| lewisakkas 15.06.2019 17:54 |
I assume Spotify leaked it early so here it is. Admin feel free to remove if not allowed. |
| stevelondon20 15.06.2019 17:57 |
Cheers! Not on Spotify though. |
| stevelondon20 15.06.2019 17:58 |
Beautiful version. Great Vocal too. |
| lewisakkas 15.06.2019 17:58 |
It got removed quickly from Spotify |
| stevelondon20 15.06.2019 18:10 |
Ah ok. Great fine mate!! |
| stevelondon20 15.06.2019 18:11 |
Find even..... |
| SpaceGrey 15.06.2019 18:27 |
Beautiful song I always said that. |
| gooddrills 15.06.2019 18:36 |
Magic. DC mentioned there was a version of Born To Rock’n’Roll years ago that was very different from the Cliff version. I would kill to hear that |
| Wilki Amieva 15.06.2019 18:44 |
SPOILER ALERT! New beautiful piano take, but the SAME VOCAL as all the previously released versions. It seems hard to believe that it took Dave Clark "years to track down the original master tape of just Freddie singing” since the song was remixed from the multitrack master in 1992 and 2000, but it could be that the main vocal was bounced down with all the BVs in the original multi. |
| mrdata1968 15.06.2019 18:47 |
Good god this is great! |
| on my way up 15.06.2019 18:47 |
I will never find the right words to describe what hearing a Freddie Mercury vocal for the first time does to me... WHAT A SINGER! This is gorgeous. |
| on my way up 15.06.2019 18:55 |
on my way up wrote: I will never find the right words to describe what hearing a Freddie Mercury vocal for the first time does to me... WHAT A SINGER! This is gorgeous.Or a version that sounds new to me hahaha |
| al bundy 15.06.2019 18:57 |
Beautiful version! Defenitely stronger than the original recording. But something is missing, maybe some decent drums. |
| Freddie rey 15.06.2019 19:22 |
the first part is identical to the original version (the vocals) but the second part is quite different and incredible |
| argQ 15.06.2019 19:25 |
Beautiful version! This vocal take is new to my ears. Thanks for share! |
| Saint Jiub 15.06.2019 19:25 |
al bundy wrote: Beautiful version! Defenitely stronger than the original recording. But something is missing, maybe some decent drums.Or John on bass? However it is near perfect as naked. |
| Agr123456 15.06.2019 19:43 |
This nude version makes Freddie shine even more... |
| stevelondon20 15.06.2019 20:03 |
Makes me wonder what else is yet to surface! |
| hectormercury 15.06.2019 20:48 |
llegue a sacarla de spoty, muy buena cancion.. sea la version q sea..!! abrazo y gracias x aportar al mundo queenero |
| Golden Salmon 15.06.2019 21:18 |
Wonderful version. I don't care how similar or different it is to the original, it's worth it for the minimalism alone. I wish we got a few more like this, which could have made it to the Solo Collection. |
| RadekQ 15.06.2019 21:38 |
at 1:32 it starts to sound so much different to me... very, very nice... |
| princetom 15.06.2019 22:42 |
wonders me who is doing the piano. |
| BradMay 15.06.2019 22:52 |
Mike Moran probably? |
| scottmax 15.06.2019 23:26 |
Always rated this song, very powerful vocal |
| Mr Mercury 15.06.2019 23:37 |
Thanks for this. Freddie is in fine form here :) |
| Wilki Amieva 15.06.2019 23:58 |
Here's a straight rip from Spotify (44.1/16) into FLAC: link This is still lossy, but at least is not re-compressed. |
| people on streets 16.06.2019 00:21 |
Beautiful version |
| gooddrills 16.06.2019 00:24 |
It’s still on Spotify |
| Spidzzle 16.06.2019 02:52 |
In America it still is on Spotify. |
| Ouzy 16.06.2019 03:47 |
Thank you for this. Beautiful take :-) |
| Biggus Dickus 16.06.2019 05:17 |
Sounds like they've run this vocal track thru pitch correction, just like Let me in your heart again. What a shame. As if the original vocal track needed any of that but they seem to like Freddie sounding robotic. |
| Anton3283 16.06.2019 06:37 |
Biggus Dickus wrote: Sounds like they've run this vocal track thru pitch correction, just like Let me in your heart again. What a shame. As if the original vocal track needed any of that but they seem to like Freddie sounding robotic.Do not act like an expert, you are not good at it. Everything is fine in the track. |
| innuendo73 16.06.2019 07:32 |
I am hoping that if Dave Clarke contacted Freddie to record s few tracks for Time, and we have Time and In My Defence, are they some demos in a vault somewhere, yet to see the light of day. |
| stevelondon20 16.06.2019 07:35 |
Still not back on UK Spotify. |
| Cruella de Vil 16.06.2019 07:51 |
Interesting that absolutely nothing about this release us being promoted on the Official Queen or Freddie sites/Facebook/Tweets etc. There’s some heavy politics going down here. |
| JacquesDaniels 16.06.2019 07:54 |
Hmm. Sounds like there were at least two takes that Freddie performed of this song for the soundtrack. It's obviously the same take that was used for the majority of the final mix on the Time soundtrack album and the later reworking(s), but there's some Freddie stuff towards the end of this raw take that were cut from the final mix to make room for the choir parts, which I suspect were considered more appropriate for a musical-style recording. But there's also some things in the final mix that Freddie sings, like the ad libs during the final choruses, which are not present in this raw take. Of course it's possible that maybe only the ad libs were recorded after the choir bits had been added in. Very interesting. |
| pmatsynot 16.06.2019 08:28 |
Thank you for this |
| BETA215 16.06.2019 08:38 |
Biggus Dickus wrote: Sounds like they've run this vocal track thru pitch correction, just like Let me in your heart again. What a shame. As if the original vocal track needed any of that but they seem to like Freddie sounding robotic.Yep, I hate how the whole vocal take is run thru' AutoTune. As if Freddie ever needed that. And it only makes it sound bad... Also, I think there are some phrasings (if that's the way to say it in English) that are purely produced by studio modifications with algorithms like Melodyne or AutoTune instead of being sung by Freddie in the original take. Or at least that's the impression it gives me. It's double bad, to say the least... |
| BETA215 16.06.2019 08:45 |
al bundy wrote: Beautiful version! Defenitely stronger than the original recording. But something is missing, maybe some decent drums.I think what's missing is a pianist who's connected with Freddie's vocal performance. It isn't a bad piano take, but it lacks power in some parts where it's needed to follow Freddie's vocal intensity. ---------------- Besides some things which I didn't liked, it's VERY welcome to have something new or unheard from Freddie/Queen. The fact that I don't like some things, doesn't means it's utter shit. I still like to hear new stuff. Thanks to lewisakkas for sharing the MP3 and thank you very much Wilki for sharing a lossless rip (at least we don't get to lose more quality than the source). |
| jerome.wuzz 16.06.2019 09:17 |
Thanks for the share, very moving version. Without the big production, we can appreciate how much Freddie could bring nuances in melodies and mean every word, singing his heart out. |
| The Fairy King 16.06.2019 09:53 |
Gorgeous! Thanks for sharing! ">link Another terrible cover. -.- |
| MrFunster 16.06.2019 11:00 |
What a negativity. Great cover. Make a better one yourself ?? |
| stevelondon20 16.06.2019 13:04 |
I think that's a great Cover. |
| Tim June 16.06.2019 16:51 |
Thank you very much for sharing this beautiful version of Time. |
| Unniendo 16.06.2019 16:56 |
Thanks for share! |
| Hangman_96 16.06.2019 17:57 |
MrFunster wrote: What a negativity. Great cover. Make a better one yourself ??He's got a point there. The cover is a 10 minutes' worth of work in Paint or Photoshop at best. If you're skilful enough and can invest at least a little time in what you do, you'd come up with anything twice as good as this product. I'm gonna be slagged off for what I'm saying anyway. |
| Chinwonder2 16.06.2019 18:47 |
For anyone who didn’t get a chance to download it, here’s a rip straight from Spotify. :) link -Chin |
| Dim 16.06.2019 18:55 |
What lack of inspiration and taste. Kitsch cover! It is worst than Hungarian Rhaspody and Odeon. |
| Golden Salmon 16.06.2019 19:19 |
Quite honestly, that cover is one cheap hackjob. I bet anyone here with some cover making experience could do a more elaborate and pleasing one. |
| brians wig 16.06.2019 20:02 |
Why are you all banging on about how bad the "cover" is? It's an image designed to promote a digital download. It's not like we are ever going to be able to hold it in our hands like a 7" or CD single. |
| MrFunster 16.06.2019 20:06 |
I am curious to the other songs on the albums . On spotify it says it is about an album. An album never has one track to my opinion |
| MrFunster 16.06.2019 20:06 |
I am curious to the other songs on the albums . On spotify it says it is about an album. An album never has one track to my opinion |
| stevelondon20 16.06.2019 21:31 |
Stop fucking moaning about the Cover. On Spotify, a lot of Singles show as 1 Track Albums. |
| *goodco* 17.06.2019 02:40 |
Beautiful from whatever versions are around. And I appreciate not having the only dreadful part of the song, that being the 'Wayeeayeeeeyates' removed |
| The Fairy King 17.06.2019 06:18 |
stevelondon20 wrote: Stop fucking moaning about the Cover. On Spotify, a lot of Singles show as 1 Track Albums.It's Queen, of course i can moan about the cover! Their covers are/were iconic back in the day. But this? Look at it... It looks like one of those pieces of shit pics on Facebook made by some 55 year old female fan who just installed Photoshop 5 minutes ago on her pc and made this her cover photo with the caption "Freddy in Jeven RIP 1946-1991 HERMOSO." *Inhales violently* Ok, rant over. "Never make me boring!" FAILED. |
| stevelondon20 17.06.2019 06:22 |
Lol. Is it really that bad Fairy? |
| The Fairy King 17.06.2019 06:52 |
stevelondon20 wrote: Lol. Is it really that bad Fairy?Nah, there are worse things in the world...but this is definitely top 5 stuff. |
| dysan 17.06.2019 07:49 |
The problem these days is artwork needs to be seen predominantly on a tiny screen so this fits the bill nicely. Pretty much all classic Queen covers would end up like that if released today. |
| Queenman!! 17.06.2019 08:51 |
The Fairy King wrote:----------------------------------------------stevelondon20 wrote: Stop fucking moaning about the Cover. On Spotify, a lot of Singles show as 1 Track Albums.It's Queen, of course i can moan about the cover! Their covers are/were iconic back in the day. But this? Look at it... It looks like one of those pieces of shit pics on Facebook made by some 55 year old female fan who just installed Photoshop 5 minutes ago on her pc and made this her cover photo with the caption "Freddy in Jeven RIP 1946-1991 HERMOSO." *Inhales violently* Ok, rant over. "Never make me boring!" FAILED. Greg B. did a try with Paint pro again! This crap has to stop! |
| cmsdrums 17.06.2019 10:27 |
dysan wrote: The problem these days is artwork needs to be seen predominantly on a tiny screen so this fits the bill nicely. Pretty much all classic Queen covers would end up like that if released today.I don't think the technical composition is the issue here, more the 'creative' choice of Freddie gazing wistfully towards clouds, intimating heaven/death/time running out etc...all a bit too mawkish and page 1 of 'The Idiot's Guide To Literal Translations!' |
| cmsdrums 17.06.2019 10:35 |
Given the lack of mention of this from QPL or on QOL, I do wonder if Dave Clark has (as is his right with material he owns) forged ahead with this release and trod on the toes of an 'official' solo Freddie release sometime around his birthday in early September? This would possibly soften the 'wow' factor of anything that QPL might have us their sleeves, as the general public would just be saying 'oh, yet ANOTHER unheard Freddie Mercury track'?!! |
| stevelondon20 17.06.2019 11:05 |
Lol top 5 @fairy. You are right about the iconic covers in the past though mate. |
| . 17.06.2019 14:13 |
So it has now become acceptable to share something before it is even officially released? On top of that why not whinge about the artwork? Disgraceful. |
| The Real Wizard 17.06.2019 15:14 |
The Kurgan wrote: So it has now become acceptable to share something before it is even officially released? On top of that why not whinge about the artwork? Disgraceful.Agreed. The sense of entitlement is just outrageous. But the song is marvellous. Nice to hear it without the backing vocals. What a great singer he was. Who knows if Mercury knew how much "time" he had left when he laid down this vocal in early 86. |
| dudeofqueen 17.06.2019 15:45 |
The Fairy King, You're a fucking idiot. It's. A. Picture. On a cloud-based release, to boot. If it affects your listening experience or the quality of the song / vocal, I'd suggest you dig out those old "Spot The Dog" audio books - the covers on those are EXCELLENT in engaging the listener I believe. |
| Holly2003 17.06.2019 16:26 |
dudeofqueen wrote: ... those old "Spot The Dog" audio books - the covers on those are EXCELLENT in engaging the listener I believe.Where can I download said product for free? ;) |
| stevelondon20 17.06.2019 16:50 |
Haha!! |
| Peneck 17.06.2019 17:16 |
Thanks! |
| hitman1502 17.06.2019 21:56 |
Thanx for sharing. Sensationel. Very close to the offical Time track. On the high notes, you can hear Freddies heavy smokin. Lovely. |
| on my way up 18.06.2019 09:16 |
Does anyone know when exactly this song was recorded (what date?)? Thanks in advance for any useful reply! |
| matt z 19.06.2019 15:11 |
Of course it's a cash grab. Not an artistic statement 33 years late I'll probably purchase it to support whatever else DC has. Pseudo new song or not. |
| Chinwonder2 19.06.2019 17:41 |
|
| dysan 19.06.2019 18:25 |
Maybe this was the thing that GB was talking about the other week. Would make sense with the artwork lolz |
| katman 19.06.2019 23:06 |
I never warmed to the original, but I really like this 'version'. |
| BETA215 20.06.2019 08:55 |
Do this video works in your region? YT vid in Chinwonder2's comment appears as not available for me. link |
