[QUOTE]
[b]justys2 wrote: [/b]
For me as long as they don't call themselves Queen it's all right. Queen and Paul Rodgers makes a huge difference. Roger and Brian can call themselves Queen but not with Paul...so I think it was a good choice to add + Paul Rodgers.. Anyway I really don't care much about the name...music is more important and they play great..and it's been about 4 years of their collaboration and people still argue about their name...strange for me:) [/QUOTE]
The consequences being what? Whiny, ungrateful fans? The tour was a success so there's no ammo there for those hung up on a name. So it must be the album, which, while not a commercial failure, didn't sell as much as the band would've liked. However, do you really think the album would've sold more if they had a different name? And does it change the quality of the music if they have a different name? As for the professional music critics, for years Queen fans have been saying they know shit about Queen and have been printing unfair reviews: now, however, we're supposed to listen to these same shit music journalists because a section of Queen fans have an irrational hatred of the band's name. I susoect a few years from now many of you will look back and wonder why you were so angry about this and you'll probably regret not making the effort to go to the shows. Not only will Brian May and Roger Taylor not be around forever, it's likely we'll see less and less of them as they get older.
Back on topic: Rodgers does some Queen stuff better than others so it's no surprise the new stuff on the tour was the strongest. He's better at doing slow(ish) tracks so I'd like to see It's Late, Innuendo and Keep Yourself Alive (original slower version). Not much chance of any of this however ;(
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[b]Holly2003 wrote[/b][i] I susoect a few years from now many of you will look back and wonder why you were so angry about this and you'll probably regret not making the effort to go to the shows. Not only will Brian May and Roger Taylor not be around forever, it's likely we'll see less and less of them as they get older.
Back on topic: Rodgers does some Queen stuff better than others so it's no surprise the new stuff on the tour was the strongest. He's better at doing slow(ish) tracks so I'd like to see It's Late, Innuendo and Keep Yourself Alive (original slower version). Not much chance of any of this however ;(
[/i]
Yes that's why I can't understand some peolple. I can understand they don't go becouse they don't like Paul's voice etc. But I can't uderstand all this argument about the name. And the band said that Freddie is irreplaceable, that Paul isn't a replacement but it's something like new band but with the connection to the past. And I understand this and I think really they made a very good decision. And even if they call themselves May/Taylor/Rodgers there would still be a comperation. And sadly they are not young. So why some people can't be happy of what we have now. You know 5 years ago nobody thought that there will be Queen on tour again. Surely it's not the same without Freddie but it's graet to see Brian and Roger. And with such a great vocalist-Paul Rodgers. Under any name. It's only a name, it doesn't make them better or worse. But ok enough from me on this topic.
As for the setlist I think it's much to early to even talk about it:) They've just finished recent tour. We don't even know if there is a next tour (although I somehow have the feeling that they will be around for next few years as QPR...and I really hope). But like Holly 2003 I would love if they play Innuedno or some other great old songs. ANd I would love if they make another QPR album. With some very good tracks...we'll see:)
Back on topic: Rodgers does some Queen stuff better than others so it's no surprise the new stuff on the tour was the strongest. He's better at doing slow(ish) tracks so I'd like to see It's Late, Innuendo and Keep Yourself Alive (original slower version). Not much chance of any of this however ;(
[/i]
Yes that's why I can't understand some peolple. I can understand they don't go becouse they don't like Paul's voice etc. But I can't uderstand all this argument about the name. And the band said that Freddie is irreplaceable, that Paul isn't a replacement but it's something like new band but with the connection to the past. And I understand this and I think really they made a very good decision. And even if they call themselves May/Taylor/Rodgers there would still be a comperation. And sadly they are not young. So why some people can't be happy of what we have now. You know 5 years ago nobody thought that there will be Queen on tour again. Surely it's not the same without Freddie but it's graet to see Brian and Roger. And with such a great vocalist-Paul Rodgers. Under any name. It's only a name, it doesn't make them better or worse. But ok enough from me on this topic.
As for the setlist I think it's much to early to even talk about it:) They've just finished recent tour. We don't even know if there is a next tour (although I somehow have the feeling that they will be around for next few years as QPR...and I really hope). But like Holly 2003 I would love if they play Innuedno or some other great old songs. ANd I would love if they make another QPR album. With some very good tracks...we'll see:)
Yes, the name is not the matter of fact
My lovely groups are:
?1 - Queen
?2 - Queen + Paul Rodgers - I enjoy them as well as Deep Purple
My lovely groups are:
?1 - Queen
?2 - Queen + Paul Rodgers - I enjoy them as well as Deep Purple
[QUOTE]
[b]justys2 wrote:[/b]And even if they call themselves May/Taylor/Rodgers there would still be a comperation. And sadly they are not young. So why some people can't be happy of what we have now. You know 5 years ago nobody thought that there will be Queen on tour again.
[/QUOTE]
Gee, I wonder why people would've thought that?
In fact, people were thinking that since 1991.
I'm glad you enjoy the lackluster "TCR" and the minority view that half of Queen somehow still is Queen.
To the majority of the public though, Queen without Freddie Mercury in particular, is not Queen.
I still can't believe you have to argue that fact on a Queen forum, or be accused of belonging to the "Church Of Freddie" because of it!
There would've been a remarkable difference in the credibility of the project had they called themselves "Rodgers, May & Taylor" instead of trying to sell themselves as Queen. Probably still would've come up with a fairly naff album though, but at least that wouldn't have be regarded in most quarters as a sad footnote to a once great band.
[b]justys2 wrote:[/b]And even if they call themselves May/Taylor/Rodgers there would still be a comperation. And sadly they are not young. So why some people can't be happy of what we have now. You know 5 years ago nobody thought that there will be Queen on tour again.
[/QUOTE]
Gee, I wonder why people would've thought that?
In fact, people were thinking that since 1991.
I'm glad you enjoy the lackluster "TCR" and the minority view that half of Queen somehow still is Queen.
To the majority of the public though, Queen without Freddie Mercury in particular, is not Queen.
I still can't believe you have to argue that fact on a Queen forum, or be accused of belonging to the "Church Of Freddie" because of it!
There would've been a remarkable difference in the credibility of the project had they called themselves "Rodgers, May & Taylor" instead of trying to sell themselves as Queen. Probably still would've come up with a fairly naff album though, but at least that wouldn't have be regarded in most quarters as a sad footnote to a once great band.
Someone asking for set-list suggestions and it ends up in a row about the group's name again.
Happy new year.
The Voice.
Happy new year.
The Voice.
Made in heaven
Great king rat
Action this day
Spread your wings
Innuendo
A winters tale
Encore
Scandal
Tenement funster
Princes of the universe
God save the queen
Great king rat
Action this day
Spread your wings
Innuendo
A winters tale
Encore
Scandal
Tenement funster
Princes of the universe
God save the queen
[QUOTE]
[b]Going Back wrote: [/b]
Made in heaven
Great king rat
Action this day
Spread your wings
Innuendo
A winters tale
Encore
Scandal
Tenement funster
Princes of the universe
God save the queen
[/QUOTE]
I don't think this setlist would go down well even in a Queen Fan Club convention...
Well, maybe ONLY there. :)
[b]Going Back wrote: [/b]
Made in heaven
Great king rat
Action this day
Spread your wings
Innuendo
A winters tale
Encore
Scandal
Tenement funster
Princes of the universe
God save the queen
[/QUOTE]
I don't think this setlist would go down well even in a Queen Fan Club convention...
Well, maybe ONLY there. :)
[QUOTE]
[b]Going Back wrote: [/b]
Made in heaven
Great king rat
Action this day
Spread your wings
Innuendo
A winters tale
Encore
Scandal
Tenement funster
Princes of the universe
God save the queen
[/QUOTE]
I can totally see this happening .....Q+pr are a pretty adventurous trio you know ....
Just listen to the recordings of the 2008 tour ......
(read with sarcasm-glasses)
O2-concert : I have never been ashamed THIS much of Q+pr's attempt to make music (or whatever they're trying to do)
If you haven't heard the recording : DON'T - it's not worth it ! ( I WAS a fan of them too in 2005/06)
A big mistake really !.....
[b]Going Back wrote: [/b]
Made in heaven
Great king rat
Action this day
Spread your wings
Innuendo
A winters tale
Encore
Scandal
Tenement funster
Princes of the universe
God save the queen
[/QUOTE]
I can totally see this happening .....Q+pr are a pretty adventurous trio you know ....
Just listen to the recordings of the 2008 tour ......
(read with sarcasm-glasses)
O2-concert : I have never been ashamed THIS much of Q+pr's attempt to make music (or whatever they're trying to do)
If you haven't heard the recording : DON'T - it's not worth it ! ( I WAS a fan of them too in 2005/06)
A big mistake really !.....
FORGET IT !
[QUOTE]
[b]inu-liger wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]-adventure seeker- wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Ken8 wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]-adventure seeker- wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Ken8 wrote: [/b]
You might want to drop the Bad Company/Free numbers. Who is going to sing them?
[/QUOTE]
me
[/QUOTE]
Queen+Adventure Seeker......hmmm. Couldn't be much worse.[img=/images/smiley/msn/wink_smile.gif][/img]
[/QUOTE]
Queen+Ken8? and anyway im too busy ;)
[/QUOTE]
Touche
[/QUOTE]
Adventure Seeker came over as rather cool at Liverpool and would make for an interesting stand in. Would get the vote for extreme enthusiasm.
[b]inu-liger wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]-adventure seeker- wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Ken8 wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]-adventure seeker- wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Ken8 wrote: [/b]
You might want to drop the Bad Company/Free numbers. Who is going to sing them?
[/QUOTE]
me
[/QUOTE]
Queen+Adventure Seeker......hmmm. Couldn't be much worse.[img=/images/smiley/msn/wink_smile.gif][/img]
[/QUOTE]
Queen+Ken8? and anyway im too busy ;)
[/QUOTE]
Touche
[/QUOTE]
Adventure Seeker came over as rather cool at Liverpool and would make for an interesting stand in. Would get the vote for extreme enthusiasm.
[QUOTE]
[b]vadenuez wrote: [/b]
No.
The problem is simply that as long as they keep calling themselves Queen, the unavoidable comparisons will surface (they had to bear with it during these last months) and everyone will miss Freddie in some way or other, hence everyone's asking them something they can't deliver anymore.
If they had chosen a fresh start as May/Taylor/Rodgers they could've come with a new album to tour and leave room for some greatest hits to play live and the critics couldn't come up with something like 'this is not Queen anymore'. But they chose to play it safe and kept the name. Now they're facing the consequences of such decision. [/QUOTE]
Touche.
It was obvious that by using Queen + Paul Rodgers would attract more fans to the gigs than using May/Rodgers/Taylor and to make more money. They could then have slipped in some greatest hits as you say and maybe not fall into the trap of "this is not Queen anymore"
I was very keen at first with the new collabaration - mainly to hear Queen songs performed again live. Now I'm not so bothered about Queen + Paul Rodgers anymore. They've maybe run their course. I know other bands have changed their singers - Van Halen for one - but Freddie was so brilliant with his style that he has become somewhat irreplaceable and nobody can come close to him in reproducing what Queen were - greatest live act ever. A hard act to follow as they say and only goes to prove what a stranglehold he had as a live performer.
[b]vadenuez wrote: [/b]
No.
The problem is simply that as long as they keep calling themselves Queen, the unavoidable comparisons will surface (they had to bear with it during these last months) and everyone will miss Freddie in some way or other, hence everyone's asking them something they can't deliver anymore.
If they had chosen a fresh start as May/Taylor/Rodgers they could've come with a new album to tour and leave room for some greatest hits to play live and the critics couldn't come up with something like 'this is not Queen anymore'. But they chose to play it safe and kept the name. Now they're facing the consequences of such decision. [/QUOTE]
Touche.
It was obvious that by using Queen + Paul Rodgers would attract more fans to the gigs than using May/Rodgers/Taylor and to make more money. They could then have slipped in some greatest hits as you say and maybe not fall into the trap of "this is not Queen anymore"
I was very keen at first with the new collabaration - mainly to hear Queen songs performed again live. Now I'm not so bothered about Queen + Paul Rodgers anymore. They've maybe run their course. I know other bands have changed their singers - Van Halen for one - but Freddie was so brilliant with his style that he has become somewhat irreplaceable and nobody can come close to him in reproducing what Queen were - greatest live act ever. A hard act to follow as they say and only goes to prove what a stranglehold he had as a live performer.
I LOVE QUEEN