| Fone Bone 24.03.2006 05:16 |
Do you think this is possible ? It does raise a few questions : 1) Is there enough material ? I Guess We're falling Out, Dog With A Bone, A New Life Is Born, Self Made Man, Secret Fantasy, Robbery, New York perhaps, what else ? 2) Would it really be Queen if John did not participate, which would probably be the case ? 3) Would Brian and Roger be willing to go back there, to do it again ? I mean, MIH was very special, could it be done twice ? This must be a really painful process, especially after a year of touring, a year of life and happy vibes (then there's the Bo Rhap Ghost Of Freddie thing every night, mind you) Your thoughts ? |
| Daburcor? 24.03.2006 05:43 |
Honestly, I'd rather them hold off any Freddie stuff for the box set (that is supposed to still be on the cards). I'm quite interested to see what Roger and Brian can come up with that is fresh and new... My only reservations toward new material come from the fact that they will most likely want it to have Paul Rodgers on vocals. Now, before anyone gets on my case, I'm not saying I have a problem with Paul, or that I wouldn't like them to record with him, or any of that. What I AM saying is that I'd MUCH rather Roger and Brian sing new songs they have written than Paul, or ANYONE else for that matter. I happen to like both of their voices, and I would be upset not to hear them sing their new material. Anyway, no. I wouldn't like a new 'Made In Heaven' style album. |
| Daveboy35 24.03.2006 07:21 |
Good topic and one i think possible will happen sometime in the future but with commitements to the tour and possible other unrelated projects i can't see it happening anytime soon. Whenever the anthology makes a appearance i'm sure there will be a few tracks either new or demoed given the "queen" treatment a la beatles with 'free as a bird and real love , it also depends on how many tracks they have that are seriously worth working on for any kind of release. The likes of i guess we're falling out secret fantasy, self made man, and others will probably appear as they are,with any other tracks worked on to add some NEW QUEEN product and i personally think if asked JD would jump at the chance to work in the studio with brian and roger. And finally no MIH STYLE album there can't be it wouldn't be queen to make a duplicate album it would be in a totally different style. |
| deleted user 24.03.2006 09:52 |
I hope that it doesn't happen. "Made In Heaven" already was a kind of a mixed bag, but definitely was a decent effort to put out the last couple of songs that Freddie wanted to release. This new album however would be a complete bomb. Why release an album with a star who is dead for fourteen years now. Plus there isn't any new material with Brian, Roger and Paul Rodgers (even if I would be a fan of the three, which I am not) that is worthy enough for such a release. You cannot make a decent album from one or two half-cooked new songs and some songs with Freddies voice, which would never have made it on an album if King Mercury would still be alive. It would be an insult to Queen's flawless album catalogue. If Brian, Roger and Paul Rodgers really want to be a sort of "new" Queen, they should record a couple of new songs and make a brandnew album ... otherwise it´s obvious that they either have either run out of ideas or really don't want to work that hard anymore. |
| Mr Faron Hyte 24.03.2006 10:32 |
Most of the demos I've heard with Freddie's vocals have at best one complete verse, a chorus and a lot of Freddie's vocal improvisation/scatting. I don't know how you make a commercially viable album out of stuff like that, and certainly not one that would be in the tradition of Queen's sound. |
| Going Back 24.03.2006 12:30 |
i would love to get new queen album with freddie on vocals, i mean no matter how many songs and how good they are, just i would really want to hear somthing ''new'' |
| john bodega 24.03.2006 12:57 |
Things like You're the Only One or A New Life is Born are beautiful, but you can't use a song who's lyrics are primarily 'loo le laa's and improv. You just can't. I'd love it if they could just fine *one* useable Freddie song and make that the single or something, and then make what, 9 other songs with Brian and Roger singing 'em. Put Paul there if you like him. Bam - album. |
| brENsKi 24.03.2006 13:01 |
Mr Faron Hyte wrote: Most of the demos I've heard with Freddie's vocals have at best one complete verse, a chorus and a lot of Freddie's vocal improvisation/scatting. I don't know how you make a commercially viable album out of stuff like that, and certainly not one that would be in the tradition of Queen's sound.you make an album that "tidies up the loose ends into groups of medleys/ interspersed with complete songs (which there probably is some complete ones about too - Dog With A Bone/Hangman/Silver Salmon/Polar Bear etc there have been some great albums down the years that have either A - been made up of lots of "leftovers" into medleys or B - segued together into kind of concept albums A TYPE - Abbey Road B TYPE - Side Black of Queen II / Dark Side of The Moon / American Idiot |
| Fone Bone 24.03.2006 13:02 |
Mr Faron Hyte wrote: Most of the demos I've heard with Freddie's vocals have at best one complete verse, a chorus and a lot of Freddie's vocal improvisation/scatting. I don't know how you make a commercially viable album out of stuff like that, and certainly not one that would be in the tradition of Queen's sound.Fair enough, hence my 1st question : "is there enogh material". There may be more advanced demos than the ones we know. Moreover, they could sing one verse each, a la let me live. And there could even be songs where Freddie doesn't appear at all, only Brian, Roger and hopefully John. I understand it would be depressing to work on old demos only. It could be a mix between "Surviving Queen" NEW songs, such as No One But You, and tracks featuring Freddie vocals with additional vocals by Roger and Brian. |
| john bodega 24.03.2006 13:05 |
An interesting point you raise, Brenski. But I must wonder - wasn't it Let It Be that was the real 'finished-afterwards' album? True that the medleys seem like unfinished works pieced together, but I always thought it was still a group effort and not so much an after-the-fact work. But hey! Wasn't even born yet. I'm just paraphrasing George Martin and the boys. I really would like to hear an album from these guys with at least one song from Freddie (anything would be nice, really - even something short leftover I dunno...). But I'm absolutely not under any illusions as to how 'Queen-y' it'd be, I wouldn't expecting a 21st century Bohemian Rhapsody. Maybe I just like to hear something new for a change? God knows I don't want to be one of those sad old fools who sits in a dark room surrounded by candles, listening to Innuendo on loop and praying to a shrine of Freddie... Ok. That was exaggerating. But yeah, bring on a new album I say. |
| john bodega 24.03.2006 13:07 |
"It could be a mix between "Surviving Queen" NEW songs, such as No One But You, and tracks featuring Freddie vocals with additional vocals by Roger and Brian." This is my favourite scenario. No one ever looked at Sail Away Sweet Sister, Tenement Funster or Sleeping on the Sidewalk and bemoaned that it wasn't Queen! Ok - these examples were made when Queen was still a fully functioning entity, but the fact remains that they focus on Brian or Roger instead of Freddie. I see them as what is left of Queen, so I welcome new music from them - and I'd happily listen to it blindfolded so I can avoid the messy arguments over it being "Queen" or not, because quite frankly I don't care. I'm in it for the sound. |
| Daveboy35 24.03.2006 13:30 |
I agree with and can see brenski's and zebonka's points of view but i think there will be all the demos that HAVE surfaced and those that haven't along with the hits(demo take) or no.of takes , along with perhaps one or two GEMS in the queen crown that would either need some work doing or releasing as it is. Remember the beatles did the anthology 10 years ago and with free as a bird and real love along with the demos and rarities sold very well, and brought the remaining threetles back together to record and sort out differences i think the same will happen with john deacon in the not too distant future. |
| Bobby_brown 24.03.2006 13:30 |
I think there is enough songes to do a MIH kind of thing! A couple of years ago Jim Beach said that 3 completed songs were founded in the archives and according to them, they have quality enough to be Queen. Lets not forget that there must be tons of unfinished demos, and those wich at least have the chorus worked out can be easilly re-donne by the surviving members ("I guess we're falling out" is a good example). To the MIH album they didn't knew at the time every song they taped (it wasn't cathalogued at the time), so probably they missed better tracks than those they've used. For example, they have recorded "Let me live" with only the first verse by Freddie. I don´t know if they wan´t to do it, but i think it's a possibility. After Greg reunites the tracks for the Box-set they might hear some good surprises! Take care |
| Mr Faron Hyte 24.03.2006 14:27 |
I think another very important thing to consider is that Brian and Roger could have at any time over the last 10 years taken the existing demos and scraps and finished them into something, and they have thus far chosen not to do so. Any project of the kind being discussed would almost certainly take a year, perhaps two, out of their lives to complete. Are they interested in doing that? So far, it doesn't look like that are, and it has to be them that do the work. I think they might finish a couple of tracks like that for the boxed set(s), should it/they ever actually materialize, but I personally don't believe they will ever piece together a whole album like that and release it. |
| brENsKi 24.03.2006 14:33 |
Zebonka12 wrote: An interesting point you raise, Brenski. But I must wonder - wasn't it Let It Be that was the real 'finished-afterwards' album? True that the medleys seem like unfinished works pieced together, but I always thought it was still a group effort and not so much an after-the-fact work. .Abbey Rd was the last album the beatles actually recorded...Let It be was recorded before AR but not releaased...AR was "unfinished" JL was maybe into heroin (allegedly)and had a car crash (officially) and didn't turn up for masses of recording sessions...the "medleys" were made from unfinsihed bits that George (Martin) and Paul rescued and laboured over to try and make a complete album Paul: "in the end we hit on an idea of medleying them all and giving the second side a sort of operatic structure...which was good because it used ten or twelve unfinished songs in a good way" personally, - i love abbey road for this reason...and it is this feel that probably makes Queen II my favourite queen album |
| Suigi 24.03.2006 14:53 |
OK, here's an idear. Make a double album called "Phoenix." Have one disc be the Q+PR stuff, like Take Love, Say It's Not True, etc. Have the other be mostly-completed or finished off demos like Self Made Man, Robbery, Feelings, Feel Like, etc., plus a few non-album B-sides redone. I dunno, but I think I Go Crazy would be friggin' amazing re-recorded with Paul singing one of the verses and duetting with Freddie on the chorus a la BoRhapLive. |
| juan1921 24.03.2006 15:31 |
Could anyone please let me know where I can get those songs you mention whether official or not? I'd very grateful. |
| bitesthedust 24.03.2006 16:34 |
Suigi wrote: OK, here's an idear. Make a double album called "Phoenix." Have one disc be the Q+PR stuff, like Take Love, Say It's Not True, etc. Have the other be mostly-completed or finished off demos like Self Made Man, Robbery, Feelings, Feel Like, etc., plus a few non-album B-sides redone. I dunno, but I think I Go Crazy would be friggin' amazing re-recorded with Paul singing one of the verses and duetting with Freddie on the chorus a la BoRhapLive.I Go Crazy should be left be....if it is to be released then wait for the boxsets. |
| k-m 24.03.2006 16:54 |
<b><font color="red">Peter Cetera</b> wrote: I hope that it doesn't happen. "Made In Heaven" already was a kind of a mixed bag, but definitely was a decent effort to put out the last couple of songs that Freddie wanted to release. This new album however would be a complete bomb. Why release an album with a star who is dead for fourteen years now. Plus there isn't any new material with Brian, Roger and Paul Rodgers (even if I would be a fan of the three, which I am not) that is worthy enough for such a release. You cannot make a decent album from one or two half-cooked new songs and some songs with Freddies voice, which would never have made it on an album if King Mercury would still be alive. It would be an insult to Queen's flawless album catalogue. If Brian, Roger and Paul Rodgers really want to be a sort of "new" Queen, they should record a couple of new songs and make a brandnew album ... otherwise it´s obvious that they either have either run out of ideas or really don't want to work that hard anymore.Agree |
| akindofmagic 24.03.2006 17:31 |
i think that an album with re-done re-made songs with freddie, having just the chorus it isn't a problem, see what happened on "let me live"! i really think that an album of this kind will come out along with the box sets in 2009 to promote them. and the demo names that people usualy talk when this subject come along will probably be not included on this album... Queen back in 1994/95 didn't knew the tracks on archive... it seems that very good stuff never saw the light of day(or of the laser, if you prefer) |
| The Freddie Bigotes 24.03.2006 19:33 |
Whitout Freedie i don´t think so, never will be a new queen Album... :( |
| Martin Stones 24.03.2006 23:00 |
Abbey road was a new album after let it be u idiot it wasnt "segued" it was fresh with martin as producer |
| john bodega 24.03.2006 23:42 |
Martin Stones wrote: Abbey road was a new album after let it be u idiot it wasnt "segued" it was fresh with martin as producerI don't know who you're calling idiot, but I'll respond anyway. Chronologically speaking, Let it Be was recorded first, Abbey Road 2nd. Let it Be was released afterwards. Simple. As for it not being "segued" I don't get you. Sure it was - isn't that what a medley is? |
| NOTWMEDDLE 25.03.2006 00:22 |
<font color=green>Bren<font color=orange>ski wrote:John Lennon detested Abbey Road. MIH was Queen's Let it Be, Coda. Innuendo was Queen's Abbey Road and In Through the Out Door.Zebonka12 wrote: An interesting point you raise, Brenski. But I must wonder - wasn't it Let It Be that was the real 'finished-afterwards' album? True that the medleys seem like unfinished works pieced together, but I always thought it was still a group effort and not so much an after-the-fact work. .Abbey Rd was the last album the beatles actually recorded...Let It be was recorded before AR but not releaased...AR was "unfinished" JL was maybe into heroin (allegedly)and had a car crash (officially) and didn't turn up for masses of recording sessions...the "medleys" were made from unfinsihed bits that George (Martin) and Paul rescued and laboured over to try and make a complete album Paul: "in the end we hit on an idea of medleying them all and giving the second side a sort of operatic structure...which was good because it used ten or twelve unfinished songs in a good way" personally, - i love abbey road for this reason...and it is this feel that probably makes Queen II my favourite queen album |
| brENsKi 25.03.2006 03:29 |
Martin Stones wrote: Abbey road was a new album after let it be u idiot it wasnt "segued" it was fresh with martin as produceri am pleased and impressed by your vocabulary. the medleys on abbey rd were in fact segued. as i pointed out in my previous post, the quote i used was from paul mccartney. and as i said before - it was recorded AFTER let it be....the difference being that they hated let it be - because of all the rows...so it got "shelved"....then they decided that they couldn't just split....without having something to give the fans...so John got Phil Specter in to record the strings and stuff. then - the already recorded let it be was released at the time they split |
| Daveboy35 25.03.2006 04:38 |
Spot on brenski!!! as a beatles fan also and for 10 years or so i will further back up what brenski has said. 1969 Recording of get back as it was first known before the final let it be title all through january using twickenham studios and then thier own apple studios. Paul's idea to go BACK TO BASICS recording with no overdubs just recording like they used to years ago, george harrison left after 9 days after a row with paul over how he should play on his songs. He left the band and then returned only on the premise that the proposed live shows were shelved. 30th january 1969 the infamous rooftop concert the last ever beatles performance. 31st january 1969 work done on let it be the long and winding road and two of us. Abbey road was recorded from april 69 to august 20th 1969 reason for this was simply they needed to record a BETTER album after the let it be fiasco, tracks were then worked on from the white album demos( mean mr mustard and polythene pam) also maxwell silver hammer, oh darling, i want you, octopus garden( all stemmed and demoed during LIT sessions). The rest of the album was recorded during apr and aug 69 and then released in oct 69 where as the shelved let it be sessions were then resurrected after paul george and ringo went into the studio on jan4th 1970 to record I ME MINE and what turned out to be the last beatles recording for 24 years. John lennon then resurrected the LIT project by bringing in PHIL SPECTOR to rescue the tapes and create a wall of sound mix to the songs and thus putting orchestral overdubs on to a few tracks, one being paul's The long and winding road which he took great offence to and then april1970 paul officially quits the beatles. As for the segue (or the long one) as it was called was made of unfinished tracks taht blended very well together to make a truly classic side2 and a great end to their career. |
| brENsKi 25.03.2006 06:27 |
from one beatles fan to another...thanks mate. nice to know a few of us know how it really is...while ONE - notably lacking in the knowledge and tact department - decides to call people idiots.... album medleys were segued BECAUSE they were unfinished bits..end of argument |
| Bobby_brown 25.03.2006 09:25 |
<font color=green>Bren<font color=orange>ski wrote:That was the reason they re-released "Let it be naked" without the overdubs if i'm correct.Martin Stones wrote: Abbey road was a new album after let it be u idiot it wasnt "segued" it was fresh with martin as produceri am pleased and impressed by your vocabulary. the medleys on abbey rd were in fact segued. as i pointed out in my previous post, the quote i used was from paul mccartney. and as i said before - it was recorded AFTER let it be....the difference being that they hated let it be - because of all the rows...so it got "shelved"....then they decided that they couldn't just split....without having something to give the fans...so John got Phil Specter in to record the strings and stuff. then - the already recorded let it be was released at the time they split According to Paul, it was how it was meant to be in the first place. Take care |
| A Word In Your Ear 26.03.2006 20:16 |
I don't think a MIH type album would be a good move for QUEEN, as they have already "Been-there-done-that" but if in the future, they do release an Album with Paul Rodgers, I do hope Brian & Roger sing Vocals on at least half of the album. Now a lot of people have slated PR as "no way being a Freddie" I have to agree, But!!! I don't think he did a bad job with the vocals on Tour. So I personally, would Welcome a New album with PR. A lot of you out there, I'm sure would rather have a MIH style Album, than a QUEEN + Paul Rodgers Album, but as it's already been said, most of the demos we have heard are incomplete & have Freddie adlib-ing. A possibilty is to say, have one "Finished" Freddie vocal demo on the Q+PR Album ( I think Roger & Freddies "Dog With A Bone" is just about finished vocal wise.) That way the Die Hard "Freddie Only" fans will have something & not feel cheated. After All, That's what's happened with the last Q+PR album ROTC with "Bo Rhap" Freddie's included on that album.(even though, Paul Rodgers wouldn't do the song justice, if he sang it all.) Anyway, just a thought!!!! |
| thenightcomedown 26.03.2006 21:42 |
new album? Impossible because queen is dead! a brian and roger and whoever album is o.k. As long as it doesnt say Queen ANYWHERE thats fine. |
| mike hunt 27.03.2006 01:44 |
I agree, Any unfinished freddie songs should be a great selling tool for the boxsets. Made in heaven has been done already. |
| brENsKi 27.03.2006 12:50 |
thenightcomedown wrote: new album? Impossible because queen is dead! a brian and roger and whoever album is o.k. As long as it doesnt say Queen ANYWHERE thats fine.grow up |
| deleted user 27.03.2006 16:00 |
<font color=green>Bren<font color=orange>ski wrote:Why should he - this person is entitled to his/her opinion. Some people (including John Deacon!) say that Queen is no more - some want that Roger and Brian carry on as Queen. He/she has said nothing offensive about Brian and Roger in the above post, so maybe you should grow up and respect the opinion of other people.thenightcomedown wrote: new album? Impossible because queen is dead! a brian and roger and whoever album is o.k. As long as it doesnt say Queen ANYWHERE thats fine.grow up |
| john bodega 28.03.2006 07:01 |
"Why should he - this person is entitled to his/her opinion. Some people (including John Deacon!) say that Queen is no more - some want that Roger and Brian carry on as Queen. He/she has said nothing offensive about Brian and Roger in the above post, so maybe you should grow up and respect the opinion of other people." I happen to disagree with the person who was told to grow up, but only on the score that the 'name' they choose is more important than the music itself. If it's a bad album, it's a bad album. If they turn up something nice, then yahoo. But god - I can't imagine anything more supremely mournful and uninspiring than arguing over what sequence of *letters* will appear on the cover. |
| Daburcor? 28.03.2006 07:45 |
Zebonka12 wrote: I can't imagine anything more supremely mournful and uninspiring than arguing over what sequence of *letters* will appear on the cover.Amen! |
| Cricket Nutter 28.03.2006 09:04 |
It wouldn't surprise me if they had about 40 songs that aren't even on the "unreleased demos" set thats floating around Queenzone, or the B Sides. But I wouldn't want them to be released as a commercial album. A special edition of rarities could be released of all B sides, and decent demos I guess |
| john bodega 28.03.2006 09:18 |
Indeed. There definitely isn't enough Freddie there to make another MIH. For one thing, an album shouldn't just be parade of nice songs. MIH worked (or, if you didn't like it - *didn't* work) because there seemed to be some kind of theme to it. Brian could make something with Silver Salmon and Feelings, for instance, but it's not going to really make a lot of sense lined up with something like A New Life Is Born or You're the Only One. Both of which don't have complete lyrics anyway! :D Nah. I wouldn't mind an album loaded with all-new songs, with perhaps one finished-up Freddie track (if they can spare it), but I'd prefer it if they just got their shit together and made a big box set with all these Freddie snippets I'm dying to hear. |
| kdj2hot 28.03.2006 10:56 |
Martin Stones wrote: Abbey road was a new album after let it be u idiot it wasnt "segued" it was fresh with martin as producerIdiot, the common knowledge fact is Let it Be was recorded before Abbey Road. They made Abbey Road to get back to their roots. The lLet it Be tapes were given to Phil Spector to freshen them up. I love it when a moron stick there foot in their mouth and it's not me. How does it taste, Martin? Crusty and salty I bet. |
| roy_fokker 30.04.2006 15:36 |
I think that everyone here says something that must be taken into account. Basically I think that something NEW would be great... considering that rarely those guys made something that wasn't worth to listen, isn't it? Surely, the majority of Queen fans can be happy of the Queen+PR cooperation. [In my case, it gave to me my first chance to see a Queen show (I discovered them when I was 9, in 1989). I think that Paul did a honest job, and Queen made a wonderful tribute to their career]. Considering especially all that crap that the music business is producing these days, we must be thankful that Queen are still pretty much in the first row. This said, I must also admit that I do really miss some NEW songs... they gave us some 'hints' with 'The call' (but does a studio version exist?), 'Invincible hope' and 'Say it's not true'... but wouldn't you be happy to have some new songs signed by Roger and Brian?? They've been 'absent' from the composition scenes since 1998, if you think. I mean Roger and Brian together, since I believe that Roger+Brian would work better than what they can do on their own. I wouldn't be hostile to a Brian+Roger+Paul studio performance, since I believe that the mood they found live could be wonderfully casted into a studio project. Perhaps this time, nevertheless, using the name Queen could be not really correct: May, Rodgers and Taylor - or simply the title of the albunm could be ok. About the other recordings usually stated to belong to Innuendo Sessions, like, i.e., Secret Fantasy or Committing Robbery... they don't seem to be complete enough for an album release... but I frequently wandered why Queen did not work, for Made in Heaven, on other Freddie's tracks, like, for instance, "money can't buy happiness" (into a who needs you arrangement it would be beautiful) or "love making love" (with a heavier guitar it could have become a great song!) or the beautiful "it's so you"? + I cannot exactly believe that's because 'twas Freddies solo projects... since 1/4 Made in Heaven is made by Freddies solo projects... Last question... what about other unreleased tracks? I've heard about a third song with Michael Jackson (a so called 'Victory'), and about Freddies other songs recorded after Barcelona, named 'The Phantom of The Opera', and 'Music of the Night'? Or about a song called 'You are the only one?' Any more detailed information is much appreciated.. Last question: how many of you think that a studio release related to Queen could be likely published in the near future? |
| 7Innuendo7 30.04.2006 22:51 |
imho I don't think there's enough taped Freddie material, and the 3 of them should just record a dozens tracks and call it something other than 'Queen' or 'Q+PR' -- let it stand on its own |
| john bodega 01.05.2006 07:42 |
I agree. Keep the Q+PR name for tours that use primarily Queen music, because it is an accurate name. However, a new album with new songs? New name too, methinks. It wouldn't stop me from listening to it, but it just makes sense. "You're the Only One" is a beautiful composition, but - it's incomplete and full of 'la la la's' instead of actual lyrics. Not much can be done there I don't think? |
| scallyuk 02.05.2006 05:13 |
There is a reason that the demos we know of remained demos . They weren't considered good enough to be developed further released. I know that Queen quality control wasn't perfect (Delilah anyone) but 99% of the time it was spot on. Most of the unreleased stuff that we've heard is interesting because of it's rarity not because of it's quality. I'd rather see an album of brand new songs (under whatever name) with the demos and rarities saved for a box set to "close the book" on Queen. N |
| not that bad 02.05.2006 07:26 |
i dont know how much songs queen or freddie did record after he knew he had aids but, what if freddie sung as much as he could knowing that the songs would be finished and released after his death? permitting the other to have an income, i think he felt guilty to be the person who killed queen in a way, the goose with the golden eggs. |
| john bodega 02.05.2006 12:19 |
"I know that Queen quality control wasn't perfect (Delilah anyone)" You prove nothing by mentioning that song. I reckon there's probably Freddie tracks left that are good enough for release. The real problem is - would they make any sense if plopped on an album? I like the track "Feelings", for instance. But thematically, would it have made sense to put this after, say, "Mother Love"? No. It'd be completely wrong for Made in Heaven. I just wish they'd pull their rich fingers out of their collective arsehole and RELEASE the damned thing. I've been listening to Beatles Anthology lately, and God oh God I wish Queen would do something similar. |
| kdj2hot 02.05.2006 14:45 |
Zebonka12 wrote: "I know that Queen quality control wasn't perfect (Delilah anyone)" You prove nothing by mentioning that song. I reckon there's probably Freddie tracks left that are good enough for release. The real problem is - would they make any sense if plopped on an album? I like the track "Feelings", for instance. But thematically, would it have made sense to put this after, say, "Mother Love"? No. It'd be completely wrong for Made in Heaven. I just wish they'd pull their rich fingers out of their collective arsehole and RELEASE the damned thing. I've been listening to Beatles Anthology lately, and God oh God I wish Queen would do something similar.and "I was born to Love you" made sense on the album? It doesn't matter. Most albums are just a collection of random songs now days. It'll work. TRhe biggest question is if they're willing to do it. I don't think looking back is something "Queen" wants to do. Even if they make an album with Paul ROdgers I doubt that they would want to mar it or maybe a better word is overshadow the new work with Freddie tracks. |
| Mr Faron Hyte 02.05.2006 15:27 |
They're not going to release an album where two-thirds of Freddie's vocals are "dee-bap-dap-da-dee-dat-dee", and anyone who has heard a lot of Queen demos knows that's how they sound. Musically they can be developed now by Brian and Roger but vocally, the material isn't there. And I highly doubt they're going to release an album of a dozen or so tracks where Freddie sings two sentences per track and the rest is sung by Brian and Roger. "Let Me Live" was one thing, but a whole album of it? I don't see it. But by all means, Brian and Roger, prove me wrong and make me eat my words. |
| chefman5150 02.05.2006 23:03 |
I do believe that there are much more Freddie Mercury vocal tracks than we think...there were always quite a bit of things left after each album that never got put out. But here's a thought...the things that have been floating through the rafters here on Queenzone, are probably just little tidbits that Roger and Brian probably didn't give a shit if they got leaked out etc. I have alot of them, and yes if that would be the kind of quality of music they would put out...just little vocal snippets, then hell no I probably wouldn't buy it either. But I guarantee you that they probably have alot of tracks left from the 'Magic' sessions and 'Works' sessions that have never seen the light of day and that nobody would've even thought...maybe not even Brian or Roger for that matter, until they got dug out out by Greg Brooks, and realized that they could have some kind of a few decent songs. There can't be anything left from 'The miracle' seesions, because i think everything from that album has been rummaged through, and innuendo I highly doubt there's much left either because Freddie just didn't have the energy to do all that much. I also agree that just a CD by itself with that kind of material would be lame...they should package it with the box sets, that way they could spend some time with the tracks and not rush them out. Just a thought... |
| john bodega 03.05.2006 13:01 |
"and "I was born to Love you" made sense on the album?" Yeah. It needed at least one bright song! Nah, it might seem overly cheerful for an album voiced by a dead man, but really - I do think the song belonged on there. |