| N0_Camping4U 05.09.2011 23:16 |
Not sure if he's given a reason - or if Queen has said anything other than "He didn't like it". I didn't really think he made too big of an impact on the song, just a nice subtle touch. He was basically rapping - a genre not explored by Queen. But I'm rambling, why do you think he wanted them scrapped? And let's not turn this into a 'this song is shite' topic! |
| rhyeking 06.09.2011 00:04 |
Here's a quote from Brian [courtesy of Bechstein Debauchery]: *** "David just did a backing track. I don't think anyone thought any more about it, except that it was a nice ornamentation. We just sent him a courtesy note telling him that we had used it and he said, 'I want it taken off, because I'm not satisfied with it.' Unfortunately he didn't tell us until about a day before the album was supposed to be released, so it really set us back. It delayed the album's release." BRIAN MAY, International Musician & Recording World, November 1982 *** It's a shame really, as I think it's the superior version. I tend to hum Bowie's parts when I hear the album version. |
| dysan 06.09.2011 04:41 |
I can see Bowie's point - it really is just grafted on an already existing song and I should imagine he'd rather not spread himself so thinly on the LP. He was also not happy about Under Pressure - I think he was probably annoyed they included that too. |
| ITSM 06.09.2011 07:11 |
Because "Cool Cat" is better without his contribution. I love that song! |
| N0_Camping4U 06.09.2011 08:42 |
I love the song, and I do like the Bowie parts. I think he thought about it too hard, or looked a little too hard into it.. but I see his point. |
| Micrówave 06.09.2011 10:33 |
Because they couldn't reach a financial agreement. |
| master marathon runner 06.09.2011 12:28 |
dysan wrote: I can see Bowie's point - it really is just grafted on an already existing song and I should imagine he'd rather not spread himself so thinly on the LP. He was also not happy about Under Pressure - I think he was probably annoyed they included that too. .. .. ......... 'Not happy about ''under pressure'' !' ? - Well it's included on his 'best of bowie' released about 9 or 10 years ago .....AND it's listed as 'David Bowie and Queen' !!!!!!- The cheeky bastard. . Master marathon runner. |
| N0_Camping4U 06.09.2011 17:52 |
Did you make that up Microwave, or is it stated some where? |
| Micrówave 06.09.2011 18:04 |
Really? You think successful artists who make gazillions can just show up to a studio and record a song, and then decide they don't want the results released because they didn't think it's that great? Maybe if my band wanted you to come in and sing harmonies... but we've got producers, engineers, and those hungry label execs to feed. This is David Bowie. This is Queen. The first collaboration blew up... one of their best selling singles ever. Someone wanted more than the other was willing to give, simple as that. Happens all the time. Why do you think the MJ / Freddie recording have never been released? Because Mercury wanted something. |
| rhyeking 06.09.2011 19:40 |
In Brian's words, Bowie's vocal on "Cool Cat" sound like they were intended to be there, that he sung them with the song and at least part of it sounds like it was done with Freddie. I agree that his contribution is small overall, "ornamentation" as Brian put it, but I still think it adds a nice extra layer, not just to the song, but to the album. I've never once heard Bowie state he was in any way unhappy with "Under Pressure" or its appearance on Hot Space. I'd love to read the source for that opinion. He didn't include it on his next album, Let's Dance, because that wasn't recorded until December of 1982, or released until April of 1983, by which time the song was already a relic (which isn't a bad thing). When he worked with Queen on UP, he wasn't recording an album at the time. Queen, obviously, *was* working on an album, so it wasn't greed that put UP on Hot Space, the song was a product of those sessions. It's no different than including "Crazy Little Thing Called Love" on The Game, where it was recorded the year before it's album was released as well. Though Brian doesn't state it, I'm sure the letter they wrote to Bowie said they were planning to use "Under Pressure" as well on Hot Space, so if Bowie had had a problem with the song, or his contribution, he would've told Queen "no go" on using it. That might have prompted Queen to re-record Bowie's vocals. The Queen & David Bowie version might have become the non-album version. Also of note, Bowie performs UP on his tours ever since the tribute concert, so if by some crazy chance he didn't like the song in the '80s, he got over it by the '90s. |
| Jimmy Dean 06.09.2011 23:46 |
rhyeking wrote: In Brian's words, Bowie's vocal on "Cool Cat" sound like they were intended to be there, that he sung them with the song and at least part of it sounds like it was done with Freddie. I agree that his contribution is small overall, "ornamentation" as Brian put it, but I still think it adds a nice extra layer, not just to the song, but to the album. how does "bom bom" every once in a while on the album's least relevent song add "a nice extra layer" to the album? staying power adds a significant layer - that being horns and dance rhythms - along with body language & back chat in the same vein - while put out the fire and action this day keep the rock layer intact - finally Under Pressure, Life Is Real & Las Parablas give the album an acoustic laid back layer. what good would "bom bom" do to enhance the layering of hot space? |
| rhyeking 07.09.2011 01:31 |
How do they add a nice extra layer to the song? By being cool as @#$%! It ain't much, but what's there is a shot of suave in an already smooth little album track. How does it add a layer to the album? Because Bowie on two tracks is better than Bowie on just one! It ties the songs together, tightens the album up just a little more thematically and is like a character going from a cameo intro on one song to a star performance in the next. It's one of those details that, for me, elevates the work a bit, taking it from a collection of individual songs to a demonstration that the artists intended something a little more between these two tracks. Maybe I'm overstating it. However, as they say, "God is in the details." If it's a song and performance you don't think much of, fine. I take I little extra enjoyment out of it. |
| Queen1973 07.09.2011 02:37 |
Hot space was going to be a duets album so maybe thats why he sand on Cool Cat also. Another piece of my heart with Rod Stewart was supposed to be on this album i think? |
| Djdownsy 07.09.2011 03:23 |
Another little piece of my heart was recorded in '83, was it not? Therefore, that's The Works. |
| dysan 07.09.2011 03:39 |
======================================= dysan wrote: I can see Bowie's point - it really is just grafted on an already existing song and I should imagine he'd rather not spread himself so thinly on the LP. He was also not happy about Under Pressure - I think he was probably annoyed they included that too. .. .. ......... 'Not happy about ''under pressure'' !' ? - Well it's included on his 'best of bowie' released about 9 or 10 years ago .....AND it's listed as 'David Bowie and Queen' !!!!!!- The cheeky bastard. ======================================== Yes, he wasn't happy with it and said it is a good 'demo', but not a release. He only started playing it live well into the mid 90's when he was getting really deperate to dig into his untouched catalogue (he similarly debuted Lust For Life after it's success in Trainspotting. Likewise, it never appeared on a Bowie collection until '93, and you'll remember Queen themselves gave it a thorough remix around the same time. Coincidence? |
| brENsKi 07.09.2011 13:06 |
he removed his vocals cos he realised he was singing like a c*nt |
| Sebastian 07.09.2011 13:41 |
>>> Here's a quote from Brian [courtesy of Bechstein Debauchery]: Argh ... I hate that title. Hopefully, before the end of the month, I'll upload a new version with a better one. >>> 'Not happy about ''under pressure'' !' ? - Well it's included on his 'best of bowie' released about 9 or 10 years ago Sometimes the artists themselves hate some of their biggest hits. If it were up to Roger, AOBTD probably wouldn't be on any Greatest Hits, Absolute Greatest or any of those compilations. Hell, if it were up to Brian and Roger, probably there wouldn't be songs by Freddie and John on those compilations (remember Queen Rocks?). But there are hits which are too big to overlook. >>> Really? You think successful artists who make gazillions can just show up to a studio and record a song, and then decide they don't want the results released because they didn't think it's that great? Actually, it DOES happen, precisely because there's a lot of hype and speculation and because the public may be overcritical of what they do, so a lot of them wait until they've got a *plu-perfect* product. Otherwise, they'd rather pass. And some of those musicians are really perfectionists so they don't want things out unless they're entirely satisfied with them. And good luck trying to get two superstars to agree on an arrangement, a mix, a title, a lyric, etc. It's even worse when the song's indeed a collaboration rather than 'x featuring y'. >>> The first collaboration blew up... one of their best selling singles ever. To be absolutely pedantic, no, it didn't. Queen had eleven singles that outsold Under Pressure (eight of which preceded it), and in those cases, they didn't have to split the money with another person. UP was a brief No 1 in Britain, a very popular song and a good seller, but not really 'one of their best selling singles ever'. * That * could've been disappointing, especially as they'd released, by themselves, another single just one year prior, which had sold almost four times as much as UP did. >>> I've never once heard Bowie state he was in any way unhappy with "Under Pressure" or its appearance on Hot Space. Brian said, on the same interview where he talked about CC, that David wanted to re-record the whole thing, and that it was very tense for them to try to agree on its details. In the end, the mix was produced by Freddie, Mack and Bowie, under a lot of strain. >>> When he worked with Queen on UP, he wasn't recording an album at the time. I doubt that was the reason, to be honest. The reason was, Let's Dance (the song) was an even bigger hit than UP, so he didn't need it to boost the album sales. On the contrary - if he included it there, he'd 'lose' some of the royalties to Queen, and some of his fans would be disinterested as the song'd already been available for over a year through both the single and Queen's album. The Queen case was different, as their public was and is different about those details. CLTCL was released very late in the year, and it slowly climbed up to the top; by the time it was at its peak, Save Me had flopped and Play the Game was only barely making it as a medium-sized hit, so it was an obvious commercial strategy to include it there. In the case of UP, Body Language wasn't the big hit they expected, and it may have also been related to the fact that both John and Roger hated Hot Space but loved Under Pressure, so it could've been included to try to keep everybody happy (or less pissed off). >>> That might have prompted Queen to re-record Bowie's vocals. The Queen & David Bowie version might have become the non-album version. Now, that'd have been amazing. I think David's great, but it's always nice to hear alternative versions. That's one of the things I'd have loved them to do: include Ga Ga sung by Roger on the album, and Fred's version on the single, and so on. >>> Also of note, Bowie performs UP on his tours ever since the tribute concert, so if by some crazy chance he didn't like the song in the '80s, he got over it by the '90s. AFAIK, he did like the song, but didn't like its recording. At the end, it seems that everybody involved had a different 'image' of how he wanted the track to be, and a lot of rowing followed, to the point that even Brian (clearly the most pig-headed member of the band - his words, not mine) had enough and decided to step out. For some artists, hearing their song on the radio is a dream come true, and a wonderful experience. For others, it may trigger some bad memories and/or reinforce certain regrets ... 'oh, if only those Queennies had allowed me to do it *my* way' ... 'oh, if only that blond singer had let me mix it the way *I* wanted it...' ... 'oh, if only we'd've re-recorded the whole thing ...' ... Which makes me think about something: Andy Gibb was a huge name in 1980. And Freddie was impressed with his backing vocals on Play the Game. So why didn't they include them? Maybe they had a strict no-guests policy, or maybe Andy's management asked for a larger slice than what they offered. |
| Daniel Nester 07.09.2011 13:46 |
-- Really?You think successful artists who make gazillions can just show up to a studio and record a song, and then decide they don't want the results released because they didn't think it's that great? --- So, you did make it up? Or is there an account of this financial objection? |
| rhyeking 07.09.2011 17:55 |
Here's a question: If Queen hadn't told Bowie they were going to use his vocals on "Cool Cat" and released the album with his contribution intact, what recourse would Bowie have had? By going in and recording on another band's work, with all parties present and aware, I believe that implies consent. It's not like they snuck a tape recorder into the room and used that on the song. Bowie was fully aware he was being recorded, was an active participant in the session and knew Queen were recording this material for an album. Further, he subsequently got involved in the writing and recording of a second track, "Under Pressure," during the same series of sessions. If Queen ignored his request to remove his vocals from "Cool Cat" and it had gone to court, I doubt any civil judge would side with him or force Queen to remove it and re-issue the album. Now that's a pretty extreme scenario, but it could easily have come to that if there had been a falling out between the camps. Since they were respected colleagues, if not friends, Queen honoured the request even though it delayed the release and may have cost them money. Brian says it was the day before the album went to print that they found out Bowie didn't want his part used, so if they'd gotten that response a day late or pressed the album a day or two early, it would have been either a case of Bowie having to suck it up, or band issuing a recall before release, or Bowie's management and Queen's management duking it out in court, Queen's camp arguing that "Hey, he recorded it for us, we've printed the album, we don't want to lose money here. What gives?!" Again, I think Bowie would lose. The best he could hope for would be to have to pay for the recall himself if he was truly adamant about it. |
| N0_Camping4U 07.09.2011 22:27 |
Very interesting points, from all involved. Sebastian, it seemed you're talking about an interview where Brian is discussing the Cool Cat / UP info and you're going to upload a better one? If I read that right let me know when you upload that. I'd like to have a listen to it. Also, I thought John really liked Hot Space? Do you have the source of him saying that? Or is it just what you've gathered? And Rhyeking, good thought. I would assume that they complied with him because they were his friends, and maybe for fear that he would ask to also remove UP from the album... The single did come out before the album, and maybe the band feared scraping the song from the album would hurt it, so they just complied. Just a thought, maybe some one can correct me. As it stands, he was very aware he was being recorded, and I think Queen should of just told him to suck it up. I love Cool Cat, it's actually in my top Queen songs.. I love how Queen has explored so many genres of music, and being able to have early rap under their belt would of just been a cool addition to their many genres. |
| Sebastian 08.09.2011 00:56 |
No, I meant that the title of my website is stupid. I'll change it ASAP. When interviewed for a German magazine in 1986 (Popcorn, IIRC), John clearly mentioned Hot Space as the worst moment of their career. His negative attitude towards the album was reinforced when he and Roger spoke to Music Life magazine in Japan '82. They both hated Jazz and they both hated Hot Space. And why wouldn't John hate HS anyway? He was its most serious victim: ALL of the songs on the album feature Freddie on lead vocals (many of them also have him on backing vocals, some of them also feature him on piano and/or synth and/or drum machines). ALL of the songs on the album feature Roger on drums (sometimes splitting duties with the songwriter on Linn, but still), plus several of them also have him on either backing vocals or synth or guitar or piano. ALL BUT ONE of the songs on the album have Brian on guitar, plus some of them also have him on backing vocals, synth, drum machine or piano. Conversely, THREE (maybe FOUR) songs on the album lack John's bass. Out of all the eleven songs on the album, one is credited to the four of them plus Bowie. Out of the remaining ten, Roger wrote 20%, Brian wrote 30%, Freddie wrote 35% and John wrote 15%. It means he was the person who contributed the LEAST to the songwriting department. Hardly a dominant force then. Five songs on the album feature drum-machines alongside, and partly instead of, Roger's live performance. The use of programmed drums is one of the main things people criticise on that album. How many of those songs were John's? ONE - 20%. The remaining 80% stemmed from the others. Three songs on the album feature synth-generated bass instead of real bass. That's another of the main aspects of the album the public panned. How many of those songs were John's? NONE. Two of them were Freddie's and the other was Brian's. Seven songs on the album lack a guitar solo. That's yet another of the main aspects of the album people criticise. How many of those songs were John's? ONE. And even that one was a collaboration. It means that 92.86% of the songs on the album without a guitar solo were NOT John's: two and two halves were Freddie's, two were Roger's, one was Brian's and another half was Bowie's. If anything, John was able to change his mind about Back Chat and let Brian put a badass guitar solo on it - Roger did NOT do the same for Action or Calling All Girls, and Freddie didn't do the same for the lead single or the opening track either, did they? So, to sum up, John was NOT the man behind Hot Space. If anything, he was it's main victim. Who can be blamed for the album? Mostly three people: Freddie, Freddie's boyfriend, and Brian, who for a while stopped writing things like Tie Your Mother Down and Prophet's Song in favour of Dancer and Las Palabras de Amor. |
| mike hunt 08.09.2011 02:27 |
Sebastian wrote: No, I meant that the title of my website is stupid. I'll change it ASAP. When interviewed for a German magazine in 1986 (Popcorn, IIRC), John clearly mentioned Hot Space as the worst moment of their career. His negative attitude towards the album was reinforced when he and Roger spoke to Music Life magazine in Japan '82. They both hated Jazz and they both hated Hot Space. And why wouldn't John hate HS anyway? He was its most serious victim: ALL of the songs on the album feature Freddie on lead vocals (many of them also have him on backing vocals, some of them also feature him on piano and/or synth and/or drum machines). ALL of the songs on the album feature Roger on drums (sometimes splitting duties with the songwriter on Linn, but still), plus several of them also have him on either backing vocals or synth or guitar or piano. ALL BUT ONE of the songs on the album have Brian on guitar, plus some of them also have him on backing vocals, synth, drum machine or piano. Conversely, THREE (maybe FOUR) songs on the album lack John's bass. Out of all the eleven songs on the album, one is credited to the four of them plus Bowie. Out of the remaining ten, Roger wrote 20%, Brian wrote 30%, Freddie wrote 35% and John wrote 15%. It means he was the person who contributed the LEAST to the songwriting department. Hardly a dominant force then. Five songs on the album feature drum-machines alongside, and partly instead of, Roger's live performance. The use of programmed drums is one of the main things people criticise on that album. How many of those songs were John's? ONE - 20%. The remaining 80% stemmed from the others. Three songs on the album feature synth-generated bass instead of real bass. That's another of the main aspects of the album the public panned. How many of those songs were John's? NONE. Two of them were Freddie's and the other was Brian's. Seven songs on the album lack a guitar solo. That's yet another of the main aspects of the album people criticise. How many of those songs were John's? ONE. And even that one was a collaboration. It means that 92.86% of the songs on the album without a guitar solo were NOT John's: two and two halves were Freddie's, two were Roger's, one was Brian's and another half was Bowie's. If anything, John was able to change his mind about Back Chat and let Brian put a badass guitar solo on it - Roger did NOT do the same for Action or Calling All Girls, and Freddie didn't do the same for the lead single or the opening track either, did they? So, to sum up, John was NOT the man behind Hot Space. If anything, he was it's main victim. Who can be blamed for the album? Mostly three people: Freddie, Freddie's boyfriend, and Brian, who for a while stopped writing things like Tie Your Mother Down and Prophet's Song in favour of Dancer and Las Palabras de Amor. i'm not surpised the band didn't like Hot Space but jazz is a very good album IMO. I guess if I was roger, and wrote two horrible tracks like Fun it and More Of That Jazz, I would have hated it too, while john also wrote two average songs. all the good songs wre written by Freddie and Brian......John alway's wrote the least amount of songs, not only on Hot space....I think all four members thought the album was good at the time, but in hindsight realized Hot space was a big mistake.....freddie needed a kick in the ass sometimes...... |
| Sebastian 08.09.2011 08:37 |
>>> i'm not surpised the band didn't like Hot Space Not the band, but half the band: John and Roger hated it. Freddie loved it (ever heard Mr Bad Guy? That could've been titled Hot Space II) and Brian's always defended it, even going to ridiculous extents as to claiming that without it there'd have been no Thriller. >>> but jazz is a very good album IMO. IMO, it is. But people are different. And Queen were not happy with the result, which is why for the next album they had a new producer and moved to a different city (and of course studio). >>> John alway's wrote the least amount of songs, not only on Hot space.... Yes, but my point was to show that HS was not John's triumph. At all. >>> I think all four members thought the album was good at the time, No, they didn't: as early as 1982 both John and Roger were panning the album. Brian's always defended it, and Freddie loved it. BTW, back to the original topic, here's Freddie: link |
| malicedoom 08.09.2011 09:29 |
Because Bowie is an asshole. (and that's per Freddie) |
| Sebastian 08.09.2011 10:54 |
LOL. |
| Micrówave 08.09.2011 12:04 |
Daniel Nester wrote: -- Really?You think successful artists who make gazillions can just show up to a studio and record a song, and then decide they don't want the results released because they didn't think it's that great? --- So, you did make it up? Or is there an account of this financial objection? I don't know exactly what you're looking for. Someone who did a website and put pretty pictures up or you simply don't understand the process of copywriting and assigning publishing rights. If you would feel better about Queen by not knowing how the business side works and stick with the promotional side, then you can believe that Bowie just didn't like it. Do you have any account as to WHY Silver Salmon was never officially released on an album? |