Are some of you so stupid that you think "All you need is Love" is superior to "Bohemian Rhapsody" or "March of the Black Queen" or "Hammer To Fall"?
What people don't understand is, the Beatles wrote mainly POP songs that were absurdly simple and boring. They are like Elevator Music compared to the Real Genius in Queen Songs.
Why do some people love Beatles so much?
It's the same question as Why do some people love Elvis or Madonna so much? They were talentless artificially propped artists with no soul, no talent.
You actually think that Freddie Mercury is on the same level as a John Lennon or Paul McCartney?
Sorry. Freddie Mercury is much much higher than either John Lennon or Paul McCartney.
Now..politically and historically, the Beatles made a difference because they came in the 60s. Their music helped to define an era.
But technically, and artistically, the Beatles were vastly inferior to Queen.
If you throw away all the social and political relevance to a Band, the Beatles were very very average that only appealed to teenagers with their pop simple sing along type songs.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
They were the first my friend it all started with them 1,100 million records sold speak for themselves.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]L-R-TIGER1994 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]They were the first my friend it all started with them 1,100 million records sold speak for themselves.[/QUOTE]
Record sales rankings do not mean Quality and Talent Rankings!
Elvis Presley is #1. I think Michael Jackson is up there too.
There's a reason why many consider Queen to be the best Music Group ever. Because Freddie had the most amazing most beautiful voice that Paul LOL McCartney or John Lennon could never touch.
Freddie and Queen also wrote brilliant complex timeless songs that dwarf "Imagine" or "All you need is love" drivel.
Record sales rankings do not mean Quality and Talent Rankings!
Elvis Presley is #1. I think Michael Jackson is up there too.
There's a reason why many consider Queen to be the best Music Group ever. Because Freddie had the most amazing most beautiful voice that Paul LOL McCartney or John Lennon could never touch.
Freddie and Queen also wrote brilliant complex timeless songs that dwarf "Imagine" or "All you need is love" drivel.
THE BEATLES RIP 1960 - 1970
In their defence, the Beatles never wrote "Let's Turn It On".
Seriously though, I'm not surprised to open another one of your threads and find that it's total nonsense. Could you be any more close-minded, musically?
Seriously though, I'm not surprised to open another one of your threads and find that it's total nonsense. Could you be any more close-minded, musically?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
What people don't understand is, the Beatles wrote mainly POP songs that were absurdly simple and boring. They are like Elevator Music compared to the Real Genius in Queen Songs.
Why do some people love Beatles so much?
It's the same question as Why do some people love Elvis or Madonna so much? They were talentless artificially propped artists with no soul, no talent.
You actually think that Freddie Mercury is on the same level as a John Lennon or Paul McCartney?
Now..politically and historically, the Beatles made a difference because they came in the 60s. Their music helped to define an era.
But technically, and artistically, the Beatles were vastly inferior to Queen.
If you throw away all the social and political relevance to a Band, the Beatles were very very average that only appealed to teenagers with their pop simple sing along type songs.
[/QUOTE]
wow. Such pretention from one so young.
Without the Beatles there would have been no Queen, without the Beatles few music groups would have been permitted to experiment in the studio and there could never have been a Black Queen, Bo Rhap or Prophet's song.
The pressure was on EMI to allow the Beatles the their freedom for purely commercial reasons.
Record sales generated by Beatlemania were enough to enable the beatles to demand artistic freedom to produce things like Tomorrow Never Knows, Sgt Pepper, #9 dream. They were not only influenced by their era they became part of the influence OF that era.
Something Queen will never do. Not denying their artistry or musical proficiency but Bo Rhap in all it's weirdness did not influence people to experiment to the same extent as the white album or revolver.
What people don't understand is, the Beatles wrote mainly POP songs that were absurdly simple and boring. They are like Elevator Music compared to the Real Genius in Queen Songs.
Why do some people love Beatles so much?
It's the same question as Why do some people love Elvis or Madonna so much? They were talentless artificially propped artists with no soul, no talent.
You actually think that Freddie Mercury is on the same level as a John Lennon or Paul McCartney?
Now..politically and historically, the Beatles made a difference because they came in the 60s. Their music helped to define an era.
But technically, and artistically, the Beatles were vastly inferior to Queen.
If you throw away all the social and political relevance to a Band, the Beatles were very very average that only appealed to teenagers with their pop simple sing along type songs.
[/QUOTE]
wow. Such pretention from one so young.
Without the Beatles there would have been no Queen, without the Beatles few music groups would have been permitted to experiment in the studio and there could never have been a Black Queen, Bo Rhap or Prophet's song.
The pressure was on EMI to allow the Beatles the their freedom for purely commercial reasons.
Record sales generated by Beatlemania were enough to enable the beatles to demand artistic freedom to produce things like Tomorrow Never Knows, Sgt Pepper, #9 dream. They were not only influenced by their era they became part of the influence OF that era.
Something Queen will never do. Not denying their artistry or musical proficiency but Bo Rhap in all it's weirdness did not influence people to experiment to the same extent as the white album or revolver.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]scallyuk wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
What people don't understand is, the Beatles wrote mainly POP songs that were absurdly simple and boring. They are like Elevator Music compared to the Real Genius in Queen Songs.
Why do some people love Beatles so much?
It's the same question as Why do some people love Elvis or Madonna so much? They were talentless artificially propped artists with no soul, no talent.
You actually think that Freddie Mercury is on the same level as a John Lennon or Paul McCartney?
Now..politically and historically, the Beatles made a difference because they came in the 60s. Their music helped to define an era.
But technically, and artistically, the Beatles were vastly inferior to Queen.
If you throw away all the social and political relevance to a Band, the Beatles were very very average that only appealed to teenagers with their pop simple sing along type songs.
[/QUOTE]
wow. Such pretention from one so young.
Without the Beatles there would have been no Queen, without the Beatles few music groups would have been permitted to experiment in the studio and there could never have been a Black Queen, Bo Rhap or Prophet's song.
The pressure was on EMI to allow the Beatles the their freedom for purely commercial reasons.
Record sales generated by Beatlemania were enough to enable the beatles to demand artistic freedom to produce things like Tomorrow Never Knows, Sgt Pepper, #9 dream. They were not only influenced by their era they became part of the influence OF that era.
Something Queen will never do. Not denying their artistry or musical proficiency but Bo Rhap in all it's weirdness did not influence people to experiment to the same extent as the white album or revolver. [/QUOTE]
There was always The Beach Boys...
What people don't understand is, the Beatles wrote mainly POP songs that were absurdly simple and boring. They are like Elevator Music compared to the Real Genius in Queen Songs.
Why do some people love Beatles so much?
It's the same question as Why do some people love Elvis or Madonna so much? They were talentless artificially propped artists with no soul, no talent.
You actually think that Freddie Mercury is on the same level as a John Lennon or Paul McCartney?
Now..politically and historically, the Beatles made a difference because they came in the 60s. Their music helped to define an era.
But technically, and artistically, the Beatles were vastly inferior to Queen.
If you throw away all the social and political relevance to a Band, the Beatles were very very average that only appealed to teenagers with their pop simple sing along type songs.
[/QUOTE]
wow. Such pretention from one so young.
Without the Beatles there would have been no Queen, without the Beatles few music groups would have been permitted to experiment in the studio and there could never have been a Black Queen, Bo Rhap or Prophet's song.
The pressure was on EMI to allow the Beatles the their freedom for purely commercial reasons.
Record sales generated by Beatlemania were enough to enable the beatles to demand artistic freedom to produce things like Tomorrow Never Knows, Sgt Pepper, #9 dream. They were not only influenced by their era they became part of the influence OF that era.
Something Queen will never do. Not denying their artistry or musical proficiency but Bo Rhap in all it's weirdness did not influence people to experiment to the same extent as the white album or revolver. [/QUOTE]
There was always The Beach Boys...
I dont think that many people think of Queen as the best group ever. But it doesnt matter at all for me. These discussions about ranking and whos the best are pointless if you ask me. Ýou can not just compare music like that.
Listen to music and enjoy it, if youre gonna have this attitude youre gonnna miss out on some fantastic bands.
Listen to music and enjoy it, if youre gonna have this attitude youre gonnna miss out on some fantastic bands.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]In their defence, the Beatles never wrote "Let's Turn It On".
Seriously though, I'm not surprised to open another one of your threads and find that it's total nonsense. Could you be any more close-minded, musically?[/QUOTE]
*cough*
the frog chorus or Mull of Kintyre
*cough*
Seriously though, I'm not surprised to open another one of your threads and find that it's total nonsense. Could you be any more close-minded, musically?[/QUOTE]
*cough*
the frog chorus or Mull of Kintyre
*cough*
Having seen both live, #1 Beatles, #2 Queen.
And there you have it.
And there you have it.
/QUOTE]
*cough*
the frog chorus or Mull of Kintyre
*cough*[/QUOTE]
Hey leave the frog Chorus alone. I can't quite remember but it was either the frog chorus or Radio GaGa that wa my first ever single. I hope it was Radio GaGa but to be honest I don't recall as I was only 9 or 10 years old.
*cough*
the frog chorus or Mull of Kintyre
*cough*[/QUOTE]
Hey leave the frog Chorus alone. I can't quite remember but it was either the frog chorus or Radio GaGa that wa my first ever single. I hope it was Radio GaGa but to be honest I don't recall as I was only 9 or 10 years old.
lordy here we go again
Tomorrow Never Knows, I'm The Walrus, Dear Prudence, Happiness Is A Warm Gun, Helter Skelter, Back In The USSR,,A Day In The Life, Here There & Everywhere, For No One, In My Life, Drive My Car, Rain, While my Guitar Gently Weeps, Girl, Norwegian Wood, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, I Want You She's So Heavy, I'm So Tired, And Your Bird Can Sing, She Said She Said, Taxman, Blackbird ...
I could on forever but that's why! every single one on these tracks which are album tracks or b-sides (in the case of Rain) no band in history can equal this & im talking across the entire planet!! in terms of them being household names. Led Zep are the only possible exception as they never released singles during their lifespan.
I could be very childish and purposely but them up against the weaker Queen album tracks but i wont. You ask the average man in the street who sang "ogre battle" or "michelle" i know which one they'll know
and im sick of the continual lennon/mccartney bashing & freddie was the greatest thing ever. Freddie was a wonderful talent but he got lazy in the 80's most Queen fans would admit this hence why may/taylor/deacon started to have hit singles.
Freddie's biggest single of the 80's "its a hard life" hardly his best was it? (in terms of chart position in the uk number 6) & it wasn't as though he was keeping his best tunes for mr. bad guy like someone else said "lets turn it on".
lets be totally truthful if it wasn't for freddie's illness he probably would have continued producing this sub-standard material for the rest of the 80's
Tomorrow Never Knows, I'm The Walrus, Dear Prudence, Happiness Is A Warm Gun, Helter Skelter, Back In The USSR,,A Day In The Life, Here There & Everywhere, For No One, In My Life, Drive My Car, Rain, While my Guitar Gently Weeps, Girl, Norwegian Wood, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, I Want You She's So Heavy, I'm So Tired, And Your Bird Can Sing, She Said She Said, Taxman, Blackbird ...
I could on forever but that's why! every single one on these tracks which are album tracks or b-sides (in the case of Rain) no band in history can equal this & im talking across the entire planet!! in terms of them being household names. Led Zep are the only possible exception as they never released singles during their lifespan.
I could be very childish and purposely but them up against the weaker Queen album tracks but i wont. You ask the average man in the street who sang "ogre battle" or "michelle" i know which one they'll know
and im sick of the continual lennon/mccartney bashing & freddie was the greatest thing ever. Freddie was a wonderful talent but he got lazy in the 80's most Queen fans would admit this hence why may/taylor/deacon started to have hit singles.
Freddie's biggest single of the 80's "its a hard life" hardly his best was it? (in terms of chart position in the uk number 6) & it wasn't as though he was keeping his best tunes for mr. bad guy like someone else said "lets turn it on".
lets be totally truthful if it wasn't for freddie's illness he probably would have continued producing this sub-standard material for the rest of the 80's
It's been said of Queen that they were "artificially propped pop, no soul, no talent." I consider all such claims bullshit by those who know very little, but pretend to be experts. Freddie himself was a huge fan of both Elvis and John Lennon.
Incidentally, Freddie once said "It destroys the soul to hear that you're all hype, that you have no talent, and that your whole career has been contrived."
Incidentally, Freddie once said "It destroys the soul to hear that you're all hype, that you have no talent, and that your whole career has been contrived."
its like comparing shit with Gold, GOLD=QUEEN
Isn't this fucker the same guy who posted, "Freddie was dumb because he was gay" and "Do girls like getting their hair pulled while being fucked?"?