[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Atheist wrote: [/QUOTENAME]its a queen vs beatles thread right? all im doing is showing proof that the beatles are garbage compared to Queen.
Queen is a million times better band in all areas. You cant compare the two[/QUOTE]
How about album sales?
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Bobby_brown
Of course there are other artists that have done great things and i was already fan of all the songs you posted. Those exact songs you posted are my favourites by those composers and i agree that bach was very good, specially the Toccata & Fuge which is both very complex and catchy at the same time.
What makes Freddie unbeatable is that he both had the songwriting skills AND the best voice that will ever be.
Music is all about emotion and freddie wrote incredibly emotional songs where he both used the piano and his incredible voice. For example "you take my breath away" is a perfect example of how much emotion he put in a song.
While those composers are very good i dont get the same deep emotions from their work as freddies. Freddie was the ultimate emotion musician. He had the most energy and passion. He could write songs in almost every genre and do it better than anyone else in that genre.
He was a wonderful,intelligent and honest man and it showed in his music and lyrics. The music an artist makes shows what kind of person he is as it reflects the thoughts and feelings of that person and i think freddie had the deepest and most intelligent and energetic music that could be written down.
Sure there are other artists that have songs that are very good too but overall they cant compete with freddie. He did amazing music nonstop til the end.
I just think he is unbeatlbe forever because he both had the musical talent and the voice of god. No singer can EVER come close to Freddie, its impossible.
Of course there are other artists that have done great things and i was already fan of all the songs you posted. Those exact songs you posted are my favourites by those composers and i agree that bach was very good, specially the Toccata & Fuge which is both very complex and catchy at the same time.
What makes Freddie unbeatable is that he both had the songwriting skills AND the best voice that will ever be.
Music is all about emotion and freddie wrote incredibly emotional songs where he both used the piano and his incredible voice. For example "you take my breath away" is a perfect example of how much emotion he put in a song.
While those composers are very good i dont get the same deep emotions from their work as freddies. Freddie was the ultimate emotion musician. He had the most energy and passion. He could write songs in almost every genre and do it better than anyone else in that genre.
He was a wonderful,intelligent and honest man and it showed in his music and lyrics. The music an artist makes shows what kind of person he is as it reflects the thoughts and feelings of that person and i think freddie had the deepest and most intelligent and energetic music that could be written down.
Sure there are other artists that have songs that are very good too but overall they cant compete with freddie. He did amazing music nonstop til the end.
I just think he is unbeatlbe forever because he both had the musical talent and the voice of god. No singer can EVER come close to Freddie, its impossible.
Atheist said:
"Music is all about emotion and freddie wrote incredibly emotional songs where he both used the piano and his incredible voice. For example "you take my breath away" is a perfect example of how much emotion he put in a song.
While those composers are very good i dont get the same deep emotions from their work as freddies. Freddie was the ultimate emotion musician. He had the most energy and passion. He could write songs in almost every genre and do it better than anyone else in that genre.
He was a wonderful,intelligent and honest man and it showed in his music and lyrics. The music an artist makes shows what kind of person he is as it reflects the thoughts and feelings of that person and i think freddie had the deepest and most intelligent and energetic music that could be written down.
Sure there are other artists that have songs that are very good too but overall they cant compete with freddie. He did amazing music nonstop til the end.
I just think he is unbeatlbe forever because he both had the musical talent and the voice of god. No singer can EVER come close to Freddie, its impossible."
If he finished the last two paragraphs with, "IMHO", then his first three sentences are hard to quibble with, and one of the few intelligent things he's had on his 20 posts on this topic. I think Freddie is the Mozart of his century, and songs like Bo Rhap, Somebody to Love grow in stature as the years go by as pieces of art, while acts like The Beatles and Stones stuff is still popular, but not holding up as well.
However, I, and others can see differing viewpoints, where Atheist can't or won't. In a recent review, some writer for an American daily called Jeff Buckley the greatest singer of his lifetime, end of discussion. I've only heard 3 or 4 songs from the late Buckley, and he has a magnificent voice. Better than Freddie? Not to my ears, but I appreciate where he's coming from. The lcoal classic rock station named Freddie as rock's greatest singer, and some guy on the message board where it was posted thought the pick was incorrect, because Queen was a novelty act, and he thought Jim Morrison of the Doors should be named the top vocalist!!! Beyond absurd!!! Open your mind a little Atheist, you appear knowledgeable at times, at others you come off like a tool, which is sad as you appear to have a lot to offer in the way of intelligent opinion.
"Music is all about emotion and freddie wrote incredibly emotional songs where he both used the piano and his incredible voice. For example "you take my breath away" is a perfect example of how much emotion he put in a song.
While those composers are very good i dont get the same deep emotions from their work as freddies. Freddie was the ultimate emotion musician. He had the most energy and passion. He could write songs in almost every genre and do it better than anyone else in that genre.
He was a wonderful,intelligent and honest man and it showed in his music and lyrics. The music an artist makes shows what kind of person he is as it reflects the thoughts and feelings of that person and i think freddie had the deepest and most intelligent and energetic music that could be written down.
Sure there are other artists that have songs that are very good too but overall they cant compete with freddie. He did amazing music nonstop til the end.
I just think he is unbeatlbe forever because he both had the musical talent and the voice of god. No singer can EVER come close to Freddie, its impossible."
If he finished the last two paragraphs with, "IMHO", then his first three sentences are hard to quibble with, and one of the few intelligent things he's had on his 20 posts on this topic. I think Freddie is the Mozart of his century, and songs like Bo Rhap, Somebody to Love grow in stature as the years go by as pieces of art, while acts like The Beatles and Stones stuff is still popular, but not holding up as well.
However, I, and others can see differing viewpoints, where Atheist can't or won't. In a recent review, some writer for an American daily called Jeff Buckley the greatest singer of his lifetime, end of discussion. I've only heard 3 or 4 songs from the late Buckley, and he has a magnificent voice. Better than Freddie? Not to my ears, but I appreciate where he's coming from. The lcoal classic rock station named Freddie as rock's greatest singer, and some guy on the message board where it was posted thought the pick was incorrect, because Queen was a novelty act, and he thought Jim Morrison of the Doors should be named the top vocalist!!! Beyond absurd!!! Open your mind a little Atheist, you appear knowledgeable at times, at others you come off like a tool, which is sad as you appear to have a lot to offer in the way of intelligent opinion.
Wow this thread is so huge that I reckon it wouldn't hurt if it got bigger.
Here's the objective stuff:
Best vocalists:
1) Freddie
2) Paul
3) Roger
4) Brian
5) John L
6) George
7) Ringo
8) John D
Best Keyboards
1) Freddie
2) Paul
3) Brian
4) John D
5) John L
Best Guitarist
1) Brian
2) Daylight
3) Paul
4) Roger
5) John D
6) John L
7) George
8) Freddie
Best Drummer
1) Roger
2) Paul
3) Ringo
Best Bass Guitars
1) John D
2) Paul
I think both Beatles and Queen fans can accept that the Queen guys were by far the better musicians and performers.
Okay as for songwriting, here's where its totally subjective. this is the stuff that you like. Personally I prefer 1973 to 75 queen above any of the Beatles stuff. However, 98% of people would disagree (not here perhaps).
Overall I think Lennon/MacCartney were consistently the best composers. You can count their crap songs on one hand. where as you need a list as long as your arm to list crap queen songs. Luckily the Good Queen songs are totally awesomes and make up for it.
QII, SHA and ANATO provided more joy for me than any other album (hmm except maybe In Utero).
So
1) Queen
2) Nirvana
3) Beatles (god blessem)
the end!
Here's the objective stuff:
Best vocalists:
1) Freddie
2) Paul
3) Roger
4) Brian
5) John L
6) George
7) Ringo
8) John D
Best Keyboards
1) Freddie
2) Paul
3) Brian
4) John D
5) John L
Best Guitarist
1) Brian
2) Daylight
3) Paul
4) Roger
5) John D
6) John L
7) George
8) Freddie
Best Drummer
1) Roger
2) Paul
3) Ringo
Best Bass Guitars
1) John D
2) Paul
I think both Beatles and Queen fans can accept that the Queen guys were by far the better musicians and performers.
Okay as for songwriting, here's where its totally subjective. this is the stuff that you like. Personally I prefer 1973 to 75 queen above any of the Beatles stuff. However, 98% of people would disagree (not here perhaps).
Overall I think Lennon/MacCartney were consistently the best composers. You can count their crap songs on one hand. where as you need a list as long as your arm to list crap queen songs. Luckily the Good Queen songs are totally awesomes and make up for it.
QII, SHA and ANATO provided more joy for me than any other album (hmm except maybe In Utero).
So
1) Queen
2) Nirvana
3) Beatles (god blessem)
the end!
"1) Queen
2) Nirvana
3) Beatles (god blessem)
the end!"
That's really funny.
2) Nirvana
3) Beatles (god blessem)
the end!"
That's really funny.
I can hardly ever find a 'terrible' Queen song for some reason. Have I been brainwashed into thinking a 'crap' song is 'good' just because it's by Queen?
For some reason people find songs like Delilah or Jesus to be absolutely terrible songs when I've always found them to be exciting and different. I guess I just want to point out that, to me, there are no 'crap' Queen songs...they're just on left field somewhere. Therefore our ears don't want to accept them. Does that make sense or am I talking out of my ass?
I'm probably talking out of my ass.
Let me put it this way...(this is for any '20th century' listeners out there)...think about Arnold Schoenberg. He tried to bend the rules of music, basically the kind of rules almost all classical composers followed previously. He invented the twelve tone technique which sounded horrendous. In most cases his music was simply disturbing and hard to comprehend. It is my theory that our ears were simply not trained for those kinds of sounds. I'll give you an example of some of his work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGWai0SEpUQ
Weird? That's what I thought.
Now, my conclusion is that there are no crap songs...everything is different. Some songs are not as satisfactory simply because we don't find them 'enjoyable' enough. Some people, believe it or not, might find that peice of music to be magnificent. Maybe a Jewish man or woman who had to suffer in a concentration camp? Who knows...all I'm getting at is that what some might not find 'excellent' others do.
So is it really possible to actually compare two artists? I mean, I can't stand KISS, but so many other people absolutely adore them. We all LOVE Queen, but other people don't. Some people HATE country music, but others are in love with it. It's all a matter of one's preference.
One band's ability over another does matter, but it's the end result that truly matters.
We can all say that The Beatles were legendary, therefore they have to be the better of the two. Or we could all say Queen improved what The Beatles were trying to do, therefore they're the better of the two. It's an on going war between two sides. I don't think this argument will ever end, but just for the record I left my two cents.
For some reason people find songs like Delilah or Jesus to be absolutely terrible songs when I've always found them to be exciting and different. I guess I just want to point out that, to me, there are no 'crap' Queen songs...they're just on left field somewhere. Therefore our ears don't want to accept them. Does that make sense or am I talking out of my ass?
I'm probably talking out of my ass.
Let me put it this way...(this is for any '20th century' listeners out there)...think about Arnold Schoenberg. He tried to bend the rules of music, basically the kind of rules almost all classical composers followed previously. He invented the twelve tone technique which sounded horrendous. In most cases his music was simply disturbing and hard to comprehend. It is my theory that our ears were simply not trained for those kinds of sounds. I'll give you an example of some of his work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGWai0SEpUQ
Weird? That's what I thought.
Now, my conclusion is that there are no crap songs...everything is different. Some songs are not as satisfactory simply because we don't find them 'enjoyable' enough. Some people, believe it or not, might find that peice of music to be magnificent. Maybe a Jewish man or woman who had to suffer in a concentration camp? Who knows...all I'm getting at is that what some might not find 'excellent' others do.
So is it really possible to actually compare two artists? I mean, I can't stand KISS, but so many other people absolutely adore them. We all LOVE Queen, but other people don't. Some people HATE country music, but others are in love with it. It's all a matter of one's preference.
One band's ability over another does matter, but it's the end result that truly matters.
We can all say that The Beatles were legendary, therefore they have to be the better of the two. Or we could all say Queen improved what The Beatles were trying to do, therefore they're the better of the two. It's an on going war between two sides. I don't think this argument will ever end, but just for the record I left my two cents.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Cedric6014 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Best Guitarist
1) Brian
2) Daylight
3) Paul
4) Roger
5) John D
6) John L
7) George
8) Freddie
[/QUOTE]
Pretty clear you don't play guitar :)
Brian and then George, Paul, John L, Roger, John D, Freddie. Some people on this site will put Freddie at the top of the list of guitarists.
Best Guitarist
1) Brian
2) Daylight
3) Paul
4) Roger
5) John D
6) John L
7) George
8) Freddie
[/QUOTE]
Pretty clear you don't play guitar :)
Brian and then George, Paul, John L, Roger, John D, Freddie. Some people on this site will put Freddie at the top of the list of guitarists.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Cedric6014 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Here's the objective stuff:
Best Keyboards
1) Freddie
2) Paul
3) Brian
4) John D
5) John L
[/QUOTE]
6) Billy P
Advantage -> BEATLES.
Freddie + Brian + John + Roger all playing at the same time couldn't touch the Great Mr. Preston. Only for a few songs, but they had him.
Go ahead Athiest, tell us how Freddie blows Billy Preston away on keys.
Best Keyboards
1) Freddie
2) Paul
3) Brian
4) John D
5) John L
[/QUOTE]
6) Billy P
Advantage -> BEATLES.
Freddie + Brian + John + Roger all playing at the same time couldn't touch the Great Mr. Preston. Only for a few songs, but they had him.
Go ahead Athiest, tell us how Freddie blows Billy Preston away on keys.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Micrówave wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Cedric6014 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Here's the objective stuff:
Best Keyboards
1) Freddie
2) Paul
3) Brian
4) John D
5) John L
[/QUOTE]
6) Billy P
Advantage -> BEATLES.
Freddie + Brian + John + Roger all playing at the same time couldn't touch the Great Mr. Preston. Only for a few songs, but they had him.
Go ahead Athiest, tell us how Freddie blows Billy Preston away on keys. [/QUOTE]
Even if this billy preston would be more skilled on keys it doenst really matter.
Freddie is the GOD of music
Best Keyboards
1) Freddie
2) Paul
3) Brian
4) John D
5) John L
[/QUOTE]
6) Billy P
Advantage -> BEATLES.
Freddie + Brian + John + Roger all playing at the same time couldn't touch the Great Mr. Preston. Only for a few songs, but they had him.
Go ahead Athiest, tell us how Freddie blows Billy Preston away on keys. [/QUOTE]
Even if this billy preston would be more skilled on keys it doenst really matter.
Freddie is the GOD of music
Yes, I think, averagely, Queen would "defeat" The Beatles by far if we left the eight lads alone (without guest arrangers, producers or performers).
Still I consider John Lennon to be a better composer than any Queennie, and same with George and Paul. But of course that's a matter of opinion.
And if Freddie's God I'm ready to become atheist (no pun intented).
Still I consider John Lennon to be a better composer than any Queennie, and same with George and Paul. But of course that's a matter of opinion.
And if Freddie's God I'm ready to become atheist (no pun intented).
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Yes, I think, averagely, Queen would "defeat" The Beatles by far if we left the eight lads alone (without guest arrangers, producers or performers).
Still I consider John Lennon to be a better composer than any Queennie, and same with George and Paul. But of course that's a matter of opinion.
And if Freddie's God I'm ready to become atheist (no pun intented).[/QUOTE]
haha funny shit. Im just saying that freddie is the best musician of all time, thats it
Still I consider John Lennon to be a better composer than any Queennie, and same with George and Paul. But of course that's a matter of opinion.
And if Freddie's God I'm ready to become atheist (no pun intented).[/QUOTE]
haha funny shit. Im just saying that freddie is the best musician of all time, thats it
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Atheist wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Even if this billy preston would be more skilled on keys it doenst really matter.[/QUOTE]
You don't know who Billy Preston is?
Well, then you really are a musical idiot. Maybe you think you're a really cool person and could have lots a friends if you applied yourself. The only thing is, those people would only make themselves dumber for having wasted the time interacting with you.
I know just in this last minute, I'm feeling a little forgetful... like the life force is being sucked out of my brain thru my lower exit ramp... and there you are to gobble it it up.
I wonder what your observations would be on non-Queen related issues. I think we're all a little curious. The world is waiting for someone with a different way of thinking to take charge. Perhaps you are it, I don't know. Let's find out:
What are your feelings on:
1. The state of independence on foreign oil. Any thoughts or solutions?
2. Is wearing fur really that bad? Animals are still going to get killed and instead of eating squirrels or alligators, wouldn't my foot look very stylish up it's anus or maybe as a hat?
3. Randy Jackson's relevance to the world. American Idol is pretty lame now, and did you see what he looked like touring with Journey in '87? Please, dogg!
4. Paper or plastic
Even if this billy preston would be more skilled on keys it doenst really matter.[/QUOTE]
You don't know who Billy Preston is?
Well, then you really are a musical idiot. Maybe you think you're a really cool person and could have lots a friends if you applied yourself. The only thing is, those people would only make themselves dumber for having wasted the time interacting with you.
I know just in this last minute, I'm feeling a little forgetful... like the life force is being sucked out of my brain thru my lower exit ramp... and there you are to gobble it it up.
I wonder what your observations would be on non-Queen related issues. I think we're all a little curious. The world is waiting for someone with a different way of thinking to take charge. Perhaps you are it, I don't know. Let's find out:
What are your feelings on:
1. The state of independence on foreign oil. Any thoughts or solutions?
2. Is wearing fur really that bad? Animals are still going to get killed and instead of eating squirrels or alligators, wouldn't my foot look very stylish up it's anus or maybe as a hat?
3. Randy Jackson's relevance to the world. American Idol is pretty lame now, and did you see what he looked like touring with Journey in '87? Please, dogg!
4. Paper or plastic
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Micrówave wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Atheist wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Even if this billy preston would be more skilled on keys it doenst really matter.[/QUOTE]
You don't know who Billy Preston is?
Well, then you really are a musical idiot. Maybe you think you're a really cool person and could have lots a friends if you applied yourself. The only thing is, those people would only make themselves dumber for having wasted the time interacting with you.
I know just in this last minute, I'm feeling a little forgetful... like the life force is being sucked out of my brain thru my lower exit ramp... and there you are to gobble it it up.
I wonder what your observations would be on non-Queen related issues. I think we're all a little curious. The world is waiting for someone with a different way of thinking to take charge. Perhaps you are it, I don't know. Let's find out:
What are your feelings on:
1. The state of independence on foreign oil. Any thoughts or solutions?
2. Is wearing fur really that bad? Animals are still going to get killed and instead of eating squirrels or alligators, wouldn't my foot look very stylish up it's anus or maybe as a hat?
3. Randy Jackson's relevance to the world. American Idol is pretty lame now, and did you see what he looked like touring with Journey in '87? Please, dogg!
4. Paper or plastic[/QUOTE]
i checked out billy preston and as expected he cant compete with freddie, who can? no one
About the animals, we humans are animals too, its just that we rule this planet and therfor do whatever we want with the other animals.
Do i think its right? of course its not good to see an animal get slaughtered and its fur being used for clothes but if that animal race ruled the planet instead of us there is a possibility they would do the same with us. Its the simple survival of the fittest and its a war between everyone every single day, its a competition and we all have egos. The greed and the will to be better and have more never stops.
now that you mention the oil thing, its the same thing there, the survival of the fittest. The goverments runned by the elite bankers are at the top and they want more and more.
I think in the end they will put a microchip in all humans and make them their slaves like cattle and im not joking. Progress in this plan are being carried out every day. the new world order.
Even if this billy preston would be more skilled on keys it doenst really matter.[/QUOTE]
You don't know who Billy Preston is?
Well, then you really are a musical idiot. Maybe you think you're a really cool person and could have lots a friends if you applied yourself. The only thing is, those people would only make themselves dumber for having wasted the time interacting with you.
I know just in this last minute, I'm feeling a little forgetful... like the life force is being sucked out of my brain thru my lower exit ramp... and there you are to gobble it it up.
I wonder what your observations would be on non-Queen related issues. I think we're all a little curious. The world is waiting for someone with a different way of thinking to take charge. Perhaps you are it, I don't know. Let's find out:
What are your feelings on:
1. The state of independence on foreign oil. Any thoughts or solutions?
2. Is wearing fur really that bad? Animals are still going to get killed and instead of eating squirrels or alligators, wouldn't my foot look very stylish up it's anus or maybe as a hat?
3. Randy Jackson's relevance to the world. American Idol is pretty lame now, and did you see what he looked like touring with Journey in '87? Please, dogg!
4. Paper or plastic[/QUOTE]
i checked out billy preston and as expected he cant compete with freddie, who can? no one
About the animals, we humans are animals too, its just that we rule this planet and therfor do whatever we want with the other animals.
Do i think its right? of course its not good to see an animal get slaughtered and its fur being used for clothes but if that animal race ruled the planet instead of us there is a possibility they would do the same with us. Its the simple survival of the fittest and its a war between everyone every single day, its a competition and we all have egos. The greed and the will to be better and have more never stops.
now that you mention the oil thing, its the same thing there, the survival of the fittest. The goverments runned by the elite bankers are at the top and they want more and more.
I think in the end they will put a microchip in all humans and make them their slaves like cattle and im not joking. Progress in this plan are being carried out every day. the new world order.
@Atheist: you're obstinate to the point of absurdity -- or rather, stubborn as a 7 year old. While you obviously aren't inherrently stupid, you're unbelievably childish. Shame.
@Sebastian. Ha ha. And your comment, "Yes, I think, averagely, Queen would "defeat" The Beatles by far if we left the eight lads alone (without guest arrangers, producers or performers)." perfectly sums up my feelings on this topic. Hear, hear!
@Freddie. No, I don't think you're talking out of your ass. There are many Queen songs that I love (e.g. from Hot Space!) that most fans tend to dismiss. I guess, taste seldom overlaps exactly. I don't agree with you, though, that there are "no" crap songs. It's not entirely subjective. Compare Britney Spears, no wait, Paris Hilton's "music" with, say, Bach. Or the Beatles. You use the example of KISS: many people do love them. Though fairly objectively, it is safe to say that although much of their music is catchy, their live acts good etc...the quality of their music does not compare favourably with some other metal acts (e.g. Dream Theater...but now we're comparing glam with prog metal). I certainly think there are crap Queen songs: I think that "Misfire" is just awful!
@Sebastian. Ha ha. And your comment, "Yes, I think, averagely, Queen would "defeat" The Beatles by far if we left the eight lads alone (without guest arrangers, producers or performers)." perfectly sums up my feelings on this topic. Hear, hear!
@Freddie. No, I don't think you're talking out of your ass. There are many Queen songs that I love (e.g. from Hot Space!) that most fans tend to dismiss. I guess, taste seldom overlaps exactly. I don't agree with you, though, that there are "no" crap songs. It's not entirely subjective. Compare Britney Spears, no wait, Paris Hilton's "music" with, say, Bach. Or the Beatles. You use the example of KISS: many people do love them. Though fairly objectively, it is safe to say that although much of their music is catchy, their live acts good etc...the quality of their music does not compare favourably with some other metal acts (e.g. Dream Theater...but now we're comparing glam with prog metal). I certainly think there are crap Queen songs: I think that "Misfire" is just awful!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]~-:Moet et Chandon:-~ wrote: [/QUOTENAME]@Atheist: you're obstinate to the point of absurdity -- or rather, stubborn as a 7 year old. While you obviously aren't inherrently stupid, you're unbelievably childish. Shame.
@Sebastian. Ha ha. And your comment, "Yes, I think, averagely, Queen would "defeat" The Beatles by far if we left the eight lads alone (without guest arrangers, producers or performers)." perfectly sums up my feelings on this topic. Hear, hear!
@Freddie. No, I don't think you're talking out of your ass. There are many Queen songs that I love (e.g. from Hot Space!) that most fans tend to dismiss. I guess, taste seldom overlaps exactly. I don't agree with you, though, that there are "no" crap songs. It's not entirely subjective. Compare Britney Spears, no wait, Paris Hilton's "music" with, say, Bach. Or the Beatles. You use the example of KISS: many people do love them. Though fairly objectively, it is safe to say that although much of their music is catchy, their live acts good etc...the quality of their music does not compare favourably with some other metal acts (e.g. Dream Theater...but now we're comparing glam with prog metal). I certainly think there are crap Queen songs: I think that "Misfire" is just awful![/QUOTE]
im not stupid or childish, i just say what i think about things without holding anything back
@Sebastian. Ha ha. And your comment, "Yes, I think, averagely, Queen would "defeat" The Beatles by far if we left the eight lads alone (without guest arrangers, producers or performers)." perfectly sums up my feelings on this topic. Hear, hear!
@Freddie. No, I don't think you're talking out of your ass. There are many Queen songs that I love (e.g. from Hot Space!) that most fans tend to dismiss. I guess, taste seldom overlaps exactly. I don't agree with you, though, that there are "no" crap songs. It's not entirely subjective. Compare Britney Spears, no wait, Paris Hilton's "music" with, say, Bach. Or the Beatles. You use the example of KISS: many people do love them. Though fairly objectively, it is safe to say that although much of their music is catchy, their live acts good etc...the quality of their music does not compare favourably with some other metal acts (e.g. Dream Theater...but now we're comparing glam with prog metal). I certainly think there are crap Queen songs: I think that "Misfire" is just awful![/QUOTE]
im not stupid or childish, i just say what i think about things without holding anything back