Studio buns in the oven

[Kes]

I'd argue that the title is QUEEN's Greatest Hits, and that maybe, for the sake of being true to the legacy, the Queen bit is more important than the Greatest Hits bit.

Despite Somebody To Love with George Michael being a #1, I'd still rather have a proper Queen single on the album, than one reconstructed with another singer after Freddie had died. I'd remove STL, AOBTD, Elton's TSMGO, and the solo bits, and replace them all with "boner-Fido" Queen singles. The only "duet" I'd leave on there is Under Pressure, as Freddie had a hand (or at the very least, a foot) in the original tracking on that one.

I'd argue that the title is QUEEN's Greatest Hits, and that maybe, for the sake of being true to the legacy, the Queen bit is more important than the Greatest Hits bit.

Despite Somebody To Love with George Michael being a #1, I'd still rather have a proper Queen single on the album, than one reconstructed with another singer after Freddie had died. I'd remove STL, AOBTD, Elton's TSMGO, and the solo bits, and replace them all with "boner-Fido" Queen singles. The only "duet" I'd leave on there is Under Pressure, as at least Freddie had a hand (or at very least a foot) in the original tracking on that one.

Deep down, I'd agree with you. But with a hand in the commercial logic of the release, then I'd keep it on there.

But then again, that road also leads to them thinking "Well, Freddie had a #1 so let's whack that on. But not the remix everyone knows. I guess Brian did that car song, so we'll put that on too. No, Roger, there's no more room. Go and remix something instead."

[Kes]

A little bird (strange that, coming from a kestrel) told me that the plan was to put the No More Brothers mix on there, but they couldn't clear the contracts in time (I reckon that's business speak for someone probably wanting a bit more money than someone else was prepared to give them!).

Solo stuff isn't Queen... err, unless I guess, the band pop into a studio and rework it, AS a band.

Therefore, if a track was made as a solo effort, and has no involvement from any other member of the group, it doesn't really have a place in the "band environment".

That's just MY opinion.

Sometimes the "little" you gain from a bit of commerciality, does a little too much damage to the righteous principles that you've previously carried, and have got you to the elevated position in the first place.

..and before I get any deeper into this, I consider No-One But You, a proper Queen track, as although it was written and recorded after Freddie left, it has all the trademarks, intent, and thought processes gone into it, that a Queen track would have had. I can't say the same for stuff like TCR, unfortunately.

While I can certainly see why people would argue against having solo/Queen+ tracks on a Queen compilation, GHIII was my introduction to the band's - and particularly Brian's - solo catalogue, while the George Michael version of "Somebody to Love" remains my favourite ever recording of the song, so I'm really glad they put them on there.

I don't mind having solo tracks on GH3. It does gives the fan an insight of what happens outside of Queen. Shame Roger wasn't represented though. Group the three Hits compilations with the three Deep Cuts albums you have a good overview of the Queen Catalog.

The last Genesis Compilation "R-Kive" was great as it had 3 tracks from each solo member as well as the bands main hits. Unfortunately however the tracks chosen weren't the ones i would have chosen, especially in Phil's case - they were the weakest ones.

[Kes]

Representing Steve Hackett, the biggest selling 7" he had, by quite a long chalk, was Clocks (Angel of Mons) off the Spectral Mornings album. Not even a sniff of it on that compilation.

With the Queen thing, you're representing the band's catalogue better by only having Queen tracks on there. Let's remember, back in the day when GHIII was released, solo wise, what exactly was still on catalogue and actually available?

Being honest, I'm not sure much of it was. At least all of the Queen albums were still on the shelves.

I think maybe the idea with the Queen+ Greatest Hits III was to test the water or make a stand that Queen+ had a future with Brian or other artists as vocalists.
And maybe it didn't go down that well among fans, and that is why there never was a Greatest video Hits III, or another standalone version of GH III 2011 Remastered ?

If fairness to the band, if you wanted to put all their UK singles between 1973-1999 on a compilation, they wouldn't quite fit on three discs.

Everything this side of the millennium gets a little tricky, especially as quality control goes out the window, and there are some songs which are technically the modern day 'promo' singles, but the waters are a lot murkier now as these things go straight to YouTube instead of radio DJs and pluggers. Plus the band have a habit of releasing one-off standalone tracks now, such as the recent WWRY / WATC alternate mixes... are they singles? They have cover art and can be bought as standalones from Amazon/iTunes etc. But by that token, All Dead All Dead (Hybrid Mix) was a more prominent 'release', and you can't buy that anywhere. And do you include the 75 re-take of Keep Yourself Alive, because it was a pink vinyl single in 2011?

Yeah. They've muddied the waters something chronic in recent years. So I'd be tempted to stick with a four-disc set that focused JUST on the various single releases in the 20th Century.

"Greatest Hits III" is a classic. I have visions of certain compilations in the future...including expanding the ones in "The Platinum Collection"! All are not said and done yet! Hoooo!

While I can certainly see why people would argue against having solo/Queen+ tracks on a Queen compilation, GHIII was my introduction to the band's - and particularly Brian's - solo catalogue, while the George Michael version of "Somebody to Love" remains my favourite ever recording of the song, so I'm really glad they put them on there.

For me, I don't see it as a proper Greatest Hits package from the band - and I can see why music critics at the time accused them of scraping the barrel.

I think they could have been the first band to have released their solo eforts combined as a Solo greatest Hits package - I am sure no band has ever done that before.

And I agree with your assessment of George's version of STL; surely the best Queen cover ever.

I think they could have been the first band to have released their solo eforts combined as a Solo greatest Hits package - I am sure no band has ever done that before.

I'd imagine rights issues would get in the way of that, but it's a neat idea.

If fairness to the band, if you wanted to put all their UK singles between 1973-1999 on a compilation, they wouldn't quite fit on three discs.

I have 4 boxsets of singles that say otherwise.

If fairness to the band, if you wanted to put all their UK singles between 1973-1999 on a compilation, they wouldn't quite fit on three discs.

I have 4 boxsets of singles that say otherwise.

Eh?

[Kes]

I think the point they were making, was that they can fit quite happily on about 48 CDs. The band proved that.

I think the point they were making, was that they can fit quite happily on about 48 CDs. The band proved that.

Ah. That doesn't prove that the tracks won't fit on 3 discs, though, does it?