There's common way for a single release - you take song, edit/remix it and release. We suppose that 'One Vision' was recorded during out-of-any-album session and released as an off-album single. Later it appeared on 'A Kind Of Magic' album but the album's version is longer than the single one, so would it be right to say that album version is an extended by itself 'cause it was remixed later especially for album release and the single's version is an original?
Yes, but the question is which version was done first: the single or the album mix? In my opinion it's clear that the single version of One Vision was done first and that this is not an edit of the extended album mix. - The case of I Want It All is different (I don't think the single version is the 'original').
deleted user 07.11.2004 16:01
But there's also a proper 6+ minutes extended version which was released at the time of the single release.
So both the single and the album-versions could just as well be considered as being edits of the extended mix.
The question actually seems to be obsolete, because the song obviously wasn't recorded in one go and the three versions are all composites of the various material they recorded. I don't think there's an "original" version of OV.
'Original version' means 'main' version, I guess, if you say 'extended', '12"', 'edit' or whatever it means that there's something original which one was extended by someone, edit etc. and no matter if all of them came from the same master tape.
So if 'One Vision' (extended) was released together with so-called 'single' version that means that it's extended to single's one and the album's one is just another extended version.
I didn't say that Queen recorded later some additional bits to make the album version, of course the album's one was mixed from the autumn '85 tapes.
My question is just for the right initialization of what is single version and album version in the case of 'One Vision'. Just imagine that all sleeves says 'One Vision' (single version), but in the reality it's an original and don't have to be called as 'single', 'edit', '7"'...
Pim Derks wrote: I think One Vision is from the A Kind Of Magic sessions. Didn't those sessions run from September 85 - Januari 86 or something?
History says that One Vision was inspired by Live Aid and then the start of recording new album was inspired by One Vision.
So, thank you, Mr Geldof! :)
I think you're completely over-complicating the whole thing. Why do you need a "main"-version ? They recorded a song, made a short version for single release, made an odd instrumental for the b-side, made a long version for the 12" and later on made a medium version for the album. The album version is called album version because it is on the album, the single version is the one on the a-side of the 7" and so on. There's no further secret behind it, as far as I can see.
Actually One Vision wasn't really inspired by or thought of as a tribute to Live Aid. Apparently some journos mis-quoted Bri (or Rog ?), which resulted in it being hyped up by the media and subsequently in Queen being flamed for cashing in on Live Aid. At least that's what I read in some bio.
The "main" version thing is subjective. For me IWTBF's single version can be the "main" one because live versions (either by Queen, Roger or B,R,J&L) take its intro, and that's the best known version (the one with the video). But other people can consider the album is the "main" because it was released first
Okay. Cool down everyone! I'm over-complicated, I'm subjective, I like 'AKOM' album, though someone thinks it's crap, 'One Vision' has nothing with Live Aid. Okay!
P.S. "Main" version of IWTBF is on the album, good version is on single. "Main" of The Invisible Man is on the album, good is on the video - and this is subjective. But singles, videos etc - it's the part of promotional of an album. They do it just for sale an album, but 'One Vision' was firstly non-album track, that's why it's on Complete Vision! So the "main" version is on single, IMHO.
And, please, no any offences and now and again - my English is bad, so if word 'main' is uncorrect just correct me. That's all!
If you consider "main" the one that came first, that's valid; technically Paul's Yesterday in Broad Street is a cover of the one in Help, for the same reasons.
Personally I think the album versions are the definite statement.
Queen considered themselves as an album band ("Please, don't judge us by our singles" B.M. on Radio One Interview 1989) and singles are a commercial "Must" to promote the album. Of course no-one complains about a No.1-single, but the album is the artistic statement and therefore those versions count. Think of the segues of songs on the earlier albums, this is what they were working for, a work of art to be seen as a whole.
That is of course and as always IMHO.
Yes, Regor, that's right IMO as well.
But sometimes there are some incorrects because of all those versions and mixes: remember re-release of Freddie's 'Living On My Own'? The track was 'radio mix by No More Brothers', but it was not from any post-Freddie's death albums: not from 'The Great Pretender' nor 'The FM album', and Queen+ contains not the version which was released as a single, reached No 1 and had a big success, but the one from 'the FM album', and that is wrong, because that version wasn't a hit. And all this fuss because there is more than 10 OFFICIAL mixes and versions of LOMO.
So we have to make all this hurly-burly with versions and mixes more clearer, I guess.
I believe that Serry was referring to the master-mix. Well, I guess none of the known versions is the master-mix.
The singles carry One Vision (single edit), One Vision (extended version) and Blurred Vision. The first could be an edit from the second, but the last two include exclusive material. So, a master-mix of that mixdown (supposing there was one for the single and one for the album) should include Blurred Vision into One Vision (extended).
But I do not believe this is the case. I have always though of One Vision as a sort of semi-raw compilation.