Catherine Porter's beautiful new version of the classic Queen song features Brian May on guitar. What does everyone think about it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPfrBIC9_As
catevenus
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Ms. Rebel
Well, at least far better than that Michael guy.
Nice cover.
Nice cover.
Amazon
Sorry, but I didn't particularly like it. It actually proves my theory; that IMO STL is a song that nobody gets right, apart from Freddie. George Michael's was very good, but I don't think that anybody who tackles it have the abilties and emotional power that Freddie did. This version is a perfect example of that. Whether Freddie's version struck me as yearning, desperately and with all his might, this version lacks all power. George Michael's version struck me as too 'joyful.' I don' t think he truly understood the song (at least from my perspective.) This version also suggests to me that the singer doesn't quite get the song. Plus, Brian's guitar, of what I heard of it (I tried listening to it twice yet I couldn't finish either time) is nowhere near as superb as it was on the original version.
Funnilly enough, the only good cover version I ever heard was in Happy Feet [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] , but that was based purely on the voice, rather than the emotion.
Funnilly enough, the only good cover version I ever heard was in Happy Feet [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] , but that was based purely on the voice, rather than the emotion.
Knute
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
Sorry, but I didn't particularly like it. It actually proves my theory; that IMO STL is a song that nobody gets right, apart from Freddie. George Michael's was very good, but I don't think that anybody who tackles it have the abilties and emotional power that Freddie did. This version is a perfect example of that. Whether Freddie's version struck me as yearning, desperately and with all his might, this version lacks all power. George Michael's version struck me as too 'joyful.' I don' t think he truly understood the song (at least from my perspective.) This version also suggests to me that the singer doesn't quite get the song. Plus, Brian's guitar, of what I heard of it (I tried listening to it twice yet I couldn't finish either time) is nowhere near as superb as it was on the original version.
Funnilly enough, the only good cover version I ever heard was in Happy Feet [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] , but that was based purely on the voice, rather than the emotion.
[/QUOTE]
This is exactly the attitude I can't stand and soon that video will soon be chock full of similar comments.
The objective is not to 'match" Freddie as you infer
It's a restructuring of harmonic and melodic material. It's being placed in a different feel to achieve a completely different effect.
Close minded people seemingly can't expand their awareness enough to appreciate the effect of this. They are obsessed with pointing out how it lacks relative to it's difference from the original
She's not trying to best Freddie or improve upon the original in any way.
Not surprisingly the only cover version of this song you approve of is the one most similar to the original. Wow, what a surprise. Let me take a wild guess. You are the type that can't stand it when Paul Rodgers interprets We Are The Champions in a bluesy manner. I suppose he doesn't get it or understand the emotion..whatever the fuck that mean.
*rolls eyes way fucking back into head*
Now watch as the "Dis sucks she killed Freddy's song" comments come rolling in.
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
Sorry, but I didn't particularly like it. It actually proves my theory; that IMO STL is a song that nobody gets right, apart from Freddie. George Michael's was very good, but I don't think that anybody who tackles it have the abilties and emotional power that Freddie did. This version is a perfect example of that. Whether Freddie's version struck me as yearning, desperately and with all his might, this version lacks all power. George Michael's version struck me as too 'joyful.' I don' t think he truly understood the song (at least from my perspective.) This version also suggests to me that the singer doesn't quite get the song. Plus, Brian's guitar, of what I heard of it (I tried listening to it twice yet I couldn't finish either time) is nowhere near as superb as it was on the original version.
Funnilly enough, the only good cover version I ever heard was in Happy Feet [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] , but that was based purely on the voice, rather than the emotion.
[/QUOTE]
This is exactly the attitude I can't stand and soon that video will soon be chock full of similar comments.
The objective is not to 'match" Freddie as you infer
It's a restructuring of harmonic and melodic material. It's being placed in a different feel to achieve a completely different effect.
Close minded people seemingly can't expand their awareness enough to appreciate the effect of this. They are obsessed with pointing out how it lacks relative to it's difference from the original
She's not trying to best Freddie or improve upon the original in any way.
Not surprisingly the only cover version of this song you approve of is the one most similar to the original. Wow, what a surprise. Let me take a wild guess. You are the type that can't stand it when Paul Rodgers interprets We Are The Champions in a bluesy manner. I suppose he doesn't get it or understand the emotion..whatever the fuck that mean.
*rolls eyes way fucking back into head*
Now watch as the "Dis sucks she killed Freddy's song" comments come rolling in.
Erin
Great voice, but not my cup of tea...
Winter Land Man
Erin, just say thank-you to them, so you can add the information to your website, queenpedia. [img=/images/smiley/msn/shades_smile.gif][/img]
silver_salmon
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Erin
[QUOTE]
[b]Jacob Britt wrote:
[/b]
Erin, just say thank-you to them, so you can add the information to your website, queenpedia.
[/QUOTE]
Pieter had already added it.
[b]Jacob Britt wrote:
[/b]
Erin, just say thank-you to them, so you can add the information to your website, queenpedia.
[/QUOTE]
Pieter had already added it.
thunderbolt 31742
Actually, I kind of like it. I kept waiting for the guitar and harmony vocals to kick in, a la the slow-fast Hammer to Fall. I could see it working out very well in that sense as a live number for Catherine Porter, playing the first couple verses slow like that, then changing more to the original arrangement.
Not bad at all, I dare say. I admire artists covering a song who have the balls to change the arrangement that drastically. I love it when it works, like that did.
Not bad at all, I dare say. I admire artists covering a song who have the balls to change the arrangement that drastically. I love it when it works, like that did.
ANAGRAMER
Great cover- totally different emotional response to the usual renditions - felt like hearing the song for the first time
Brill
(just to put cat amongst pidgeons - B's guitar is a tad predictable)
Brill
(just to put cat amongst pidgeons - B's guitar is a tad predictable)
inu-liger
I like this one too. Very different.
Amazon
[QUOTE]
[b]Knute wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
Sorry, but I didn't particularly like it. It actually proves my theory; that IMO STL is a song that nobody gets right, apart from Freddie. George Michael's was very good, but I don't think that anybody who tackles it have the abilties and emotional power that Freddie did. This version is a perfect example of that. Whether Freddie's version struck me as yearning, desperately and with all his might, this version lacks all power. George Michael's version struck me as too 'joyful.' I don' t think he truly understood the song (at least from my perspective.) This version also suggests to me that the singer doesn't quite get the song. Plus, Brian's guitar, of what I heard of it (I tried listening to it twice yet I couldn't finish either time) is nowhere near as superb as it was on the original version.
Funnilly enough, the only good cover version I ever heard was in Happy Feet [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] , but that was based purely on the voice, rather than the emotion.
[/QUOTE]
This is exactly the attitude I can't stand and soon that video will soon be chock full of similar comments.
The objective is not to 'match" Freddie as you infer
It's a restructuring of harmonic and melodic material. It's being placed in a different feel to achieve a completely different effect.
Close minded people seemingly can't expand their awareness enough to appreciate the effect of this. They are obsessed with pointing out how it lacks relative to it's difference from the original
She's not trying to best Freddie or improve upon the original in any way.
Not surprisingly the only cover version of this song you approve of is the one most similar to the original. Wow, what a surprise. Let me take a wild guess. You are the type that can't stand it when Paul Rodgers interprets We Are The Champions in a bluesy manner. I suppose he doesn't get it or understand the emotion..whatever the fuck that mean.
*rolls eyes way fucking back into head*
Now watch as the "Dis sucks she killed Freddy's song" comments come rolling in.
[/QUOTE]
Did I just hit a nerve? (Rolls eyes) Let me guess; the only comments that will satisfy you are those that treat this version as if it was the greatest musical performance of all time? Right. Well, please allow me to have a different opinion to you. Is that alright?
First of all, I'm not a type. So whatever you may think of my comments (which I couldn't care less about), don't treat me as I'm some 'type' rather than a person who is entitled to her point of view.
Alright, let me tell you what [b]I [/b]think. I do not want want people to match Freddie; I think it's impossible as I consider him to have been the greatest male rock singer of all time and truly unique. [b]But[/b] I do think that certain songs should be sung in certain ways; do you really think that Yesterday would sound good as a rap song or Bohemian Rhapsody would sound good as a Country song? Does my dislking Rolf Harris's version of Stairway to Heaven make me close minded? Well, who knows and who cares. Although, I do find it interesting that you called me narrow minded because I disliked this version. Let me guess, if I liked it, that would make me real open minded? LOL.
And for your information, I did not infer that the objective should be to match Freddie, but I do think that IMO he is the only person who truly understood the emotions that the song required; you disagree, fine, but that is my opinion. So don't give me that crap about 'how It's a restructuring of harmonic and melodic material. It's being placed in a different feel to achieve a completely different effect'; well, yes, but I can still dislike it. You also say 'she's not trying to best Freddie or improve upon the original in any way'; well, she certainly succeeded as I don't think she improed upon it at all (the opposite in fact.)
As for Paul Rodger's version of We Are The Champions; let me guess, if I say that I [b]love[/b] it, then I must be open minded; but if I say that I [b]hate[/b] it, then I'm close minded? Well, what if I said that Rodgers is a extremely overrated singer whose version of WATC is as I always expected it to be; entirely forgettable. I guess that makes me narrow minded then. To quote you, *rolls eyes way fucking back into head*!
Oh, and regarding the last comment; at least I can spell!
[b]Knute wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
Sorry, but I didn't particularly like it. It actually proves my theory; that IMO STL is a song that nobody gets right, apart from Freddie. George Michael's was very good, but I don't think that anybody who tackles it have the abilties and emotional power that Freddie did. This version is a perfect example of that. Whether Freddie's version struck me as yearning, desperately and with all his might, this version lacks all power. George Michael's version struck me as too 'joyful.' I don' t think he truly understood the song (at least from my perspective.) This version also suggests to me that the singer doesn't quite get the song. Plus, Brian's guitar, of what I heard of it (I tried listening to it twice yet I couldn't finish either time) is nowhere near as superb as it was on the original version.
Funnilly enough, the only good cover version I ever heard was in Happy Feet [img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] , but that was based purely on the voice, rather than the emotion.
[/QUOTE]
This is exactly the attitude I can't stand and soon that video will soon be chock full of similar comments.
The objective is not to 'match" Freddie as you infer
It's a restructuring of harmonic and melodic material. It's being placed in a different feel to achieve a completely different effect.
Close minded people seemingly can't expand their awareness enough to appreciate the effect of this. They are obsessed with pointing out how it lacks relative to it's difference from the original
She's not trying to best Freddie or improve upon the original in any way.
Not surprisingly the only cover version of this song you approve of is the one most similar to the original. Wow, what a surprise. Let me take a wild guess. You are the type that can't stand it when Paul Rodgers interprets We Are The Champions in a bluesy manner. I suppose he doesn't get it or understand the emotion..whatever the fuck that mean.
*rolls eyes way fucking back into head*
Now watch as the "Dis sucks she killed Freddy's song" comments come rolling in.
[/QUOTE]
Did I just hit a nerve? (Rolls eyes) Let me guess; the only comments that will satisfy you are those that treat this version as if it was the greatest musical performance of all time? Right. Well, please allow me to have a different opinion to you. Is that alright?
First of all, I'm not a type. So whatever you may think of my comments (which I couldn't care less about), don't treat me as I'm some 'type' rather than a person who is entitled to her point of view.
Alright, let me tell you what [b]I [/b]think. I do not want want people to match Freddie; I think it's impossible as I consider him to have been the greatest male rock singer of all time and truly unique. [b]But[/b] I do think that certain songs should be sung in certain ways; do you really think that Yesterday would sound good as a rap song or Bohemian Rhapsody would sound good as a Country song? Does my dislking Rolf Harris's version of Stairway to Heaven make me close minded? Well, who knows and who cares. Although, I do find it interesting that you called me narrow minded because I disliked this version. Let me guess, if I liked it, that would make me real open minded? LOL.
And for your information, I did not infer that the objective should be to match Freddie, but I do think that IMO he is the only person who truly understood the emotions that the song required; you disagree, fine, but that is my opinion. So don't give me that crap about 'how It's a restructuring of harmonic and melodic material. It's being placed in a different feel to achieve a completely different effect'; well, yes, but I can still dislike it. You also say 'she's not trying to best Freddie or improve upon the original in any way'; well, she certainly succeeded as I don't think she improed upon it at all (the opposite in fact.)
As for Paul Rodger's version of We Are The Champions; let me guess, if I say that I [b]love[/b] it, then I must be open minded; but if I say that I [b]hate[/b] it, then I'm close minded? Well, what if I said that Rodgers is a extremely overrated singer whose version of WATC is as I always expected it to be; entirely forgettable. I guess that makes me narrow minded then. To quote you, *rolls eyes way fucking back into head*!
Oh, and regarding the last comment; at least I can spell!
john bodega
For what it is, it's really rather well done. I think they could've gotten more out of her voice and Brian's playing, while still keeping it mostly mellow though. She has a pretty decent set of pipes on her to be sure.
Saif
What I hate about Queen fans is how the always have to remark how "inferior" a cover is compared to the version sung by Freddie. There are some people here who, no matter how great a "cover" is, will slag it saying, "meh, not as good as the original".
I admit, at one time, I was a zealous Queen fan and couldn't entertain the thought of them not being the greatest band ever. There was a time I felt that way about Led Zeppelin too. But it was just a phase and I got over. When I was obsessed, it seemed like a fact to me and I thought everyone else were idiots for not agreeing with me as it seemed so factual. Later, I realized that I was the idiot for being so narrow-minded to others' opinions since it was all really subjective. As I got more and more interested in metal, I started enjoying Queen less. Honestly, I think Metallica's version of "Stone Cold Crazy" is better than Queen's but that's just my opinion. You can't measure the two versions with a stick and conclusively declare one better.
If I listen to a cover of an originally great song and like it, but not as much as the original, I say "nice attempt". But a lot of people here are acclimatized to saying, "Not as good as the original" as if it were some sort of catchphrase.
Yeah, maybe I'm spewing nonsense here. What do I know?
I admit, at one time, I was a zealous Queen fan and couldn't entertain the thought of them not being the greatest band ever. There was a time I felt that way about Led Zeppelin too. But it was just a phase and I got over. When I was obsessed, it seemed like a fact to me and I thought everyone else were idiots for not agreeing with me as it seemed so factual. Later, I realized that I was the idiot for being so narrow-minded to others' opinions since it was all really subjective. As I got more and more interested in metal, I started enjoying Queen less. Honestly, I think Metallica's version of "Stone Cold Crazy" is better than Queen's but that's just my opinion. You can't measure the two versions with a stick and conclusively declare one better.
If I listen to a cover of an originally great song and like it, but not as much as the original, I say "nice attempt". But a lot of people here are acclimatized to saying, "Not as good as the original" as if it were some sort of catchphrase.
Yeah, maybe I'm spewing nonsense here. What do I know?
john bodega
I think in a lot of cases, people are merely covering their asses when they write 'not as good as the original'. I'd rather put that disclaimer in one of my posts than have some Freddie Cultist coming after me and complaining that I've disrespected the Master or something...