| martin S 11.11.2017 17:10 |
Hi everybody, just finished watching the Queen Rock the World documentary and one thing buggers me since then. In the description of the BBC one can read that the documentary shows Queen creating and developing the songs for News of the World. On the other hand we can see a NOTW inner sleeve lying in front of Freddie on the mixing desk. You can also see Freddie waving with that inner sleeve when the band is rehearsing for the North America tour. How is it possible that an inner sleeve from a released album is lying around when the band is supposedly still working on that album? cheers |
| Wilki Amieva 11.11.2017 18:05 |
Actually, the footage is from the BBC Sessions at Maida Vale Studios. |
| NastyQueenie74 11.11.2017 18:05 |
The painting that was used for the album's cover was likely done before the album was completed |
| scollins 12.11.2017 00:39 |
frank kelly freas did the original |
| Martin Packer 12.11.2017 12:24 |
They might well have been inspecting the proofs for the cover and liner. |
| cmsdrums 12.11.2017 12:39 |
The studio footage is from the bbc sessions, after the album artwork was done, and not the actual album recording. |
| Nitroboy 12.11.2017 17:06 |
cmsdrums wrote: The studio footage is from the bbc sessions, after the album artwork was done, and not the actual album recording.And the footage of the band mixing We Are the Champions??? |
| mooghead 12.11.2017 19:11 |
"one thing buggers me since then" That may be the best thing someone has ever accidentally said ever!! |
| mooghead 12.11.2017 19:12 |
Martin Packer wrote: They might well have been inspecting the proofs for the cover and liner.Nah, why include lyrics From All Dead All Dead that weren't actually on the track? |
| martin S 12.11.2017 20:45 |
That may be the best thing someone has ever accidentally said ever!! Haha.....When non-native Speakers wanna be cool *g* |
| cmi 13.11.2017 08:50 |
Nitroboy wrote:B/W footage is from WATC recording/mixing session in Summer 1977 for the album.cmsdrums wrote: The studio footage is from the bbc sessions, after the album artwork was done, and not the actual album recording.And the footage of the band mixing We Are the Champions??? MMB colour footage is from Maida Vale studios on 28th October 1977 for BBC broadcast. 'It's Late' backing vocals recording colour footage needs to be analysed... Most probably from the album recording sessions. |
| cmsdrums 13.11.2017 09:54 |
Nitroboy wrote:Sorry - my bad - I meant any footage of Freddie with the NOTW vinyl inner sleeve was from the BBC stuff. Even more frustrating to learn that there might be footage of the actual album sessions that we won't get to seecmsdrums wrote: The studio footage is from the bbc sessions, after the album artwork was done, and not the actual album recording.And the footage of the band mixing We Are the Champions??? |
| IanR 13.11.2017 12:20 |
Rhys Thomas said this in the Reddit Q&A from many moons ago:
Q: How many tracks from the News of the World album were filmed by Bob Harris and his crew during the recording sessions for that album? A: My Melancholy Blues and bits of It's Late as well as Champions are all. These were filmed at the recording for the BBC Sessions rather than the actual record.Now, given the presence of Gary Langan in the WATC clips, I reckon this was indeed recording/mixing for the album. However, the studio is NOT Maida Vale #4, NOR is it Basing Street (aka Sarm). |
| cmi 13.11.2017 13:05 |
So it must be Wessex studios. |
| IanR 13.11.2017 13:11 |
Except it looks nothing like the studio in the STL video :/ |
| IanR 13.11.2017 13:11 |
I'm wondering if they were re-mixing WATC for the video (the so-called extra guitar mix)? |
| Vocal harmony 13.11.2017 13:24 |
^^^ could be. Or could it be a day's filming in a studio just for documentary footage that they needed to complete the recording of the album scenes at the time. So not a genuine recording or mixing session, just a staged event. |
| Sebastian 13.11.2017 13:28 |
Vocal harmony wrote: ^^^ could be. Or could it be a day's filming in a studio just for documentary footage that they needed to complete the recording of the album scenes at the time. So not a genuine recording or mixing session, just a staged event.Bingo! |
| Togg 14.11.2017 10:25 |
Is that what we actually think? seems a bit like hard work doing it all again just for the doc, if the gear was in the studio at the time maybe, but they wouldnt bother bringing it all back again surely? I would think it's genuine? it could have been any of the tracks that they were working on at the time it just happened to be that one, at the time they would have had no idea it was going to turn out to be one of the biggest Queen hits. Do we know it was staged or was that just spectulation? |
| Sebastian 14.11.2017 13:00 |
Togg wrote: seems a bit like hard work doing it all again just for the doc,They were hard working lads after all. Togg wrote: if the gear was in the studio at the time maybe, but they wouldnt bother bringing it all back again surely?Why not? They'd been moving gear around all the time for years anyway. Moreover, they could've just taken the drum set, Brian's guitar and John's bass and that was it. It would've been the same investment as going to a live gig. Most of the gear, including the piano, would be what was housed in the studio. Togg wrote: I would think it's genuine?Wishful thinking. Togg wrote: Do we know it was staged or was that just spectulation?Do we know it was genuine or was that just speculation? |
| Vocal harmony 14.11.2017 14:33 |
The BBC were filming the documentary. They would have been working to time and financial constraints. Would they have had a crew on call, through out the time spent in the studio just to capture certain moments. The Sheperton rehearsals are genuine, the film crew would have had a block of time to film what they needed. The various interviews, such as Freddie's would have been done in a day or less. In the case of John maybe an hour on the way to Sheperton, or less. The gigs in the states maybe a week or less for the film crew. The studio would have been different, from day to day, a lot of playing one day more talking the next. Several days on one thing. It would be a lot of work for the film crew with possibly not much return. The answer would be to hire a studio for a day and stage a days work. It may even have been on the last days recording or mixing. No we don't know for certain but everyone is asking is it the album sessions or Maida Vale sessions. I believe that this is a possibility alternative. |
| Sebastian 14.11.2017 18:28 |
Vocal harmony wrote: No we don't know for certain but everyone is asking is it the album sessions or Maida Vale sessions. I believe that this is a possibility alternative.In fact, it's quite a realistic and likely possibility. |
| Thrill Yeti 14.11.2017 19:37 |
If it's just a 'staged event', the dialogue between Freddie and the engineer is awfully realistic. Fred seems really quite creatively engaged to suggest he's doing nothing of any consequence, doesn't he? |
| ggo1 15.11.2017 06:31 |
I have to believe they are the BBC sessions. If they are staged they are too bloody natural, fair to say acting is not something that came naturally to any of them. The mixing desk stuff without the inner sleeve could have been from anytime, but the bits with the inner sleeve would have to be after the album's running order was confirmed but not necessarily after the record was mixed and pressed. Artwork and sleeves were printed before the vinyl was pressed so that there would be something to put the vinyl into. That's just the way the manufacturing process used to work. The printers made the sleeves then delivered them to the pressing plant ready for the fresh vinyl. You wouldn't press the vinyl without a sleeve to put it in. |
| Thrill Yeti 15.11.2017 11:36 |
I should also point out, at 9:57 into the documentary, we have the quote from Freddie which appeared at the end of the raw mix of WATC ("That was a lovely feel. That's exactly how it should be"). To me it seems likely, therefore, that the footage is indeed of the recording session, as the raw mix is presumably made up of stuff from those original sessions. It seems less likely that whoever put together the Raw Mix went into the archives of either a staged event or an unused BBC recording of WATC and stole a quote from Fred to stick on the end of a track meant to be from the original recording sessions. |
| Togg 15.11.2017 12:07 |
Sebastian wrote:I can see no reason for doing that? Bob Harris followed them for months why couldn't the cameras be there at the right time it was done while they were working on it so??Togg wrote: seems a bit like hard work doing it all again just for the doc,They were hard working lads after all.Togg wrote: if the gear was in the studio at the time maybe, but they wouldnt bother bringing it all back again surely?Why not? They'd been moving gear around all the time for years anyway. Moreover, they could've just taken the drum set, Brian's guitar and John's bass and that was it. It would've been the same investment as going to a live gig. Most of the gear, including the piano, would be what was housed in the studio.Togg wrote: I would think it's genuine?Wishful thinking.Togg wrote: Do we know it was staged or was that just spectulation?Do we know it was genuine or was that just speculation? I think the take we saw was either the backing track they would play to afterwards individually or was the take they used for guitar. You can hear piano on the drum takes from what i've heard online, but there no way you could have recorded the kit like that without massive spill from the guitar. What reason do you have for thinking that? As always the simplest answer is usually the correct one,and in this case the simplest answer is they filmed them working... |
| Togg 15.11.2017 12:14 |
Vocal harmony wrote: |
| Sebastian 15.11.2017 15:37 |
Togg wrote: I can see no reason for doing that?These things do not depend on whether you (or I, or anyone for that matter) can or cannot see a reason for doing them. They just are, or aren't. Togg wrote: Bob Harris followed them for months why couldn't the cameras be there at the right time it was done while they were working on it so??Of course they could, but they also could've been there while they were staging a re-creation after the fact. Togg wrote: I think the take we saw was either the backing track they would play to afterwards individually or was the take they used for guitar.They could've easily mimed to an already existing backing track. Togg wrote: What reason do you have for thinking that?It wouldn't be the first or last time such a thing is staged (in general ... I'm not talking about Queen particularly), it was suspicious not to see Mike doing the mix with them, etc., etc. Togg wrote: As always the simplest answer is usually the correct oneMake up your mind: 'always' or 'usually'? Togg wrote: in this case the simplest answer is they filmed them working...Sure: they could've filmed them while working on staging a recreation of what their (not filmed) recording sessions had been like. For the record, I'm not saying I'm absolutely positively one-hundred-percent certain it's staged, I'm just saying it wouldn't surprise me if it were and, if I were to wager on it, I'd say (based on my completely unqualified perspective) it's more likely to have been staged. Whether they would admit it or not is obviously another story... They're yet to acknowledge the 'Live Killers' overdubs, for instance. |
| Chopin1995 16.11.2017 10:41 |
I don't know if this can help but I'm just reading DOOL documentary notes and let me quote this - "We Are The Champions 2011: In 1977, cameras filmed Queen recording a new version of the song for the promo video. This video shows the band performing and mixing this unreleased version in two live takes. An instrumental version of this closed Part One of ‘Days of our Lives’. Here for the first time the video can be seen in its entirety." Taken from - link |
| Sebastian 16.11.2017 14:13 |
Interesting indeed. Thanks for the input. Perhaps, and this is just guesswork, they'd initially considered shooting a video similar to the 'Somebody to Love' one, then they probably thought it'd be better to have another version of the song for the single and/or video, and then they scrapped the idea and thought of filming it with a crowd and simply miming to the album version. |
| aristide1 16.11.2017 17:41 |
Sebastian, contrary to your expectations, these endless phrase by phrase pseudo-informed and pseudo-logical comments are boring beyond imagination. |
| Sebastian 16.11.2017 17:59 |
Don't read them, then. Simple as that. |
| Thrill Yeti 16.11.2017 18:14 |
The Top of the pops version does have some different guitar bits, so maybe that's what they were doing? As Top of the Pops is a BBC programme, might also explain why this session has been described as a 'BBC' one, even though there is no conventional BBC WATC. |
| Sebastian 17.11.2017 04:27 |
Good point. |
| cmi 17.11.2017 06:57 |
As these guitar bits appeared in 'raw sessions' mix they most probably from actual recording of the song for the album. Hopefully we'll find some recording details in the book inside the box set. |
| dysan 17.11.2017 08:32 |
The sleeve question: I'd also point out that it wasn't out of the question back then that the artwork was completed ahead of the recording - complete with tracklisting. I know of a few examples of this, including Sparks (1976) and Toyah. I'd say it's unlikely in this case, but possible. I can't imagine the strain put on the band in this scenario! |
| Holly2003 19.11.2017 18:55 |
C&P from another thread: This is what Rhys Thomas said in that 2012 Q&A on reddit (about the Harrris documentary and the 77 NOTW tour): "My Melancholy Blues and bits of It's Late as well as Champions are all. These were filmed at the recording for the BBC Sessions rather than the actual record." |
| Togg 20.11.2017 09:23 |
That's interesting and I guess seals it |
| Togg 20.11.2017 12:22 |
It must have been a total ball ache having to re-do all your bloody work just for the BBC, I'm amazing artists had the time given they were touring back then immediately the recording finished. Seb's comment about Mike not being there was the olny thing that made me wonder if it was staged, but it's much more convincing as a re-recording, it all seemed too 'real' to be staged for the cameras and too much effort for a BBC doc. Nevertheless it's a great peice of film actually capturing some magic moments of them in the studio |
| IanR 20.11.2017 12:23 |
Except it doesn't since WATC was recorded in a different studio (not Madia Vale #4), on a different day with a different producer (Gary Langan / Jeff Griffin). |
| Sebastian 20.11.2017 12:52 |
Togg wrote: It must have been a total ball ache having to re-do all your bloody work just for the BBC, I'm amazing artists had the time given they were touring back then immediately the recording finished.Not really. Miming is not that hard. It would've taken them an evening, if that. Just a day in the office. The first time they recorded the song it may have taken them weeks as they discussed every detail, learnt the parts they were coming up with, experimented with ideas - some of which were discarded - and generally tidied it up. But for a recreation, it's much, much, much easier: they can mime to an already existing backing track (that'd take them less than ten minutes for a couple of takes), mime the backing vocals, spend some minutes in the control room discussing mixing ideas. It's like doing a crossword puzzle when you already know the answers. Bits of the 'One Vision' video may have been taken from the actual recording of the song, but the majority of it is just staged (the promo film for the song, I mean, not the Magic Years / GVHII bit). For 'Somebody to Love', all of it is staged - they mimed to what they'd already recorded days or weeks prior. It's happened to other bands as well: 'Who Are You' is chiefly re-recorded (again, not a massive effort since they'd done it before and already knew the song) but the bass and synth are from the original cut, they're just miming to them; 'I Can't Tell You Why' is also a recreation (Glenn is even miming to a different instrument to the one he recorded); the director of Pink Floyd's 'Live at Pompeii' wanted footage of them recording in the studio but they'd already finished 'Dark Side' by that point, so what they did was book EMI (Abbey Road), go in there and pretend they were adding overdubs as well as have another go at some mixes and whatnot. Again, not a massive amount of work considering they knew very well what they were doing. Creating takes time, re-creating... not so much. |
| cmsdrums 21.11.2017 09:51 |
Official announcement: Claim A Corrected 'News Of The World' Replica 'Special Press Edition' Newspaper Due to an unforeseen print error, a small number of the 'News Of The World Anniversary Edition' box sets were shipped with a misprinted replica 1977 'Special Press Edition' newspaper inside. If your copy is affected and you would like to claim a free corrected replacement newspaper, please fill in your details using the form below, including proof of purchase and a photo of the inside pages of your replica 1977 newspaper, and we will post one out to you as soon as possible. Apologies for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding and patience. Go to link to claim a free corrected replacement newspaper. Your request for a corrected replica 1977 newspaper must be submitted by May 17th 2018. If you have any questions please email claim@notw40.com. #NOTW40 link |
| dysan 21.11.2017 10:13 |
Can someone upload loads of different photos of their set from different angles and pictures of their receipt so we can all claim one? Ta. |
| dysan 21.11.2017 10:15 |
Also - XTC had a documentary about recording a song called Towers Of London at The Manor studios. For years fans were confused by what they did in the film as no other versions of the track emerged. They assumed it was staged. Then lo and behold, the version appeared on a boxset - totally rerecorded! |
| Togg 22.11.2017 12:09 |
Sebastian wrote:Togg wrote: It must have been a total ball ache having to re-do all your bloody work just for the BBC, I'm amazing artists had the time given they were touring back then immediately the recording finished.Not really. Miming is not that hard. It would've taken them an evening, if that. Just a day in the office. |
| Sebastian 22.11.2017 13:39 |
You seem to keep misunderstanding my point... they were re-creating the VISUALS so there'd be footage of them PRETENDING to be recording what they'd ALREADY tracked. They did NOT need the final product to sound polished and as close to the released version, because they'd simply bring the audio from the released version (or a version with some minor mixing changes or a couple of overdubs which would indeed take an evening). There are quite a few different aspects which are being discussed here: - Does the 'Champions' footage come from the actual recording/mixing process of the version of the song we all know? - Is it possible for a band to re-record a song in one day? - Is it possible for a band to re-create (for film) and act like they're recording when they're actually not? All of those are different matters and, again, I'm not saying the 'Champions' recording video is definitely staged, I'm just saying it wouldn't surprise me if it were, and indeed it's not a process that would take them weeks to do. If the audio comes from an already existing source (in this case, the already existing and already mixed recording), then it is indeed just walk in, play and go. They don't need to spend days testing the mic positions on the drums because they're not gonna use those tracks at all. They'll only use the visuals and sync them with the already existing mix (or a slight variation of it, which could've indeed taken them an evening). |
| dysan 22.11.2017 15:59 |
Wouldn't it be funny if it all turned out to be footage from them recording it for ANATO |
| Sebastian 23.11.2017 01:46 |
Well, that'd be a possibility as well. |
| Togg 23.11.2017 08:52 |
We've already established that this is footage from the BBC sessions "This is what Rhys Thomas said in that 2012 Q&A on reddit (about the Harrris documentary and the 77 NOTW tour): "My Melancholy Blues and bits of It's Late as well as Champions are all. These were filmed at the recording for the BBC Sessions rather than the actual record." So they weren't doing visuals, they were working on the alternative version for those sessions. Or am I missing something here? There are mics on the kit and amps, they are re-doing the tracks, now the clips we see are mainly early run throughs in the case of the four playing together but that is what is being filmed So what I'm saying is firstly they would have to re-record everything pretty much from scratch, as it was for a 'new' recording specifically for the BBC, My second aside/point was that given the unions required another version played on shows like Top Of The Pops it must have been a all ache having to do that after you've already finished what you feel to be the definative version, often it was simply a re-mix but nevertheless a pain in the arse. |
| Biggus Dickus 23.11.2017 11:49 |
There is footage from two different studios. If all the material was from the BBC sessions, why would they have used two different studios? |
| Sebastian 23.11.2017 13:02 |
Togg wrote: So they weren't doing visuals, they were working on the alternative version for those sessions.On 'It's Late' and 'Melancholy Blues' they could be working on alternative versions, on 'Champions' they could've been doing that as well... or they could've been staging an acted recreation of the recordings for the doco, similar to what Pink Floyd had done for the studio segment of the Pompeii film. Togg wrote: So they weren't doing visuals, they were working on the alternative version for those sessions. Or am I missing something here? There are mics on the kit and amps, they are re-doing the tracksNot necessarily. They may have been doing that, or they may have been staging the 'Champions' bit. Not that difficult, really. Togg wrote: So what I'm saying is firstly they would have to re-record everything pretty much from scratch, as it was for a 'new' recording specifically for the BBCNo. They *could* do that if they wanted to (and in some cases they probably did) but they also could've used pre-existing backing tracks and added a few overdubs and that was it. That's what they'd done for some earlier BBC sessions ('Doing All Right' pretty much preserves the backing track but has different overdubs, 'My Fairy King' is chiefly a re-mix of the Trident version). Togg wrote: often it was simply a re-mix but nevertheless a pain in the arse.Even if that were the case, that wouldn't preclude them from being able to stage (either parts of or all of) the studio footage. That's my point. |
| Togg 23.11.2017 16:19 |
Okay I grant you that they could simply have jumped on the kit and guitar to give the crew something is certainly possible, sure anything's possible, Kenndy could have been shot from the Grassy Knowl... But I feel the more likely senario is the cameras caught the process of them compiling the alternate versions with the original tapes as both a guide, and to drop in parts that were too time consuming to re-do (Brians multiple guitar parts for one) And what we see is a mixture of that process, the footage of them all playing is clearly a run through and Freddie saying "That's a lovely feel, exactly as it should be" (or whatever he says,) is clearly a natural commment giving direction which is not something he'd say if it were just for the cameras. And the nail in the coffin for me is that is what he says at the end of the 'Alternate version' just released.... so clearly the tapes were running at that point... |
| dysan 23.11.2017 16:23 |
As Sebastian says, if it's 2 studios and has been confirmed to be the BBC session - that in a way backs up what I've been saying for years that the 77 BBC session was primarily done at Wessex. |
| Sebastian 23.11.2017 17:26 |
Togg wrote: Okay I grant you that they could simply have jumped on the kit and guitar to give the crew somethingThat's my point. Now, whether they actually did that or not is open to debate and mostly I agree with you there. Togg wrote: Freddie saying "That's a lovely feel, exactly as it should be" (or whatever he says,) is clearly a natural commment giving direction which is not something he'd say if it were just for the cameras.Why not? Would the universe implode if he uttered those words in front of a camera? Again, I'm not saying that part is staged, I'm just saying it easily could be and I wouldn't be surprised either way. |
| Biggus Dickus 23.11.2017 19:26 |
That "That's a lovely feel, exactly as it should be" comment seemed to me that it was just added on top of the footage, not being a part of the original audio. |
| Togg 24.11.2017 09:04 |
It's definately not added to the video footage, whether or not they slipped it on the end of the 'alternate version' is I guess open to debate, but really, why bother? it didn't need it and seems like just more hassle to try to make something seem real, when it clearly is a real alternate version anyway. i take your points Seb, sure yes all things are possible, I feel this video seems much more natural that the One Vision footage, with that, I personally feel the Roger and snare beats part are real, the snippet of Brian playing is real, and the rest done for the film crew. I'm correct in thinking the Champions track didn't end up on a BBC sessions recording no? I wonder why? |
| Chopin1995 24.11.2017 12:38 |
Biggus Dickus wrote: That "That's a lovely feel, exactly as it should be" comment seemed to me that it was just added on top of the footage, not being a part of the original audio.Yeah, I also think it was added. What's more after the last chord (just before this comment) Freddie plays some passage but it looks different to what he plays on the video. It sounds like he plays F minor arpeggiated chords but it looks like he plays something completely different on the video. I'm talking about BBC4 version (9:55), I don't know if DVD version is the same at this moment. |
| Biggus Dickus 24.11.2017 12:57 |
Chopin1995 wrote:Exactly. His playing doesn't match the audio. And if you look carefully, Freddie's mouth isn't even moving in sync with the 'lovely feel' comment.Biggus Dickus wrote: That "That's a lovely feel, exactly as it should be" comment seemed to me that it was just added on top of the footage, not being a part of the original audio.Yeah, I also think it was added. What's more after the last chord (just before this comment) Freddie plays some passage but it looks different to what he plays on the video. It sounds like he plays F minor arpeggiated chords but it looks like he plays something completely different on the video. I'm talking about BBC4 version (9:55), I don't know if DVD version is the same at this moment. |
| Chopin1995 24.11.2017 13:23 |
Biggus Dickus wrote:And when he is saying "that's" he just smiles on the video.Chopin1995 wrote:Exactly. His playing doesn't match the audio. And if you look carefully, Freddie's mouth isn't even moving in sync with the 'lovely feel' comment.Biggus Dickus wrote: That "That's a lovely feel, exactly as it should be" comment seemed to me that it was just added on top of the footage, not being a part of the original audio.Yeah, I also think it was added. What's more after the last chord (just before this comment) Freddie plays some passage but it looks different to what he plays on the video. It sounds like he plays F minor arpeggiated chords but it looks like he plays something completely different on the video. I'm talking about BBC4 version (9:55), I don't know if DVD version is the same at this moment. |
| MercurialFreddie 26.11.2017 20:55 |
Chopin1995 wrote:It is strange as when you look closely, the passage starts but Freddie's hands are not moving. In the 2011 docu, the bit "that's a lovely feel" is not there at all. Either something happened to the original audio track or this is QPL meddling with everything because they feel it's their right to do.Biggus Dickus wrote:And when he is saying "that's" he just smiles on the video.Chopin1995 wrote:Exactly. His playing doesn't match the audio. And if you look carefully, Freddie's mouth isn't even moving in sync with the 'lovely feel' comment.Biggus Dickus wrote: That "That's a lovely feel, exactly as it should be" comment seemed to me that it was just added on top of the footage, not being a part of the original audio.Yeah, I also think it was added. What's more after the last chord (just before this comment) Freddie plays some passage but it looks different to what he plays on the video. It sounds like he plays F minor arpeggiated chords but it looks like he plays something completely different on the video. I'm talking about BBC4 version (9:55), I don't know if DVD version is the same at this moment. |
| MercurialFreddie 26.11.2017 20:56 |
What is more, now that we've seen the best looking bits from the documentary (HD and in colour)... would this mean that also "Champions" recording (staged) session was also primarily shot in colour but something happened to the tapes and they used the safety copy ? |
| Biggus Dickus 27.11.2017 04:31 |
^^ It's interesting that some of the footage that's b/w in the new documentary was in colour in Days Of Our Lives documentary. For example the footage of a Queen crew member walking towards the stage wearing a Queen jacket. That footage was in colour on DOOL but in b/w on the NOTW doc. |
| Chopin1995 27.11.2017 11:21 |
Is is because The American Dream "new" documantary is actually 1977 version which was finished back then but simply not released until this year, and by 2011 they just found better sources and quality of some footage? |
| The Real Wizard 28.11.2017 05:42 |
Chopin1995 wrote: Is is because The American Dream "new" documantary is actually 1977 version which was finished back then but simply not released until this year, and by 2011 they just found better sources and quality of some footage?As far as I know it was completed recently. It wouldn't be the first time they used imperfect footage for an official release or documentary. Maybe it just degraded over the last few years, and they had to use a safety b/w copy? |
| Togg 28.11.2017 09:03 |
Chopin1995 wrote:That is nonesense, you can't see his face as he turns away from the camera, I've watched it a dozen times after reading that and you can't see his mouth at allBiggus Dickus wrote:And when he is saying "that's" he just smiles on the video.Chopin1995 wrote:Exactly. His playing doesn't match the audio. And if you look carefully, Freddie's mouth isn't even moving in sync with the 'lovely feel' comment.Biggus Dickus wrote: That "That's a lovely feel, exactly as it should be" comment seemed to me that it was just added on top of the footage, not being a part of the original audio.Yeah, I also think it was added. What's more after the last chord (just before this comment) Freddie plays some passage but it looks different to what he plays on the video. It sounds like he plays F minor arpeggiated chords but it looks like he plays something completely different on the video. I'm talking about BBC4 version (9:55), I don't know if DVD version is the same at this moment. |
| Sebastian 28.11.2017 13:18 |
Togg wrote: I've watched it a dozen times after reading that and you can't see his mouth at allTranslation: there's no proof the audio comes from that particular moment. |
| Biggus Dickus 28.11.2017 17:33 |
I guess all people just aren't equally observant. |
| Togg 29.11.2017 09:05 |
Sebastian wrote:No... but making statements such as that equally doesn't help, and is misleading, you can't see his mouth move, his head is facing the opposite direction and you can't see if he is speaking at all, you can't even see his jaw line accurately...Togg wrote: I've watched it a dozen times after reading that and you can't see his mouth at allTranslation: there's no proof the audio comes from that particular moment. It's a bit of an ellaborate conspiracy if you are suggesting they found the exact moment he turns away to insert a comment to try to make it look like a proper take, why the hell would you go to all that trouble? They had the cooment on tape clearly so he said it at some point, yes? so obviously the taped comment comes from a point at which they were doing an early run through of 'something' It seems to me to be a lot of hard work to gig it out and place it there for no good reason, the clip holds up perfectly well without it. So no it doesn't 'prove' anything, but then again we don't have definitive proof of much to do with Freddie if you are going to start stating footage is faked... Again, it's not proof, but equally there's no proof he didn't say it there and then, because his mouth is not visable |
| Togg 29.11.2017 09:25 |
Biggus Dickus wrote: I guess all people just aren't equally observant.Please then show me a screen shot or still photograph of the moment you can see his mouth 'smiling'....? |
| Biggus Dickus 29.11.2017 10:28 |
Right after the little run he does on his right hand on the keys he hits the keys again and you can see him smile and "talk" at the same time right before he does that. That piano run doesn't match the audio plus after the run you can see him hit the keys again with his hand but there's no sound of the keys at all. No sound of piano at that point because the fake added talk line is over the footage at that point. |
| Togg 29.11.2017 11:24 |
|
| Togg 29.11.2017 11:28 |
|
| Togg 29.11.2017 11:32 |
This is the exact moment the comment starts, he then turns fully away from the camera until just before the end of his sentence, at no point can you see his mouth or jaw, partly due to the studio light to the right of him and partly due to his face turned the wrong way... there is NO smile visable, show me the shot of him smiling???? As for the piano, I can't see any point where his keys are not making a sound, maybe your audio needs adjusting, there's faint key noise all along the run, and the hand shapes all seem fine to me (however I'm not much of a keyboard player) |
| Biggus Dickus 29.11.2017 12:23 |
This is the exact point he smiles as you can see his upper teeth. This is also the point when he hits the keys without making a sound. Sure the picture quality isn't the best, but it's much more visible when watching the video. If you can't see that the video doesn't match the audio when he plays the piano run and hits the keyboards without a sound after that, then I'm not surprised you can't see him smiling either. What explanation is there that the audio isn't on sync during these bits, when it's perfectly in sync when they play the song? The only explanation I can think of is that the audio isn't the same that it was during the actual performance of the song. This is only my opinion, if you don't agree with me that's just fine. |
| Biggus Dickus 29.11.2017 12:41 |
Oh another observation. You've got exactly the same 'lovely feel'-comment by Freddie at the end of WATC raw version, yet the piano bits he plays in that after the song are completely different to the bits he plays at the documentary after the song. How is this possible? Wasn't it said that the WATC-footage was filmed during the BBC session? How could two different session have exactly the same comment by Freddie? It's so fishy it ranks. |
| Chopin1995 29.11.2017 13:34 |
Biggus Dickus wrote: Oh another observation. You've got exactly the same 'lovely feel'-comment by Freddie at the end of WATC raw version, yet the piano bits he plays in that after the song are completely different to the bits he plays at the documentary after the song. How is this possible? Wasn't it said that the WATC-footage was filmed during the BBC session? How could two different session have exactly the same comment by Freddie? It's so fishy it ranks.Exactly! Two different renditions but the comment is exactly the same at the documentary and in the Raw Sessions CD. |
| Chopin1995 29.11.2017 13:42 |
Togg wrote: As for the piano, I can't see any point where his keys are not making a sound, maybe your audio needs adjusting, there's faint key noise all along the run, and the hand shapes all seem fine to me (however I'm not much of a keyboard player)I play the piano more than 10 years (about half of my life), and believe me, Freddie plays completely different thing on the video than what we hear. If you want more details just read my post from 24 Nov 17, 12:38. |
| Togg 29.11.2017 14:43 |
|
| Togg 29.11.2017 14:54 |
For some reason I can't post a pic and write in the same post today... Anyway, I have to take issue with the 'smile' cleaning it up and blowing it up, I 100% disagree, the light could be something in the background or a flare on the side of his face, teeth...naaa, sorry don't buy it at all, but on the 100 to 1 shot it is his teeth, there no possible way you can look at that and say he's smiling.... that is just rubbish, you simply can't tell what he's doing from this shot Regarding the RAW trake, sure I agree it's a different ending, but wait, the RAW track is made up of dozens of elements, guitar solos, extra vocals, it's a finished track, so they played it together 2-10 times maybe and cobbled together all the parts, when done they probably had four or five different endings that weren't used, nothing strange there, the RAW has Rogers tom being struck at the end as well, that's not on the video, but for whatever reason someone decided to keep the comments at the end of one of the takes, I don't see why this proves anything other than they did multiple takes which you can tell by listening to it anyway, unless there are 8 Brian May's in there. I see what you're saying, but I don't agree, I see a multi track tape having been mixed down to 1/4 inch for the alternate version on the RAW disc, and one single take on the video, nothing more sinister than that. |
| Sebastian 29.11.2017 17:02 |
But the conclusion is: the audio and video sources could easily be different and come from different sessions (one of which may not have been filmed), and loads of people would still fall for it. They could've also be pretending to have been mixing it for the first time, for the cameras to capture a recreation and make the doco more appealing. Just like Pink Floyd did. |
| popy 30.11.2017 05:00 |
Is not just at the end of the song that what you hear is different from what's being played. Throughout the video there are parts where you see Freddie playing one thing and the audio doesn't match. |
| Togg 30.11.2017 09:59 |
"But the conclusion is: the audio and video sources could easily be different and come from different sessions (one of which may not have been filmed), and loads of people would still fall for it. They could've also be pretending to have been mixing it for the first time, for the cameras to capture a recreation and make the doco more appealing. Just like Pink Floyd did." Agreed to a point, clearly what they are playing is in there, you can hear elements different to the final (official version) of what both Roger and Brian are doing that you can see them play, but certainly it may have been fiddled with in places. But, you like to deal in facts Seb, and the fact is this is only speculation, which makes for an interesting debate but doesn't hold water unless it can be proved, The RAW version is a multitrack mix, made up of dozens of takes and snippets as you'd expect, the video is basically one take, with the 'possibility' that a few moments have been cleaned up, I am confident that elements of what you see has ended up on the RAW mix |
| Chopin1995 30.11.2017 13:15 |
Togg wrote: For some reason I can't post a pic and write in the same post today... Anyway, I have to take issue with the 'smile' cleaning it up and blowing it up, I 100% disagree, the light could be something in the background or a flare on the side of his face, teeth...naaa, sorry don't buy it at all, but on the 100 to 1 shot it is his teeth, there no possible way you can look at that and say he's smiling.... that is just rubbish, you simply can't tell what he's doing from this shotI'm not 100% sure what he is doing at this moment but I still think that what we see is different to what we hear. It's easier to notice this while watching the video rather than from one screenshot. Like I said Freddie's piano playing is different, and with this I'm as sure as it can get, becuase I just see this. I belive that the rest of this segment (the 'infamous' comment) is different as well. Beginning from the last piano passage audio is from the other recording. This is my theory which is different to yours. I respect your theory so disagreement is the only solution here and let's leave it as it is. Togg wrote: Regarding the RAW trake, sure I agree it's a different ending, but wait, the RAW track is made up of dozens of elements, guitar solos, extra vocals, it's a finished track, so they played it together 2-10 times maybe and cobbled together all the parts, when done they probably had four or five different endings that weren't used, nothing strange there, the RAW has Rogers tom being struck at the end as well, that's not on the video, but for whatever reason someone decided to keep the comments at the end of one of the takes, I don't see why this proves anything other than they did multiple takes which you can tell by listening to it anyway, unless there are 8 Brian May's in there.Here on the other hand, I can agree. |
| Sebastian 30.11.2017 14:33 |
Togg wrote: the fact is this is only speculationThe same can be said about nearly everything. It is only speculation that I'm writing these lines and that some people are reading them - how can we prove we're not hallucinating? The point is, going back to the start of this discussion, Vocal Harmony used the modal verb 'could,' clearly making the distinction between a possibility and a certainty. Let's go to the next messages (omitting those simply saying things like 'Bingo' or 'I agree'): - No we don't know for certain but everyone is asking is it the album sessions or Maida Vale sessions. I believe that this is a possibility alternative. - In fact, it's quite a realistic and likely possibility. - They could've easily mimed to an already existing backing track. - For the record, I'm not saying I'm absolutely positively one-hundred-percent certain it's staged, I'm just saying it wouldn't surprise me if it were and, if I were to wager on it, I'd say (based on my completely unqualified perspective) it's more likely to have been staged. |
| Togg 01.12.2017 09:03 |
"- No we don't know for certain but everyone is asking is it the album sessions or Maida Vale sessions. I believe that this is a possibility alternative." Why do you keep bye-passing what Rhys said is was? I thought we had established when this was done? "We've already established that this is footage from the BBC sessions "This is what Rhys Thomas said in that 2012 Q&A on reddit (about the Harrris documentary and the 77 NOTW tour):" |
| Biggus Dickus 05.12.2017 15:53 |
I just watched the DVD-version and they've cut the bit of Freddie saying the bit about lovely feel we have been discussing. Also some of the stuff that was on the BBC-version isn't on this official release. The question/answers about how their solo albums would be wasn't included. It's really annoying that they didn't include all the material that was on the BBC-version to this DVD-version. They did this with The Great Pretender documentary as well. There were little bits missing and stuff that wasn't included between all of the versions of that documentary. Hell, even the version they showed in Finnish TV had bits that neither the official version or the BBC-version had. It's ridiculous. I also noticed that they somehow managed to hide Freddie's voice breaking during Champions filmed in Houston, when he sings 'I ain't gonna LOSE'. Maybe they have the multitracks after all? |
| RS_Protos 05.12.2017 16:34 |
Wow, what is the point of doing that? |
| Togg 07.12.2017 09:37 |
I don't know whey they cut stuff out? surely it would have been better to include it all and add new parts? I thought maybe it was cut to fit into a run time, but seems unlikely given it was for a DVD |