Adam Lambert possibly new singer for Queen

[b]Daniel Nester wrote:
[/b]
Perhaps the question should be: Which truly great artist has ever [b][i]not [/i][/b]done anything that might ruin their legacy?


[/QUOTE]

Neil Young. ;-) (my bias...hehehe)

By the way: Hi, Daniel, great to read your posts again. I hope you're doing fine.

I just wanted to point out that I fully completely agree with you about the wording - "legacy" seems to be a clumsy inadaquate term to describe the fate of a rock band, to my mind.

Take care and have a great week!

I can honestly say that what The Who are doing 'now' is not ruining their legacy at all.  Having finally seen them live I would happily declare that they're doing the very opposite.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]I think they did their legacy ruining from 81-89.  Kenney Jones.  "It's Hard".  Brass section accompaniment.  Since then it's been just swell.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]With regards to this Idol fella; I still say give him a go.  One can claim that'll 'ruin Queen's legacy' but I mean ... the only ones who remember Queen's previous missteps (Wyclif Jean, Pepsi, etc...)  are US; fans that just won't let it go.  People should exercise their right to choose what is worth remembering.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

[b]Daniel Nester wrote: [/b]

I agree with just about what everybody says about Queen and publicity.

I guess I don't think Queen's legacy would be tarnished by pretty much anything they do.  They're doing what they do: play music.

Boy do we throw that word--legacy--around a lot here.  It carries a lot of weight. 

[b]Can anyone name an artist that diluted, ruined, or otherwise hurt their legacy, after they had done great work?
[/b]
I can start.

[b]Beach Boys:
[/b][i]Crimes against legacy: [/i]Duets with Fat Boys and John Stamos.  Tours now with just one guy, Mike Love, who is a total Republican a-hole. 
[i]Ruling: [/i]There's still Pet Sounds for everyone to listen to.

[b]The Who:
[/b][i]Crimes against legacy: [/i]Tours as duo now.  Has greatest hits packages every fiscal quarter. 
[i]Ruling: [/i]Albums still on soundtrack of every teenage boy who wants to twirl air guitar.

[b]Led Zeppelin:
[/b][i]Crimes against legacy: [/i]Jimmy Page duets with Puff Daddy for Godzilla soundtrack; Page/Coverdale; Live Aid performance; Robert Plant's solo career
[i]Ruling: [/i]They are freaking Led Zeppelin

Who else?  Beatles?  Michael Jackson?  Prince?  I think one could make an argument for all of them sullying their legacies at some point.

Perhaps the question should be: Which truly great artist has ever [b][i]not [/i][/b]done anything that might ruin their legacy?

[/QUOTE]


Michael Jackson??  bwuhahaha

as long as he doesnt get AIDS he will be perefectly placed.

So, if twenty other blokes hit their wives, it's OK to hit mine?

Myself, I don't give a fuck about legacy, but I do think B+R are prostituting themselves and the Queen name. Is that good? Is that bad? Dunno, and couldn't care less.

[b]Sheer Brass Neck wrote: [/b]

I agree with Amazon, Sebastian and Daniel.  All good points.  My take? Queen (were) like Beethoven, or The Beatles, once in a lifetime artists whose music will stand the test of time. Their legacy is secure, but it's becoming tarnished. TCR and Paul Rodgers did nothing to help, nad this little charade makes them appear as hangers on of the first class.  Eminently knowledgeable posters like Sir GH and Daniel among others point that for publicity purposes, doing this type of stuff is fantastic as Idol is a ratings juggernaut.  True, but what's the cost?  We're fans, but for people who know Queen casually, or not at all, I'm sure it appears that here are these guys playing those songs again for the hundredth time, desperately trying to hang on by glomming on to an up and coming talent. Sure they mayget noticed, but it's below them, and pathetic.  The Hills is a scripted reality show about a vapid group of pretty people in Hollywood.  It's very popular, and made stars out of the cast (think Paris Hilton variety in the talent department).  Should Martin Scorsese cast the women of The Hills in his next flick?  After all, he's getting a little long in the tooth, and people would relate more to his movies if they had Audina Partridge in them instead of someone like Meryl Streep.  Or Woody Allen could cast the Real Housewives of Atlanta in his next ensemble.  What would people think in Hollywood?  They'd think that they were pathetic.  Which is what Brian and Roger are if they're thinking that.  Having said that I understand why.  They know that there is no market or future for Queen without Freddie Mercury, and that in itself must be a death sentence.  Poor John Deacon is the only one left with any sense of dignity left.   


[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]

Great post, it makes complete sense to me.

Sort of off-topic, but Face Dances by The Who is a favorite album.  It's probably because I was a kid when it came out, but there it is.  It's Hard has "Cry If You Want," which is a favorite, too.

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV6ud6PluYo]Here's a live performance of that song.  For what it's worth.[/url]

[QUOTE]

[b]The Doctor wrote: [/b]

[QUOTE]





[b]Ducksoup wrote: [/b]



I sell my collection if they do this.

[/QUOTE]

If you survived Queen + 5ive I am sure you could get through this.




[/QUOTE]
Well, I think the 5ive collaboration had good Queen music content in it. I am talking about the single, where Roger also collaborated. Since I do not live in the UK or in the US, the name of that 5ive thing did not mean anything to me, I had never seen their faces and so I was not sick to hear their name. Maybe that is why I could appreciate the Queen content of the single, regardless of that boy band making some noise all over it. It was like listening to Queen while my neighbor played the odd pop band of the moment. I just tried to focus on the part I like - Brian and Roger playing. And it felt good :)

Cheers,

Ogre-

If Queen is doing this for "marketing" reasons (which they obviously didn't do with Paul... or did they?), what will be the excuses? I thought they just had a succesful (according to some opinions) tour, and didn't exactly need any "promotion" right now. If it was really a huge success (it wasn't) maybe they would have the urge to put anyone in Paul's shoes to keep it going but... oh well.

This is more than disgusting - now they have gone to their lowest standards. I'm starting to regret my opinion that they shouldn't have fired Paul (or that he shouldn't have quit, whatever have happened). Paul is a nice singer after all, he just didn't fit with Queen - or all their catalogue, at least. Things are really going downhill it seems if they try it once more.

This guy will be great in a duet... with Cher.

Oh dear

They might just have hit the bottom there ... AI as a marketing opportunity to sell the back catalogue in the US ? Nothing to be proud of, but OK, it's been done before (Stone Cold Classics, anyone ?).

But the crap about having "a meaningful conversation" with a young fellow who IS NOT A SINGER but can occasionaly hit a few high notes and implying he might be in the near future the frontman of QUEEN ???

I liked the post benchmarking comparable acts like The Who, The Beach Boys and Led Zep. I think none of them has sunk so low

Either they lost their mind, or Brian, who is a control freak and wants to be Queen by himself since Freddie died, thinks this guy will be a more manageable resource than Paul Rodgers. Surely if Brian wants to boss his new vocalist around, this boy will be more appopriate than the former frontman of fracking Free. More generally, Brian should get his act together : his songs on TCR sucked and he didn't really shine during the tour (unlike Roger). Less musical, less badges, less American Idol : he's Brian May, he should focus on making some new good music, on this I am with Sebastian 200%

I love Queen and I love Brian, but if it happens with Lambert, it will be shameful beyond redemption

Oh man, c'mon.

Adam Lambert is a singer.

He does it professionally and he was on American Idol.

Say what you will about AI, but it is a singing competition, as well as a personality contest.  It's not a dating or a reality show.  It's not a talent contest. It's a singing contest.  There is a difference. 

What kind of art doesn't involve personality as well as art?

And what has always been Queen's justification for what they do? The people like it!  Damn the critics! 

We sound like a bunch of rock critics lately.

And no one on this board, I suspect, can sing as well as him.  Whoever said that sounded a little crazy to me.

Talk about the cult of the amateur.

He is Broadway.  I will say that.  Which gets on my wife's nerves, for one.

Me, I like him. 

I said this before, and I will say it again: Queen has never performed as Queen after Freddie died, except for NOBY and the Tribute.  Everything else has been with the + sign.  Which I have always thought has been an elegant way of saying Queen is - Freddie.

I can see people who don't want anything to happen with the Queen moniker after Freddie died.  But I can see Brian and Roger sort of consciously adding that "+" moniker as a way of saying this is different, this is a post-Freddie kind of thing.

Everyone has seen the big magazine articles about Glambert, even before the finale.  Comparisons were made. Photos of Freddie in People magazine?  Wow.  That Bri and Rog played the finale--again, without an announcement from a contestant, judge or host, only the bass drum gave people any indication these two old dudes had anything to do with Queen.

Sorry for meandering.

This is an on-line forum, and as such, it's a free space where people can comment and have an opinion. It's not OK for us to resemble 'a bunch of rock critics' but it's OK for B+R to harshly criticise AI and then kneel down to it?

Remember: this is a discussion forum, not a worship one.

When I first saw Adam on the show I immediately thought that he would be the typical person that they would want to hire for WWRY.  He had that fake rock star look (the clothing and hair) - like an actor playing a rock star.  I haven't seen WWRY, but I've seen the cast performing on the Tonight Show (I think it was the Tonight Show and I think I saw that unless I was dreaming or something - ha) - and so I get the general idea of what they are doing with that production.  (I would like to see WWRY eventually.)

But ... that fake rock star thing was my first impression only.  When I watched his performances during the season, he got more and more impressive to me.  That was because of his musical abilities, compared to everyone else - not his look.  He had very good arrangements to the songs and his voice could be beautiful on some of the songs.  I think he overdoes that yelling thing on some songs, but that could be taken care of with some good musical direction.  He never made any mistakes.  He seems very quick and bright and cheerful, and comfortable on stage.  His performances were the only ones this season that I wanted to watch more than once.  So, he became like a real rock star to me and I found myself only looking forward to his performances during the show.  Now that the show is over, I'm not sure how exciting he will seem.  If he is on TV, I will watch it, for sure.

Everyone is speculating so I will too.  I think that first of all Brian was probably impressed by this guy's talent.  He rehearsed with him briefly, and so I guess he was able to assess the situation quickly.  And maybe he has been interested in Adam's performances this year with regard to WWRY (a possible Broadway production maybe?).  I think the close timing of the announcement of Paul's departure (by Paul) and then Brian saying this kid, Adam, is talented and he would like to work with him in the future is what is getting everyone so upset.  They think that Brian and Roger are desiring to re-create the type of relationship they had with Paul, with touring, etc.  I doubt if that is the case at this point.

I'm not sure if Lambert has any musical background or if he can write music, anyway if he doesn't it'll mean that Brian and Roger will be hiring him to hit some high notes so they'll be able to recreate more Queen songs for future concerts. In a word, they'll probably turn into their own official tribute band. They're free to do so, of course but I won't be interested in whatever they do anymore. There are thousands of new bands out there who are coming out with very interesting new music, so I fail to see the point of sticking to a couple of middle age men who are trying to recreate something they'll never get to do again, with a fake version of their former singer.

God, the actual Queen seems to be millions of years away from the days when they gave birth to gems like The March of the Black Queen or Spread Your Wings.

[QUOTE]

[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]

 It's not OK for us to resemble 'a bunch of rock critics' but it's OK for B+R to harshly criticise AI and then kneel down to it?

[/QUOTE]

.... ugh! ugh!
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]it is ok because you do this in the space of one sentence where it's just not the truth.......   when was the last time brian really, really to his full ability said "IDOL IS ALL EVIL 100% BULLSHIT"? [/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]been months or years hasn't it?[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]and he has explained on his soapbox his mixed feelings  but has decided that to some instances its just a way for people to expose themselves ......   its probably not the preferrred way but fucks sake.....




[/QUOTE]