QueenZone discussion #1580196

Rogers Untidy Bottom wrote:[color=blue] Well, well, well. How times change. How what was ridiculed a few years ago is now accepted as the truth. Back in Summer 2004, I joined the Queenzone for about a couple of weeks. How things were different back then. I was based in London back then - at the hub of the "action". Just for the records - I was ridiculed for saying the "Seven Seas of Rhye" lasted originally around 4 minutes but was then cut back. Lo and behold - one of the two 4 minute versions finally appears on Ebay - link. For the records, the version of the song was not the "wrong backing track" - it was but it wasn't, it's hard to explain. I have been out of the loop for so long now that I don't know if a certain person still has the other 4-minute version (I heard it on a studio tape - don't know if an acetate version of it was made). Queen II did originally have 13 songs. Their existence has now been confirmed in books despite the ridicule the suggestions attracted at the time. I was told that "Deep Ridge" (originally meant to segue between White Queen and SDOD and was very Led Zep) was left off because the continuity of the sound wasn't quite right (in their minds). I thought it sounded great and lyrically, it sort of tied the album sides together making the concept stronger. It's hard to explain - sorry but been a few years since I heard the song now. "Surrender To The City" lasted about 3 minutes from memory and was quite poppy. For some reason, unknown to me, only the first bit of it (heavily reworked though) was included on the album segueing directly into FHLI. That section became part of TMOFTBQ. When you think it about, despite that song's many different mood changes, have you never thought that the last 30 seconds didn't quite make sense in the soundscape of that song? The reason for the non-appearance of the box sets is two-fold and I find the reasons unfortunate, especially for the fans who have stuck by the band up to 40 years. a) Lack of will by band members - the argument about incomplete archives is partly true but they're nowhere near as incomplete as suggested. They're now all old men and don't particularly fancy the graft in putting them together. I sort of get that but it's a pisser for all of us. b) The "Fanthology" members simply enjoy the competition between each other. I am not slagging them off - the amount of unreleased stuff they have given away free we should all be grateful for. They are fans first and foremost and all the rarities will surface over the next 20-30 years as they enjoy the gratitude of the general fans. Their argument about needing valuable stuff to trade is true. Neither party has any interest in admitting that the outtakes, unreleased songs, etc is quite as vast as it is. You would generally be surprised. I love this place and I love Queen. Do with this information as you will. I'll try to answer as many questions as possible but please bear in mind I am out of the circle now so some of it will be from memory.[/color]

brENsKi wrote: i know - that's where I posted it from. I thought - that as it never really reached a conclusion...maybe worth another fresh airing.

Rogers Untidy Bottom wrote: I'm out of the circle now and therefore have no material I can post. Like I mentioned, the only thing I can offer are my memories of a great couple of decades. Things I can remember about the Miracle... 1) The original version of Scandal was a lot closer in sound and length to what turned out to be the 12" version of it. Before the album was released, the song had been pre-selected as a single and was shortened for the album. I *believe* the original version is still in the vaults. 2) What became "Let Me Live" on MIH was seriously revisited for a place on the album. I always wondered why BM and RT sang on the MIH version as I am absolutely positive FM laid down four verses for the song back in the early 1980s 3) The orchestral middle-8 in WIAWI originally had a synth-orchestral version of bits of SSOR as its middle-8 (sort of completing the circle idea) but was dropped. Again, I am sure this exists (at least it did when I heard it) I don't know a massive amount about Innuendo for two reasons - I was abroad when most of that album was made and I never really liked it that much so didn't really ask many questions about it.

Among all the contributions to this thread, this is the best out of a quality bunch of replies. "Fanthology" are not the enemy - it's QPL. "Fanthology" members are torn though and it's completely understandable why. On the one hand, they're Queen fans - massive Queen fans. So much so, they've spent £10,000s acquiring the rarest material. They need to preserve the scarcity of the recordings in order to trade to get more rarities. On the other hand, they'd love to share it with all of us. They'd love QPL to release them. But the value of their investments will plummet, just like the FM rarities did after the publication of the box set. They are caught between a rock and a hard place, albeit with some fascinating, rare music to accompany them. Neither side wants to admit how vast the output of recordings, different versions, unused songs, etc are, even during the early albums. It doesn't suit them (as they don't want QPL to know they have it) and it sure doesn't suite QPL (who don't want to release anything any way). Two 4m versions of SSOR exist. "Deep Ridge" exists. "Surrender To The City" exists. The Game was originally going to be a double album but, somehow, was released as one of their shortest single albums. Some of the left-off songs are great, some a bit iffy. With the quality of songs available, how on earth did "Coming Soon" and "Need Your Loving Tonight" make it on the album??? Take the red pill and go back to your 2011 remasters. Take the blue pill and see how deep the rabbit hole really goes.

Some of the people in the inner circle thought Fanthology was behind 9/11.

Most of the people close to the fact know there were over 30 songs recorded for what became "The Game". From memory, RT is quoted as saying 20. Rubbish, there's easily 10 more and he knows it and Fanthology knows it. Hugely hugely creative period even when the first cracks were starting to appear between FM and BM (imho, BM never really liked FM but other people said I was wrong on that). QPL history tells us that "The Game" was recorded over 2 periods of time - summer 79 and spring 80. That much is factually correct but there were at least 2 more. Within the band, following the release of "Jazz", there was general confusion in what direction they should take the next album. Do they stay all "no synths" and "baroque and roll" or do they adapt to the times? Well, they did both - originally by "accident", then the idea of a double LP with two discs with different "Queens" on it circulated, then it went to the LP that was originally released. CLTCL, SASS, CS and SM were four of, from memory, 16 tracks laid down in 1979 in various different studios (deffo one in London and Ireland). You could imagine any of those tracks fitting on SHA right up to NOTW - albeit with different production. Very classic Queen direction. Other track names from memory were "Home" (ballady), "Only For Today" ("save the world" type song), "Earth" (rocker - not the Smile song), "Cut Me Up" (rocky ballad) and "(It) Seems Like Love" (acoustic ballad, from memory). "It's A Beautiful Day" was originally a gospel-like "All God's People"/"Somebody To Love" type song. I loved the original version abck then but I really like All God's People, despite the fact it appears on what I think is a terrible album. However, come 1980, the thinking had flipped more to FM and JD's approach, hence AOBTD, DA, PTG, RI(PJ) (Roger attempt at the sound) and a few other tracks, some of which wouldn't have been out of place on Hot Space. In fact, I wonder if some of the completed songs from those sessions were "re-imagined" for Hot Space. I think they might have been but we are talking 33-34 years ago and it was a mad time. I wasn't there when the decision-making process took place, but it's obvious they went all "new Queen" and consigned the rest to the archive. A great pity - the March-ish 1980 idea of a double LP with one 12" of old "Queen" and a 12" of the new "Queen" would have been amazing.

Epstein Didn't Kill Himself.

The Ghost of Lester Burnham wrote: I asked Greg about this a few years ago. He said it's all the work of an overactive imagination, and definitively untrue.

thomasquinn 32989 wrote:

The Ghost of Lester Burnham wrote: I asked Greg about this a few years ago. He said it's all the work of an overactive imagination, and definitively untrue.

Considering this is GB we're talking about, that's basically a full confirmation, right?

dudeofqueen wrote: brENsKi, re: >but GB has only recently confirmed they've found some bits for the LK boxset Were they discoveries of tapes that he knew they had because they'd been listed on his archive list from a few years back? I beieve Greg is still of the opinion that TFFMS was never performed live, too......

dudeofqueen wrote:cmsdrums, re: >the only thing that he can officially confirm is that something isn’t held in the archives....he doesn’t know what is held in private collections, He was incredibly quick to deny the existance of much of what John S Stuart (no more honourable or reliable collector has there been...) had in his posession

Bike It 80 wrote:About the "The Game being conceived as a double album" thing, did it occur to anyone that Queen were probably working on both "The Game" and "Flash Gordon" (which, let's not forget, was released six months later) at the same time, and that the "other half" of the supposed double album is just Flash Gordon?

Sebastian wrote:Interesting. The fact that at least two 'Flash Gordon' tracks are confirmed to have been demo'd in Munich during sessions for 'The Game' seems to support that theory.

Martin Packer wrote:But what would their motivation be to have a double?

Bike It 80 wrote: You do have some good points concerning Roger, Brenski. However, I read somewhere that Queen entered the studio in 1979 only to record some songs, not really in order to record an album, but just to see what would come out. And maybe it's me but I can't imagine Queen sitting down and deciding from the get-go to record a double studio album right after they'd released a double live album. I think it is more likely that, at some point during the sessions, they saw how many songs they had and the idea of a double album arose (maybe pushed by Roger, who wanted to make sure there would be lots of his songs on the album!), if it ever arose, and was then rejected. I just find it hard to believe that the band had written some 18 songs (minus the ones that we're sure were recorded during "The Game" sessions and the ones that more or less repeat themselves on the Flash Gordon album) in less than six months for "Flash Gordon", hence my reasoning. But, hey, "The Game" being conceived as a double album is nonetheless a possibility and maybe I'm completely wrong, and I'm ok with that! ;)