Sure, he's a blubbering idiot, but let's give Treasure Moment a second here. He says that:
* Freddie wrote the biggest single of all time.
Not necessarily true sales wise, but arguably the most popular and best loved in many countries as witnessed by the BBC poll. Not many songs have a TV special dissecting a song as Bo Rhap did, so it's on a very, very, very small list of rock songs of the century. That is a FACT ;)
* He was the best frontman of all time.
If not the best, but only a Queen hater wouldn't have Freddie on a very, very, very small list of rock's greatest ever frontmen.
* He had the best voice of all time with range beyond many singers.
No, but in the world of rock and roll, he had few peers. Forgetting range, which is a small function of singing, Freddie was a fantastic singer and interpreter who could do more with a phrase than some artists could with an entire catalogue.
* He was in the most succesful band of all time.
Meet the Beatles. Queen are there with the others that Sir GH listed, and probably ahead of a lot of them saleswise.
* Live aid performance was voted the best concert of all time, beating every single band on the bill.
Vote is based on popularity so somewhat frivolous, however, he won over an entire audience that day, and surely they weren't all Queen fans. Why didn't the Who, Page and Plant, Simple Minds, Dire Straits or any other band who we're comparing Queen to get the same response that day? Critically, even the most callous critic would give Queen, and Freddie, their due for their performance at their generations Woodstock.
* He is simply the best, unbeatable, just for fun tell me someone who is better :)
Apparently not Paul Rodgers or The Beatles according to Treasure Moment! When it comes to a writer who had a fantastically diverse body of work, a frontman who could work a stadium like none before or since, and a singer who could sing all types of music from opera and gospel, to funk and rock, there may be a lot of people who fit into one catagory (hello David Lee Roth), or two (hello Mick Jagger!), there aren't many who had success as writer/singer/performers (in addition to being a fine musician early in his career.) If he's not the best at those three disciplines in rock, it's a hell of a short list.
BTW, Treasure Moment, the Beatles are amazing. Accept it.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Boy Thomas Raker wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Sure, he's a blubbering idiot, but let's give Treasure Moment a second here. He says that:
* Freddie wrote the biggest single of all time.
Not necessarily true sales wise, but arguably the most popular and best loved in many countries as witnessed by the BBC poll. Not many songs have a TV special dissecting a song as Bo Rhap did, so it's on a very, very, very small list of rock songs of the century. That is a FACT ;)
* He was the best frontman of all time.
If not the best, but only a Queen hater wouldn't have Freddie on a very, very, very small list of rock's greatest ever frontmen.
* He had the best voice of all time with range beyond many singers.
No, but in the world of rock and roll, he had few peers. Forgetting range, which is a small function of singing, Freddie was a fantastic singer and interpreter who could do more with a phrase than some artists could with an entire catalogue.
* He was in the most succesful band of all time.
Meet the Beatles. Queen are there with the others that Sir GH listed, and probably ahead of a lot of them saleswise.
* Live aid performance was voted the best concert of all time, beating every single band on the bill.
Vote is based on popularity so somewhat frivolous, however, he won over an entire audience that day, and surely they weren't all Queen fans. Why didn't the Who, Page and Plant, Simple Minds, Dire Straits or any other band who we're comparing Queen to get the same response that day? Critically, even the most callous critic would give Queen, and Freddie, their due for their performance at their generations Woodstock.
* He is simply the best, unbeatable, just for fun tell me someone who is better :)
Apparently not Paul Rodgers or The Beatles according to Treasure Moment! When it comes to a writer who had a fantastically diverse body of work, a frontman who could work a stadium like none before or since, and a singer who could sing all types of music from opera and gospel, to funk and rock, there may be a lot of people who fit into one catagory (hello David Lee Roth), or two (hello Mick Jagger!), there aren't many who had success as writer/singer/performers (in addition to being a fine musician early in his career.) If he's not the best at those three disciplines in rock, it's a hell of a short list.
BTW, Treasure Moment, the Beatles are amazing. Accept it.[/QUOTE]
yes they are amazingly overhyped and crappy, my band is better.
* Freddie wrote the biggest single of all time.
Not necessarily true sales wise, but arguably the most popular and best loved in many countries as witnessed by the BBC poll. Not many songs have a TV special dissecting a song as Bo Rhap did, so it's on a very, very, very small list of rock songs of the century. That is a FACT ;)
* He was the best frontman of all time.
If not the best, but only a Queen hater wouldn't have Freddie on a very, very, very small list of rock's greatest ever frontmen.
* He had the best voice of all time with range beyond many singers.
No, but in the world of rock and roll, he had few peers. Forgetting range, which is a small function of singing, Freddie was a fantastic singer and interpreter who could do more with a phrase than some artists could with an entire catalogue.
* He was in the most succesful band of all time.
Meet the Beatles. Queen are there with the others that Sir GH listed, and probably ahead of a lot of them saleswise.
* Live aid performance was voted the best concert of all time, beating every single band on the bill.
Vote is based on popularity so somewhat frivolous, however, he won over an entire audience that day, and surely they weren't all Queen fans. Why didn't the Who, Page and Plant, Simple Minds, Dire Straits or any other band who we're comparing Queen to get the same response that day? Critically, even the most callous critic would give Queen, and Freddie, their due for their performance at their generations Woodstock.
* He is simply the best, unbeatable, just for fun tell me someone who is better :)
Apparently not Paul Rodgers or The Beatles according to Treasure Moment! When it comes to a writer who had a fantastically diverse body of work, a frontman who could work a stadium like none before or since, and a singer who could sing all types of music from opera and gospel, to funk and rock, there may be a lot of people who fit into one catagory (hello David Lee Roth), or two (hello Mick Jagger!), there aren't many who had success as writer/singer/performers (in addition to being a fine musician early in his career.) If he's not the best at those three disciplines in rock, it's a hell of a short list.
BTW, Treasure Moment, the Beatles are amazing. Accept it.[/QUOTE]
yes they are amazingly overhyped and crappy, my band is better.