| plumrach 06.02.2012 02:29 |
Kiss came 1st link TBH i like hot space but thats just my opinion and it did get quite high in the UK charts |
| brENsKi 06.02.2012 06:08 |
i'm surprised it's so low on the list i woulda put it about 3 or 4 |
| Amazon 06.02.2012 07:17 |
brENsKi wrote: "i'm surprised it's so low on the list i woulda put it about 3 or 4" Please tell me that you're not serious! :D Hot Space is no classic, but IMO it is extremely fun, and in no way is it one of the 50 worse albums of all time. I think that is just absurd. |
| thomasquinn 32989 06.02.2012 08:48 |
It all depends on what list of albums you're selecting them from. Hot Space certainly wouldn't qualify as "worst record of 1982", but on the list of "worst gold or platinum-selling records of 1982" it would certainly be up high. My guess is they drew up the list from albums they've reviewed in the past. I couldn't draw up a "bottom-50" list, so to speak, but I certainly rank Hot Space pretty low (although there is an enormous quantity of junk waaaay below it). I believe a pretty good EP could be made from it. |
| YAFF 06.02.2012 09:18 |
plumrach wrote: Kiss came 1st Kiss should've filled up all fifty places. Worst Band Ever. |
| brENsKi 06.02.2012 09:22 |
Amazon wrote: brENsKi wrote: "i'm surprised it's so low on the list i woulda put it about 3 or 4" Please tell me that you're not serious! :D Hot Space is no classic, but IMO it is extremely fun, and in no way is it one of the 50 worse albums of all time. I think that is just absurd.that's not what the article is about the editorial of the mag sums it up perfectly: " because it;s just cost you the best aprt of your spending money, and becuase of your loyalty to the feckless eedjits whose name is on the cover, you will spend the next few weeks listening to it over and over, praying that it's a "grower" the 50 worst albums of all time article is about great bands producing something sh*t - it 's about classic rock groups' 50 worst |
| Amazon 06.02.2012 09:30 |
Well, I still disagree. Even if we are only talking about great bands, I think it's 'terrible' status is highly overstated. Among Queen albums, I don't even think it's the worst. Furthermore, if the article is about great bands producing something that is shit, then why is Kiss on the list? No, I suspect that it's a list of the 50 worse albums of all time, full stop. The term classic rock refers to the type of music, not to the artists being great. I think the article is exactly as I thought. |
| brENsKi 06.02.2012 09:59 |
you're using "great" in a subjective manner...i agree (imo) kiss aren't great...but the "great" in this article is measure on more than personal opinion..... sales, worldwide status (kis were and always will be huge in USA and far east - approx 2/3 of the world classic rock market. no it isn't a simply a "worst albums of all time" article - every band listed fits the classic rock category, and most were at the peak of their powers at the time their "50 worst" album came out queen's in particular had massive emphasis - Hot Space was the album that killed queen in america for good - they went from USA dominance after AOBTD and CLTCL and the Game to not even being able to give Hot Space away in the USA....that merits their status in this top 50 list,,, that and Freddie's apology at MKeynes ( i know i was there) "it's only a bloody record" and "it doesn't mean we've lost our rock feel" is a clear statement that they underestimated their audience, they felt they could dish up anything and their loyal rock fan base would swallow it...cock balls and all one more thing...even tho "the game" was funky-ish in places...it still sounded like old queen often enough to work were you a queen fan from their early days thru to 1982? because if you were then i think your perspective might be different. try and put yourself in the place of someone who had "grown up with this band" become part of their fanbase and eagerly awaited each new "rock" album they released....then going out to but this on day of release (like i did) - looking at the cover and thinking "what's this about?" then getting the album home and trying...really trying to get into it...but failing cos i can't....that's the position of most of the "royal rock fans" at that time....it hurt...which is why freddie apologised finally, while queen were "jerking off and strutting their funky stuff" other rock bands were releasing some great hard rock albums rush, sabbath, halen, lizzy, etc |
| Amazon 06.02.2012 10:34 |
brENsKi wrote: "you're using "great" in a subjective manner...i agree (imo) kiss aren't great...but the "great" in this article is measure on more than personal opinion..... sales, worldwide status (kis were and always will be huge in USA and far east - approx 2/3 of the world classic rock market. no it isn't a simply a "worst albums of all time" article - every band listed fits the classic rock category, and most were at the peak of their powers at the time their "50 worst" album came out" To some degree, I am using greatness in a subjective manner. However I simply don't agree with you that greatness can automatically be applied to the artists on this list. Ultimately, these are generally rock artists who were popular during the 70's. That doesn't make them great though. You talk about the classic rock market, however the artists they listen to were generally hard rock groups who were big in the 70's. That does not automatically make them great, not matter how many albums Kiss may have sold. However, I think this is a red herring. Whether this is a list of the 50 worse albums of all time, or the 50 worse albums by great artists, I don't think that HS deserves to be there. It's an album containing arguably among Freddie's finest vocal work, has a couple of terrific solos from Brian, features one of the all-time bass riffs, and has Under Pressure. "queen's in particular had massive emphasis - Hot Space was the album that killed queen in america for good - they went from USA dominance after AOBTD and CLTCL and the Game to not even being able to give Hot Space away in the USA....that merits their status in this top 50 list,,," I don't agree. If this is a list of the 50 worse albums of all time, and not a list of the 50 albums that killed the popularity of successful artists, then IMO it shouldn't be there. Hot Space may have destroyed Queen in America, but that is separate to it being a bad album. Popularity or lack thereof in the US does not indicate artistic quality, or lack thereof. "that and Freddie's apology at MKeynes ( i know i was there) "it's only a bloody record" and "it doesn't mean we've lost our rock feel" is a clear statement that they underestimated their audience, they felt they could dish up anything and their loyal rock fan base would swallow it...cock balls and all" That is presuming that Queen didn't go into Hot Space wanting to put out the best album they could, and instead just wanted to put out an album to cash in on their popularity. I doubt that Roger would feel that way, Brian was probably still in his pre-milk Queen's name days, while Freddie and John were both very much for the album. |
| Amazon 06.02.2012 10:45 |
brENsKi wrote: "one more thing...even tho "the game" was funky-ish in places...it still sounded like old queen often enough to work were you a queen fan from their early days thru to 1982? because if you were then i think your perspective might be different. try and put yourself in the place of someone who had "grown up with this band" become part of their fanbase and eagerly awaited each new "rock" album they released....then going out to but this on day of release (like i did) - looking at the cover and thinking "what's this about?" then getting the album home and trying...really trying to get into it...but failing cos i can't....that's the position of most of the "royal rock fans" at that time....it hurt...which is why freddie apologised' I became a Queen fan after Freddie died, however I do understand what you're saying. As a matter of fact, when I first heard HS, I was massively disappointed with it; so much so, that I considered giving it away! It wasn't until some years later that I relistened to it, and I realized that it was actually pretty fun. (Although, I should note that I've always loved Staying Power, due to Freddie's vocals.) I want to emphasize that I don't consider HS to be a masterpiece. I really don't. However when I think of Queen albums that disappoint me, I think of The Works & AKOM. "Finally, while queen were "jerking off and strutting their funky stuff" other rock bands were releasing some great hard rock albums rush, sabbath, halen, lizzy, etc" The early 80's wasn't a great era for quite a few groups, not just Queen. |
| brENsKi 06.02.2012 10:47 |
1. yes you are using greatness in a subjective manner 2. think you should check the list more than half of those listed ARE NOT hard rock artists..and never were 3. it's not saying it's 50 worst of all time - it's saying it's 50 worst by classic rock artists 4. wrong again - i said they underestimated their audience...which they did, their worldwide image was never the same since. |
| Amazon 06.02.2012 10:54 |
brENsKi wrote: "1. yes you are using greatness in a subjective manner" I said, 'To some degree, I am using greatness in a subjective manner.' There is nothing purely objective about greatness. "2. think you should check the list more than half of those listed ARE NOT hard rock artists..and never were" I was referring to the classic rock market, which you referred to originally. However, it's still a red herring. The question is, does HS belong? "3. it's not saying it's 50 worst of all time - it's saying it's 50 worst by classic rock artists' I feel like we're going around in circles. Whether it's the 50 worst of all time, or the 50 worst by classic rock artists, or the 50 worst by great artists, there is still only one relevant question. Does HS belong? IMO it does not. "4. wrong again - i said they underestimated their audience...which they did, their worldwide image was never the same since." What is wrong? It would help if you quoted whatever statement was wrong. Also, how am I wrong again? When was I wrong the first time? |
| Micrówave 06.02.2012 11:03 |
Hot Space is certainly better than Wang Chung - Points On The Curve and I didn't see that one on the list. |
| brENsKi 06.02.2012 11:15 |
your exact words were: "You talk about the classic rock market, however the artists they listen to were generally hard rock groups who were big in the 70's" i replied that more than half were not "hard rock" artists.... you skipped over my point...more than half were never hard rock artists...and the list gets longer if you start treating the likes of Jon Anderson and Genesis as the prog/art rock they were |
| Amazon 06.02.2012 11:21 |
You've got me. I apologize for going by classic rock in general. However it still does not address whether HS belongs on this list. Unless you are more interested in debating what kind of list this is, I think HS's inclusion is more relevant. You also haven't addressed what statement I made was wrong. |
| jamster1111 06.02.2012 11:37 |
This is ridiculous. Why do people think Hot Space is such a bad album? It is a great album! I think it is some of Queen's best work. I think people only dislike it because it's style is different than that on Queen's other albums. Technically, most of the songs are very well written songs and only show just how diverse of a band Queen was. If anything, an album like The Miracle should be on that list but to put a gem like Hot Space is crazy. |
| brENsKi 06.02.2012 11:59 |
i explained my reasons...what i grew up with the change was not to my liking |
| ksimpson1960 06.02.2012 13:25 |
I really like listening to all these comments, they're informative,& very interesting answers. 1st: well said brENsKi... I too was disapointed, but I just figured Queen were having internal arguments, you know, John should have a say, let John have an album,John likes horns, honestly, I thought the whole "slow thing" was johns' idea. WOW, do I miss him now |
| thomasquinn 32989 06.02.2012 14:43 |
Micrówave wrote: Hot Space is certainly better than Wang Chung - Points On The Curve and I didn't see that one on the list.Again, I doubt they've reviewed that, or that it went gold or platinum. |
| The Real Wizard 06.02.2012 14:47 |
It's only because records like Sheer Heart Attack and A Night At The Opera exist that Hot Space is a point for comparison. Side 2 of Hot Space is very good, and ranks up there with some of Queen's better material. As dodgy and dated as some of the record is, there is no way it belongs on a list of the all-time worst records ever made. It may Queen's worst record, and that's as far as it should go. But again, the filler on A Kind Of Magic might even be worse. |
| jamster1111 06.02.2012 20:37 |
The Real Wizard wrote: It's only because records like Sheer Heart Attack and A Night At The Opera exist that Hot Space is a point for comparison. Side 2 of Hot Space is very good, and ranks up there with some of Queen's better material. As dodgy and dated as some of the record is, there is no way it belongs on a list of the all-time worst records ever made. It may Queen's worst record, and that's as far as it should go. But again, the filler on A Kind Of Magic might even be worse.I don't even think it's Queen's worst record. I think it's much better than The Miracle. I think it's a pretty good record with great memorable songs with just a different style. For the past 3 years I've loved it and for the past 3 years I've tried to figure out why people think it's a bad record. |
| Wiley 06.02.2012 20:41 |
It's one of my favorites, to be honest. Actually, I think my Queenzone profile still lists it as my favorite Queen album. I guess it's easier to "like" Hot Space when you weren't there at the time it was launched. In my opinion, Side 1 gets an A+ for sheer balls and risk taking, even if the songs are not to par with previous records -specially if your previous records are called Queen II and A night at the opera. Still, I wouldn't change a thing on it. Side 1 flows like an album called "Hot Space" should. To me, except for Under Pressure, the better tracks are on Side 1: Staying Power is a strong opener, Dancer's arrangement (simple beat and synth bass, hard rocking guitars) is how all the album should have sounded, Body Language was the OBVIOUS choice for lead single. Let's put it this way: If you are releasing an album called Hot Space and you have a song called Body Language on it, well... you go all the way and release it with naked bodies on the sleeve, damn it! :) I have heard people say "What if they had included X song instead of -say- Dancer or Body Language" or even people posting alternate track lists that might as well be called "The Game 2" or "The (not so good) Works". I say they are missing the point... it wouldn't be Hot Space. |
| The Real Wizard 06.02.2012 22:06 |
jamster1111 wrote: I don't even think it's Queen's worst record. I think it's much better than The Miracle.To each their own. But for the sake of discussion, how many Hot Space tracks compare to the brilliant arrangements of The Miracle, Breakthru or Was It All Worth It? I can only think of one, and it's not really a Hot Space track since it was released as a single the year before. for the past 3 years I've tried to figure out why people think it's a bad record.It's not a bad record. But compared to Queen's great records, it just doesn't come remotely close. Besides Under Pressure, Las Palabras de Amor is the only track on Hot Space that ranks up there with the other great Queen songs. The record is largely weak, either because of poor writing or poor production - or both. It's still hard to believe that only seven years divide Hot Space from the sheer perfection that was A Night At The Opera. It took Queen ten years to become the greatest band in the world, and one record to dismantle it all. But as Freddie once said, getting to the top isn't hard - staying there is, because the only place to go is down. Ask any fan in Canada or the US who was around then. The record destroyed them. |
| the dude 1366 06.02.2012 23:28 |
If they had reversed the sides the album woulda been a different story. Side 2 was pretty good! But not many people made it that far. |
| The Real Wizard 06.02.2012 23:37 |
Exactly. But hindsight is always 20/20, ain't it? But it's fun to imagine. Had they flipped the sides, dropped Body Language and added Soul Brother, it could've fared far better. |
| The Real Wizard 06.02.2012 23:39 |
Who's the small-minded twit who compiled this list? Olias Of Sunhillow by Jon Anderson is one of the greatest progressive rock records ever made. He played every instrument and arranged the entire thing. It is such a beautiful piece of work, a musical landscape unlike anything ever heard before or since. |
| Charlie Brown 07.02.2012 02:13 |
Hi everyone, music is probably one of the most subjective topics known to man. So i am not sure anything can really ever be best or worst. We all admire Queen a great deal but other people admire 50 cent or Kenny G, so go figure! Now as for Hot Space, i don't think its one of the 50 worst albums of all time, 50 most disapointing is more accurate. After delivering multiple masterpieces the guys produced what would be considered a mediocrity by the standard they had set for themselves and we the fans. Having said this though i must admit i have grown to like it more over the years. |
| philip storey 07.02.2012 04:24 |
Aahh Hot Space Lets GO ! |
| billy bob 07.02.2012 04:54 |
If Hot Space had been their 1st album then they wouldn't have made a 2nd. EMI would have dropped em. |
| Amazon 07.02.2012 07:21 |
billy bob wrote: If Hot Space had been their 1st album then they wouldn't have made a 2nd. EMI would have dropped em. |
| Amazon 07.02.2012 07:21 |
billy bob wrote: "If Hot Space had been their 1st album then they wouldn't have made a 2nd. EMI would have dropped em." I doubt that. Hot Space was more successful than their first album, and they survived that album. Record labels don't care about quality as much as they care about sales, and Hot Space went gold in both the US and the UK. It also broke the UK top ten, and produced a hit single. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, it did better than both of Queen's first two albums. So on that basis, if HS was their first, I think they would have definitely been able to make a second album. |
| thomasquinn 32989 07.02.2012 08:47 |
@Bob: I stand by my words: Hot Space is a mediocre album that could've been a pretty good EP. |
| brENsKi 07.02.2012 10:26 |
i disagree i think it's a poor album that could've made a mediocre EP |
| Over the Field 07.02.2012 11:43 |
I presume that the magazine consider Hot Space bad due the songs but what about performance? Freddie's vocals are stunning and very enjoyable through this album, and I think that even the editors can't deny that. It is true that the production could have been better, but here and there are quite nice arrangements and good performances. That's for sure. Songwriting or the track order cannot make the album bad alone. |
| Vocal harmony 07.02.2012 12:37 |
Hot Space seems to have made this Bottom 50 list purely on the style of music contained there in. Disco or Dance or what ever. Of the 11 tracks less than half fall into the offending category. The rest get little or no mention. Given Queen's track record with the press it's hardly surprising that Hot Space was slammed. Even funnier the same press that slated Hot Space, a year later were heralding Michael Jackson's Thriller album as being ground breaking and a truly great album. Wow Beat it had a guitar riff and an Edward Van Halen solo. So that's great but Dancer and Staying power aren't ? I guess that's the press for you. Of course the press killed off the album but Queen continued to be come more successful everywhere except The US. I guess the American market Is more fickle and less open to artists being artists. Listening to Hot Space now, it's very much an album of that period, production wise, but that's also true of The Works, in fact if you take the singles off the works what's left is not all great and is no better or worse than Hot Space, so why Hot Space. It was the last album on which they did something unexpected. As far as being badly produced or played, as I said the production is very much early 80's. But live, watch Staying Power on live at the Bowl and then watch Radio GaGa at Wembley. The first is a band locked into the rhythm of the song with all the members visibly playing for the song, the second Is a band almost on auto pilot. Forget the catchy chorus and hand claps which is honestly the better and more challenging to play? Hot Space is a few years and a million miles from being my favourite Queen album, but it certainly isn't the worst. Any list of best or worse in a magazine is only there to make the short sighted minds of the journalists involved seem to be of importance, and to make Joe public run out and buy the Magazine in the hope that their favourite band gets a mention, or in this case doesn't! |
| brENsKi 07.02.2012 13:23 |
HS was not groundbreaking queen had already ventured into this territory with The Game AOBTD don't try suicide and Dragon Attack were queen's first big visits to the dancefloor Coming Soon was repeated with Call All Girls and there were a couple of Brian ballads there too i think the press - and the seasoned fans just sighed and thought "not more of this? yawn" |
| Russian Headlong 07.02.2012 13:51 |
Quite right too, should have been higher, its is utter shit except for Under Pressure and Put Out The Fire |
| Russian Headlong 07.02.2012 13:57 |
Oh and KISS are a great band too, Sonic Boom their last album was terrific, they get better with age. |
| brENsKi 07.02.2012 15:03 |
Russian Headlong wrote: Oh and KISS are a great band too, Sonic Boom their last album was terrific, they get better with age.if by "better with age" you mean they are like wine...best served with loads of CHEESE, then yes, Kiss do "cheesy" to extreme |
| Vocal harmony 07.02.2012 16:52 |
brENsKi wrote: HS was not groundbreaking queen had already ventured into this territory with The Game AOBTD don't try suicide and Dragon Attack were queen's first big visits to the dancefloor Coming Soon was repeated with Call All Girls and there were a couple of Brian ballads there too i think the press - and the seasoned fans just sighed and thought "not more of this? yawn" |
| Vocal harmony 07.02.2012 17:03 |
As opposed to them thinking oh not more of those vocal harmonies When Somebody to Love or Bicycle Race were released. Yes The Game had a couple of Dance/ funk orientated songs on it, but so did Jazz. Roger's Fun It? As far as Dragon Attack goes, a prominent Bass line doesn't make a dance song. I didn't say Hot Space was ground breaking what I wrote was that the press had said that Thriller was ground breaking even though it covered some of the ground Hot Space had done a year before. |
| Holly2003 07.02.2012 17:43 |
Hot Space has many weak songs. That's what it boils down to. If the songs were better quality more people would've bought it. Body Language, Calling All Girls, Cool Cat and Dancer are mediocre and annoying. Put Out the Fire, despite its commendable lyrics, is a sonic mess and among Brian's least inspired heavy metal ooze (add Tear It Up, Still Burnin' and Headlong to that list). The good songs aren't that good. Only Under Pressure, Staying Power, Back Chat and Las Palabras stand out. Body Language was a really poor choice for first single. But seriously --Thriller. Don't even talk about HS and Thriller in the same breath. Back Chat is not comparable to Beat It. In BC, Brian does not play a heavy metal solo, he plays a tasteful funk-inspired solo. In Beat It, Eddie VH plays a heavy metal solo over the bridge (instead of the chorus) and it sounds great and -- incredibly -- not out of place in a funk/disco song. Plus Eddie's solos are amazing and, as Star Fleet showed, he's a much more innovative soloist that Brian when asked to improvise. |
| greaserkat 07.02.2012 18:35 |
Holly2003 wrote: In BC, Brian does not play a heavy metal solo, he plays a tasteful funk-inspired solo.=========================================================== Isn't it John who plays the solo on Back Chat? |
| maxpower 07.02.2012 18:46 |
No it's not |
| Vocal harmony 07.02.2012 19:58 |
Holly, You need to go and listen to Back Chat again. That isn't a classic funk solo. Like most BM solo's it good and well thought out. It sounds like it owes a dept to Jeff Beck. Strange you picked that song, I was thinking of Dancer I didn't compare Hot Space to Thriller other than to say both albums contain some very similar songs stylistically and Hot Space came first but got hammered by the press for being a dance album while Thriller was hailed as being innovative when clearly it isn't. As far as Edward Van Halen's playing goes. On beat it he has said many times he walked into the studio asked what was required of him and was told that Micheal Jackson liked that really fast thing he does. So that's what he played. He'd done it all before and has done better solo's since, but that's the one on a million selling single and album, and out side of Van Halen's fan base that's what he's famous for. Quiet where Star Fleet fits in to this, I don't really see. Yes Van Halen is better at Jamming off the cuff ideas, BM has always worked most of his solos out very carefully before committing to it, that however doesn't mean one is better than the other. If your talking about dance/ funk with real guitar riffs then both Queen and Jackson, by the way Steve Luckather Played all the guitars on Beat it except the solo, stole the idea from mid 70's Rick James. As for Hot Space only having 4 good songs on it, what about The Works or A Kind Of Magic. . . . |
| brENsKi 08.02.2012 11:35 |
i think perhaps you might need to listen to Back Chat again the solo would fit nicely on almost any motown group single lsiten to some of the temptations, supremes, and vandellas up-tempo songs...it fits....and no way could it ever be a rock/metal/blues solo.....it's soul/funk |