I have owned a copy of the original, although not a first pressing, since about 1981, and still play it regularly. The new version does sound crisper in places, probably due to updated recording techniques, BUT, for me, the drums on the new version of Liar sound horrendous.
@@paulphipps3995 I think the issue is that they’ve “modernised” the drums through quantising, re-recording or whatever and they now don’t fit in with the overall mix. I said in the video that they have more attack, where the original sound is far more laid back. Still heavy but not so in your face. I stand by my comment that the original is the better overall listen.
@@carefulwiththataxeeugene-fz2ek I totally agree. The original is better by far. There was a depth of feeling put into those recording sessions that can never be replicated. For me, the original instrumentation along with Freddie's voice will always be perfect.
I was listening to all your comments of praise for the sound quality and I was thinking, “Yes, I hear you, but…” And then you mentioned the re-recording of some parts and, er, yes, but… And then the words about Freddy’s voice, and ah, see? And then finally you said it: You prefer the original, and you prefer it for all the reasons I could have thought of given enough time to consider. There are many albums from the early seventies and even later that contain fantastic music, but the recording quality is lacking. I often think, “If only the recording quality or mixing was better.” However, I also feel remixing and even re-recording parts so many decades later is like doctoring an old photo to say, “This is how I really wanted to look when I was 15.” I’m all for a good remastering. Steven Wilson does fantastic work. But remixing, re-recording, and adding things they originally wanted to have but couldn’t (Yes, Dave Mustaine, I’m thinking of your Megadeth remixes), to me that’s just not honest treatment of a historical artifact. I loved hearing your review, Nick. Coming from a veteran Queen fan whose opinions I know and trust, I can rest assured I’ve heard the best review out there.
thanks Peter. We really should "sit down" one day and have a good old chat about music and photography (and life in general). I think we'd have a fair few thngs in common!!
I never switch off a tune by Queen that I hear on my radio. Yes, I still listen to FM radio. But only in the car. Queen hasn’t been added to my Spotify yet. There are many such classic rock bands that aren’t. It’s a different listening experience. (Speaking of listening experience, your audio sounded as good as I’ve ever heard in this video. Looks like mic placement is just right. 😎)
@@TC_Conner thanks TC I’ve been experimenting with mic position and settings in GarageBand so it’s nice to hear it’s paid off :-) Get some more Queen in your life! The early stuff is best IMO :-)
Brian May said they re-named it Queen 1 because that's what the band referred to it as for years whenever they talked about it. Pretty simple reason, really.
I have owned a copy of the original, although not a first pressing, since about 1981, and still play it regularly. The new version does sound crisper in places, probably due to updated recording techniques, BUT, for me, the drums on the new version of Liar sound horrendous.
True, it horrble on Liar, and its digital. computerised or something. Its not just re-doing the drums, something i really off there
@@paulphipps3995 I think the issue is that they’ve “modernised” the drums through quantising, re-recording or whatever and they now don’t fit in with the overall mix. I said in the video that they have more attack, where the original sound is far more laid back. Still heavy but not so in your face. I stand by my comment that the original is the better overall listen.
@@carefulwiththataxeeugene-fz2ek I totally agree. The original is better by far. There was a depth of feeling put into those recording sessions that can never be replicated. For me, the original instrumentation along with Freddie's voice will always be perfect.
I was listening to all your comments of praise for the sound quality and I was thinking, “Yes, I hear you, but…” And then you mentioned the re-recording of some parts and, er, yes, but… And then the words about Freddy’s voice, and ah, see? And then finally you said it: You prefer the original, and you prefer it for all the reasons I could have thought of given enough time to consider.
There are many albums from the early seventies and even later that contain fantastic music, but the recording quality is lacking. I often think, “If only the recording quality or mixing was better.” However, I also feel remixing and even re-recording parts so many decades later is like doctoring an old photo to say, “This is how I really wanted to look when I was 15.” I’m all for a good remastering. Steven Wilson does fantastic work. But remixing, re-recording, and adding things they originally wanted to have but couldn’t (Yes, Dave Mustaine, I’m thinking of your Megadeth remixes), to me that’s just not honest treatment of a historical artifact.
I loved hearing your review, Nick. Coming from a veteran Queen fan whose opinions I know and trust, I can rest assured I’ve heard the best review out there.
thanks Peter. We really should "sit down" one day and have a good old chat about music and photography (and life in general). I think we'd have a fair few thngs in common!!
@ We should talk about arranging that during the holidays, Nick.
I never switch off a tune by Queen that I hear on my radio. Yes, I still listen to FM radio. But only in the car. Queen hasn’t been added to my Spotify yet. There are many such classic rock bands that aren’t. It’s a different listening experience.
(Speaking of listening experience, your audio sounded as good as I’ve ever heard in this video. Looks like mic placement is just right. 😎)
@@TC_Conner thanks TC
I’ve been experimenting with mic position and settings in GarageBand so it’s nice to hear it’s paid off :-)
Get some more Queen in your life! The early stuff is best IMO :-)
@ Yes, I agree that I need more Queen in my life. 😎
Brian May said they re-named it Queen 1 because that's what the band referred to it as for years whenever they talked about it. Pretty simple reason, really.
for years after maybe, but at the time of its release?
@@carefulwiththataxeeugene-fz2eksince they released Queen II they called it that
Queen, Queen, Queen, what about Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds Singin' in the Rain?
@@Enrique-the-photographer I prefer the Morecambe & Wise version
@@carefulwiththataxeeugene-fz2ek Haha, I had to "google" them.
@@Enrique-the-photographer you'd not heard of M&W? colour me amazed!!
@@carefulwiththataxeeugene-fz2ek All we get in south Florida by law is Lawrence Welk🤣
@@Enrique-the-photographer I'm going to make a Lawrence Welk video one day!