Forums > Queen - General Discussion > MIH Track 13 question

forum rss feed
Author

Stormtrooper076 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 46 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 13 Nov 11, 23:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I remember reading something about this mysterious track that said certain sounds would turn up at significant times like there's something at the time where Freddie passed etc. Does this sound familiar?

bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12697 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Nov 11, 00:07 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think the theory ran that the track length, doubled (22ish minutes?) would wind up at just over 45 minutes, and since Freddie lived to just over 45 years of age, that somehow certain noises in the track would correlate with events in his life.

That's all I remember.  I think it's hooey because the spookiest part of that track is when it goes quiet and all of a sudden those spooky chimes go off.  I have no idea what that's supposed to signify - certainly not him dying, because it's not at the end.  But it's the damned scariest thing on the track.  I actually pulled my headphones off the first time I heard it, because it was late at night and I was not in the mood to be scared.


"Your not funny, your not a good musician, theres a difference between being funny and being an idiot, you obviously being the latter" - Dave R Fuller
dysan user not visiting Queenzone.com
dysan
Royalty: 1544 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Nov 11, 04:13 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

MIH would be 100 times better without that track and the pointless 4 second yeah track. It makes it seem messy and cobbled together at the last minute with no quality control.

Oh wait...

MadTheSwine73 user not visiting Queenzone.com
God Save The Queen
MadTheSwine73
Royalty: 1013 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Nov 11, 08:35 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Personally, I love the track. However, I must agree wit Zebonka, the part where everything stops os pretty creepy.


Any way the wind blows...
rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Nov 11, 11:54 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I still consider "It's a Beautiful Day (Reprise)" to be a single song mastered into three parts.

Which is to say, I don't consider "Yeah" Or "Track 13" to be their own separate pieces, just their own separate tracks.

I think the reason they mastered them this way, with these breaks, was just cheekiness and them playing with the medium, not them proclaiming: "Look, here are two more individual, wholly unique songs!"

Just my view, anyway.

And if you find the CD version too long, the LP fades out after the second "yeah."

dysan user not visiting Queenzone.com
dysan
Royalty: 1544 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Nov 11, 12:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I agree with that. I guess it's one of those CD quirks (it was the first CD they did with CD as the primary format) that hasn't aged that well. An attempt to make the CD a more interactive experience which is doesn't need to be. In fact, several albums that year had little tricks like that - check The Stone Roses Second Coming - it has 12 songs and something like 99 actual track marks. Annoying!

Queen1973 user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queen1973
Bohemian: 590 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Nov 11, 13:09 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Crazy i was listening to this track again before i signed on, 22 mins 33 seconds.  I read somewhere 22 is the years since there first album Queen 1973--------Made In Heaven 1995, thats the 22 and the 33 i cant remeber what that was for. The track before the yeah......is a sample from Action this day..

The 22 minute length of Track 13 echoes the 22 year gap between the release of 'Made in Heaven' and Queen,
the band's first album, with key moments in the time-span (such as
Freddie Mercury's death in 1991 (18:00)) being echoed with more dramatic
and eerie notes than earlier minutes in the piece. At the end following
a symbol build-up, a sound resembling a cartoonish spaceship is heard,
which could be signalling that Mercury has left the planet as all of his
vocals have been used up. Finally, at the end of the "Untitled" Track
13, a voice is heard (likely Freddie's) saying 'Fab!'


ride the vision

dbruce user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 163 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Nov 11, 13:34 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



kevinhairsineevans wrote: The track before the yeah......is a sample from Action this day..


Whereabouts in Action is this taken from? Every time I listen to Action I can never quite place where this Yeah is pulled from!!

Cheers

bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12697 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Nov 11, 04:35 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Oh, that explanation makes a heap more sense.  Cheers


"Your not funny, your not a good musician, theres a difference between being funny and being an idiot, you obviously being the latter" - Dave R Fuller
Scofflaw user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 40 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Nov 11, 10:10 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Probably the creepiest song I've ever heard, and also one of my favorites. If it does correlate with events in his life, I'd love to know how so and what each part means. That creepy part in the middle with the chimes still scares me, even though I've heard it several times.

As a side note, I've always thought this would end up as part of the score for the Queen biopic, if it ever happens.

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

Posted: 15 Nov 11, 11:24 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I'm not sure I buy into the 22 minutes = 22 years idea. It seems like someone trying to add more significance to the piece than was intended. Yes, sometimes works are given that kind of subtle meaning (such as "'39" being the 39th album track), but I personally don't see it (hear it?) here.

In order to work, each minute must represent a year. Therefore, each set of sounds represents something happening in that year? Are they referring to points significant to the band? To Freddie? Their personal lives? Which events? Why those and not others? Is there significance to the different musical bits used (the percussion represents X? The piano represents Y? Freddie laughing in "1993" is what?)? Honestly, there ought to be a consistent method to the application of an idea in order for it carry the impact of that idea most fully. And don't call it "Abstract," because you can't be both specific (22 years) and abstract at the same time.

Also, given that I consider "It's A Beautiful Day (Reprise)" to be the entire 25:37 long song, including the closing ambient portion,  it no longer really works on that level. And what about the LP version, where the track fades out after the second "Yeah"? Is the significance now only applicable to the CD? Does anyone have the cassette version, does it have the full IABD-R track?

Anyway, this is just my opinion. I think the extended ambient closing was David Richards' successful experiment which the band decided to include, because it *is* cool and gets people talking and they'd not done anything quite like it before. I'm a big fan of Mike Oldfield, who is known for creating epic (22- to 25-minute long) pieces on many of his albums, even going so far on his masterpiece Amarok to create a 60:02 long track (that's the entire album, which is an unbroken hour-long piece; no individual tracks at all, and it's brilliant). IABD-R has more in common with some of those pieces, in my opinion, than anything else. 

Sorry for harping on this. I'm not trying to ruin anyone's enjoyment. It's a long, beautiful piece of music and need not be anything else.

dysan user not visiting Queenzone.com
dysan
Royalty: 1544 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Nov 11, 12:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

1993 = first solo number one? :o)

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

Posted: 15 Nov 11, 13:42 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



dysan wrote: 1993 = first solo number one? :o)


If you subscribe to the 22 minutes = 22 years theory, sure, why not?

Given that things of relative importance happen in Queen's existence every year, it's easy to play the game of "this must equal that" in retrospect. When there's a lot to pick from, it's easy to see parallels where none exist.

Also occurring in 1993:

Parlophone re-issued "The Great Pretender" single
The Brian May Band toured the US and Europe
The Left-Handed Marriage album Crazy Chain was released
Hollywood Records released "Driven By You" in the US
The Five Live EP was released (also a #1)
Brian and Paul Rodgers record "I'm Ready" for Paul's solo album
"Resurrection" is released as a single
"Too Much Love Will Kill You" is released as a single
"Hard Business" debuts on Frank Stubbs Promotes as the theme song
The Freddie Mercury Remixes EP is released
The Cross play their last concert with Roger
"Last Horizon" is released as a single
"Love Token (Explicit Version)" is released on the Classic Rock Collection, Vol. 4 CD from Rock CD magazine.

It was a busier time for Brian, since he was dealing with his grief by working overtime promoting "Back To The Light" and doing side projects.

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

Posted: 15 Nov 11, 17:57 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



rhyeking wrote: I'm not sure I buy into the 22 minutes = 22 years idea. It seems like someone trying to add more significance to the piece than was intended. Yes, sometimes works are given that kind of subtle meaning (such as"'39" being the 39th album track), but I personally don't see it (hear it?) here.

In order to work, each minute must represent a year. Therefore, each set of sounds represents something happening in that year? Are they referring to points significant to the band? To Freddie? Their personal lives? Which events? Why those and not others? Is there significance to the different musical bits used (the percussion represents X? The piano represents Y? Freddie laughing in "1993" is what?)? Honestly, there ought to be a consistent method to the application of an idea in order for it carry the impact of that idea most fully. And don't call it "Abstract," because you can't be both specific (22 years) and abstract at the same time.

I have no opinion really, but am pointing out that this is fallacious logic.  The work could certainly have deliberately been 22 minutes long, with something deliberate placed at the segment that would correlate to the loss of Freddie (or not), and everything else be just music.   There is no requirement that every minute must reflect something happening in that year. This is the rough intellectual equivalent of your claim that thinking Bohemian Rhapsody was in whole or in part autobiographical somehow negates a belief in Fred's ability to weave a purely fictional tale of significance  i.e. it's a completely bogus argument.

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

Posted: 15 Nov 11, 20:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

There's no fallacy in my asking for clarity about an interpretation of a piece of art or of the artist's motivation.

If the artist's intention is not clear, questions have to be asked. If the artist's statement is muddied by ineffective execution, questions will expose that. It is the artist's responsibility to have clear intent and to be able to defend it.

Being vague, non-committal or generally wishy-washy about their idea does not make for an impactful artistic vision.

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

Posted: 15 Nov 11, 20:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

As to "Bohemian Rhapsody," since you brought it up, you still fail to see my point.

It's not about whether Freddie was creative enough to write the song solely from his imagination or not, it's about the fact that certain fans seem to think that something so evocative could ONLY come out of his direct personal experience. In his lifetime he denied such personal motivations were behind it, but those are patently ignored now because the tragedy of his death paints a more romantic picture of he himself being the tragic figure in the song.

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

Posted: 16 Nov 11, 11:21 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I thought we were supposed to be watching The Wizard Of Oz while playing Track 13.   The flying monkeys appear right when Freddie dies.

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

Posted: 16 Nov 11, 12:19 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



rhyeking wrote: There's no fallacy in my asking for clarity about an interpretation of a piece of art or of the artist's motivation.

If the artist's intention is not clear, questions have to be asked. If the artist's statement is muddied by ineffective execution, questions will expose that. It is the artist's responsibility to have clear intent and to be able to defend it.

Being vague, non-committal or generally wishy-washy about their idea does not make for an impactful artistic vision.

I don't really know or care what any of that is meant to mean, but my point stands:  It's is not a reasonable argument against the length of the piece being significant or the possibility of Fred's death being marked in the piece to say that the intention of every other minute is not clear.  To repeat, what follows is crap, with the parts in bold especially crap:

In order to work, each minute must represent a year. Therefore, each set of sounds represents something happening in that year? Are they referring to points significant to the band? To Freddie? Their personal lives? Which events? Why those and not others? Is there significance to the different musical bits used (the percussion represents X? The piano represents Y? Freddie laughing in "1993" is what?)? Honestly, there ought to be a consistent method to the application of an idea in order for it carry the impact of that idea most fully. And don't call it "Abstract," because you can't be both specific (22 years) and abstract at the same time.

Queen was under no artistic obligation to make every minute reflect a year.  Get real.  Once again, you're so hot to undermine the ideas of other people (which is different from simply constructing an opposing argument) that you don't even care if you make any sense!

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

Posted: 16 Nov 11, 12:36 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



rhyeking wrote: As to "Bohemian Rhapsody," since you brought it up, you still fail to see my point.

It's not about whether Freddie was creative enough to write the song solely from his imagination or not, it's about the fact that certain fans seem to think that something so evocative could ONLY come out of his direct personal experience. In his lifetime he denied such personal motivations were behind it, but those are patently ignored now because the tragedy of his death paints a more romantic picture of he himself being the tragic figure in the song.

The only fan I'm aware of that has ever implied that there is some issue around the idea "that something so evocative could ONLY come out of his direct personal experience" is YOU!  The original thread: 

http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1282128/very-interesting-probably-the-best-interpretation-of-boh-rhap.aspx

Fred said in one way or another all his songs were about love, or alternatively, about relationships.   Like many songwriters he wanted people to find their own lives and meanings in his songs. That a private gay man might have declined to describe in intimate and frank detail what may have been beautifully and creatively camouflaged struggles around those issues can hardly be considered proof of anything.  Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

MercurialFreddie user not visiting Queenzone.com
old fashioned dandy
MercurialFreddie
Bohemian: 806 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Nov 11, 12:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Didn't Brian May clear this up saying that the track represents "night" while the rest of the MIH album represents day ?
I've seen that statement somewhere on his soapbox.