[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]kween-iloveit wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I really wanna know which mental institution you gig in. Some of the things you say are just stupid.
How many polls have you read that include freddie mercury and mozart?
Mozart cant be as good as freddie, he's never had a number 1 single.
~Your logic is mind boggling~[/QUOTE]
ive checked out both mozart and freddie and the conclusion is that Freddie is way more important and overall better musician both when it comes to writing songs and not to mention he had the voice of GOD
Thread
Posts in chronological order
How do you know god can sing?
And, on those live recordings of mozart his pitch is all over the place. How do you know he couldnt sing?
When you hear a mozart cd, its not actually him you idiot.
And, on those live recordings of mozart his pitch is all over the place. How do you know he couldnt sing?
When you hear a mozart cd, its not actually him you idiot.
This topic is probably going way out into left-field here but let's use an analogy...
If anything...'Better' is a matter of opinion.
A Rolex Watch might cost $2000 - top quality watch.
A Rolaids Watch might cost $2.00 - good price.
If 2 million people in 2007 buy Rolaids watches - does it mean it's a 'better' watch...??? Nope! Does it mean it's more popular...YES! Will it rank higher in 'popularity'...probably. Will it last as long as a Rolex...nope.
Same goes for alot of music - and to a certain degree Queen's music. Queen's music is generally popular in a certain demographic - NOT EVERYONE knows who Freddie Mercury is. But if you walk down the street and ask 10 people at random - OF ALL AGES...I'm betting that 9 out of 10 of them would know who Mozart is.
To use another analogy...I'm betting you that in the United States -- American Idol is WAY more popular than Queen...does it mean that the winners are better musician -- often times the answer is no.It's all a matter of popularity...which most often than not - translates into success.
People will always have a wider respect for the Mozarts, Beethovens, Chopins, Bach's -- how could you not ?!?! But to make a statement that 'Freddie wrote better classical music' than Mozart....?!?!
If anything...'Better' is a matter of opinion.
A Rolex Watch might cost $2000 - top quality watch.
A Rolaids Watch might cost $2.00 - good price.
If 2 million people in 2007 buy Rolaids watches - does it mean it's a 'better' watch...??? Nope! Does it mean it's more popular...YES! Will it rank higher in 'popularity'...probably. Will it last as long as a Rolex...nope.
Same goes for alot of music - and to a certain degree Queen's music. Queen's music is generally popular in a certain demographic - NOT EVERYONE knows who Freddie Mercury is. But if you walk down the street and ask 10 people at random - OF ALL AGES...I'm betting that 9 out of 10 of them would know who Mozart is.
To use another analogy...I'm betting you that in the United States -- American Idol is WAY more popular than Queen...does it mean that the winners are better musician -- often times the answer is no.It's all a matter of popularity...which most often than not - translates into success.
People will always have a wider respect for the Mozarts, Beethovens, Chopins, Bach's -- how could you not ?!?! But to make a statement that 'Freddie wrote better classical music' than Mozart....?!?!
Hurrah!
Well said.
Waste of time tho, he will only dig himself another hole with a daft remark and climb straight in.
Well said.
Waste of time tho, he will only dig himself another hole with a daft remark and climb straight in.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]smileexpert wrote: [/QUOTENAME]This topic is probably going way out into left-field here but let's use an analogy...
If anything...'Better' is a matter of opinion.
A Rolex Watch might cost $2000 - top quality watch.
A Rolaids Watch might cost $2.00 - good price.
If 2 million people in 2007 buy Rolaids watches - does it mean it's a 'better' watch...??? Nope! Does it mean it's more popular...YES! Will it rank higher in 'popularity'...probably. Will it last as long as a Rolex...nope.
Same goes for alot of music - and to a certain degree Queen's music. Queen's music is generally popular in a certain demographic - NOT EVERYONE knows who Freddie Mercury is. But if you walk down the street and ask 10 people at random - OF ALL AGES...I'm betting that 9 out of 10 of them would know who Mozart is.
To use another analogy...I'm betting you that in the United States -- American Idol is WAY more popular than Queen...does it mean that the winners are better musician -- often times the answer is no.It's all a matter of popularity...which most often than not - translates into success.
People will always have a wider respect for the Mozarts, Beethovens, Chopins, Bach's -- how could you not ?!?! But to make a statement that 'Freddie wrote better classical music' than Mozart....?!?!
[/QUOTE]
those classical music composers lived a few hundred years ago so they have had the time to build this incredible hype around them.
People are still talking and listening to Queen 15 years after freddies death and many consider him as the greatest singer of all time which he was. Imagine what they will say about him in 200 years if the race is still around then.
If anything...'Better' is a matter of opinion.
A Rolex Watch might cost $2000 - top quality watch.
A Rolaids Watch might cost $2.00 - good price.
If 2 million people in 2007 buy Rolaids watches - does it mean it's a 'better' watch...??? Nope! Does it mean it's more popular...YES! Will it rank higher in 'popularity'...probably. Will it last as long as a Rolex...nope.
Same goes for alot of music - and to a certain degree Queen's music. Queen's music is generally popular in a certain demographic - NOT EVERYONE knows who Freddie Mercury is. But if you walk down the street and ask 10 people at random - OF ALL AGES...I'm betting that 9 out of 10 of them would know who Mozart is.
To use another analogy...I'm betting you that in the United States -- American Idol is WAY more popular than Queen...does it mean that the winners are better musician -- often times the answer is no.It's all a matter of popularity...which most often than not - translates into success.
People will always have a wider respect for the Mozarts, Beethovens, Chopins, Bach's -- how could you not ?!?! But to make a statement that 'Freddie wrote better classical music' than Mozart....?!?!
[/QUOTE]
those classical music composers lived a few hundred years ago so they have had the time to build this incredible hype around them.
People are still talking and listening to Queen 15 years after freddies death and many consider him as the greatest singer of all time which he was. Imagine what they will say about him in 200 years if the race is still around then.
I'm guessing, NOT MANY!
"those classical music composers lived a few hundred years ago so they have had the time to build this incredible hype around them.
People are still talking and listening to Queen 15 years after freddies death and many consider him as the greatest singer of all time which he was. Image what they will say about him in 200 years if the race is still around then."
15 years is nothing my friend...
Consider this...
In the time of these classical composers there were NO Radios, NO Televisions, NO Youtube, NO Internet -- people were mainly relying on live performances, and word of mouth etc. etc. etc.
Artists in the 20th and 21st centuries have had considerably more success without doing HALF as much effort. Often times their success is handed to them with very little effort.
Do you think the same people would have been AS successful in the time of these composers - The Mozarts, The Bachs, The Beethovens, Chopins etc. etc. - PLEASE. It's a no-contest.
Reverse the roles...if Mozart or Beethoven lived in 2007 - with the advances in media-tools - not to mention medicine (Beethoven eventually lost his hearing - remember and STILL wrote some amazing stuff) - they would have kicked the shit (both literally and musically) out of any artist alive today.
The point is that they worked and performed their ASSES off travelling around Europe - showing their skill and writing music for others to perform...such music is STILL performed to this day.
They didn't record a thing - but had their music written down and in most cases "literally" wrote their own music...not to be confused with people who 'record' but don't "write" a note...not saying that's bad at all - just making that clarification.
There were no Top 40 charts - no iTunes - no American Idol, American Top 40 - Top of the Pops etc. etc. or nothing that came close to these 'clouded' views of what 'good' music is these days.
So these composers and performers were popular -- and had the "hype" not because they had great media tools or a stunning website or a great manager, producer or because they were good-looking. They worked to reach their popularity AND they sometimes failed miserably.
The "hype" was there because the composers earned it ON THEIR OWN.
People are still talking and listening to Queen 15 years after freddies death and many consider him as the greatest singer of all time which he was. Image what they will say about him in 200 years if the race is still around then."
15 years is nothing my friend...
Consider this...
In the time of these classical composers there were NO Radios, NO Televisions, NO Youtube, NO Internet -- people were mainly relying on live performances, and word of mouth etc. etc. etc.
Artists in the 20th and 21st centuries have had considerably more success without doing HALF as much effort. Often times their success is handed to them with very little effort.
Do you think the same people would have been AS successful in the time of these composers - The Mozarts, The Bachs, The Beethovens, Chopins etc. etc. - PLEASE. It's a no-contest.
Reverse the roles...if Mozart or Beethoven lived in 2007 - with the advances in media-tools - not to mention medicine (Beethoven eventually lost his hearing - remember and STILL wrote some amazing stuff) - they would have kicked the shit (both literally and musically) out of any artist alive today.
The point is that they worked and performed their ASSES off travelling around Europe - showing their skill and writing music for others to perform...such music is STILL performed to this day.
They didn't record a thing - but had their music written down and in most cases "literally" wrote their own music...not to be confused with people who 'record' but don't "write" a note...not saying that's bad at all - just making that clarification.
There were no Top 40 charts - no iTunes - no American Idol, American Top 40 - Top of the Pops etc. etc. or nothing that came close to these 'clouded' views of what 'good' music is these days.
So these composers and performers were popular -- and had the "hype" not because they had great media tools or a stunning website or a great manager, producer or because they were good-looking. They worked to reach their popularity AND they sometimes failed miserably.
The "hype" was there because the composers earned it ON THEIR OWN.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]smileexpert wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"those classical music composers lived a few hundred years ago so they have had the time to build this incredible hype around them.
People are still talking and listening to Queen 15 years after freddies death and many consider him as the greatest singer of all time which he was. Image what they will say about him in 200 years if the race is still around then."
15 years is nothing my friend...
Consider this...
In the time of these classical composers there were NO Radios, NO Televisions, NO Youtube, NO Internet -- people were mainly relying on live performances, and word of mouth etc. etc. etc.
Artists in the 20th and 21st centuries have had considerably more success without doing HALF as much effort. Often times their success is handed to them with very little effort.
Do you think the same people would have been AS successful in the time of these composers - The Mozarts, The Bachs, The Beethovens, Chopins etc. etc. - PLEASE. It's a no-contest.
Reverse the roles...if Mozart or Beethoven lived in 2007 - with the advances in media-tools - not to mention medicine (Beethoven eventually lost his hearing - remember and STILL wrote some amazing stuff) - they would have kicked the shit (both literally and musically) out of any artist alive today.
The point is that they worked and performed their ASSES off travelling around Europe - showing their skill and writing music for others to perform...such music is STILL performed to this day.
They didn't record a thing - but had their music written down and in most cases "literally" wrote their own music...not to be confused with people who 'record' but don't "write" a note...not saying that's bad at all - just making that clarification.
There were no Top 40 charts - no iTunes - no American Idol, American Top 40 - Top of the Pops etc. etc. or nothing that came close to these 'clouded' views of what 'good' music is these days.
So these composers and performers were popular -- and had the "hype" not because they had great media tools or a stunning website or a great manager, producer or because they were good-looking. They worked to reach their popularity AND they sometimes failed miserably.
The "hype" was there because the composers earned it ON THEIR OWN.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah but really , how much of this do you know for a fact? You only know what is written and we all know that alot of crapp can be in writing.
People are still talking and listening to Queen 15 years after freddies death and many consider him as the greatest singer of all time which he was. Image what they will say about him in 200 years if the race is still around then."
15 years is nothing my friend...
Consider this...
In the time of these classical composers there were NO Radios, NO Televisions, NO Youtube, NO Internet -- people were mainly relying on live performances, and word of mouth etc. etc. etc.
Artists in the 20th and 21st centuries have had considerably more success without doing HALF as much effort. Often times their success is handed to them with very little effort.
Do you think the same people would have been AS successful in the time of these composers - The Mozarts, The Bachs, The Beethovens, Chopins etc. etc. - PLEASE. It's a no-contest.
Reverse the roles...if Mozart or Beethoven lived in 2007 - with the advances in media-tools - not to mention medicine (Beethoven eventually lost his hearing - remember and STILL wrote some amazing stuff) - they would have kicked the shit (both literally and musically) out of any artist alive today.
The point is that they worked and performed their ASSES off travelling around Europe - showing their skill and writing music for others to perform...such music is STILL performed to this day.
They didn't record a thing - but had their music written down and in most cases "literally" wrote their own music...not to be confused with people who 'record' but don't "write" a note...not saying that's bad at all - just making that clarification.
There were no Top 40 charts - no iTunes - no American Idol, American Top 40 - Top of the Pops etc. etc. or nothing that came close to these 'clouded' views of what 'good' music is these days.
So these composers and performers were popular -- and had the "hype" not because they had great media tools or a stunning website or a great manager, producer or because they were good-looking. They worked to reach their popularity AND they sometimes failed miserably.
The "hype" was there because the composers earned it ON THEIR OWN.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah but really , how much of this do you know for a fact? You only know what is written and we all know that alot of crapp can be in writing.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Atheist wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=pink>Account Deleted wrote: [/QUOTENAME]That attitude isn't going to help you at all, Atheist.
Stop being such an arrogant cunt.
I'm not trying to be mean or anything, it's just how your stupid ways make you come off.[/QUOTE]
Im just being myself and saying whats on my mind thats all.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to break it to you, but then you're just plain fucked up.
Stop being such an arrogant cunt.
I'm not trying to be mean or anything, it's just how your stupid ways make you come off.[/QUOTE]
Im just being myself and saying whats on my mind thats all.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to break it to you, but then you're just plain fucked up.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=pink>Account Deleted wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Atheist wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=pink>Account Deleted wrote: [/QUOTENAME]That attitude isn't going to help you at all, Atheist.
Stop being such an arrogant cunt.
I'm not trying to be mean or anything, it's just how your stupid ways make you come off.[/QUOTE]
Im just being myself and saying whats on my mind thats all.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to break it to you, but then you're just plain fucked up.[/QUOTE]
as you may have found out by now, i dont care what people think of me
Stop being such an arrogant cunt.
I'm not trying to be mean or anything, it's just how your stupid ways make you come off.[/QUOTE]
Im just being myself and saying whats on my mind thats all.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to break it to you, but then you're just plain fucked up.[/QUOTE]
as you may have found out by now, i dont care what people think of me
well yo obviously do as yo wouldnt feel the need to defend yourself.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Now you're arguing "for" complexity, when that was your reason to bash Mozart? Make up your mind, will you?
[/QUOTE]
Maybe he thinks Mozart just used too many notes
Now you're arguing "for" complexity, when that was your reason to bash Mozart? Make up your mind, will you?
[/QUOTE]
Maybe he thinks Mozart just used too many notes
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Now you're arguing "for" complexity, when that was your reason to bash Mozart? Make up your mind, will you?
[/QUOTE]
Maybe he thinks Mozart just used too many notes[/QUOTE]hahaha
xD
Now you're arguing "for" complexity, when that was your reason to bash Mozart? Make up your mind, will you?
[/QUOTE]
Maybe he thinks Mozart just used too many notes[/QUOTE]hahaha
xD
This thread has become way more funny in the past few hours....
A guy with a beard talking like a 13 year old, while his brother argues like a 9 year old.
Please, keep it going...I especially liked the line about composers having had time to build their reputations over hundreds of years (despite being dead throughout).
And Queen being more influential than the Beatles....despite being influenced by the Beatles themselves...
A guy with a beard talking like a 13 year old, while his brother argues like a 9 year old.
Please, keep it going...I especially liked the line about composers having had time to build their reputations over hundreds of years (despite being dead throughout).
And Queen being more influential than the Beatles....despite being influenced by the Beatles themselves...
I thought the composition itself was good. It sounded like it was inspired by Freddie's "A Day At The Races" piano playing. Like I said before, Once you guys get past your egos; and begin to really refine what you do...you'll show something. The only thing I would strongly urge is use a more authentic piano sound on the keyboard. That keyboard tone is one of the reasons that people like Richard Marx are out of a job. Its sooo annoying.
And on a final note, a question and comment:
Why do you call yourself an Atheist, but yet you say that Freddie has the voice of God? That was your words...That being said, If that's what you believe...then you aren't atheist at all. You're agnostic.
And on a final note, a question and comment:
Why do you call yourself an Atheist, but yet you say that Freddie has the voice of God? That was your words...That being said, If that's what you believe...then you aren't atheist at all. You're agnostic.