I love how treasure moment is trying to make himself relevant again,
not that he was relevant in the first place,
but on the subject of Kiss v/ Queen, there's no contests between the two, Queen could kick their uncreative asses any day.
[/QUOTE]
But Queen can't because their lead singer is dead.
KISS "Sonic Boom" World Tour 2010
Long live KISS!
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]DvD wrote: [/b]
I love how treasure moment is trying to make himself relevant again,
not that he was relevant in the first place,
but on the subject of Kiss v/ Queen, there's no contests between the two, Queen could kick their uncreative asses any day.
[/QUOTE]
But Queen can't because their lead singer is dead.
[/QUOTE]
Then by that logic, Kiss are better than The Beatles too. That said, John Lennon's corpse could still write a better song than anyone in Kiss.
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
Your arguments are getting pretty weak... not that they were ever strong to begin with. Keep on trolling..
Amazon · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]DvD wrote: [/b]
I love how treasure moment is trying to make himself relevant again,
not that he was relevant in the first place,
but on the subject of Kiss v/ Queen, there's no contests between the two, Queen could kick their uncreative asses any day.
[/QUOTE]
But Queen can't because their lead singer is dead.
[/QUOTE]
Then by that logic, Kiss are better than The Beatles too. That said, John Lennon's corpse could still write a better song than anyone in Kiss.
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
Your arguments are getting pretty weak... not that they were ever strong to begin with. Keep on trolling..
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely true Sir Gh, although I want to note that I personally would rather go to a concert featuring Roger Tyler on lead vocals (my third favourite lead singer in Queen), than go to a Kiss concert. Heck, I would rather go to a concert featuring John Deacon on lead vocals than a Kiss concert. he doesn't have to sing; He can just play his bass, and it would still be money better spent than attending a Kiss concert. Honestly, how anyone could put Kiss in the same category as Queen is beyond me.
Gregsynth · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]DvD wrote: [/b]
I love how treasure moment is trying to make himself relevant again,
not that he was relevant in the first place,
but on the subject of Kiss v/ Queen, there's no contests between the two, Queen could kick their uncreative asses any day.
[/QUOTE]
But Queen can't because their lead singer is dead.
[/QUOTE]
Then by that logic, Kiss are better than The Beatles too. That said, John Lennon's corpse could still write a better song than anyone in Kiss.
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
Your arguments are getting pretty weak... not that they were ever strong to begin with. Keep on trolling..
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely true Sir Gh, although I want to note that I personally would rather go to a concert featuring Roger Tyler on lead vocals (my third favourite lead singer in Queen), than go to a Kiss concert. Heck, I would rather go to a concert featuring John Deacon on lead vocals than a Kiss concert. he doesn't have to sing; He can just play his bass, and it would still be better money spent than attending a Kiss concert. Honestly, how anyone could put Kiss in the same category as Queen is beyond me.
[/QUOTE]
It's apples and oranges. I don't compare bands that are drastically different (Like Queen/Kiss), but I will say that Queen is the better band overall (not because it's a Queen forum, or if I'm biased towards Queen--it's FACT)!
Amazon · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Gregsynth wrote: [/b]
It's apples and oranges. I don't compare bands that are drastically different (Like Queen/Kiss), but I will say that Queen is the better band overall (not because it's a Queen forum, or if I'm biased towards Queen--it's FACT)!
[/QUOTE]
Usually I would feel the same, whether or not someone considers Kiss to be better than Queen doesn't reallly concern me; however Skip has made me so angry with his constant and immaturely unapologetic homophobia, that I thought I would make an exception this time. Nonetheless I certainly agree with your last comment. :D :D :D
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]DvD wrote: [/b]
I love how treasure moment is trying to make himself relevant again,
not that he was relevant in the first place,
but on the subject of Kiss v/ Queen, there's no contests between the two, Queen could kick their uncreative asses any day.
[/QUOTE]
But Queen can't because their lead singer is dead.
[/QUOTE]
Then by that logic, Kiss are better than The Beatles too. That said, John Lennon's corpse could still write a better song than anyone in Kiss.
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
Your arguments are getting pretty weak... not that they were ever strong to begin with. Keep on trolling..
[/QUOTE]
To me KISS are better than The Beatles. I think The Beatles suck and are vastly overrated. Can't stand Lennon.
He wasn't good enough to be in the same band as McCartney.
Your posts against KISS show that you're narrow-minded. Queen used pyro too, that is, after KISS already was using it.
Like Queen never sold a t-shirt or a tourbook in their lives.
KISS Sonic Boom World Tour 2010
thunderbolt 31742 · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote:[/b]
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
[/QUOTE]
WTF?! You mean there's more to being great than pyro and t-shirts that cost as much as the concert ticket?!
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]DvD wrote: [/b]
I love how treasure moment is trying to make himself relevant again,
not that he was relevant in the first place,
but on the subject of Kiss v/ Queen, there's no contests between the two, Queen could kick their uncreative asses any day.
[/QUOTE]
But Queen can't because their lead singer is dead.
[/QUOTE]
Then by that logic, Kiss are better than The Beatles too. That said, John Lennon's corpse could still write a better song than anyone in Kiss.
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
Your arguments are getting pretty weak... not that they were ever strong to begin with. Keep on trolling..
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely true Sir Gh, although I want to note that I personally would rather go to a concert featuring Roger Tyler on lead vocals (my third favourite lead singer in Queen), than go to a Kiss concert. Heck, I would rather go to a concert featuring John Deacon on lead vocals than a Kiss concert. he doesn't have to sing; He can just play his bass, and it would still be money better spent than attending a Kiss concert. Honestly, how anyone could put Kiss in the same category as Queen is beyond me.
[/QUOTE]
You'd be more at home at a Melissa Etheridge concert.
"KISS: Behind The Mask"
Brian May: "I like KISS a lot. Queen were often compared to KISS at the time. We were sort of counterparts. They were the American version and we were the English version. I think we went into it with slightly different ideas. KISS came more from a presentation view to begin with and moved more toward the musical. I think we probably started in the musical and worked more toward the presentation. I have a great regard for KISS 'cause it's all-out. They just had their vision, they had their dream, and they damn well went for it."
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Gregsynth wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]DvD wrote: [/b]
I love how treasure moment is trying to make himself relevant again,
not that he was relevant in the first place,
but on the subject of Kiss v/ Queen, there's no contests between the two, Queen could kick their uncreative asses any day.
[/QUOTE]
But Queen can't because their lead singer is dead.
[/QUOTE]
Then by that logic, Kiss are better than The Beatles too. That said, John Lennon's corpse could still write a better song than anyone in Kiss.
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
Your arguments are getting pretty weak... not that they were ever strong to begin with. Keep on trolling..
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely true Sir Gh, although I want to note that I personally would rather go to a concert featuring Roger Tyler on lead vocals (my third favourite lead singer in Queen), than go to a Kiss concert. Heck, I would rather go to a concert featuring John Deacon on lead vocals than a Kiss concert. he doesn't have to sing; He can just play his bass, and it would still be better money spent than attending a Kiss concert. Honestly, how anyone could put Kiss in the same category as Queen is beyond me.
[/QUOTE]
It's apples and oranges. I don't compare bands that are drastically different (Like Queen/Kiss), but I will say that Queen is the better band overall (not because it's a Queen forum, or if I'm biased towards Queen--it's FACT)!
[/QUOTE]
That's not fact, it's your opinion. It's obvious you don't know the difference.
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Gregsynth wrote: [/b]
It's apples and oranges. I don't compare bands that are drastically different (Like Queen/Kiss), but I will say that Queen is the better band overall (not because it's a Queen forum, or if I'm biased towards Queen--it's FACT)!
[/QUOTE]
Usually I would feel the same, whether or not someone considers Kiss to be better than Queen doesn't reallly concern me; however Skip has made me so angry with his constant and immaturely unapologetic homophobia, that I thought I would make an exception this time. Nonetheless I certainly agree with your last comment. :D :D :D
[/QUOTE]
Go listen to your Indigo Girls cds.
john bodega · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote:[/b]
That's not fact, it's your opinion. It's obvious you don't know the difference.
[/QUOTE]
That being the case, why do you post your opinion so often? Is it an insecurity thing or what? [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]I mean fair enough - freedom of speech is nice and all, but exercising a bit of thought before said speech never goes astray. [/QUOTE]
mike hunt · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Amazon wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]DvD wrote: [/b]
I love how treasure moment is trying to make himself relevant again,
not that he was relevant in the first place,
but on the subject of Kiss v/ Queen, there's no contests between the two, Queen could kick their uncreative asses any day.
[/QUOTE]
But Queen can't because their lead singer is dead.
[/QUOTE]
Then by that logic, Kiss are better than The Beatles too. That said, John Lennon's corpse could still write a better song than anyone in Kiss.
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
Your arguments are getting pretty weak... not that they were ever strong to begin with. Keep on trolling..
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely true Sir Gh, although I want to note that I personally would rather go to a concert featuring Roger Tyler on lead vocals (my third favourite lead singer in Queen), than go to a Kiss concert. Heck, I would rather go to a concert featuring John Deacon on lead vocals than a Kiss concert. he doesn't have to sing; He can just play his bass, and it would still be money better spent than attending a Kiss concert. Honestly, how anyone could put Kiss in the same category as Queen is beyond me.
[/QUOTE]
You'd be more at home at a Melissa Etheridge concert.
"KISS: Behind The Mask"
Brian May: "I like KISS a lot. Queen were often compared to KISS at the time. We were sort of counterparts. They were the American version and we were the English version. I think we went into it with slightly different ideas. KISS came more from a presentation view to begin with and moved more toward the musical. I think we probably started in the musical and worked more toward the presentation. I have a great regard for KISS 'cause it's all-out. They just had their vision, they had their dream, and they damn well went for it."
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, brian doesn't say a bad word about anyone. This is the same guy who loves katy perry and brittany spears...
john bodega · Member since
I think [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PDf6MagRp8]Queen + Treasure Moment[/url] would be a great idea...
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote: [/b]
To me KISS are better than The Beatles.
[/QUOTE]
This statement alone has rendered you unable to discuss music with 99.999% of the civilized world. Honestly, why do you even bother?
No band will ever be bigger or better than The Beatles. They connected with billions of people around the world. Their music is perfect and timeless. If it wasn't, they wouldn't have been the best-selling artists of the last decade (30+ years after their demise), even without the remasters.
[QUOTE]Queen used pyro too, that is, after KISS already was using it.[/QUOTE]
But it was never the centrepiece to Queen's show. It merely augmented what was already happening on stage. What would Kiss' show be without the make-up, pyro, and gimmicks? It'd be a bunch of average musicians playing average songs for average people.
[QUOTE]Brian May: "I like KISS a lot. Queen were often compared to KISS at the time. We were sort of counterparts. They were the American version and we were the English version. I think we went into it with slightly different ideas. KISS came more from a presentation view to begin with and moved more toward the musical. I think we probably started in the musical and worked more toward the presentation. I have a great regard for KISS 'cause it's all-out. They just had their vision, they had their dream, and they damn well went for it."[/QUOTE]
It's called being a gentleman and a team player. Take some notes.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Thunderbolt wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote:[/b]
You probably don't realize this, but all you're doing is furthermore contributing to the general idea that Kiss fans are narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual people who think pyro and merchandise are what make a band great.
[/QUOTE]
WTF?! You mean there's more to being great than pyro and t-shirts that cost as much as the concert ticket?!
[/QUOTE]
I know... I was shocked at the idea as well. Ask skip... he seems to be the expert.
