| pittrek 03.12.2015 05:22 |
Hey guys and girls, did somebody of you make already a list of all audio overdubs done on the new release? I noticed two things : - "I rule with m.............. I rule with my right" was replaced with "I rule with my left hand, I rule with my right" - the ending of Liar is completely different and shorter thanks to a "correction" plus there are many things which I "suspect" are "touched" but I'm not sure. Is here somebody good enough for noticing all of the changes? I can provide a stereo flac file in which the left channel will be a mono version of the original TV mix and the right channel will be a mono version of the new mix if it helps. |
| que.123 03.12.2015 07:42 |
Hi pittrek, I did notice that Freddie had an off key moment on the piano in Leroy Brown in the original mix which was actually overdubbed/auto tuned in the 2009 broadcast but was simply muted in the new release! On the new video you see Freddie strike the keys but no sound at that moment from the piano, it seems strange they took the trouble to fix it in 2009 but just mute it in 2015? I wonder what most people would prefer, leave it as it is, overdub it, mute it? |
| tomchristie22 03.12.2015 08:53 |
On a related note, where would the overdubs most likely come from? They didn't record any overdubs for Hammersmith in studio, cos it was a live TV broadcast not really intended for any other sort of release at the time. Does it mean they'd have to have come from other ANATO tour shows which were professionally recorded (if there are any such shows)? |
| jondickens1 03.12.2015 10:11 |
There's quite a bit of autotune going on on Bohemian Rhapsody. Sounds quite natural to my ear though so not complaining. I wish they did a better job with the mix of Ogre battle tho. The final two "Argh Argh Argh Argh ARRRRRGGGHHH" (If you get my drift?) make me cringe a bit. And why take the guitar feedback sound away from the beginning of KYA? |
| pittrek 03.12.2015 10:32 |
Something very weird is going on during some bits of KYA and basically all vocals on Liar - the instruments are synchronized perfectly, but the vocals are off. "Ladies and gentlemen, this is Queen" comes in later. Some of Freddie's vocals on Now I'm Here are "off" too. "Didn't mean to make you cry" is a pretty obvious "fix", just like "shivers down my spine" |
| Nitroboy 03.12.2015 10:54 |
que.123 wrote: I wonder what most people would prefer, leave it as it is, overdub it, mute it? Leave it as it is. I'm curious as well, as to where all of the overdubs/fixes are sourced from. |
| pittrek 03.12.2015 11:06 |
If anybody of you guys is interested, check this flac file : link The left channel contains a mono version of the OGWT broadcast, the right channel contains a mono version of the new DVD I'm listening to it right now and I'm surprised how many changes there are to Fred's vocals. |
| Bad Seed 03.12.2015 13:34 |
I've not had the chance to compare yet (thanks pittrek btw) but I knew a lot had been done to the vocals. Freddie is off key A LOT on the original broadcast to the point it is hard for me to listen to, let alone enjoy. This new version is a big improvement. |
| pittrek 03.12.2015 14:43 |
This is a comparison of the QTV version and the new release, let me know what you think about it. |
| DepeX 03.12.2015 15:40 |
Pittrek would you be so kind to upload the full qtv broadcast? Thank you |
| alberbal12 03.12.2015 17:00 |
DepeX wrote: Pittrek would you be so kind to upload the full qtv broadcast? Thank you+1 please :) PD: Really a good research, wow! |
| Krypto_98 03.12.2015 19:07 |
pittrek wrote: Something very weird is going on during some bits of KYA and basically all vocals on Liar - the instruments are synchronized perfectly, but the vocals are off. "Ladies and gentlemen, this is Queen" comes in later. Some of Freddie's vocals on Now I'm Here are "off" too. "Didn't mean to make you cry" is a pretty obvious "fix", just like "shivers down my spine"There is one at "i dont want to die" also |
| Cruella de Vil 03.12.2015 22:13 |
What are all the complaints about? We've been after this for years, sit back and enjoy it! |
| Biggus Dickus 03.12.2015 22:42 |
CruellaDeVille wrote: What are all the complaints about? We've been after this for years, sit back and enjoy it! It's not necessarily about complaining, but about doing research. Personally I find stuff like this interesting. |
| tomchristie22 03.12.2015 23:40 |
Nitroboy wrote:For sure. One could make the argument that they need to make it clinically perfect in order to survive in today's market, but the fact is that these releases are for a pretty specific and small audience anyway - one that's going to appreciate them more if they haven't been tampered with.que.123 wrote: I wonder what most people would prefer, leave it as it is, overdub it, mute it?Leave it as it is. Let Me In Your Heart Again, which probably had pitch correction on it, is a slightly different matter - if Freddie sang some not so good notes on it, and they had no alternative recording, then I think it's an acceptable solution. Especially since if autotune is present on that song, it's quite subtle, unlike some of the live corrections in the last 2 years. |
| pittrek 04.12.2015 02:23 |
DepeX wrote: Pittrek would you be so kind to upload the full qtv broadcast? Thank youI'll ask the "correct people" |
| pittrek 04.12.2015 02:24 |
Biggus Dickus wrote:Thanks. Me to.CruellaDeVille wrote: What are all the complaints about? We've been after this for years, sit back and enjoy it!It's not necessarily about complaining, but about doing research. Personally I find stuff like this interesting. The fact I'm trying to find out which changes have they done doesn't mean I'm complaining or that I'm not grateful for the release. |
| Cruella de Vil 04.12.2015 03:56 |
Pitttrek wrote: The fact I'm trying to find out which changes have they done doesn't mean I'm complaining or that I'm not grateful for the release. My apologies, I misread your intent. Cheers, CDV |
| Bad Seed 04.12.2015 04:38 |
tomchristie22 wrote: For sure. One could make the argument that they need to make it clinically perfect in order to survive in today's market, but the fact is that these releases are for a pretty specific and small audience anyway - one that's going to appreciate them more if they haven't been tampered with. Let Me In Your Heart Again, which probably had pitch correction on it, is a slightly different matter - if Freddie sang some not so good notes on it, and they had no alternative recording, then I think it's an acceptable solution. Especially since if autotune is present on that song, it's quite subtle, unlike some of the live corrections in the last 2 years.I personally disagree. If I wanted to listen to Freddie singing off key I'd stick on the old bootleg. For an official release, I don't nesseceraly want perfection but I do want it to be enjoyable and easy on the ear if I'm paying good money for it. I'm happy for fluffed guitar parts and other mistakes, i.e. the end of Liar, to be left in. But off key singing is unacceptable for an official release. Autotune all the way for me. |
| thomasquinn 32989 04.12.2015 05:56 |
Bad Seed wrote:You do realize that, in exactly the same way that '80s synth strings and old movie special effects sound/look extraordinarily cheesy and fake today, these 'fixes' are going to sound laughably fake in the future?tomchristie22 wrote: For sure. One could make the argument that they need to make it clinically perfect in order to survive in today's market, but the fact is that these releases are for a pretty specific and small audience anyway - one that's going to appreciate them more if they haven't been tampered with. Let Me In Your Heart Again, which probably had pitch correction on it, is a slightly different matter - if Freddie sang some not so good notes on it, and they had no alternative recording, then I think it's an acceptable solution. Especially since if autotune is present on that song, it's quite subtle, unlike some of the live corrections in the last 2 years.I personally disagree. If I wanted to listen to Freddie singing off key I'd stick on the old bootleg. For an official release, I don't nesseceraly want perfection but I do want it to be enjoyable and easy on the ear if I'm paying good money for it. I'm happy for fluffed guitar parts and other mistakes, i.e. the end of Liar, to be left in. But off key singing is unacceptable for an official release. Autotune all the way for me. |
| Bad Seed 04.12.2015 06:17 |
Again I disagree. The pitch correction on the Rainbow shows is noticeable for someone who knows what they're listening for but not at all for the average listener. Where on the Odeon show is autotune at all obvious, even for someone with a good ear? |
| thomasquinn 32989 04.12.2015 06:50 |
Bad Seed wrote: Again I disagree. The pitch correction on the Rainbow shows is noticeable for someone who knows what they're listening for but not at all for the average listener. Where on the Odeon show is autotune at all obvious, even for someone with a good ear?You totally fail to get the point. This is a fairly new technology, just like the special effects of 1950s films were new. Nobody noticed the shortcomings because people weren't used to it yet. Twenty years later, after massive exposure to the technologies in question, they become painfully easy to pick out. There is absolutely NO reason to assume it will be ANY different for this technology. In 20 years, it WILL sound cheesy and fake. You can disagree as much as you want to, it won't change a thing. Do yourself a favor. Look up some of the North Korean doctored photographs of American POWs from the 1950s. At the time, even photographics experts thought they were real. Now, a 10-year-old can see how they were edited together from different pieces. Exactly the same concept. |
| Bad Seed 04.12.2015 07:01 |
I completely get your point, I just think you're wrong. |
| brunogorski 04.12.2015 07:41 |
I will save this thread for 20 years, and then I'll bring it back in 2035. See ya :D |
| cmsdrums 04.12.2015 07:46 |
brunogorski wrote: I will save this thread for 20 years, and then I'll bring it back in 2035. See ya :DThe same year the anthology sets will be released, yeah?!! |
| DepeX 04.12.2015 08:41 |
pittrek wrote:Ok, thank you.DepeX wrote: Pittrek would you be so kind to upload the full qtv broadcast? Thank youI'll ask the "correct people" |
| que.123 05.12.2015 20:14 |
I think in the circumstances they did a pretty good job of removing the original BBC end credits but why oh why did they decide to shove some cut and paste frames of the audience in the middle? If you look at pittrek's side by side comparison the footage that they discarded looks good and has less on-screen text to remove than other sections? The decision that they took to use the original footage (rather than edit it all out like they did in 2009) was a good one so why go to the trouble of painstakingly removing all that text just to botch it in the middle...it defies logic? |
| Holly2003 06.12.2015 02:58 |
Really disappointed to hear there are so many studio additions and tweaks to a concert that I've always thought sounded good in its unaltered state (despite Fred being ill). But I've come to accept that *some* edits and tweaks are necessary for a commercial release and that's fine if they are done well. Who wants to hear Fred's voice crack or him miss a note on an official release? (Maybe some uber fans and perfectionists, but bootlegs are available for them.) As for the 'what will people in the future think', well fair enough, but this isn't an archeological dig where the ground will be covered over again so that future archeologists can use their state of the art technology, it's a product for sale and unless they have access to a time machine Queen Productions have, of course, to use current technology. The original tapes still exist and we can assume in the future they will re-release this concert using whatever technology is then available. |
| Nitroboy 06.12.2015 06:25 |
Holly, Freddie still cracks on other releases like Milton Keynes, Wembley, and Budapest as well. I'm an advocate of leaving the stuff as original as it can be. Cracks and all. If it's something as bad as Japan '79, then use that kind of stuff as bonus material. Obviously stuff like that isn't suited for being the main release. |
| vonkeil 06.12.2015 07:00 |
Has anyone of you noticed the digital glitch in Fred's introduction for BoRhap? ("...with a little segment from a numberRRRRR...") ? |
| Barry Durex 06.12.2015 07:20 |
pittrek wrote:LOLDepeX wrote: Pittrek would you be so kind to upload the full qtv broadcast? Thank youI'll ask the "correct people" |
| Oscar J 06.12.2015 09:18 |
vonkeil wrote: Has anyone of you noticed the digital glitch in Fred's introduction for BoRhap? ("...with a little segment from a numberRRRRR...") ? Digital glitch? It's a rolled R. Freddie does the same in the introduction to Brrrrrighton Rrrrock. |
| brians wig 06.12.2015 10:11 |
Barry Durex wrote:I think by that he means the mods.pittrek wrote:LOLDepeX wrote: Pittrek would you be so kind to upload the full qtv broadcast? Thank youI'll ask the "correct people" |
| DepeX 06.12.2015 10:19 |
brians wig wrote:Me too.Barry Durex wrote:I think by that he means the mods.pittrek wrote:LOLDepeX wrote: Pittrek would you be so kind to upload the full qtv broadcast? Thank youI'll ask the "correct people" |
| Biggus Dickus 06.12.2015 11:02 |
Nitroboy wrote: Holly, Freddie still cracks on other releases like Milton Keynes, Wembley, and Budapest as well. I'm an advocate of leaving the stuff as original as it can be. Cracks and all. If it's something as bad as Japan '79, then use that kind of stuff as bonus material. Obviously stuff like that isn't suited for being the main release. I agree. For some reason with Wembley, Keynes etc. they seemed to leave the vocals alone. Sure they still had the original overdubs but at least they didn't run everything Fred sang through autotune. |
| dysan 06.12.2015 13:55 |
I agree that this kind of analysis is fascinating. And also that a few tweaks here and there might be necessary for whatever reason - from that video above I'm not seeing anything that is deceptive or bad. But missing out the intro and the outro freezeframe? WTF? And those end credits are pretty bad. Dear QPL I am quite handy with Final Cut and would've done this a lot better. Best regards, Lord Dysan. |
| Nitroboy 06.12.2015 14:26 |
Not to mention the bad colours.... |
| mooghead 06.12.2015 14:47 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote:Bad Seed wrote: Again I disagree. The pitch correction on the Rainbow shows is noticeable for someone who knows what they're listening for but not at all for the average listener. Where on the Odeon show is autotune at all obvious, even for someone with a good ear?You totally fail to get the point. This is a fairly new technology, just like the special effects of 1950s films were new. Nobody noticed the shortcomings because people weren't used to it yet. Twenty years later, after massive exposure to the technologies in question, they become painfully easy to pick out. There is absolutely NO reason to assume it will be ANY different for this technology. In 20 years, it WILL sound cheesy and fake. You can disagree as much as you want to, it won't change a thing. Do yourself a favor. Look up some of the North Korean doctored photographs of American POWs from the 1950s. At the time, even photographics experts thought they were real. Now, a 10-year-old can see how they were edited together from different pieces. Exactly the same concept. Good point but you are comparing visuals with audio, unless you actually know what the 'real' recording sounds like it will be easy to assume that what you hear is the way it was. I may be proven wrong in time. I have never heard the 'real' gig but due to the whole issue of autotune on this site (and others) I am looking much more forward to seeing the thing rather than listening to it, I might play the radio in the background who knows? (Expecting delivery tomorrow :-) |
| Oscar J 06.12.2015 15:20 |
It is NOT that badly autotuned. There are no glaringly obvious examples anywhere - it has been done much more carefully than, say, Rainbows "Fairy Fellers". |
| matte9898 06.12.2015 17:45 |
I don't know why they didn't correct the speed of the japan's live... The tape runs 1 semitone faster than normal... |
| pittrek 07.12.2015 01:21 |
matte9898 wrote: I don't know why they didn't correct the speed of the japan's live... The tape runs 1 semitone faster than normal...Yes, for some reason they still use the PAL tape source, which is weird. Maybe they don't have the film source already? Anyway I agree it would be better if they slowed it down from 25fps to 23.976fps. |
| vonkeil 07.12.2015 02:09 |
Oscar J wrote:You're absolutely right.vonkeil wrote: Has anyone of you noticed the digital glitch in Fred's introduction for BoRhap? ("...with a little segment from a numberRRRRR...") ?Digital glitch? It's a rolled R. Freddie does the same in the introduction to Brrrrrighton Rrrrock. I was pretty sure it sounds different on my old bootleg. I just checked and it didn't. My bad, sorry. |
| Nitroboy 07.12.2015 07:22 |
pittrek wrote:matte9898 wrote: I don't know why they didn't correct the speed of the japan's live... The tape runs 1 semitone faster than normal...Yes, for some reason they still use the PAL tape source, which is weird. Maybe they don't have the film source already? Anyway I agree it would be better if they slowed it down from 25fps to 23.976fps. That wouldn't be the correct speed either :P The correct speed would be a precise 24fps. 23.976 is NTSC film, which is running slower than standard film speed (24fps). |
| matte9898 07.12.2015 08:03 |
Yes, but 24 fps is film speed, like budapest and montreal. The japan's movie doesn't seem to be "slow" like budapest or montreal, maybe because it is 25 fps interlaced (50i) ? Sorry for my bad english |
| pittrek 07.12.2015 08:49 |
Yes, but is 24fps supported by either DVD or BD ? I know both formats support 23.976 fps and that's how Montreal is encoded on the BD if I remember correctly. |
| Nitroboy 07.12.2015 09:00 |
matte9898 wrote: Yes, but 24 fps is film speed, like budapest and montreal. The japan's movie doesn't seem to be "slow" like budapest or montreal, maybe because it is 25 fps interlaced (50i) ? Sorry for my bad englishIt was sped up from 24fps to 25pfs (PAL), which was then badly converted to NTSC. Hence the increased speed/pitch and the subpar video quality. pittrek wrote: Yes, but is 24fps supported by either DVD or BD ? I know both formats support 23.976 fps and that's how Montreal is encoded on the BD if I remember correctly.Blu-ray supports both. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray#Video |
| jjbluecaps 07.12.2015 10:23 |
I didn't understand why the hell they did a little cut in Freedie's walk to the light in the very beginning of Now I'm Here... |
| que.123 07.12.2015 11:01 |
jjbluecaps wrote: I didn't understand why the hell they did a little cut in Freedie's walk to the light in the very beginning of Now I'm Here...It's bizarre! Some of the decisions in this release are completely unfathomable. At least we have both the 2009 BBC broadcast and the WOWOW version in excellent quality to work with should anyone be interested in doing their own edit - the extended intro from 2009 and the extended outro from WOWOW for a start. |
| matte9898 07.12.2015 17:12 |
At least there aren't overdubs on vocals... Not like on rainbow (november)... For example the end of lap of the gods revisited, where it seems that 400 people are singing...Or the "i want you" part of son and daughter... |
| que.123 27.12.2015 18:14 |
alberbal12 wrote:Hi Pittrek, if you are not able to share your full QTV version (if it's too close to the official release) is it possible to share the bit NOT on "A Night At The Odeon" marked "Missing" in your side by side comparison i.e. the Bob Harris intro? (I know part of it is in the documentary but it is not the full version).DepeX wrote: Pittrek would you be so kind to upload the full qtv broadcast? Thank you+1 please :) PD: Really a good research, wow! I do have most of the Bob Harris intro on VHS (no turning time clocks or split screen effects) I will gladly share it if anyone wants it but its missing the bit where he walks on stage. Thank you. |
| ***JAN*** 29.12.2015 05:13 |
The thing that bothers me most is the damned BASS GUITAR. They turned it into some slushy-barely intelligible frequency blended in with the guitar...And I multiple-tested this release on several devices... PLUS, what about the drums? Is that compression? Or (even worst) are those triggers?!...By no means that's how RMT's recorded drums sounded in the '70s (ok, I wasn't there...But...), or is it just my impression? (same applies for the Rainbow release) |
| Biggus Dickus 29.12.2015 07:24 |
***JAN*** wrote: The thing that bothers me most is the damned BASS GUITAR. They turned it into some slushy-barely intelligible frequency blended in with the guitar...And I multiple-tested this release on several devices... PLUS, what about the drums? Is that compression? Or (even worst) are those triggers?!...By no means that's how RMT's recorded drums sounded in the '70s (ok, I wasn't there...But...), or is it just my impression? (same applies for the Rainbow release)Yeah it has to be extreme compression on the drums and it sounds awful. |
| bitesthedust 03.01.2016 13:31 |
I picked up on the opening line to Black Queen immediately but didn't do so with Liar until a second listen. Overall the sound seems like they are playing to a outdoor stadium rather than a indoor concert hall. |
| Vocal harmony 04.01.2016 08:34 |
I think Queen productions and the people who work for BM and RT are very much a closed shop, and this DVD like so many other releases provide jobs for the boys. I don't doubt that they want the best sound, and picture, reproduction as possible, but if the staff they employ are not capable or believe what they are doing is good and are then telling the band this is it this is the best that can be done with the recordings we have, then maybe that is being exepted as fact. If you have a belief in what you are told you are less likely to question it. It's a sad fact but every other current re release or new release of old recordings by other artists seem to have less questionable production then anything with the Queen name on it. |
| Oscar J 04.01.2016 10:13 |
^Very good post. |
| Queenman!! 04.01.2016 10:45 |
Biggus Dickus wrote:==============================***JAN*** wrote: The thing that bothers me most is the damned BASS GUITAR. They turned it into some slushy-barely intelligible frequency blended in with the guitar...And I multiple-tested this release on several devices... PLUS, what about the drums? Is that compression? Or (even worst) are those triggers?!...By no means that's how RMT's recorded drums sounded in the '70s (ok, I wasn't there...But...), or is it just my impression? (same applies for the Rainbow release)Yeah it has to be extreme compression on the drums and it sounds awful. They let Greg Brooks taking part into the graphic process. We have all saw what great ....ahum... artwork Qp came with . Don't tell me he is also involved in the mixing process. LOL |
| Nitroboy 04.01.2016 15:31 |
*sigh* I've written this before, but I'll do it again. The cover artwork was created by this company link |
| cmsdrums 06.01.2016 09:44 |
Nitroboy wrote: *sigh* I've written this before, but I'll do it again. The cover artwork was created by this company link /Marmalade may have physically put it together, but the sleevenotes state that "art direction and design" is jointly by Greg Brooks. it is without a doubt the worst cover they have ever had, and almost makes Richard Gray's Montreal cover look like a masterpiece. |
| Oscar J 06.01.2016 10:22 |
As a design student, I think Rock Montreal has a refreshingly slick and clean looking cover. This on the other hand: link Bet that was done by the same guys that did the cover to Odeon. I really doubt the cover design was done by Marmalade London. They have such a huge list of prestigious clients and projects. |
