Forums > Queen - General Discussion > Queen I

forum rss feed
Author

qrock user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 313 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Aug 10, 11:55 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

In the last year I have asked Queen fans what they think of every Queen Studio Album from A Day at the Races to Made in Heaven. 

Now It's time to discuss their debut an album, some fans say it's a gem, some may say nothing because they've never heard of it or dislike the style of what to begin with "THE ORIGINAL QUEEN".

It woud be interesting to hear what other fans think of this debut, review it, best song but most importantly mention the time they first found out that this album excisted and how.

To start things Off, I would do my review of the first Queen record to have excisted on a world that they would go on to dominate in future years and have a lasting legacy.

KEEP YOURSELF ALIVE - A Great way to start a legendary career. I think the guitar intro is probably the perfect way to start your first ever single. Unlike other debut albums or debut singles, Queen had a good depth, sound, balance.....and they could transmit these Qualities to make many varieties of songs with a large array of moods and genres.
Keep Yourself Alive is a solid Song, Queen is a solid album. 
Rating: 10/10

DOING ALL RIGHT - After the fun, optimistic and lively opening tack, Doing All Right starts off quietly and goes through many different changes. A Very well crafted song and it had Queen feeling free in what they want to do and what they should do.
Rating: 9.5/10

GREAT KING RAT - Epic Song, Clever, Loud, Heavy and Leaves you in awe. A Very good heavy metal song with an interesting theme.
Rating: 10/10

MY FAIRY KING - Mysterious, Magical, Fantastical, Enchancted it's all fantasy and progressive rock in this track but it's played to a very high standard. From the wailing falsetto to a Natural land full of clear, fresh rivers and roaming deer and fairies Queen's art is not a pass, it's a masterpiece as Queen create a picture through music.
Rating: 10/10

LIAR - WOW, Highway Rock at its rolling best. All Four members play at their best. Rogers' drumming and Johns' bass is the most important here as they create a solid sound together and both create the building blocks to allow Brian to do what he does best and what Freddie does best. Well constructed, Epic, it has everything.
Rating: 10/10

The NIGHT COMES DOWN - Underrated, a lovely, quiet piece after the heaviness of liar allows the listener to think and enjoy the "looking back" song.
Rating: 9.5/10

MODERN TIMES ROCK N ROLL - Pretty good, and maybe better performed live, this short song is energetic and exciting with a good heavy sound, (particulary bass). It's a bit like Com... Breakdown, but done Roger Style with the unique Queen vocals coming in towards the end.
Rating: 9/10

SON AND DAUGHTER - Led Zeppelin like? Maybe - BUT done Queen Style. One thing Led Zeppelin would never have done to a record like that is use backing vocals like Queen and take the lead role in this song as well as Freddie,( Only a thing Freddie can do, SORRY ROBERT). The bass line at the begining is fantastic and emphasised by the drums and guitar makes a fantastic rhythm section.
Rating: 9.75/10

JESUS - Underrated, Epic, Clever and if you do compare Queen I to Led Zep I, well Jesus ends that argument as it's uniquely Queen. My favourite part of the song is the heavy part. It gives me the shivers as it creates an  amazing atmosphere.
Rating: Nearly 10/10

SEVEN SEAS OF RHYE (INST) - IN PROGRESS BUT NON THE LEAST A VERY GOOD WAY TO END A VERY GOOD ALBUM AND A UNIQUELY QUEEN ALBUM.

ALBUM RATING: DON'T KNOW BUT SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 9.5 AND 10.

mike hunt user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 2770 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Aug 10, 12:15 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Aswome album and review.....i think I agree with everything the original poster has said.......I'll be back for more comments about this great album.

rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Aug 10, 23:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

"Representing at last something of what Queen music has been the last three years" reads the sleeve notes of Queen's debut album. By now, the group had gelled, working well as a team and having developed some chops playing clubs and halls. Recorded under the least ideal conditions, you wouldn't know it to hear this record. Sheer willpower and talent made this album possible and despite it not making much of a dent in 1973, the band's focus and confidence did not waver. Was there room for improvement? Sure, but that's true of anything. This is a solid first effort.

"Keep Yourself Alive": The band knew what they were doing with this track. They knew it was going to be the lead off single and they knew it was going to open the album. Mike Stone mixed the version we know and love, rising to the challenge to give Queen what they wanted out of this track, where the Long Lost Re-Take and numerous mixes had failed. Why it failed to chart the first time around is anyone's guess. It has a catchy riff and a certain exhuberance that tells us we're in for a treat with this album.

"Doing All Right": The first piano notes tell the listener that this band is not just guitar rock; there's some depth to the line up and something quiet and beautiful. Where the first song puts us firmly in the shadowy hall on the front cover, we now find ourselves in the weathered photos on the back. This former Smile track balances rock and ballad in sharp contrast to each other and the result is effective in keeping us wanting more.

"Great King Rat": The dirty riff and feedback invoke dark, smelly taverns and ale-swilling braggarts. We're told of the death of a rather unpleasant outlaw. Freddie treats us to our first glimpse of his love for myth and fantastic story-telling. I've often wondered if this is a peek into the seedier side of his world Rhye. It has the right flavour and texture.

"My Fairy King": Now we know we have crossed into the world that is Rhye. Perhaps the ale house evoked in "Great King Rat" was a way station on the border between our world and this one. The character Mercury The Messenger witnesses a Fairy kingdom ravaged by men.  A gem of a song.

"Liar": Are we still in Rhye? Perhaps. We are definately in a place of dusty shadows and cathedral ceilings. This is a confessional rock epic that unleashes Queen's power in all its fury.

"The Night Comes Down": I've previously called this song a near-perfect gem. It is moody, atmospheric and featuures some great guitar work from Brian. The acoustic work calls to mind a lost soul fleeing in to the darkness, whether to something or way, we do not know.

"Modern Times Rock And Roll": Back in the shadowy concert hall on the cover, this straighforward rocker cuts through the pretense like a splash of cold water. As usual, Roger's vocals are blistering!

"Son And Daughter": Down and dirty blues rock that show Queen out-Zepplining Zepplin!

"Jesus": Not limiting his love of mythology, Freddie tackles Christianity and the result is a holy rock fest of awesome. Why don't they play songs like this in church?

"Seven Seas Of Rhye...": Closing out the record with a short piano-driven instrumental, this song foreshadows the next album, though we wouldn't know that until the next year. Taken by itself, it's a curtain call or an encore; the band jamming one last time before the stage goes dark at the end of the show. Amazing what you can fit into a minute and fifteen seconds.

mike hunt user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 2770 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 17 Aug 10, 01:16 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Keep yourself alive-  10/10  how was this song not a hit?
Doing alright-  8/10, love the young voice of freddie
Great king Rat- 10/10,  underated masterpiece!
My fairy king-  10/10,  Freddie's first piano classical masterpiece.  Love the lryics!
Liar-  10/10......Should be more popular.  One of Queen's best songs ever!
Night comes down-  10/10,  Again, love the young freddie voice.  One of his best vocal performances ever IMO!
modern times rock n roll-  9/10,  Tenament funster wasn't roger's first great song,  This was. Kicks ass!
Son and Daughter-  7/10-   pretty cool song and heavy.  lacks originality though, sounds like sabbath a bit.  Better live.
Jesus-  7/10,   cool song, not as good as the first 7 songs though.  love the middle bit when it gets heavy.
SSOY-  6/10,  Unfinished but still an interesting piece of music.

Overall,  a fantastic Debut..  One of the better debutes in rock history, though I could understand it might be a bit much for some of the youngster's out there who think radio ga ga was Queen's best.  The album does lose a little steam towards the end, but still a very consistent album....I rank it at # 5 of my favorite Queen albums.

GratefulFan user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 17 Aug 10, 01:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

If there is a better opening 30 or 40 seconds to a song in the history of ever than Keep Yourself Alive I can't think of it. And even after that epic opening it manages to keep up with itself right to the end.  Fantastic song well near the top of my personal best of Queen list. The whole album is full of great stuff.  Most of us worked our way back to these early albums, and I'd love to pull an Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind for a short while and hear this work like people heard it in 1973. Fresh and intriguing and exciting, waiting to see what was going to happen next.

Bo Rhap user not visiting Queenzone.com
Bo Rhap
Bohemian: 534 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 17 Aug 10, 06:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Some great reviews of this album in here.

I'm enjoying this thread of what really is a class album.And a highly underrated one too.Even Brian and Roger dont rate it as highly as we do.Wasnt it Brian that said he would have re-did this album?He didnt like the recording process or something.

Hard to pick a favourite track on this album


I never forget a face,

but in your case i'll be glad to

make an exception-Groucho Marx
mike hunt user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 2770 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 17 Aug 10, 07:10 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Yea, brian didn't like the production,   and for good reason.  it's also not the most original sounding Queen album.....Those are some of the reasons brian, roger don't rate it so high.   The songs make up for those things though, and many fans and famous rockers mention the first album as their favorite.  Brian once said he was surprised how many people still consider it their best.    Then again,  i think these guy's really lost their minds along the way.  roger mentions A kind of magic as one of his favorites.   Brian probably thinks the works is better than A night at the opera.    lol.  I don't take much stock in what those guy's think anymore.

lifetimefanofqueen user not visiting Queenzone.com
lifetimefanofqueen
Royalty: 1328 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 17 Aug 10, 14:45 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

thats alot of wrighting XD

k-m user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 535 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 18 Aug 10, 05:17 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I thought it was a good debut, with some solid rock tracks (KYA, Liar), nice ballads (Doin' Alright, The Night Comes Down - very underrated), and a couple of gems signalling their true potential (Great King Rat, My Fairy King). Overall, it wasn't their stratospheric heights yet, but a promising record, even though I don't play it very often. Rating: 3/5

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18638 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 18 Aug 10, 12:21 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

rhyeking wrote:

"Doing All Right": The first piano notes tell the listener that this band is not just guitar rock; there's some depth to the line up and something quiet and beautiful.


To me that's the single most important moment of the album for that exact reason.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
Micrówave user not visiting Queenzone.com
Delilah, on Medium Power
Micrówave
Deity: 7037 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 18 Aug 10, 16:22 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I must say that a few of you are giving out far too many 10/10 ratings.  Give me a break.   Mike's got half the album at 10/10.  A debut album!!!  I normally would think a 10/10 would mean one of their best songs.  But at that rate, Queen's got 90 or so greatest songs ever?  Then how do you rank those 90 cuts if they're all 10/10?

We complain about Rolling Stone magazine's reviews of Queen albums and then we get a silly thread like this?

Hate to break it to you, but there are no 10/10 songs on Queen I.   Unless the only thing you listen to is Queen.  I'd like to think a Classic song like Stairway To Heaven, Bohemian Rhapsody, Let's Get It On, etc. are 10/10s.  If you think Liar or Jesus is on the same par as those, then you need your ears checked or need to stop reviewing albums.

rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 18 Aug 10, 19:21 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Numeric ratings or "grades" are kind of silly. How do we quantify art? It means different things to different people. Every single song is a complex combination of sounds to which we react differently based on our experiences and tastes. We try to justify our opinions when we talk about musicianship, sometimes forgetting that technical skill is no substitute for effectiveness. The two should work in harmony, but that harmoniousness requires the subjective ear of the listener.  

Whether it's a debut album or not is beside the point when it comes to quality.  Tubular Bells and In The Court Of The Crimson King are masterpiece first albums. Queen isn't a masterpiece, but there is a lot to admire on it.

GratefulFan user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 18 Aug 10, 20:10 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

rhyeking wrote: Numeric ratings or "grades" are kind of silly. How do we quantify art? It means different things to different people.

=============================================

Ratings and grades for art are common cultural shorthand that effectively communicate quite a lot about the value one person assigns to a piece or collection of music or a film.  That's why they are a standard part of just about every reivew out there. Stars, marks out of 5, marks out of 10, percentages etc. are all so widely used to express opinion about art that to imply they have little value or are 'kind of silly' is frankly kind of silly.  As such, I give this portion of your post one star.

rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 18 Aug 10, 20:55 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Exactly my point, GF.

?/10...stars...thumbs up/down...are all incredibly ill-fitted tools for criticing art. They simply are. Roger Ebert doesn't like the star system he uses his print reviews and insists that to understand his opinion of a film, ***read his full review***! 

You say it's a short hand. I ask what's the hurry? If someone is going to take the time to give me their opinion of something, the fairest approach for both of us is to explain fully their position so that I might best appreciate it. 

I hold to my view that numerical values in this situation do everyone a disservice because it does not employ a base point of reference or common ground by which we can apply these numbers.

Does 1/10 mean it's a bad song? That you didn't like it? That it's worse than the sound of a baby crying? Did they get only one thing correct in the entire song? What was it?

What does 5/10 mean? That only half the song works or that the band played only half their parts well?

Is 10/10 an utter masterpiece or that you really, REALLY think this song is completely without flaw? Were there specific things that you were grading the band on? What were they? Lyrics? Musicianship? Tempo?

You can't apply a point system to a work where the parameters were not clearly defined beforehand. And why would you want to? This is art!

rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 18 Aug 10, 21:05 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

GratefulFan wrote: rhyeking wrote: Numeric ratings or "grades" are kind of silly. How do we quantify art? It means different things to different people.

=============================================

Ratings and grades for art are common cultural shorthand that effectively communicate quite a lot about the value one person assigns to a piece or collection of music or a film.  That's why they are a standard part of just about every reivew out there. Stars, marks out of 5, marks out of 10, percentages etc. are all so widely used to express opinion about art that to imply they have little value or are 'kind of silly' is frankly kind of silly.  As such, I give this portion of your post one star.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

rhyeking asks:

So, "widely used" equals *correct* and *infallible*?

Seriously? You believe this?

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18638 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 19 Aug 10, 00:06 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

These last few posts are a delight to read.  I love watching people who thoroughly know how to express themselves.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
GratefulFan user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 19 Aug 10, 03:15 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

rhyeking wrote: Exactly my point, GF.

?/10...stars...thumbs up/down...are all incredibly ill-fitted tools for criticing art. They simply are. Roger Ebert doesn't like the star system he uses his print reviews and insists that to understand his opinion of a film, ***read his full review***! 

You say it's a short hand. I ask what's the hurry? If someone is going to take the time to give me their opinion of something, the fairest approach for both of us is to explain fully their position so that I might best appreciate it. 

I hold to my view that numerical values in this situation do everyone a disservice because it does not employ a base point of reference or common ground by which we can apply these numbers.

Does 1/10 mean it's a bad song? That you didn't like it? That it's worse than the sound of a baby crying? Did they get only one thing correct in the entire song? What was it?

What does 5/10 mean? That only half the song works or that the band played only half their parts well?

Is 10/10 an utter masterpiece or that you really, REALLY think this song is completely without flaw? Were there specific things that you were grading the band on? What were they? Lyrics? Musicianship? Tempo?

You can't apply a point system to a work where the parameters were not clearly defined beforehand. And why would you want to? This is art!
=============================

I called the various point systems 'shorthand' because they're clearly always followed by a text review.  Obviously. For goodness sake. Example:

"rhyeking's last two posts"
by Some Canadian

5 of of 10

After overcommiting on his initial foray into grading systems, rhyeking doubles down with a string of strawman arguments that would even embarrass the Conservative Party of Canada in the two posts that follow.  He spends the initial paragraphs of post one passionately belabouring the point that grading systems for art are useless without expanded explanations, a  thought that achieved in the superfluous as grandly as it failed in matching any argument Grateful Fan actually made.   Already on shaky ground, he wisely moves on from the blindingly obvious to...the factually incorrect.  In claiming there is no "base point of reference" or "common ground" to which numbers can be applied he misses entirely that there is indeed a collective knowledge about elements that may combine to make art (or posts!) effective, or not, and that the degree to which a piece of art succeeds in the eye of the reviewer can indeed be expressed through that pithy grade at the top. How it failed or succeeded is up to the text.

On the eye of the reviewer: we have to stagger ahead for a moment to post two, a brief work so odd one might think rhyeking quaffed a bottle of 99% proof album cleaner before making it. "So, "widely used" equals *correct* and *infallible*?" Seriously? You believe this?" he demands. Nowhere do the words *correct* or *infallible* or any words that could reasonably substitute for either one of them appear in GratefulFan's post. A review may be 'correct' and 'infallible' in so far that the reviewer, who no one with the sufficient mental faculties to actually read a review (or a sixth grade primer) would ever assume is the final arbiter of the worth of art, is presumably both infallible and correct about what he himself actually thinks.

Mercifully, back at the final section of post one, the fog of incoherence mostly clears and we see glimmers of rhyeking's passion for analysis and knowledge of the elements of music. He still can't say much of anything, hamstrung as he is by a failure to acknowledge what grading systems are and are not meant to be, and when he asks just what 5/10 actually means, there is an aswer. It's what everybody learns it is back in grade school: it's a mercy pass.


Grading systems not only communicate useful knowledge when applied against well accepted standards of achivement, but they are useful at expressing relative relationships between mulltiple reviews by the same reviewer. For example:

"bob's last post"
by Some Canadian

9 out of 10

Bob seems to compliment me. I like this!  He must be brilliant.


See? With that you learn something about the reviewer that may be useful in assessing future reviews against your own tastes.

In the interest of going to freakin' sleep, I'll just sum up by saying if you want to rent a great movie, and you find Roger Ebert to be a reliable sort when it comes to the appreciation of film, go to RogerEbert.com and pull up all his 3 star to 4 star ratings. Avoid the 0 to 1 star ratings. Then do some reading and make your pick. To reject that there is valuable information in those stars is, as I said, kind of silly.


rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 19 Aug 10, 10:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

GF, I love your slapstick reviews. They make my day even when they don't entirely make sense.

Oh...what? That was satire? Whatever. I still laughed.

In short (too late, I know), I didn't include grades in my review, mentioned that I think they're kind of silly, was accused of disrespecting a cultural touchstone, and explained my position while agreeing that the shorthand exists despite the much better approach of the review.

What I don't understand is why my lack of respect for grades bothers you so.

I don't really care to know. I simply accept it now as a constant of the universe.

GratefulFan user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 19 Aug 10, 12:15 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Excellent! I'm happy to have helped halt your existential tailspin on grading systems, however it happened. :P

GF

rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 19 Aug 10, 14:14 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

We've sidetracked this thread long enough with our sillyness.

I'm curious about reading more reviews.