Can somebody tell me whose bright idea it was to call "Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke" not a "highlight" of the Queen II Tour? I understand that we need to work within the context of the medium, but come on.
The double LP setset is labeled as featuring highlights from the March show, and yet the only true incentive to buy this package at all (LP or otherwise) was left off. Was that to entice people to buy the $150 - $200 4LP set, which includes TFFMS?
Well, that's not going to happen in my case. What were they thinking?
Yeah they are ridiculously overpriced. 40 euro's here for the 2LP - which only has the 'highlights' and the full 4LP set is at least €100 - which is more than twice the price for something twice the size.
It is the only reason I still haven't bought it.
It's beyond me why anyone would want to listen to LPs containing music that was produced digitally (compression/limiter notwithstanding).
It completely defeats the purpose of having an analog medium.
The Real Wizard wrote:
It's beyond me why anyone would want to listen to LPs containing music that was produced digitally (compression/limiter notwithstanding).
It completely defeats the purpose of having an analog medium.
I think for me there's something about listening to music the way I used to, cassette and vinyl included. Listening in front of the turntable and watching it go. It's cathartic.
Plus I want the album art in large form. I can't read those crummy CD liner notes anymore! :-)
7thStranger wrote:
I think for me there's something about listening to music the way I used to, cassette and vinyl included. Listening in front of the turntable and watching it go. It's cathartic.
Plus I want the album art in large form. I can't read those crummy CD liner notes anymore! :-)
I agree with Real Wizard.
I love vinyils, and I have the queen studio records in their first editions and sounds, to me, better than the remasters (than I also have from Hollywood Records, EMI or Virgin). But this is a different thing for the technical reasons Real Wizard gave. For example, Made In Heaven sounds better in cd than in vinyl, or Innuendo.
Of course, if I have the enough money I will buy also the four lp box set for collection. And is more beauty the art work and the experience is more cathartic ;)
The BIGGEST let down with the two LP set is that the March show is a "recreation" of the originally planned first live LP, edited down from the newly remastered audio.
WTF?
This SHOULD have been taken from the ORIGINAL mastered tapes - it SHOULD have been what we would have got IF they'd released it back in the 70's with the soundtrack as it was then.
It's such a pointless release.
brians wig wrote:
This SHOULD have been taken from the ORIGINAL mastered tapes - it SHOULD have been what we would have got IF they'd released it back in the 70's with the soundtrack as it was then.
That would pretty much be the prevailing bootleg version of the March show, but in slightly better quality than we've had prior. I'm just glad they were focused on doing the (nearly) full March show without overdubs.
I was thinking about it last night, and you guys make a good point. Why should I buy a vinyl pressing of an overly processed and doctored show that at times sounded better on the bootleg... I'll just get the CD.
The Real Wizard wrote:
It's beyond me why anyone would want to listen to LPs containing music that was produced digitally (compression/limiter notwithstanding).
It completely defeats the purpose of having an analog medium.
You are working off a completely faulty assumption, and that is that the majority of people could tell the difference between a CD and vinyl, regardless of the source.
They couldn't.
LPs are a multi-sensory experience for me, it's not just about the sound ... the tactile nature of the medium, and the large scale of the artwork - even the pops, clicks and scratches - are all very satisfying somehow.