I actually thought this was a four-page long thread discussing the tour. Silly me!
Thread
Posts in chronological order
From a legal POV, Brian and Roger have all the right to be called Queen. But the old entity called QUEEN is no more, in the same way that Daltrey & Townshend can't be The Who, Pink Floyd sans Waters couldn't be PF, the Farris bros. sans Hutchence aren't INXS and so on. No matter how hard they try, all those bands were the result of a moment in time and a consecuence of their own experiences living together. The songs and the live shows are only a result, not the band itself. The "classic Queen sound" as many like to call it, is just the final link of a big chain of events including gathering together, writing, brainstorming, fighting, laughing, crying, arguing, writing music, erasing music, touring, partying, dating groupies,... you name it.
In Queen's particular case, without Freddie and John any attempt to recreate a certain mood will simply fail. Paul Rodgers must create his own experiences with Brian and Roger and those experiences will be reflected in whatever album/tour they'll be able to come up with. That's why I believe they must search their new own style, instead of getting washed versions of a time that won't come back, simply because they aren't the same anymore.
In Queen's particular case, without Freddie and John any attempt to recreate a certain mood will simply fail. Paul Rodgers must create his own experiences with Brian and Roger and those experiences will be reflected in whatever album/tour they'll be able to come up with. That's why I believe they must search their new own style, instead of getting washed versions of a time that won't come back, simply because they aren't the same anymore.
Queen is a brand, and just as any company can change it's staff and retain the same name, so can any brand or band.
Just because the original four people are not together anymore has no baring on the name, Coke is no longer the same formula, nor does it have any of the same people working for it, however it is still the same product that has moved on.
Queen the 'brand' has simply moved on the 'spirit' lives on in whatever form so long as the core of the brand remain in tact.
For the record pretty well all major recording artists feel the same about this.
Hence
Pink Floyd
The Who
Led Zep
Oasis
The Beatles (yes the original members were not the same as the ones at the end)
Crowded house
Genesis
Sex Pistols
The Eagles
Kiss
ToTo
Rainbow
Foreigner
Squeeze
Wings
Level 42
Bad Company
The Rolling Stones
To name a few off the top of my head
The list goes on and on, one notable exception is ABBA
In almost every band you care to name people have come and gone, very very few have the original people and have stayed together throughout their history
Just because the original four people are not together anymore has no baring on the name, Coke is no longer the same formula, nor does it have any of the same people working for it, however it is still the same product that has moved on.
Queen the 'brand' has simply moved on the 'spirit' lives on in whatever form so long as the core of the brand remain in tact.
For the record pretty well all major recording artists feel the same about this.
Hence
Pink Floyd
The Who
Led Zep
Oasis
The Beatles (yes the original members were not the same as the ones at the end)
Crowded house
Genesis
Sex Pistols
The Eagles
Kiss
ToTo
Rainbow
Foreigner
Squeeze
Wings
Level 42
Bad Company
The Rolling Stones
To name a few off the top of my head
The list goes on and on, one notable exception is ABBA
In almost every band you care to name people have come and gone, very very few have the original people and have stayed together throughout their history
What a pointless fucking list. None of those bands frontmen died and then didn't release anything for years and actually said it was the end for the band. Changing personnel of an active band is totally different to resurrecting a dead band with half it's members and not even the main focal point of the band. To suggest that Queen didn't end in November 1991 is laughable.
At the end of the day Roger and Brian want their ego's stroking by being able to play arena sized venues - without the name of their old band they would be playing places like Shepherd's Bush Empire... good enough for most bands, but not for Brian May who is under the impression he deserves to be playing venues today the same size as he did with Queen at their peak despite having not released anything of any real worth since.
At the end of the day Roger and Brian want their ego's stroking by being able to play arena sized venues - without the name of their old band they would be playing places like Shepherd's Bush Empire... good enough for most bands, but not for Brian May who is under the impression he deserves to be playing venues today the same size as he did with Queen at their peak despite having not released anything of any real worth since.
Really so why do you think they've made a NEW ALBUM then if not to tour with billed as queen and i believe that BRIAN does deserve to be playing places like 02 and arenas around the world, they were a part of the legendary group queen and guess what they still are.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Negative Creep wrote: [/QUOTENAME]What a pointless fucking list. None of those bands frontmen died and then didn't release anything for years and actually said it was the end for the band. Changing personnel of an active band is totally different to resurrecting a dead band with half it's members and not even the main focal point of the band. To suggest that Queen didn't end in November 1991 is laughable.
At the end of the day Roger and Brian want their ego's stroking by being able to play arena sized venues - without the name of their old band they would be playing places like Shepherd's Bush Empire... good enough for most bands, but not for Brian May who is under the impression he deserves to be playing venues today the same size as he did with Queen at their peak despite having not released anything of any real worth since.[/QUOTE]
You naysayers do make me laugh, Do you seriously think people turn up to concerts these days expecting to see Freddie still fronting them!?
If not then one would assume Brian and Roger incapable of filling an arena, however judging by the last tour it would appear they can!
If an Artist can fill an arena the size of the O2 then they surely deserve to play there?
Brian and Roger have a vast following of fans that just want to hear old and new song alike
Why you people can't get your heads around the fact that it's just a name is beyond me, why bother coming to a fan site if you think they died in 91' surely nothing new is going to interest you.
The fact is almost every band changes its members but retains the name, get over it.
At the end of the day Roger and Brian want their ego's stroking by being able to play arena sized venues - without the name of their old band they would be playing places like Shepherd's Bush Empire... good enough for most bands, but not for Brian May who is under the impression he deserves to be playing venues today the same size as he did with Queen at their peak despite having not released anything of any real worth since.[/QUOTE]
You naysayers do make me laugh, Do you seriously think people turn up to concerts these days expecting to see Freddie still fronting them!?
If not then one would assume Brian and Roger incapable of filling an arena, however judging by the last tour it would appear they can!
If an Artist can fill an arena the size of the O2 then they surely deserve to play there?
Brian and Roger have a vast following of fans that just want to hear old and new song alike
Why you people can't get your heads around the fact that it's just a name is beyond me, why bother coming to a fan site if you think they died in 91' surely nothing new is going to interest you.
The fact is almost every band changes its members but retains the name, get over it.
Just imagine. Two friends are founding members of a group, that has already been going for about 2 years. Then 2 talented young men join - one of them happens to have an idea for a good new name - and the band keeps going.
For the next 2 decades they rehearse and go on tour together. Share hotel rooms, station wagons, trains, tour busses and planes.
They eat, drink and party together - and whatever else can be imagined from the heyday of r'n'r.
They write songs (in fact, these 2 write more than 50% of the songs of that particular band), design album sleeves, stages, light shows, release albums, singles, videos, earn money (loads of) together - and then suddenly the singer dies.
If I had been in that band for 20+ years and experienced what they have together, I'd be pretty pissed off if someone told me to stop using that name.
For the next 2 decades they rehearse and go on tour together. Share hotel rooms, station wagons, trains, tour busses and planes.
They eat, drink and party together - and whatever else can be imagined from the heyday of r'n'r.
They write songs (in fact, these 2 write more than 50% of the songs of that particular band), design album sleeves, stages, light shows, release albums, singles, videos, earn money (loads of) together - and then suddenly the singer dies.
If I had been in that band for 20+ years and experienced what they have together, I'd be pretty pissed off if someone told me to stop using that name.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]fredswife wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I actually thought this was a four-page long thread discussing the tour. Silly me![/QUOTE]
LOL!
Yeah right.
People just can't get enough of this four year old argument.
LOL!
Yeah right.
People just can't get enough of this four year old argument.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Regor wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Just imagine. Two friends are founding members of a group, that has already been going for about 2 years. Then 2 talented young men join - one of them happens to have an idea for a good new name - and the band keeps going.[/QUOTE]
That's not true: it's not that Fred joined Roger's and Brian's band and changed its name. The story, as Mercury told it (Tom Browne interview, Xmas Eve '77), is:
"Very briefly, Brian and Roger were in a very up tempo raucous band called Smile and I used to be in another band called Wreckage or something, even more up tempo, and we used to be friends, going to collage together and met up. After the first couple of years knowing each other, we decided we'd form a band together and it's as simple as that. We thought our musical ideas would blend"
So... they formed a NEW band. The three of them.
That's not true: it's not that Fred joined Roger's and Brian's band and changed its name. The story, as Mercury told it (Tom Browne interview, Xmas Eve '77), is:
"Very briefly, Brian and Roger were in a very up tempo raucous band called Smile and I used to be in another band called Wreckage or something, even more up tempo, and we used to be friends, going to collage together and met up. After the first couple of years knowing each other, we decided we'd form a band together and it's as simple as that. We thought our musical ideas would blend"
So... they formed a NEW band. The three of them.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Knute wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]fredswife wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I actually thought this was a four-page long thread discussing the tour. Silly me![/QUOTE]
LOL!
Yeah right.
People just can't get enough of this four year old argument.
[/QUOTE]
I wish people could just get past it. It becomes tiresome to come to the boards here and on QOL and see endless threads discussing the subject.
LOL!
Yeah right.
People just can't get enough of this four year old argument.
[/QUOTE]
I wish people could just get past it. It becomes tiresome to come to the boards here and on QOL and see endless threads discussing the subject.
Paul Rodgers is a great singer he sings Queen songs in his own style they sound different but they sound great. Brian & Roger play Paul's songs in a different yet great way compared to the orginals. You don't see Free or Bad Company fans (I am a large fan of both these bands) complaining that Brian doesn't play the songs how Paul Kossoff or Mick Ralphs played them the same for Roger with Simon Kirk. The songs are meant to be played and I'd rather they be played with a different singer than not at all
There is a significant demand to hear QUEEN songs live from the original composers. Not like the Seventies or Eighties but there is a demand. If you don't believe me, ask someone who saw them in Hyde Park. Awesome.
In the Nineties, it was all 'when are the band getting back together'? Now, in the politically correct environment we live in, it's 'you can't play Queen songs because you're not Queen'. Rubbish!
In the Nineties, it was all 'when are the band getting back together'? Now, in the politically correct environment we live in, it's 'you can't play Queen songs because you're not Queen'. Rubbish!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Togg wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Queen is a brand, and just as any company can change it's staff and retain the same name, so can any brand or band.
Just because the original four people are not together anymore has no baring on the name, Coke is no longer the same formula, nor does it have any of the same people working for it, however it is still the same product that has moved on.
Queen the 'brand' has simply moved on the 'spirit' lives on in whatever form so long as the core of the brand remain in tact.
For the record pretty well all major recording artists feel the same about this.
Hence
Pink Floyd
The Who
Led Zep
Oasis
The Beatles (yes the original members were not the same as the ones at the end)
Crowded house
Genesis
Sex Pistols
The Eagles
Kiss
ToTo
Rainbow
Foreigner
Squeeze
Wings
Level 42
Bad Company
The Rolling Stones
To name a few off the top of my head
The list goes on and on, one notable exception is ABBA
In almost every band you care to name people have come and gone, very very few have the original people and have stayed together throughout their history
[/QUOTE]
More than half of your list is filled with bands who retain the name but nowadays are just covering the songs from their own golden years for a smaller fan base and nostalgia (Foreigner, Crowded House, Toto, Level 42). Others are able to change members because they are bands who are owned by one or two musicians, being the rest members just nearly disposable session musicians (Oasis, Wings). Genesis went down the gutter when Gabriel left and Pink Floyd, after a sad trial and two so-so albums, realized cleverly that they won't reach their old heights anymore and disbanded.
People don't give a shit about brands, they want good music. If a new face-washed group don't give them what they are expecting, they will move along and look somewhere else, simply as that, and to hell with the brand. Or there's a second choice: tour in smaller venues and play your hits. But don't expect to fill Knebworth with 140,000 souls again if you're not able anymore, just because you call yourselves Queen.
Just because the original four people are not together anymore has no baring on the name, Coke is no longer the same formula, nor does it have any of the same people working for it, however it is still the same product that has moved on.
Queen the 'brand' has simply moved on the 'spirit' lives on in whatever form so long as the core of the brand remain in tact.
For the record pretty well all major recording artists feel the same about this.
Hence
Pink Floyd
The Who
Led Zep
Oasis
The Beatles (yes the original members were not the same as the ones at the end)
Crowded house
Genesis
Sex Pistols
The Eagles
Kiss
ToTo
Rainbow
Foreigner
Squeeze
Wings
Level 42
Bad Company
The Rolling Stones
To name a few off the top of my head
The list goes on and on, one notable exception is ABBA
In almost every band you care to name people have come and gone, very very few have the original people and have stayed together throughout their history
[/QUOTE]
More than half of your list is filled with bands who retain the name but nowadays are just covering the songs from their own golden years for a smaller fan base and nostalgia (Foreigner, Crowded House, Toto, Level 42). Others are able to change members because they are bands who are owned by one or two musicians, being the rest members just nearly disposable session musicians (Oasis, Wings). Genesis went down the gutter when Gabriel left and Pink Floyd, after a sad trial and two so-so albums, realized cleverly that they won't reach their old heights anymore and disbanded.
People don't give a shit about brands, they want good music. If a new face-washed group don't give them what they are expecting, they will move along and look somewhere else, simply as that, and to hell with the brand. Or there's a second choice: tour in smaller venues and play your hits. But don't expect to fill Knebworth with 140,000 souls again if you're not able anymore, just because you call yourselves Queen.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Togg wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Pink Floyd
The Who
Led Zep
Oasis
The Beatles (yes the original members were not the same as the ones at the end)
Crowded house
Genesis
Sex Pistols
The Eagles
Kiss
ToTo
Rainbow
Foreigner
Squeeze
Wings
Level 42
Bad Company
The Rolling Stones
To name a few off the top of my head
The list goes on and on, one notable exception is ABBA
In almost every band you care to name people have come and gone, very very few have the original people and have stayed together throughout their history
[/QUOTE]
...and just how many of these bands had a 20 year recording career (starting before their first song was released) with the same personnel?
Which of them sold a hundred million records before their charismatic frontman was replaced?
I've got a few great examples for you as well.
Genesis
Van Halen
Iron Maiden
Queen
A long, succesful, and even a respected career with a line-up that wasn't their original one. Replacing a charismatic frontman with the wrong type of guy, and very limited commercial or critical success afterwards.
The first three have gone to great lenghts to try to sweep that last huge mistake under the carpet by re-hiring their best asset, thus rewriting the ending of their story.
Queen doesn't have that luxury anymore. Freddie's gone permanently, and the last chapter of Queen's story is being written now... The only question that remains is whether the story is worthy of the Queen name? I don't know about you, but #90 in the charts doesn't really do it for me. ;)
Pink Floyd
The Who
Led Zep
Oasis
The Beatles (yes the original members were not the same as the ones at the end)
Crowded house
Genesis
Sex Pistols
The Eagles
Kiss
ToTo
Rainbow
Foreigner
Squeeze
Wings
Level 42
Bad Company
The Rolling Stones
To name a few off the top of my head
The list goes on and on, one notable exception is ABBA
In almost every band you care to name people have come and gone, very very few have the original people and have stayed together throughout their history
[/QUOTE]
...and just how many of these bands had a 20 year recording career (starting before their first song was released) with the same personnel?
Which of them sold a hundred million records before their charismatic frontman was replaced?
I've got a few great examples for you as well.
Genesis
Van Halen
Iron Maiden
Queen
A long, succesful, and even a respected career with a line-up that wasn't their original one. Replacing a charismatic frontman with the wrong type of guy, and very limited commercial or critical success afterwards.
The first three have gone to great lenghts to try to sweep that last huge mistake under the carpet by re-hiring their best asset, thus rewriting the ending of their story.
Queen doesn't have that luxury anymore. Freddie's gone permanently, and the last chapter of Queen's story is being written now... The only question that remains is whether the story is worthy of the Queen name? I don't know about you, but #90 in the charts doesn't really do it for me. ;)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]monty-- wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Now, in the politically correct environment we live in, it's 'you can't play Queen songs because you're not Queen'. Rubbish![/QUOTE]
My complaint is just about the name. If they want to play Queen songs, Beatles songs, Elvis songs, new songs or whatever, I support that, as long as they use another name.
My complaint is just about the name. If they want to play Queen songs, Beatles songs, Elvis songs, new songs or whatever, I support that, as long as they use another name.