Forums > Queen - Serious Discussion > Queen 1 - Remaster Review

forum rss feed
Author

Soundfreak user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 378 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 11:37 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I just got the remasters and this is my first review of the album "Queen 1".

I compared it with the Hollywood remaster from 1991 and put several tracks into a multitrack-system. Cause things like loudness can fool your ear...

I took  Keep yourself alive, Liar and The night comes down. The main difference is the loudness. The tracks have been turned up between 3 to 5 db, different on each track. The dynamics are still quite intact although some limiting has happened at the louder parts. 
Also notacable is a reduction in the high frequencies above 6 Khz. 

If you turn up the Hollywood remaster while reducing the treble a bit you will not notice any difference. 

The booklet contains lyrics plus few fotos I haven't seen before, no info on the album, there's just some unspecific info on the bonus tracks. 

And they are difficult to rate in this case. I compared this new version of the De Lane tracks with the version Of "In the beginning. 

My impression is, that both versions come from the same source and sadly it's not the mastertape. 
According to the booklet the source is an acetate belonging to Brian. This may be true as "Keep yourself alive" has a slightly longer guitar intro with some additional  "needle-finding the groove-noise" at the very beginning. 
"In the beginning" features the tracks playing 2 % too fast, on the remaster they are playing correct.
Played in sync the new one has less treble and they worked a lot on the noise reduction, which sometimes makes them sound amazingly clear - although not like a mastertape should be. 
Also the makers of "In the beginning" removed noise, sometimes too much (like in the intro of Jesus) and lost the sound of the cymbals etc. On this remaster they did a real good job. Although there are moments, when "In the beginning" has more treble and hiss but sounds more precise. It's a mixed bag - but just because of the correct speed I would recommend the remaster. 

For "Mad the Swine" it's the same as the album tracks, louder and less treble. 

Basically these remasters are just a catalogue replacement for the former EMI versions and less designed for the collector - apart from the bonus tracks. There is no real reason to throw away your old cds, you won't hear anything you haven't heard before.

Sebastian user not visiting Queenzone.com
Sebastian
Deity: 6326 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 12:27 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I'm not 100% sure, but some harmonies on KYA (after the break) sound different to me. I don't know if it's a matter of mastering or if they used outtakes or stuff from one of the many different recordings of that one.


John hated HS. Fred's fave singer was not PR. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' Witness testimonies are often inaccurate. Scotland's not in England. 'Bo Rhap' hasn't got 180 voices.
Rick user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4796 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 12:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I have heard some samples and I think Queen II has been improved the most. It sounds epic in every way. The definitive version in my book.


John: "It's the one thing I wish I could do - sing."

Soundfreak user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 378 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 13:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I'm not 100% sure, but some harmonies on KYA (after the break) sound different to me. I don't know if it's a matter of mastering or if they used outtakes or stuff from one of the many different recordings of that one.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

You mean after the "Do you think your better everyday" part?
Comparing it in the multitracker they are identic.

Sebastian user not visiting Queenzone.com
Sebastian
Deity: 6326 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 15:13 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I meant the time they sang the chorus in F.


John hated HS. Fred's fave singer was not PR. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' Witness testimonies are often inaccurate. Scotland's not in England. 'Bo Rhap' hasn't got 180 voices.
paulosham user not visiting Queenzone.com
Lazing on a Sunday Afternoon
paulosham
Bohemian: 659 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 17:22 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The album is called Queen not Queen 1


Don't shun it!
rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 18:14 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It's standard practice in most instances to refer to the debut album as "Queen 1." Saying I'm going to do a review of Queen can be mistaken for doing a review of the band itself. It's like "Led Zeppelin 1" (or 2, or 3 or 4) or "Peter Gabriel 1" (or "Rain," or "Car") or The Beatles' "White Album." Since there was a "Queen II," it's logical, unofficial nomenclature. 

If I'm going to write a post talking about that album, I'll probably call it a various points "Queen 1," "the debut album," and "the first album."

MERQRY user not visiting Queenzone.com
MERQRY
Bohemian: 746 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 18:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The sound of the bonnus not is bad But WHY they let all these Noise?? at least they could had removed the Start Noise of Keep Yourself Alive!


"I will destroy any man who dares abuse my trust" Freddie Mercury
Thistleboy1980 user not visiting Queenzone.com
You wanna ring the bell?
Thistleboy1980
Deity: 3053 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 20:16 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think they all sound better, with Queen II being the most improved.  Also, I'm loving the clarity of some of the bonus tracks and also the stand-alone efforts on "Deep Cuts".

Btw, I'm getting tired already with folk moaning about the "noise" on the DLL demos, ffs it sounds more "authentic" this way - we all wanted them in their true form, we got it.


It ain't about how hard you can hit, it's about how hard you can get hit: how much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!
rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 20:36 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think the "needle finding groove" sound was done deliberately, to give it the sound of an actual acetate pressing. Sure, when I copy something from vinyl I tend to remove elements like that, but here they left it on for artistic reasons. Notice the beginning of "Live At The Bowl" starts with the sound of the master tape distortion that happens when you start an actual recording. It was there on the original recording and they kept it for aesthetic reasons, rather than having a quiet fade in. The same tape distortion appears at the beginning of "Rock In Rio Blues" on the "A Winter's Tale" CD single (but not on the US "Too Much Love..." CD single, which has a cleaner fade in). It's not sloppy if they intended it to be there, it's just an effect some people don't like.

If your ears find it an affront to sound quality, it's easy enough to remove the needle scratch if you have a basic audio editing program. As for the hiss, maybe they thought employing noise-reduction software dulled the sound. I'm not an expert on post-production computer audio software, so I'll let others debate the merits of leaving the hiss noise on the track.

Thistleboy1980 user not visiting Queenzone.com
You wanna ring the bell?
Thistleboy1980
Deity: 3053 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Mar 11, 20:42 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Well said.  I think it sounds the business.


It ain't about how hard you can hit, it's about how hard you can get hit: how much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!
Rick user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4796 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 11, 08:25 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Queen I and II are absolutely brilliant. It's like listening to the albums for the very first time.


John: "It's the one thing I wish I could do - sing."

philip storey user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 521 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 11, 15:12 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

So far i have Queen,Queen 2 and SHA 2011 remasters.They sound fantastic ,i also bought Deep Cuts and i am looking foward to rest of the releases.

Holly2003 user not visiting Queenzone.com
Hot Buttered Soul
Holly2003
Deity: 4706 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 11, 15:19 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

rhyeking wrote: It's standard practice in most instances to refer to the debut album as "Queen 1." Saying I'm going to do a review of Queen can be mistaken for doing a review of the band itself. It's like "Led Zeppelin 1" (or 2, or 3 or 4) or "Peter Gabriel 1" (or "Rain," or "Car") or The Beatles' "White Album." Since there was a "Queen II," it's logical, unofficial nomenclature. 

If I'm going to write a post talking about that album, I'll probably call it a various points "Queen 1," "the debut album," and "the first album."
================================================

I have decided to remaster the title to Queen 1 and it's now called Queen I


"With a population of 1.75 million, Northern Ireland should really be a footballing minnow. Instead, they could be better described as the piranhas of the international game" (FIFA.com)
Bo Alex user not visiting Queenzone.com
Bo Alex
Bohemian: 494 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 11, 17:24 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I downloaded the 2011 remaster in FLAC earlier today. IHMO, sounds great. Better than Queen II (also I heard it in FLAC). I think Jesus particularly sounds amazing.


A man who learnt how to teach, but forgot how to learn.

A la grande le puse cuca!!
MERQRY user not visiting Queenzone.com
MERQRY
Bohemian: 746 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 11, 18:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Maybe if they remove the sound they lost quality (The quality is Excellent for a acetate)
Or maybe (as rhyeking said) is a artistic expression


"I will destroy any man who dares abuse my trust" Freddie Mercury
Farrokh The Great user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 374 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 17 Mar 11, 01:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Hi, I did a quick review of the MP3 samples here:

http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1264316/queen-2-remaster-review.aspx

Greetings

GonnaUseMyPrisoners user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 714 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Mar 11, 09:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

No one's mentioned the bass nor the bass qualities of the drums - have those been improved?  To my ears, that was always sorely lacking from the first two albums.


...gonna use my prisoners, gonna give 'em the business...
ITSM user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1021 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Mar 11, 17:55 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think the bonus material on Queen (I) was a bit disappointing. We have allready heard all the songs many years ago - but of course it's good to finaly have them on an official CD. But they could fill the CD('s) with more songs than five or six. I really like the album though, and I enjoy Mad the Swine as well.

Live versions of My Fairy King and Great King Rat would have been great!


Chuck Norris never sleeps, he waits...
MERQRY user not visiting Queenzone.com
MERQRY
Bohemian: 746 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Mar 11, 18:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

ITSM wrote: I think the bonus material on Queen (I) was a bit disappointing. We have allready heard all the songs many years ago - but of course it's good to finaly have them on an official CD. But they could fill the CD('s) with more songs than five or six. I really like the album though, and I enjoy Mad the Swine as well.

Live versions of My Fairy King and Great King Rat would have been great!
-------------------
One live version of Great King Rat are possible in relative High Quality (31th March rainbow,Japan 75,etc) But a live version of My Fairy king is almost... is impossible cause they never performed that song live (except some references in 1984 or 1985,i don´t remember well)


"I will destroy any man who dares abuse my trust" Freddie Mercury