QueenZone discussion #1400612
To those who complain about ''Queen Forever''...
| Doga 26.09.2014 10:01 |
...Queen released ''Live at the Rainbow'' this year, an outstanding release. Even more important, Queen released ''Killer Queen'' the vodka. Mix them and: YEEEEAH! |
| Oscar J 26.09.2014 11:00 |
Queen Forever is soooo overshadowed by Rainbow! |
| TomP63 26.09.2014 11:01 |
For thoste who want to complain......we salute you...... |
| queenside 26.09.2014 12:06 |
of course we fans are really excited about live at rainbow release but i'm sure queen forever will sell better cos it's more aimed toward general public. |
| Elskidor 26.09.2014 12:29 |
I usually don't like live albums. Is it any good? |
| pittrek 26.09.2014 12:34 |
The Rainbow album is brilliant. The Forever pseudocompilation sucks. |
| andyb1968 26.09.2014 13:41 |
I gotta say rainbow brilliant ( especially as I was at the Manchester show ), forever....cack. concentrate on the live shows and release the demos for the fans to finish off ! Job done !! |
| k-m 26.09.2014 14:21 |
Oh dear, I really don't know what did you guys expect from QF. They said from the start it was gonna be a compilation and Roger made it painfully clear there was simply not enough material and they didn't want to force anything. At least, Let Me In is a damn nice song, with some powerhouse vocals from Frederick. Rainbow is pure joy and the only regret I have is that its promotion is suffering due to the upcoming QF release. Rainbow deserved better, imo. |
| YAFF 26.09.2014 20:41 |
k-m wrote: Oh dear, I really don't know what did you guys expect from QF. They said from the start it was gonna be a compilation and Roger made it painfully clear there was simply not enough material and they didn't want to force anything. .Brian May made several comments that lead us to believe QF was going to be a bigger project than this. He used the "Made In Heaven" anthology and hinted there might be up to five tracks with at least THREE never before heard. He stated that it would have “new material on it which nobody in the world has ever heard.” (only Let Me In was unheard) |
| soxtalon 27.09.2014 08:36 |
Again though as always overspeculation and wishful thinking does at least half the damage. QPL doesn't help themselves, I will admit with some poorly worded phrasing but all in all if you read all the quotes from BM & RT all along this release is pretty much what they said it would be. - "He used the "Made In Heaven" anthology" This is the one article (and maybe one followup comment) that people completely hang their hat on...To them though it was a bit like MIH 2 in that it was a similar process. It is like MIH in that they used older Freddie vocals and patched on new recordings to make a new track. Poor choice of words on that one occasion? Yes But that one occasion vs every other interview where he states a compilation of unusual album tracks not usually compiled. I mean you contradict yourself in the next part of your statement. - " hinted there might be up to five tracks with at least THREE never before heard" Where is that even close to MIH? And we know they were working with 3 MJ tracks plus obviously now Let Me In and Love Kills. Things with the MJ estate didn't go very well and they were left with the one MJ track and the two others. MIGHT be up to 5 tracks. At the time there was. THREE never before heard? Well there was at least TWO Let Me In and Victory. The third? Well that would be questionable but given that State of Shock is only a demo on YT that may qualify in Brian's mind. " He stated that it would have “new material on it which nobody in the world has ever heard.” (only Let Me In was unheard) " - He didn't state that it would be all new - he said it would have new material. It does. Let Me In is unheard. |
| tomchristie22 27.09.2014 09:07 |
How on earth can ANYONE complain about 'Queen Forever'? We got a track we'd never heard before, and it's a terrific sounding song too. We got a version of Love Kills with new instrumentation, the type of 'Queen treatment' of an old track that so many people here have yearned for. We can also hear Freddie's vocal with much more clarity, and without the overlap from 'won't leave you alone' straight into the next verse. Two incredible songs. Yes, TMBMTLTT was disappointing, but that doesn't negate the fact that we got two gems out of this release. |
| anniestu44b 27.09.2014 09:10 |
As always too many presumptions. Yes I think Dr May did elude to something a little better but some people expect far too much. |
| DragonflyTrumpeter83 27.09.2014 09:57 |
I hope people aren't blaming Brian and Roger for Queen Forever. All blame should be placed on Universal. They're the ones that want to capitalise on the Queen catalog as much as they can. Brian and Roger are almost like bystanders. Also, I think if it were up to Brian and Roger, they probably wouldn't have released Let Me in Your Heart Again, Love Kills, or There Must Be More To Life Than This. Because they probably feel that they are sub-par songs that shouldn't be released. But that is just my opinion. |
| CaptainV 27.09.2014 15:32 |
I'm happy for the material in QF, even if it packaged with a bunch of stuff we've all heard before. I'll cling to anything I can get. It's been a great year overall. I saw them twice on the North American tour, we have Rainbow which is just incredibly brilliant, and now QF. Overall 2014 has been a wonderful year for Queen fans. Brian has said for years that there really wasn't much left in the vault so I wasn't expecting much out of QF anyway. |
| tomchristie22 27.09.2014 17:20 |
DragonflyTrumpeter83 wrote: Also, I think if it were up to Brian and Roger, they probably wouldn't have released Let Me in Your Heart Again, Love Kills, or There Must Be More To Life Than This. Because they probably feel that they are sub-par songs that shouldn't be released. But that is just my opinion.They sounded pretty enthusiastic about them on the Chris Evans show - Brian was particularly affectionate for Love Kills, which they'd worked on for a long time to get it sounding right as a ballad, and they both agreed that Let Me In had been an unfinished track, but they were satisfied that they had 'finished' it by assembling certain takes. If they really didn't want them released, they wouldn't let them be released. |
| DragonflyTrumpeter83 27.09.2014 17:32 |
tomchristie22 wrote:You could be right, Tom.DragonflyTrumpeter83 wrote: Also, I think if it were up to Brian and Roger, they probably wouldn't have released Let Me in Your Heart Again, Love Kills, or There Must Be More To Life Than This. Because they probably feel that they are sub-par songs that shouldn't be released. But that is just my opinion.They sounded pretty enthusiastic about them on the Chris Evans show - Brian was particularly affectionate for Love Kills, which they'd worked on for a long time to get it sounding right as a ballad, and they both agreed that Let Me In had been an unfinished track, but they were satisfied that they had 'finished' it by assembling certain takes. If they really didn't want them released, they wouldn't let them be released. Still, it could be that they have to promote it because they're under contract with the record company. Record companies are fickle. I only share my opinion. I could totally be wrong. ...and totally full of shit. ;) |
| tero! 48531 28.09.2014 02:40 |
Judging by the releases so far, Universal is giving the band minimum requirements for the releases, and Queen has the artistic right to fullfill those requirements. In 2011 Universal obviously asked for "2cd deluxed editions with at least five non-album tracks (demos, remixes, b-sides") on the second disc." This time they called out for "a compilation album with at least three previously unreleased Queen tracks, and a deluxe version with further previously unreleased versions of the old songs." Frankly, I'm surprised by the Rainbow release, but I suppose Universal asked for a 70's concert release, and QP didn't want to pay anything to BBC for a Hammersmith 1975 release... |
| JeroenG 28.09.2014 08:27 |
tero! 48531 wrote: Frankly, I'm surprised by the Rainbow release, but I suppose Universal asked for a 70's concert release, and QP didn't want to pay anything to BBC for a Hammersmith 1975 release...The Rainbow release was released by Virgin EMI Records, not by Island, right......? |
| tero! 48531 28.09.2014 12:16 |
JeroenG wrote:Which are both owned by Universal, right?tero! 48531 wrote: Frankly, I'm surprised by the Rainbow release, but I suppose Universal asked for a 70's concert release, and QP didn't want to pay anything to BBC for a Hammersmith 1975 release...The Rainbow release was released by Virgin EMI Records, not by Island, right......? |
| EDWOOD 28.09.2014 19:34 |
They are owned by them now I believe. Remember as well that Queen Forever was due to be released in 2011 (due to that early press release/info from their record company). Now whether QF back then would have been the same as it is now 3 years later is anyone's guess. I'm assuming it was either delayed as Universal felt that the reissuing of all the studio albums in one year was enough and no more product was needed that year to 'flood the market with'. Also the Deep Cuts albums were put out to try and highlight studio cuts that were not well-known and that releasing QF on top of this would have been overkill. Also in 2011 they may have viewed releasing a MJ track as too soon after his death? Or the legal rights were nowhere near sorted out ( they sound like they are only 25% sorted out now hence the mysterious non-appearance of those other 2-3 MJ tracks Brian talked about). I suppose this is the first big new release that Universal have seen from Queen since the contract started. They'll be wanting it to be a big hit no doubt but I'm still dubious as to HOW big it will be. Will it appeal to enough non-casual fans? Will the new tracks make enough of an impact? Will Joe public give a shit? |
| ITSM 29.09.2014 02:27 |
Even the hardcore fans are having doubts about buying Queen Forever. They got our hopes up for many new songS, and we only get one. |