 30.04.2010 06:52 |
mickyparise wrote: Actually I hated this album when it came out, but it really grew on me threw the years. It's not that bad of a album after listening to it recently. Me too, it took me a few years to get past the first few songs. It's a fun listen for me these days. Still in my top 3 least favorite list. My least favorite queen album is the miracle. |
| Jazz 78 30.04.2010 07:51 |
I admit that when I bought it in May of 82 I was really confused as to what the hell they were up to. Under Pressure came out first and it really set the anticipation for a great album. But then I put it on the turntable (yeah, we had them back then) and couldn't figure out if I was to like or loathe it. I've been a fan since 77 and had all the albums up to that point. So us fans back then loved everything they did up to that point. After Another One Bites The Dust came out I think they must have thought that if they had such success with that track they could probably have more with more funky stuff. Nah, it repelled us. You younger guys out there may have felt the same way had you been born earlier BUT in your defense it's interesting to hear your comments and you're more accepting of it than we were back then. And I WAS one of those fans that kind of dismissed Queen a little after that record. Still dedicated but not as interested until The Works album. Then my love for the band was restored. But those tracks were powerful when they brought them to the stage. |
| Holly2003 30.04.2010 08:14 |
Jazz 78 wrote: Under Pressure came out first and it really set the anticipation for a great album. But then I put it on the turntable (yeah, we had them back then) and couldn't figure out if I was to like or loathe it. Very true. Under Pressure is not a funk-dance track, like a lot of Hot Space (Staying Power, Dancer, Back Chat, Cool Cat, Body Language). It is more 'New Wave', like Calling All Girls, Action This Day, or Coming Soon (from The Game). As such, even if one ignores that it was released as a single seven months before Hot Space was released and had already appeard on some Greatest Hits LPs, stylistically Under Pressure is a bit 'between albums'. Regarding Hot Space, I dont know if it was as much Queen moving away from their fanbase as it was the poor quality songwriting on the album. Only one or two songs really stand out. Only one or two would've made it onto, for example, The Game. They simply made an album that wasn't very good, and which didn't connect with their core audience or the wider public. Many other bands were doing funk-soul better than Queen. They ended up looking like imitations of these artists. It's nice that MJ said it influenced Thriller, but let's be honest, Thriller is a classic, whereas HS is a dud. |
| The_CrY 30.04.2010 09:15 |
Holly2003 wrote: It's nice that MJ said it influenced Thriller, but let's be honest, Thriller is a classic, whereas HS is a dud. Perhaps it influenced him like: "alright, so I should not be doing something like that". |
| Amazon 30.04.2010 09:28 |
Hot Space is no masterpiece, however I think it's one of Queen's most enjoyable albums. I recently relistened to in full, and I was stunned at how fun it is. There aren't any duds on the album. Body Language isn't great, but I don't consider it to be among Queen's weakest songs, and unlike in previous albums (such as Queen II, SHA and Jazz), there aren't any songs which I would skip over. They are all, at the very least, enjoyable, with Freddie in extraordinary form. He's simply incredible. Staying Power, Put Out the Fire and Las Palabras de Amor are IMO the three best songs on the album, with Staying Power being among my favourite Queen songs. Other songs like Dancer, Life Is Real and Under Pressure are very good. Most of the other songs, such are Back Chat, are pretty good. There are two or three songs that I'm not a big fan of, but I would take any song on Hot Space over several 70's songs. If I were to divide Queen's recording career into eras, I would have the first 8 albums as the classical period; The Works and AKOM as Queen's dark ages; The Miracle, Innuendo and Made In Heaven as Queen's mature golden era; and I would have Hot Space in an era all by itself. Unlike any other Queen album, I love that they made it, it gives me incredible pleasure, I am a very proud owner of it, yet I wouldn't describe it as Queen's very best albums. A terrific album. |
| mike hunt 30.04.2010 11:00 |
The_CrY wrote: Holly2003 wrote: It's nice that MJ said it influenced Thriller, but let's be honest, Thriller is a classic, whereas HS is a dud. Perhaps it influenced him like: "alright, so I should not be doing something like that". I don't know about that....i don't think hot space really influenced michael jackson..Maybe a little.....I think the queen album that influenced him was the game IMO. the songs had a funky feel like dragon attack and bites the dust, and like thriller the songs were perfect... Maybe a little of dancer the way a dance song has a rock guitar solo. michael did it right though...that's not a put down on queen at all....Imagine if michael jackson tried to make an album like the classic rockers of the 70's?....trying too do a night at the opera or who's next?....He would be a fish out of water like Queen was with hot space, only much much worse. Queen at least did a decent Job at dance music. Let me say this, i'm no fan of michael...he was just an updated version of the great smoky robinson (and not as good as smoky) i don't care how many albums he sold....they're is nothing brilliant about the music, it's just basic pop music. early queen smokes him in creativity. All the elements Queen music had is underappreciated. They did more styles on one album than michael had in his whole career. Album sales don't mean everything....I bet brittany spears will out sell queen worldwide by the time she's 40.....what does that prove?....a pop star will usually out sell a rock band. |
| Sebastian 30.04.2010 11:34 |
Technically, nobody's been able to find (here on QZ at least) a direct quote from MJ saying 'Hot Space' influenced 'Thrilller'. All there is consists of hearsay, speculations, conjectures and what's been implied by Dr May. |
| mike hunt 30.04.2010 12:11 |
yea, and Dr. May knew micheal Personally. We don't, so maybe we should listen to the man. |
| Sebastian 30.04.2010 22:43 |
Fred knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Quincy knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Michael's mum knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Michael's dad knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Rebbie knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. La Toya knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Janet knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Jermaine knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Tito knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Marlon knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Randy knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Jackie knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Mr Fosterknew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Van Halen knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Sir Paul knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Vincent Price knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Bruce Swedien knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. Last but not least: Michael Jackson knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let a lone a chief influence. |
| mike hunt 01.05.2010 01:04 |
Sebastian, i couldn't give a rats ass what michael was influenced by....I couldn't stand the guy...Still can't. I don't why you people even give a shit about michael jackson and hot space. fuck michael Jackson....michael jackson michael jackson, fuck michael jackson. he sucks!....He's bad He's bad you know it!....If queen made lryics like that you people would hang them....michael say's it and it's brilliant.....I'm bad.....michael wasn't bad, he was fucking awful. |
| Sebastian 01.05.2010 01:27 |
In the case MJ was awful or whatever, the following remains true: Fred knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Quincy knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Michael's mum knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Michael's dad knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Rebbie knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. La Toya knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Janet knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Jermaine knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Tito knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Marlon knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Randy knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Jackie knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Mr Fosterknew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Van Halen knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Sir Paul knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Vincent Price knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Bruce Swedien knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Last but not least: Michael Jackson knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. In the case MJ wasn't awful or whatever, the following remains true: Fred knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Quincy knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Michael's mum knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Michael's dad knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Rebbie knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. La Toya knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Janet knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and she never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Jermaine knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Tito knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Marlon knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Randy knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Jackie knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Mr Fosterknew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Van Halen knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Sir Paul knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Vincent Price knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Bruce Swedien knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. Last but not least: Michael Jackson knew MJ a hell of a lot more than Dr May, was a hell of a lot more involved in Thriller than Dr May, and he never said or implied (AFAIK) HS was an influence on Thriller, let alone a chief influence. |
| tcc 01.05.2010 01:32 |
To sum up in one sentence: We don't know what is the real situation :-) |
| Holly2003 01.05.2010 03:05 |
You're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. And you're getting a Hot Space album. Thanks Oprah! |
| Amazon 01.05.2010 09:50 |
I love Michael Jackson, I consider him to have been a genius and one of the greatest musical artists of all time, but I honestly couldn't care less whether or not HS inspired Thriller. I love HS, I think it's a terrific album, and my feelings about it have nothing to do with how influential it is. |
| Sebastian 01.05.2010 13:06 |
tcc wrote: To sum up in one sentence: We don't know what is the real situation :-) |
| mike hunt 01.05.2010 15:19 |
Amazon wrote: I love Michael Jackson, I consider him to have been a genius and one of the greatest musical artists of all time, but I honestly couldn't care less whether or not HS inspired Thriller. I love HS, I think it's a terrific album, and my feelings about it have nothing to do with how influential it is. ok I exaggerated a bit...great entertainer, One of the best of all time....not a musical genius though....does he even play an instrument?....i don't think so.....He was no more than a decent singer. his brilliance was as a entertainer on stage, dancing and groundbreaking musical video's. He's not my thing....i don't care for dancing or video's. I'm a music lover. |
| Sebastian 01.05.2010 15:40 |
He did play instruments, never on a high level though, but that's not mandatory to be a musical genius. He was a great, great composer. |
| Amazon 01.05.2010 16:47 |
Uh, Mike, I'm also a music lover. My love for MJ is not simply because of his dancing and videos, but also because of his actual music. Anyway one doesn't need to play any instruments to be a musical genius. Whether Freddie played the piano or not, I would still have regarded him as a musical genius. In regards to MJ, I think he was a wonderful song-writer and composer, one of the greatest dancers and entertainers of all time, and one of the greatest vocalists of all time. I think he was an extraordinary singer. |
| mike hunt 01.05.2010 21:00 |
average singer at best |
| Amazon 02.05.2010 04:39 |
I disagree. |
| dragon-fly 02.05.2010 06:07 |
Hot Space..... 1. Staying Power- so-so. 2. Dancer- so-so. 3. Back Chat- ok. 4. Body Language- awful rubbish. 5. Action This Day- good one. 6. Put Out The Fire- ok. 7. Life Is Real - rubbish. 8. Calling All Girls- ok. Pretty lilt. 9. Las Palabras de Amor- love it! (Finally lol) 10. Cool Cat- good one. 11. Under Pressure- good one. Though I like live versions without Bowie more. (Duh, clearly not my fav album.) |
| qrock 02.05.2010 09:53 |
It's interesting that Hot Space is not strictly speaking the least popular Queen album among fans. Body Language is sometimes voted in the Top 40 Queen songs and some people just love Hot Space. In a poll about Queen's best albums Hot Space was ranked higher than the Works. link |
| Soundfreak 02.05.2010 12:13 |
qrock wrote: It's interesting that Hot Space is not strictly speaking the least popular Queen album among fans. Body Language is sometimes voted in the Top 40 Queen songs and some people just love Hot Space. In a poll about Queen's best albums Hot Space was ranked higher than the Works. link <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Maybe the fact that people still like this album more than others is the fact, that "Hot Space" was the last "risky" album, which so far was part of the attraction of Queen. You never really knew what happened next. After "Hot Space" they played more safe, "The Works" sounding like "The Game"-Pt 2, still few inventive sounds here and there but never again as radical. |
| The Real Wizard 02.05.2010 17:36 |
Whoever thinks Michael Jackson is an average singer clearly hasn't heard Earth Song. It's easily one of the most soaring and passionate vocals ever laid down onto tape. |
| Sebastian 02.05.2010 19:26 |
At one of those award ceremonies (maybe the Grammys) they had some top-notch singers (Celine and some others) doing that one, and they weren't even close. |
| skip 02.05.2010 22:27 |
Holly2003 wrote: Jazz 78 wrote: Under Pressure came out first and it really set the anticipation for a great album. But then I put it on the turntable (yeah, we had them back then) and couldn't figure out if I was to like or loathe it. Very true. Under Pressure is not a funk-dance track, like a lot of Hot Space (Staying Power, Dancer, Back Chat, Cool Cat, Body Language). It is more 'New Wave', like Calling All Girls, Action This Day, or Coming Soon (from The Game). As such, even if one ignores that it was released as a single seven months before Hot Space was released and had already appeard on some Greatest Hits LPs, stylistically Under Pressure is a bit 'between albums'. Regarding Hot Space, I dont know if it was as much Queen moving away from their fanbase as it was the poor quality songwriting on the album. Only one or two songs really stand out. Only one or two would've made it onto, for example, The Game. They simply made an album that wasn't very good, and which didn't connect with their core audience or the wider public. Many other bands were doing funk-soul better than Queen. They ended up looking like imitations of these artists. It's nice that MJ said it influenced Thriller, but let's be honest, Thriller is a classic, whereas HS is a dud. "Hot Space" was the result of Queen (particularly Freddie and John) trying to recapture the success they had with "Another One Bites The Dust." The two of them thought that having an lp full of dance/funk tunes was their way of hitting the jackpot again. |
| skip 02.05.2010 22:29 |
mike hunt wrote: average singer at best That's when he was actually singing onstage rather than lip synching. |
| mike hunt 03.05.2010 01:54 |
skip wrote: mike hunt wrote: average singer at best That's when he was actually singing onstage rather than lip synching. Agreed |
| Sebastian 03.05.2010 03:49 |
skip wrote: "Hot Space" was the result of Queen (particularly Freddie and John) That's a widespread fake myth. The John part. Actually, he was the one who contributed the least to the songwriting department and the one whose function was replaced by machines the most. Besides, neither 'Dancer' nor 'Action' were written by Jeddie, nor Maylor were forced to come up with them or to arrange them that way. Hot Space was the result of ALL of them moving away from their previous direction. And if anything, it was chiefly Freddie and Brian who did it (none of R's and J's songs have synth-bass, for instance), while both John and Roger were vocal about their dislike of the album. John was indeed more fond of 'black' music than Maylor, but it doesn't mean he was more involved on Hot Space. |
| qrock 22.11.2010 17:07 |
Just listended to Hot Space today. I agree that it's a fun listen but by the end of the record you get a feeling of disapointment in the lack of varied and quality tunes and the absence of Brian May solos. What irratest me further is the fact that the band used Drum Machines and Programmed Keyboard Bass played by a non band member or for example, John decides to programe the drums of Cool Cat. The group does not sound like a group in hot space. Their songwriting is below par because I think they were aware that they were making a record focused on Dance music. It might have been the first time in their career that the band did not feel free. I do begin to wounder why drum programming was used on Queen songs from Hot Space to Innuendo. I think most songs by Queen in the 80s were not played by Taylor with the use of Drum Machines. And I think the rating of a song is lowered by knowing that authentic instrements are not being played. For example,you listen to a great song like I Want to Break Free, Who Wants to Live Forever, I Can't Live Forever. You like it, but you suddenly discover Roger is not doing the drums or it's been played by on a keyboard by the guitarist. The listener then does not feel the same about that song, knowing that the band was not entirely involved in that record. You don't feel you are listening to a proper band when a song has some guy other than the drummer doing the percussion. Was Roger lazy, was he bored, why did Queen take the easy way in the 80s. After the Miracle, Queen were showing signs of moving away from that era but unfortuantly it was short lived with the death of Freddie Mercury. |
| paulosham 22.11.2010 18:09 |
Do the band play real instrements on I Can't Live Forever? |
| Bigfish 23.11.2010 11:06 |
I think the real problem with this album is the quality of the more traditional Queen material. Side 1 is actually vibrant, experimental and brave. True, I don't like Body Language and when they missed they usually missed big time but you don't acheive anything creatively without taking risks.. Oddly I now prefer it to those mid eighties albums; Works, magic and Miracle and I actually think the album features some of Freds last great vocal performances before technology kicked in to shore up his ageing smoking voice. 'Staying Power, Dancer and Back Chat are all fine fresh songs even now but I understand that people who considered Q2, for example, the bees bollocks probably find it difficult to reconcile with such a different album just 8 years later. Side 2, with the exception of Calling all Girls and Pressure, seems to lack heart and they seemed to be treading through areas where they had been before with greater inspiration. There's nothing wrong with 'Put out the fire' but once you've heard 'White Man' or It's Late...well and 'Las Palabras'...Sorry folks but I think it's sugary and awful. If I could re-write history - how about Dancer as a first single ? Things could have been different... |
| matt z 23.11.2010 17:13 |
mike hunt wrote: skip wrote: mike hunt wrote: average singer at best That's when he was actually singing onstage rather than lip synching. Agreed (i'm assuming this is another dig at Michael Jackson) Actually, with some exceptions he DID sing live onstage... you may be forgetting that he only had a FEW tours. In a live set of about two hours, he DID do some notable Lip Syncs... "Stranger In Moscow" (while doing some HEAVY gyrations ...bad for vocal phrasing)... as well as some on and off parts of other songs... "Will You Be There", "Man In The Mirror"... however, anything of "recent" years (meaning 1999-2003) broadcast... that's all been rescreened and edited for consumption. (Voice overs)... a HUGE notable was the live broadcast for the 2001 event... people listening on the radio got the live feed (with bad P.A. issues... possibly due to inexperienced singers onstage? inexperienced sound man?... or just the massive amount of MICS onstage)... that had tons of feedback while audiences who tuned in to watch it as it was later broadcast... got voice overs for really bad vocal takes... (noticeably... none of the bad ones were Michael's) VERSION AIRED link LIVE RADIO FEED: link Give the guy a break, he busted his ass onstage DYNAMICALLY in all but that 30th anniversary special. For once he looked a little off. Though, i'm not certain if he'd lip synced all those songs either, sometimes if the raw vocal take wasn't considered on par or had cracks, hiss, feedback whatever... it wasn't released. Having been less bootlegged than Queen, ya never know. |
| Sebastian 24.11.2010 05:17 |
> What irratest me further is the fact that the band used Drum Machines and Programmed Keyboard Bass played by a non band member or for example, John decides to programe the drums of Cool Cat. Those drums are real. > I do begin to wounder why drum programming was used on Queen songs from Hot Space to Innuendo. Because, at the time, it was trendy, and allowed non-drummers to have exactly what they wanted without having to explain in detail to Roger. > I think most songs by Queen in the 80s were not played by Taylor with the use of Drum Machines. Really? Most? Let's see: Play the Game - Real Dragon Attack - Real Another One Bites - Real Need Your Loving - Real Rock It - Real Don't Try Suicide - Real A Human Body - Real Flash's Theme - Real In the Space Capsule - Real Football Fight - Real Flash to the Rescue - Real Vultan's Theme - Real Battle Theme - Real The Wedding March - Real Marriage of Dale and Ming - Real Crash Dive on Mingo City - Real Flash's Theme Reprise - Real The Hero - Real Under Pressure - Real Soul Brother - Real Staying Power - Real + Computer Dancer - Real + Computer Back Chat - Real + Computer Body Language - Real + Computer Action This Day - Real + Computer Life Is Real, So Are Drums Calling All Girls - Real Las Palabras de Amor - Real Cool Cat - Real Radio Ga Ga - Real + Computer Tear It Up - Real It's a Hard Life - Real Man on the Prowl - Real Machines - Real + Computer I Want to Break Free - Real (pads, but it still counts) Keep Passing the Open Windows - Real Hammer to Fall - Real One Vision - Real (both acoustic and electric) A Kind of Magic - Real One Year of Love - Real Pain Is So Close - Real + Computers Friends Will Be Friends - Real Gimme the Prize - Real Don't Lose Your Head - Real + Computers Princes of the Universe - Real Party - Real + Programmed Khashoggi's Ship - Real The Miracle - Real I Want It All - Real The Invisible Man - Real Breakthru' - Real + Programmed Rain Must Fall - Real + Programmed Scandal - Real My Baby Does Me - Real + Programmed Was It All Worth It - Real Hang on in There - Real Stealin' - Real Chinese Torture - Real Hijack My Heart - Real My Life Has Been Saved - Real Innuendo - Real Slightly Mad - Real + Programmed (Shaker) Headlong - Programmed I Can't Live With You - Programmed Don't Try So Hard - Real Ride the Wild Wind - Real All God's People - Real + Programmed Days of Our Lives - Real Delilah - Real + Programmed The Hitman - Real + Programmed Show Must Go On - Real So: out of 171 songs featuring drums that Queen recorded at least partly in the 1980's, 153 (89.47%) of them have only real drums, and most of the remaining 18 have him alongside the machines. Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaardly 'most songs by Queen in the 80s were not played by Taylor with the use of Drum Machines.' > For example,you listen to a great song like I Want to Break Free, Who Wants to Live Forever, I Can't Live Forever. Break Free - All instruments are real (synths are a real instrument too, or d'you think they're imaginary?). And even if synths counted as 'imagunary', still drums, bass and guitars are real so real instruments win. WWTLF - One synth vs real harp, real flutes, real violins, real violas, real celli, real guitar, real percussion, real horns... mostly real. ICLF - If you mean I Can't Live With You, then again: real bass + real guitars. The majority is still real. > You like it, but you suddenly discover Roger is not doing the drums or it's been played by on a keyboard by the guitarist. Brian did not play the 'Can't Live' drums on keyboard. He programmed them on an Apple Mac, which is not the same thing. > Was Roger lazy, was he bored, why did Queen take the easy way in the 80s. When 89.47% of the songs with drums have exclusively real drums, a comment like that is lazy, bored, easy and waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off. |
| Wiley 24.11.2010 15:56 |
It's incredible to see that most of the drums we hear in the 80's albums (+ Innuendo) are "real" drums, as opposed to them being drum machines, like a lot of people seem to think. There seems to be something here. Something that makes the overall perception of the average Queen fan lean towards the idea that in the 80's Queen stopped "painstakingly crafting" their music and programmed everything on computers. There was a change in sounds in Queen's music (including the drum sound) when Mack came on board. Eventhough you can hear differences in previous albums (Q1, ADATR, NOTW, Jazz all have different drum sound), it became more evident around this time. Why does the "Live" feel on a rock song like Hammer to Fall is less evident than in -say- It's Late or Stone Cold Crazy? Why does it feel artificial? Roger plays "real" drums on HTF. Did he use triggered samples or synth drums in that song? Something is off. It doesn't sound like an entirely acoustic drum set. The average music listener apparently doesn't know the difference between a Drum machine, Acoustic drums sampled and looped, synth drums played by a real drummer, etc... If the song doesn't sound like Roger is playing drums next to you in the room (like ANATO-NOTW) then "THEY MUST BE SYNTHS". |
| McNulty 24.11.2010 16:22 |
Sebastian wrote: > Radio Ga Ga - Real + Computer Machines - Real + Computer I Want to Break Free - Real (pads, but it still counts) A Kind of Magic - Real One Year of Love - Real Pain Is So Close - Real + Computers Don't Lose Your Head - Real + Computers The Invisible Man - Real Breakthru' - Real + Programmed Rain Must Fall - Real + Programmed Scandal - Real My Baby Does Me - Real + Programmed Slightly Mad - Real + Programmed (Shaker) Days of Our Lives - Real Are you absolutely sure? To me all the songs above sound totally programmed. I mean, they might have sampled a single drumhit from Roger or something, but they don't even sound vaguely human to me. Obviously, that was the sound they were going for, a more "modern" pop sound. I can't see it as being laziness or inability, Roger obviously had the chops. I think they probably did it because it worked better for the song. That's the important thing. Not who gets to show off the most on their instrument. That's why Queen weren't a metal band ;) |
| Sebastian 25.11.2010 06:24 |
> It's incredible to see that most of the drums we hear in the 80's albums (+Innuendo) Innuendo was also (drum-wise) mostly done in the 80's, as they laid down backing tracks in March to December 1989 (and guess what: 1989 is still the 80's). The 1990 sessions were mostly for computer stuff, overdubs and so on. > There seems to be something here. Something that makes the overall perception of the average Queen fan lean towards the idea that in the 80's Queen stopped "painstakingly crafting" their music and programmed everything on computers. Yes: A says something; B believes it, without even making an effort to verify if it's true; C thinks 'if A and B say so, it must be true'; D thinks 'if A, B and C say so it must be true', and so on. Soon enough you'll have thousands of people thinking Roger sat on his arse for a full decade and then out of thin air came up with Innuendo. Both statements couldn't be further from the truth. > There was a change in sounds in Queen's music (including the drum sound) when Mack came on board. And David Richards. > Eventhough you can hear differences in previous albums (Q1, ADATR, NOTW, Jazz all have different drum sound), it became more evident around this time. Partly because Roger changed to smaller kits as well. Also the new (to them) studios had a different set-up and the switch from analogue to digital played a key role as well. Bass also sounds different but people don't seem to misatribute it to machines as often as Roger's drumming. Not to mention piano or guitars... > Why does the "Live" feel on a rock song like Hammer to Fall is less evident than in -say- It's Late or Stone Cold Crazy? Kit, mics, tape recorders, pre-amp (if there's any), console, engineers, producer, generation tapes. > Roger plays "real" drums on HTF. Did he use triggered samples or synth drums in that song? I'm listening to it (Karaoke version not to be distracted by the wonderful vocals) in order to double-check. So: * The snare beats on the beginning sound odd because the song is varisped. It makes the tuning different and very uncharacteristic. Same for B/D. * Hi-hats are obviously real: technology to emulate them that well did not exist in 1983. Also check out Rog's trademark foot thing... not only it's a bitch to programme, but also totally unnecessary as you've got the person there. * Crash cymbals seem to be muted somehow... besides the varisped thing there seems to be something like mic position affecting it. Or maybe there's some sort of interference between the different mics set-up. > It doesn't sound like an entirely acoustic drum set. As you wrote later on, not everything that doesn't sound like Opera to News of the World is not acoustic. There are literally thousands of ways to mic and mix drums, even if you've got the same player. > The average music listener apparently doesn't know the difference between a Drum machine, Acoustic drums sampled and looped, synth drums played by a real drummer, etc... Indeed. Moreover, they think drum-machines are magical things where you just programme and listen. Even nowadays with such amazing samples, it's still a hundred times easier, cheaper and better to get a real drummer playing the part. > If the song doesn't sound like Roger is playing drums next to you in the room (like ANATO-NOTW) then "THEY MUST BE SYNTHS". Indeed. Ignorance is bliss... but not in this case. Had 'Best Friend' or 'Misfire' been recorded in the 80's, people would be convinced they're synths too. ----- Regarding the inquiries about Ga Ga, etc... first of all, let us pretend, for a second, that those were all computers: you'd still have 81.87% of drums being totally real, which still renders qrock's comment absolutely categorically wrong and waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off. Now: Radio Ga Ga: The intro sound is programmed (and nicely mixed in stereo). That sound keeps going throughout most of the song. Again I'm listening to the karaoke version to have a clearer image. Note how the hi-hat misses the trademark Roger thing... it does accentuate it at the end but that's not the same sound and is also an easily programmable pattern for Linn computers (in fact, if I'm not mistaken, it may well even be a preset). When 'So don't become' kicks in, there are about three or four seconds of a real kit in the background, with Roger's hi-hat thing and all (listen to the live versions for the same sound). By 'you had the time' there's that real kit again doing some overdubs. Chorus is interesting: hi-hat is programmed, claps are done on e-drums (not the same as machines as you've actually got to play them), cymbals are real. So yes: it IS real + computer. As a side note, bass is also a combination of real + machines. The cymbal rolls before the synth solo (and then again before the guitar solo) are real too BTW. Only the piano is 'fake': it's actually a Fairlight CMI-II with (close to) piano sound. Live, Spike did use a Yamaha CP80 to get a (much better) sound, and for the Magic tour he used an Emulator II+ that sampled it much more accurately. Machines: Again, listening to the instrumental version to be more certain. The main pattern during the verses is almost identical to 'Ga Ga', with only some different effects to make the snare deeper. When Brian hits those power chords (e.g. before the vocal comes in), Roger adds some cymbal + bass-drum, which are real. So my point is already confirmed: real + computer. For the refrain, the programmed hi-hat goes to the background but the real kit enters: real B/D, real snare (with a similar effect to HTF), real toms (with Roger's trademark fills). In the instrumental version you can really notice the contrast between programmed and acoustic drums, both of which play key roles on this song. Something similar happens to bass. Reportedly, it was Brian's idea to have that: the machines and the human band sort of fighting each other. By 2.57 (on the instrumental version) acoustic drums are much more prominent, with Roger's hi-hat thing (the acoustic giveaway) audible. I Want to Break Free: Again, listening to the karaoke version to be sure. Cymbal rolls on the intro are real. The pattern is also real, note how the snare sound 'bounces', in a way no machine or synth could emulate back in '83 (it's still nearly impossible in 2010). Hi-hats are real but have a different set-up to Roger's traditional way. They probably experimented a lot at the studio in LA - note that Brian used a different guitar to record both HTF and TIU (something most people have never noticed). The crash for the middle-eight is sort of muted, but it seems to me that it was more of a post-production thing. It'd be great to hear those raw tracks and get someone like Rob Cavallo remixing them. For the instrumental verse (single version), the fact drums are real is more evident (compare them to Magic Tour versions, although those have a waaaaaay better set-up and miking). Mack (or an engineer) probably thought of dubbing the snare with a (possibly sampled) tambourine. Actually, that's a technique Queen may have used in the 70's (with handclaps instead of tambourine), as it was a favourite of the late Geoff Workman. I know for a fact that Workman used that trick (having claps and snare coming in at the same moment - listeners don't notice the claps but they just feel the snare is stronger and deeper) with other bands he worked with, but I'm not sure if he applied the technique with Queen. Maybe on 'Leaving Home Ain't Easy', one of my favourite songs BTW. A Kind of Magic: Karaoke version again, just to be certain. Well, fingerclicks are real (they have an 'echo' that only sounds that way when doing real ones). The hi-hat in the background is obviously programmed, it's almost as if they'd copied and pasted what they'd done on Machines and Ga Ga. Snare could be either way... to be fair that sound is easily gotten on pads but it can also be a ( |
| Sebastian 25.11.2010 06:31 |
A Kind of Magic: Karaoke version again, just to be certain. Well, fingerclicks are real (they have an 'echo' that only sounds that way when doing real ones). The hi-hat in the background is obviously programmed, it's almost as if they'd copied and pasted what they'd done on Machines and Ga Ga. Snare could be either way... to be fair that sound is easily gotten on pads but it can also be a (slightly muted) real one. Fills are real (e.g. 'eternity'), although Roger probably used drum pads rather than actual toms. Still, drum pads are not the same as programmed or computer drums, as you have to actually play them (i.e. hit them with a stick - check out the 'One Vision' video). Bass-drum comes from Simmons SDS-VII (IIRC), it's part of what made them famous. Again, it's not acoustic but it's still real as you have to play them, not programme them. The snare fill on 3.20 is obviously real, and the snare becomes real from then on (listen to the live version for a closer sound). So, it's not completely real but it's combination of programmed hi-hat plus real (both acoustic and electric) drums. Note that the live version does have the hi-hat thing, missing from the album cut. A shame really, as Roger's playing is way better than that stupid looped computer hi-hat. As for the film version: pattern's real, but looped (a la 'Rock It', 'Coming Soon' or 'Another One Bites the Dust'). There are some overdubs here and there (e.g. before 'the waiting') that are neither acoustic nor programmed, but electronic. Come to think of it, it seems that the chorus pattern (obviously real) is the same as on the album, only that on the album it was mixed more in the back, which people tend to mistake for programmed. One Year of Love: Couldn't get an instrumental, so I'm analysing it through the extended version, which includes some instrumental passages. B/D is real althoug mixed in a very Deacy way (see my YBMF point above). Same for snare... although that sound could be obtained via e-drums too (or at least close to it). If multi-tracks ever surface we can be positive. Hi-hat is also real, but looped (a la AOBTD), and there's the tambourine trick again. It seems, then, that it was a John thing (see IWTBF). Remember: a closed-miked kit is not the same as a MIDI. Pain Is So Close to Pleasure: Listening to its extended version to be more certain. The pattern at the beginning is obviously real (listen to what Roger plays to warm up during the One Vision sessions), and quite cleverly mixed. Tom sounds are again obviously real (you couldn't get that exact sound in '86 as you can't get it right in 2010). There are some cowbell-like overdubs before the verse starts (on the extended mix) which seem to be indeed programmed, I think Duran Duran also used them. Tambourine trick again. The main pattern during the verses is still the real one (listeneable on much clearer detail at the beginning of the extended mix), but mixed way in the back and with some weird EQing (as in Best Friend). Actually, after having hated this song for years and years, now I'm starting to like it thanks to those drums... not only are they (mostly) real, but they're a great pattern, I can't wait to try it out on drums next time I play ... I know I won't get it, but it's still nice to try. By the way, bass is a nice combination of real + synth. Intro is synth, but when vocal kicks in it's real. The e-piano, OTOH, is not a real one, but a DX-7 synth emulating an e-piano sound. Around 4.40 (extended mix) you can listen to the real and the synth bass simultaneously, then only the synth one and there's indeed a (not so) subtle difference... great ear training if you feel like it! Don't Lose Your Head: I'm listening to A Dozen Red Roses (extended) to be sure. Hi-hat is real (listen to [and watch!] the One Vision warm-ups again). The B/D + snare pattern is also real although probably done on electronic (rather than acoustic) drums, which again is not the same as programming something on keys or computers. Now, at 1.25 they're obviously real (note the acoustic echo), so either Roger played them all on real (Ludwig, I guess) drums, or he had the same pattern on both a- and e- and mixed them. The hi-hats at 2.42 and from then on are copied 'n' pasted from 'A Kind of Magic' (or the other way around). So, I was right: real + computers. Invisible Man: There was actually an interview with (IIRC) a French magazine where Roger confirmed that although people seemed to think they were programmed (as it was the trend at the time for Jax Trax), Invisible Man had been done with real drums. Again, I'm listening to the karaoke version as I write - yes, the intro fills are real, you can't get that sound from machines even now in 2010. The pattern is also real (it's got the hi-hat thing) although probably looped (not a rarity for Roger's songs, check Rock It, Coming Soon or his solo career!). The chorus adds the same programmed hi-hat as Magic, Machines, Ga Ga and Don't Lose Your Head. The build-up before the middle eight is a combination of programmed hi-hats plus the real thing. The other build-up (before the May-estic solo) is also real, but crash cymbals are very weak (miking and mixing are to blame, or probably Rog used a different kit, but it's definitely acoustic anyway). For the solo in question, hi-hat is again the same old thing as in most Roger's songs from the 80's, but with a much better sound (closer to the real thing but still programmed), and the fills near the 'Roger Taylor' line are also real, but processed via limiters and flanged to sound more 'techno'. Still, most of the work is on authentic acoustic drums. Breakthru': Karaoke again. Hi-hat is programmed and the same old shite as on Machines, Ga Ga, Magic, Head and Invisible. That indeed seems kind of lazy :) But main kit is obviously real: note the fills before the chorus - not only they're very very very hard to programme, but it's also unnecessary as you can get Roger to play them in five minutes and get a way better sound. Not only are drums real there, but they're also a very hard thing to pull off. People seem to think that Roger was only a great drummer in the 70's, and it's not quite right. For the 'your smile' verse, hi-hat begins programmed but fades out to make room for the real one by the end of the section. B/D + snare are real throughout. Note the very real and very nice crash cymbals on the chorus. Again, there's some flange and probably a limiter to make it sound more techno. Four-string bass is only real during the solo, otherwise it's two different kinds of synth sounds combined and alternating. Note the hi-hat thing near the end. For those who haven't noticed, Roger added an 'a-ha' voice doubling the bass at some points. You may like or hate this 'poppy' era of Queen, but in either case, the amount of work and effort behind four-minute gems like this one, from every aspect - miking, producing, engineering, playing (try doing Brian's solo) - is extraordinary. Rain Must Fall: No kar version, so I'm using the album cut. Well, the pattern is obviously MIDI, and a good one actually in terms of mixing. Cymbal on 0.52 is real, and so are the tom fills near the second verse. Timbales, believe it or not, are actually real (e.g. 1.27), even in 2010 you can't get that sound from samples. Hi-hats are real during the solo. About that song, Roger did comment (BBC, May 1989) that it was mostly machine-like, with some overdubs he (Roger) put on top of it, most of which they (I assume John and Freddie) edited out. A shame. I suspect the programmed pattern was by John (listen to No Turning Back - the drummer's mostly put in the video as a prop). So, I was right: real + programmed. By the way, regarding the congas (3.01-3.03 for instance, and from then on), those ones are indeed sampled. Conga percussion is very very very hard to mic, and unless you've got a studio especially set-up for that (e.g. those used for Jamaican music), it's way cheaper to |
| Sebastian 25.11.2010 06:33 |
Rain Must Fall: No kar version, so I'm using the album cut. Well, the pattern is obviously MIDI, and a good one actually in terms of mixing. Cymbal on 0.52 is real, and so are the tom fills near the second verse. Timbales, believe it or not, are actually real (e.g. 1.27), even in 2010 you can't get that sound from samples. Hi-hats are real during the solo. About that song, Roger did comment (BBC, May 1989) that it was mostly machine-like, with some overdubs he (Roger) put on top of it, most of which they (I assume John and Freddie) edited out. A shame. I suspect the programmed pattern was by John (listen to No Turning Back - the drummer's mostly put in the video as a prop). So, I was right: real + programmed. By the way, regarding the congas (3.01-3.03 for instance, and from then on), those ones are indeed sampled. Conga percussion is very very very hard to mic, and unless you've got a studio especially set-up for that (e.g. those used for Jamaican music), it's way cheaper to sample them if you've got the technology (and in late 80's, they did). In some cases, like 'Days of Our Lives', you can get the drummer miming congas in the video and thousands will believe he recorded the real thing! Scandal: Listening to the extended version to have a clearer view. B/D is obviously real (again, you can't get that with machines even in 2010). Note the hi-hat thing showing up from time to time. Toms are also obviously real. Snare starts off more compressed but then it's clear that it's also real (note the echo). DR probably added a looot of processing to make it sound contemporary and sort of European (if they thought they'd make it big in the States with this single they were nuts). It seems to me that, with some obvious exceptions (like ICLWY), Brian demanded his songs to include real drumming, while Roger and perhaps John were more keen on combining acoustic, electronic and programmed. While drums on this song are real, Roger is mostly miming something else in the video ... probably related to the fact he reportedly never liked the song. For some bits (e.g. 'twisted and broken') there's the illusion of an extra hi-hat (or a programmed one), most likely done via delay rather than MIDI - that way the producer could get the acoustic sound but the electronic feel, very clever indeed! Wonder if DR ever ran out of tricks... The organ is obviously synth-generated rather than a real one, BTW. You know, if you put this same drum pattern (with the tom fills) on a slightly faster tempo and processed it differently so it didn't 'warble' that way, you'd get Roger playing neo-punk a la Travis Barker! (I'm serious, try playing the Scandal pattern along with Adam's Song or Online Songs). Now I'm listening to the demo to see if there's any changes: now, there you do have it chiefly programmed (note the much drier snare, for instance). At the time, Brian's method was programming the drums on computers and then getting Roger (or Cozy, for his solo work) to learn the part and replace it by real acoustic drums. For some cases (like DBY, album version), the track wound up with the programmed thing. Thankfully, for Scandal, it was mostly replaced although the tambourineloop still shows up from time to time. My Baby Does Me: Main pattern is a poorly disguised (or not even disguised) programmed pattern. I wonder if John and Roger had a fall-out or something as it seems that for both of his songs drums are mostly (but not entirely) machines. Or maybe it was Freddie's idea, or maybe Roger was simply on tour with The Cross and that's it. The fills are also something you can easily get via early MIDI sequencers and/or Passport Master Tracks software for those old Atari's. E-piano is on a DX-7 (same sound on One Year of Love). There's a lot of processing to make the pattern sound more realistic but it's not. There, I admit I was mistaken: it's all programmed. In fact, Roger doesn't sing harmonies on this song either so they did it completely without him. He must be happy now as it's probably the weakest track on the album. Same programmed pattern is used for I Guess We're Falling Out BTW, but that one does have some real drums as well, most noticeably the cymbal rolls. Slightly Mad: Main pattern is indeed Roger's acoustic playing, note the hi-hat thing (although more subtle than on, say, Ride the Wild Wind) and the powerful snare. B/D isn't too noticeable as it's perfectly locked in with the (also real) bass. I hope multi-tracks some day see the (public) light of day... for ear education and Queen investigation, they'd be quite the holy grail. There's a programmed shaker (more prominent during the 'banana tree' bit) that seems to have been fading in since earlier on. I guesstimate there was a lot of input from all band members in this song, and they all contributed ideas for the MIDI parts. On 2.34 you have a very Roger-esque (and very real) fill before the solo, which proves that (at least that part) is neither programmed nor looped. For 'oh oh ah ah', there's no natural echo when drums stop, which makes me think that they simply muted them - probably a post-production decision then. This song is so weird... and it's sort of tragic and comic to think that a dying man came up with it. Days of Our Lives: Actually, three months ago I had that debate via the YT comment section on the karaoke version. There, I clear up that while the shaker is programmed and the congas are sampled, the main drum part is indeed acoustic. I also clear up that on the earlier Bechstein Debauchery site I had mistakenly stated those drums were programmed and that's probably why Georg's book (sort of a Bible for Queen Scholars now) also, incorrectly, claims so. Roger plays so perfectly that you can mistake him by a machine. Note the hi-hat thing also present on the Tribute version (the only one I know of that he played drums live on that song). Speaking of which, for the Tribute version, Roger had worked out a much better drum part with some nice fills before the solo kicked in ... it's a shame he didn't think of it a year earlier so that he could put it on the version we all know and (most of us) love. Note, again, the cymbal rolls and the warm snare no computers or samples can yet emulate, 20 years after the Innuendo album was recorded. For some reason, no matter how advanced synths and digital stuff are, great musicians (like Roger) still use real acoustic grand pianos, real acoustic or electric guitars, real violins, etc. Back to TATDOOL karaoke version, on 2.55 there's a wonderful cymbal thing very reminiscent of the early days. Roger's very underrated. Another cymbal roll during the last chorus. Some nice splash cymbals there too... and a wonderful hi-hat ornament during the outro. > I think they probably did it because it worked better for the song. That's the important thing. Not who gets to show off the most on their instrument. That's why Queen weren't a metal band ;) But they were clever enough to notice that, as in the examples above, actual drums fit in better for most of those songs, and that' why for most cases, they were still the norm. Electronic drums, keyboard drums and computer drums (including MIDI) were used mostly as an overdub and only occasionally (e.g. My Baby Does Me) replacing the real thing, but that's it. BTW, thank you for bringing this up, as I was 'forced' to listen to some great songs again. I may not like that era as much as 'Queen II' or 'A Night at the Opera', but it's still great! |
| McNulty 25.11.2010 07:34 |
Thanks for the detailed reply Sebastien. I basically joined this forum so I could find out a bunch of geeky shit like this about the recording and production of the songs. I'm still not entirely convinced by some of your explanations. Even if the snare on say, AKOM or IWTBF sounds real, it could just be sampled from a hit and programmed. Just because it sounds like a real drum hit, doesn't mean it's not played through a sampler. The beats sound too quantized. I know nowadays you can record a drummer into software, then use something like Beat Detective to quantize it, replace hits with samples, etc, and make it sound almost like a drum machine. Surely that technology didn't exist in the 80's? Surely it would have been easier to sample a hit or a beat, then loop it? Where did you get all your info about this? I've seen the One Vision documentary, but haven't really been able to get hold of anything else. |
| Sebastian 25.11.2010 07:47 |
> I'm still not entirely convinced by some of your explanations. Neither am I. There are probably several mistakes, so I hope this research (and many others) undergoes several re-writings until it's (closer to) flawless. > Even if the snare on say, AKOM or IWTBF sounds real, it could just be sampled from a hit and programmed. Sure, but for that matter, the same could be done with vocals (word-wise), guitars (chord-wise), etc. > Just because it sounds like a real drum hit, doesn't mean it's not played through a sampler. It's a bit of a grey area sometimes... let's say Rog recorded the pattern, then they quantised it and looped it. Does it count as human or programmed? Or both? Or neither? > The beats sound too quantized. So do many of the 70's things, that I bet many people would swear are machines had they been done a decade later. Or think about Ringo. > I know nowadays you can record a drummer into software, then use something like Beat Detective to quantize it, replace hits with samples, etc, and make it sound almost like a drum machine. Roger's synchronisation already made him sound like a machine when he wanted that kind of sound. > Surely it would have been easier to sample a hit or a beat, then loop it? Sure, but for that matter, they could've also sampled and looped the bass in similar sections, or guitar chords, or piano, etc. We could start second-guessing everything, or get to a point where we could say 'OK, thinking logically, what's more likely?' > Where did you get all your info about this? Years of making mistakes and learning from them. > I've seen the One Vision documentary, but haven't really been able to get hold of anything else. Check out YT. |
| McNulty 25.11.2010 09:46 |
You're right, I'm probably over analysing. Never a good thing when it comes to rock 'n' roll. |
| Wiley 25.11.2010 18:57 |
Awesome posts Sebastian! (as usual) I am still reading through the latter stuff but I wanted to comment regarding the Works bit, since that's the album I have on my car stereo now. Some key items I see here: - Most drums are 'real', as in, played by Roger and not programmed in a computer/machine of any kind. - The 'real' drums in The Works sound different to the 'real' drums in the 70's albums. This is due to different gear (smaller kits, not entirely acoustic sometimes) and production styles/methods being used. - Sometimes the songs used drum loops (still, played by Roger) - Roger's timing is usually flawless. Considering these points... No wonder Rog is mistaken for a Machine sometimes, hehe :). This was kinda the concept of the "The Works" album, wasn't it? Man vs. Machine? Now, about the "Machines (Back to Humans)" track: I think the transition from 'machine' to 'human' drums is not that evident because the human drums don't sound too organic. I guess the drums on that song should have gone from "Mr. Roboto" to "White Man" for the effect to be more noticeable. :P |
| Sebastian 25.11.2010 21:32 |
Yes, the transition is a bit smooth(er than what it was probably meant to be). It seems to me that, in the early days of digital mastering, some of those dynamics were lost. That's one of the recurrent problems of records being louder and louder. Plus, if you factor in vocals (with those amazing two-part harmonies), there's a lot pushed to the background and people can easily overlook the 'battle' between machines and acoustic drums. Same for bass. |
| sara1893 29.11.2010 18:04 |
When I drive in my car and listen to Hot Space one moment and then Queen II the next moment it is insane how it is the same band ..I know there was a 12 yr. difference but it is kind of sad how a band can go from White Queen (As it began) to a shit song like Dancer |
| Bigfish 01.12.2010 13:27 |
sara1893 wrote: When I drive in my car and listen to Hot Space one moment and then Queen II the next moment it is insane how it is the same band ..I know there was a 12 yr. difference but it is kind of sad how a band can go from White Queen (As it began) to a shit song like Dancer Sorry to pick but it was only 8 years difference. Actually if they'd carried on making albums like Queen 2 then they would have been dead and buried by '82 - punk explosion et al and lets face it, despite Q2's musical accomplishment which is considerable it does now sound a little dated and proggy with lyrics about white queens, ogres and misty castles. Also Dancer is a pretty good song in my book - a real groove, heavy and funky at the same time with that slowed down drum track. Now if you wanted shit Queen songs you had to wait another four years.... |
| Amazon 01.12.2010 16:13 |
I love Queen II (BF, I don't think it's outdated simply because of its lyrics), but I also love Dancer. Yes, it's not as good as Queen's best material, but I think it is INCREDIBLY fun with a fantastic vocal performance from Freddie. I agree with the way BF describes it; 'a pretty good song.... a real groove, heavy and funky at the same time with that slowed down drum track'. I've said it before, and I will say it again. IMO Hot Space is Queen's most underrated album. It's enormously fun, Freddie is at the top of his game (and sounds like he's having a ball of a time), the group took risks for the last time until The Miracle or Innuendo, and IMO it was also a pretty consistent album. There were one or two songs that were extremely ordinary, but when I think of Queen's worst songs, many of them in all honestly come from the 70's, and not Hot Space. |
| Bigfish 02.12.2010 04:07 |
Amazon wrote: I love Queen II (BF, I don't think it's outdated simply because of its lyrics), but I also love Dancer. Yes, it's not as good as Queen's best material, but I think it is INCREDIBLY fun with a fantastic vocal performance from Freddie. I agree with the way BF describes it; 'a pretty good song.... a real groove, heavy and funky at the same time with that slowed down drum track'. I've said it before, and I will say it again. IMO Hot Space is Queen's most underrated album. It's enormously fun, Freddie is at the top of his game (and sounds like he's having a ball of a time), the group took risks for the last time until The Miracle or Innuendo, and IMO it was also a pretty consistent album. There were one or two songs that were extremely ordinary, but when I think of Queen's worst songs, many of them in all honestly come from the 70's, and not Hot Space. Whatever Queen 2 is, it is definately a child of it's time - love it or loath it. Please understand me - it's an immense achievement but just to my ears, lyrically, it really does sit in that jethro Tull, Zeppelin, Wishbone Ash, early Rush area - dated or not. Hot Space on the other hand is clearly lyrically quite contemporary even now. When CD's came out I cheerfully dumped most of my massive album collection in the used record stores. Stupid boy! I've now burnt all my CD's to my hard drive (they are going to the use CD store!) and I've spent the last couple of years replacing all my very favourite vinyl again. At first I just wanted the 70's queen stuff again as i rate 70's Queen much more highly but just recently I got an '82 copy of Hot space.. Maybe I'm sentimental as it was the first Queen tour I saw but just maybe history will judge it as one of the bravest and most innovative things they did... Actually a friend who knew i was recollecting vinyl recently gave me a copy of A Kind Of Magic - thankfully the used record store is still open.....:-) |
| Soundfreak 02.12.2010 05:32 |
Whatever Queen 2 is, it is definately a child of it's time - love it or loath it. Please understand me - it's an immense achievement but just to my ears, lyrically, it really does sit in that jethro Tull, Zeppelin, Wishbone Ash, early Rush area - dated or not. Hot Space on the other hand is clearly lyrically quite contemporary even now. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< All Queen albums are "children of it's time". Technology made a big step forward and that's what Queen always made use of. And the world around them also influenced their music. Also the thinking was different. Musicians were driven by the idea not to repeat themselves, every album...every single had to be different. It was the 80s that changed this, when market research became more powerful and the goal was to "give the people what they want" instead of playing with a risk. And that lead to "The Works", a kind of "The Game pt.2".... Anyway, most successfull bands only enjoy 3 or 4 years of real creativity and big chart success. And then it's over. So all in all Queen did enormously well, no matter if this or that album does not really stand the test of time. |
| Sebastian 02.12.2010 06:46 |
Only that Queen II does stand the test of time, HS doesn't. Lyrically speaking, there's always gonna be room for fantasy (think about how popular Harry Potter and Twilight films are). In terms of recording, compare John's magnificent bass sound (on Black Queen for instance, or Seven Seas) with the shitty synth on Body Language or Dancer. Which ones become dated from 1983 onwards? Not to mention the (few but existent) drum-machines... |
| Bigfish 02.12.2010 10:53 |
Sebastian wrote: Only that Queen II does stand the test of time, HS doesn't. Lyrically speaking, there's always gonna be room for fantasy (think about how popular Harry Potter and Twilight films are). In terms of recording, compare John's magnificent bass sound (on Black Queen for instance, or Seven Seas) with the shitty synth on Body Language or Dancer. Which ones become dated from 1983 onwards? Not to mention the (few but existent) drum-machines... Queen 2 doesn't stand the test of time lyrically at least - prog music grew up as a result of the generation that first read Tolkien and C.S. Lewis et al - hence all those 70's bands writing Fairy Stories. Funny how with the advent of said Movies of Tolkien, Lewis etc. we haven't seen a resurgence of prog in popular music culture - there's a reason for that, peoples creative imaginations are no longer fired by this kind of inspiration - so by definition dated. Thematically, rubbish or not - Hot Space covers Love Songs, Political Comment, Social comment etc - all the themes that are still covered by singers and bands to this day - so by definition contemporary.. Have to say, better melodies and craft on Q2 though and Sevens seas beats anything on HS hands down dated lyrics or not. Oh and by the way - DANCER - I've said it before and I'll say it a again; a great groove (sorry if that word offends proggies) - heavy and funky (oops - did it again) at the same time and I love the slowed down drum track..Sometimes genius is the simplest of things.... |
| Bigfish 02.12.2010 11:02 |
Soundfreak wrote: Whatever Queen 2 is, it is definately a child of it's time - love it or loath it. Please understand me - it's an immense achievement but just to my ears, lyrically, it really does sit in that jethro Tull, Zeppelin, Wishbone Ash, early Rush area - dated or not. Hot Space on the other hand is clearly lyrically quite contemporary even now. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< All Queen albums are "children of it's time". Technology made a big step forward and that's what Queen always made use of. And the world around them also influenced their music. Also the thinking was different. Musicians were driven by the idea not to repeat themselves, every album...every single had to be different. It was the 80s that changed this, when market research became more powerful and the goal was to "give the people what they want" instead of playing with a risk. And that lead to "The Works", a kind of "The Game pt.2".... Anyway, most successfull bands only enjoy 3 or 4 years of real creativity and big chart success. And then it's over. So all in all Queen did enormously well, no matter if this or that album does not really stand the test of time. I think Hot Space was definately an attempt to do something different too and Queen, throughout their career - into the 80's and beyond continued to do things differently and tried not to repeat themselves..I can't think of two Queen singles that sounded samey.. |
| mike hunt 02.12.2010 12:26 |
Nothing against Hot Hpace, it's actually a underated album. cool record, but Queen2 is far better in every way, including Lryics. (way more original). Usually Time takes care of what's considered good or Bad, or Ordinary. Maybe Queen2 isn't the most popular of albums, but most rock fans who hear it are blown away by it. Music that has a huge influence on musicians years after it's release. 36 years later Musicians still bring up Queen2. If Hot space was really that great We would hear what a big Influence it was despite it's lack of popularity. I do think it's underated because fans and critics alway's mention it as their worst album when it's not. |
| mike hunt 02.12.2010 12:36 |
some lryics are great and some are a bit silly on Queen2, like most of their records. I think black queen is a brilliant song, but that one has the most silly lryics. Other's have solid lryics like father to son, white Queen (beautiful love song) Fairy feller's seems silly, but dig deeper and you'll find the lryics are brilliant. 'Orge Battle' metal bands still write songs like that one. Hot space Space is no different, Silly lryics like staying Power and Cool cat (though I like those songs) and Obviously body language. Put out the fire is also weak lryically. Life is real?.....Nice song, but not the best lryics in the world. Dancer is actually sillier than anything on Queen2 |
| Gregsynth 02.12.2010 13:02 |
Hot Space is grossly underrated. I showed some friends the album, and they like it! |
| Wiley 02.12.2010 15:31 |
Every Queen fan SHOULD love Hot Space, if only for Freddie's vocals. He belts out the funk songs like there's no tomorrow and he seems to be having the greatest time... even more than on Mr. Bad Guy. Queen II is a masterpiece. However, I listen to it maybe twice a year. Hot Space on the other hand is in my car stereo more often than not. |
| PrimeJiveUSA 02.12.2010 18:43 |
Wiley...VERY interesting. There really is no right-or-wrong in these matters. But I couldn't just listen to Queen II "just once or twice a year"...I mean, it's like...the best album of ALL-TIME! But, if you listen to it only occaissionally...I guess that does make the moment even more precious, doesn't it? |
| mike hunt 02.12.2010 18:51 |
yea, I think it's freddie's best album vocally. A few other's rival it like Barcelona and ANATO/ News of the world. Mr. Bad guy, but hot space is the best of them all. My biggest problem with the album is it should have been so much better. Queen2 is probably my favorite album of all time, but after years of playing it out I only listen to it a few times a year myself. Just recently I put it on for the first time in almost a year. |
| Soundfreak 03.12.2010 03:13 |
Soundfreak wrote: Whatever Queen 2 is, it is definately a child of it's time - love it or loath it. Please understand me - it's an immense achievement but just to my ears, lyrically, it really does sit in that jethro Tull, Zeppelin, Wishbone Ash, early Rush area - dated or not. Hot Space on the other hand is clearly lyrically quite contemporary even now. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< All Queen albums are "children of it's time". Technology made a big step forward and that's what Queen always made use of. And the world around them also influenced their music. Also the thinking was different. Musicians were driven by the idea not to repeat themselves, every album...every single had to be different. It was the 80s that changed this, when market research became more powerful and the goal was to "give the people what they want" instead of playing with a risk. And that lead to "The Works", a kind of "The Game pt.2".... Anyway, most successfull bands only enjoy 3 or 4 years of real creativity and big chart success. And then it's over. So all in all Queen did enormously well, no matter if this or that album does not really stand the test of time. I think Hot Space was definately an attempt to do something different too and Queen, throughout their career - into the 80's and beyond continued to do things differently and tried not to repeat themselves..I can't think of two Queen singles that sounded samey.. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Dear bigfish, it would improve the communication, if you quote correctly. I did not write "Whatever Queen 2 is, it is ...even now." Those are your lines. I wrote the part from "All Queen Albums are ...........stand the test of time", which now looks as if it's yours. Don't misunderstand me, it's not about who is right or whatever. But I don't like to read "Soundfreak wrote" followed by something that I never wrote. |
| Bigfish 03.12.2010 03:25 |
Sorry mate ! They've changed the 'reply with quote' thingy so it all gets a bit jumbled up and looks a bit confusing - anyway it's all subjective, happy listening.. |
| McNulty 03.12.2010 03:29 |
I used to love Queen's early fantasy stuff when I was younger. But when I hit puberty, I became more concerned with getting laid than winning a Warhammer battle, so I didn't dig it as much. |
| Bigfish 03.12.2010 04:39 |
McNulty wrote: I used to love Queen's early fantasy stuff when I was younger. But when I hit puberty, I became more concerned with getting laid than winning a Warhammer battle, so I didn't dig it as much. Exactly.. |
| Wiley 03.12.2010 10:04 |
McNulty wrote: I used to love Queen's early fantasy stuff when I was younger. But when I hit puberty, I became more concerned with getting laid than winning a Warhammer battle, so I didn't dig it as much. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Enter Hot Space :) |
| Bigfish 03.12.2010 12:42 |
You're more likely to get laid with Hot Space. It's all in the rhythm - better shagging music. :-).... |
| mike hunt 03.12.2010 19:38 |
Soundfreak wrote: Whatever Queen 2 is, it is definately a child of it's time - love it or loath it. Please understand me - it's an immense achievement but just to my ears, lyrically, it really does sit in that jethro Tull, Zeppelin, Wishbone Ash, early Rush area - dated or not. Hot Space on the other hand is clearly lyrically quite contemporary even now. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< All Queen albums are "children of it's time". Technology made a big step forward and that's what Queen always made use of. And the world around them also influenced their music. Also the thinking was different. Musicians were driven by the idea not to repeat themselves, every album...every single had to be different. It was the 80s that changed this, when market research became more powerful and the goal was to "give the people what they want" instead of playing with a risk. And that lead to "The Works", a kind of "The Game pt.2".... Anyway, most successfull bands only enjoy 3 or 4 years of real creativity and big chart success. And then it's over. So all in all Queen did enormously well, no matter if this or that album does not really stand the test of time. funny how people put down the works album because it was The Game part 2, but no one seems to put down A Day At the Races for being A night At The opera Part 2. Why is that?....I'm not a huge fan of the works, but seems like Races was more a copy of opera than the works was for the game. |
| Soundfreak 04.12.2010 04:38 |
Mike Hunt wrote: funny how people put down the works album because it was The Game part 2, but no one seems to put down A Day At the Races for being A night At The opera Part 2. Why is that?....I'm not a huge fan of the works, but seems like Races was more a copy of opera than the works was for the game. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< I did not put "the Works" down at all. But in the Queen history, where the band would always try to move forward, "The Works" was an obvious step back for commercial reasons. Sure, "A Day at the Races" was a bit like "Opera", but yet it was different, the arrangements were simpler and easier to reproduce on stage. |
| Sebastian 04.12.2010 06:45 |
But the songs on Races have a life of their own, and loads and loads and loads and loads of people actually prefer it over Opera. Even if there's, for some extent, a bit of an analogy between the tracks (e.g. Prophet's Song vs White Man, with sixth string tuned down to D), there's no gospel or waltz on Opera, as well as there's no guitar jazz band on Races. The fact Races is probably more rocker (You and I vs Best Friend, Tie Your Mother Down vs Sweet Lady, Good Old Fashioned Lover Boy vs Lazing on a Seaside Rendezvous [I know that's not the title but I mean both songs]). That's probably why it hasn't been criticised too much. The Works, on the other hand... |
| mike hunt 05.12.2010 00:24 |
I understand all that.......Races is a brilliant album IMO and the works is pretty average, but some people claim not to like The works because it's The game part 2. How about Just saying The Works isn't a great album because the songs arn't very Good. The Album still has More styles of music than most bands have in a 40 year career. ACDC and kiss for example. |
| Sebastian 05.12.2010 02:58 |
It's a double standard, simple as that. If you like the album, you don't mind it being a sequel. If you dislike it, being a sequel is a reason to criticise it. If it was discovered tomorrow that Brian wrote a song for Justin Bieber, half of the Bieber-haters here would instantly begin to like him. Others would simply think less of the Dr. |
| Amazon 05.12.2010 03:46 |
I think that Races is a superior album to The Works, however my problem woth both is that they seem to me to be a step backwards. While Hot Space was no Opera, it did see the group taking risks; just as with SHA/ANATO. I don't consider either Races or the Works to be ordinary albums; Races features several brilliant songs, while The Works was extremely consistent. However neither excite me as much as the previous albums. |
| Sebastian 05.12.2010 04:46 |
Actually, Hot Space was NOT taking risks: they were going in the direction they'd already explored with Another One Bites the Dust. It's as if Sheer Heart Attack had been 13 Seven Seas of Rhyes, or if Opera had been 12 Killer Queens, Races 10 Bo Rhaps, News 11 Somebody to Loves, Jazz 13 Rockyous, etc. Sure, Hot Space was not 11 Dusts, but several of the songs (the main bunch of the album) were going in that direction, so they were NOT exploring anything new to them. And for the remaining ones: Put Out the Fire was as typical Queen as it could get, Life Is Real was similar to Play the Game. With the only exception of Cool Cat (and UP which was not new at the time), Hot Space wasn't taking any actual risks. On the contrary, they were following the trend of the moment. They lacked the guts they had in the past to actually come up with something different. |
| splicksplack 05.12.2010 06:14 |
I'd just like to add that Backchat is one of my all time favourite Queen songs. The chord progressions give it a sense of melancholy. Whenever I hear it now I just glaze over remembering the hot summer days of 1982. |
| Michael 05.12.2010 08:14 |
It's just my opinioin, but Queen were never really the same after Hot Space. Hot Space was made to capitalize on the success of Another One Bites the Dust. However, the band hedged their bets by including mostly traditional-sounding Queen songs on side 2, as well as the previously released Under Pressure. BTW, Under Pressure is, let's face it, not one of Queen (or Bowie's) better moments, with its silly, nonsensical lyrics and music that sounds like they were put-together on the fly, which they were. Hot Space signalled the decline of Queen throughout the 1980s, when they went from being a brilliant rock band to an above-average pop band that occassionally released a song recalling their former glory. In fact, you can almost count the number of Queen songs, which were released after The Game but measure up to their previous output, on one hand: I Want It All, Was It All Worth It, One Vision, Innuendo, The Show Must Go On, Let Me Live - and then the pickings get slim. In addition, after 1980, Freddie all but stopped writing piano songs, and the synthesizer began playing a much larger role in Queen's songs. This is a shame, because Freddie wrote such beautiful ballads - and several great rockers - on the piano. The second side of The Game should have warned us fans that something was amiss: Other than Save Me and, perhaps, Sail Away Sweet Sister, it had very little quality to offer. Of course, Queen continued, for a few more years, to be a big draw on the live circuit, albeit not in the USA, where they lost most of their fan base after Hot Space. So, once again its just my opinion, but Hot Space signalled the beginning of the end of Queen as we know and love them. |
| Sebastian 05.12.2010 08:27 |
> after 1980, Freddie all but stopped writing piano songs Er... no. Life Is Real, It's a Hard Life, Keep Passing the Open Windows, Man on the Prowl, Friends Will Be Friends (with John), The Miracle (sort of), Made in Heaven, I Was Born to Love You, There Must Be More to Life Than This, Man Made Paradise (sort of), Love Me Like There's No Tomorrow, Living on My Own (sort of), She Blows Hot and Cold, Barcelona (with Mike), Fallen Priest (with Mike), Guide Me Home (with Mike), Golden Boy (with Mike), How Can I Go On (with Mike). > The second side of The Game should have warned us fans that something was amiss: Other than Save Me and, perhaps, Sail Away Sweet Sister, it had very little quality to offer. Both of which were from the previous decade. |
| mike hunt 06.12.2010 01:27 |
Sebastian wrote: > after 1980, Freddie all but stopped writing piano songs Er... no. Life Is Real, It's a Hard Life, Keep Passing the Open Windows, Man on the Prowl, Friends Will Be Friends (with John), The Miracle (sort of), Made in Heaven, I Was Born to Love You, There Must Be More to Life Than This, Man Made Paradise (sort of), Love Me Like There's No Tomorrow, Living on My Own (sort of), She Blows Hot and Cold, Barcelona (with Mike), Fallen Priest (with Mike), Guide Me Home (with Mike), Golden Boy (with Mike), How Can I Go On (with Mike). > The second side of The Game should have warned us fans that something was amiss: Other than Save Me and, perhaps, Sail Away Sweet Sister, it had very little quality to offer. Both of which were from the previous decade. Every band has a prime. Queen's was 1973 to 1980. Nothing wrong with that, but i will say freddie's Barcelona ranks with his best stuff from his heyday. I know it's not Queen, but still. Even Zeppelin was losing their edge after a certain amount of albums. It happens to the best of them. Only the Beatles I think never would have lost their edge. Even if they lasted through the 70's and 80's. john and paul were amazing songwriter's. On the comments about freddie's piano songs.....Mike's playing fit perfectly on the Barcelona album, and freddie did play a decent amount of piano on The Works. A kind of magic is where freddie didn't play enough piano. That continued on the the miracle and Innuendo, which was one of Queen's better moments by the way. |
| Bigfish 07.12.2010 12:23 |
Sebastian wrote: Actually, Hot Space was NOT taking risks: they were going in the direction they'd already explored with Another One Bites the Dust. It's as if Sheer Heart Attack had been 13 Seven Seas of Rhyes, or if Opera had been 12 Killer Queens, Races 10 Bo Rhaps, News 11 Somebody to Loves, Jazz 13 Rockyous, etc. Sure, Hot Space was not 11 Dusts, but several of the songs (the main bunch of the album) were going in that direction, so they were NOT exploring anything new to them. And for the remaining ones: Put Out the Fire was as typical Queen as it could get, Life Is Real was similar to Play the Game. With the only exception of Cool Cat (and UP which was not new at the time), Hot Space wasn't taking any actual risks. On the contrary, they were following the trend of the moment. They lacked the guts they had in the past to actually come up with something different. Hot Space took HUGE risks.. Back Chat, Staying Power, Dancer etc are about as similar to Another one Bites the Dust as, say, Hammer to Fall is to It's Late or Stone Cold Crazy is to Let Me entertain you. It's Late, Stone Cold, Hammer and Let me entertain you are of the heavy rock genre and on every album prior to Hot Space you could find a group of songs that fitted into that group. Hot Space was a wholesale genre switch because the one 'generic' group of songs on the album were those of the 'funk. black category'. I'd call that a bit risky.. |
| ole-the-first 09.12.2010 07:14 |
Staying Power — 6/10 to album version and 8/10 to extended (althrough live versions are much better) Dancer — 4/10 (one of Queen's worst songs) Back Chat — 10/10 (very good one) Body Language — 2/10 (worst Queen's song) Action This Day — 3/10 (bad, even if author is Roger) Put Out the Fire — 8/10 (good rocker) Life Is Real (Song for Lennon) — 6/10 (boring) Calling All Girls — 7/10 (not as bad as it could be) Las Palabras de Amor (The Words of Love) — 10/10 (great ballad) Cool Cat — 6/10 (bad, but a little bit entertaining) Under Pressure — 10/10 (one of Queen's greatest songs) Body Language (1991 Bonus Remix by Susan Rogers) — 2/10 (remix of a bad song) Soul Brother — 4/10 (too boring) Under Pressure (Rah Mix) — 10/10 (great remix) Under Pressure (Mike Spencer Mix) — 10/10 (great remix) Under Pressure (Knebworth Mix) — 10/10 (great remix) Under Pressure (Club 2000 Remix) — 6/10 (bad remix) |