> So even if John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, so what?
So what? This: if John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, then John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, simple as that.
> 99% of the population wouldn't know a note of John Petrucci's music.
So what?
> My parents, and most of yours, and grandparents have heard WWRY guitar solo and can probably hume it note by note
Good for them. Which doesn't change that if John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, then John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, simple as that.
> It's not like Brian is Bruce Springsteen or Billy Joe Armstrong on guitar
Saying he's not the best is not the same as saying he's not very good. A person who's 6 ft tall is not a dwarf, but he's not the tallest person in the world. There are literally millions of people who can play guitar and none of them can hold a candle to Brian; but there are also several people (dozens?, hundreds? several in any case) who can play better than him. And Petrucci's one of them.
> Thousands of kids on YouTube are "better" than Brian.
Not thousands, but some may be, and he's kind and clever enough to accept so.
Sheer Brass Neck · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]
> So even if John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, so what?
So what? This: if John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, then John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, simple as that.[/QUOTE][QUOTE] [/QUOTE][QUOTE]S[b]o what? John Petrucci isn't as good a guitarist as Nuno Bettencourt. Does this mean Extreme is more similar to Queen, or Green Day, than DT. The thread is about Queen and Green Day similarities, or lack thereof.[/b]
> 99% of the population wouldn't know a note of John Petrucci's music.
So what?[/QUOTE][QUOTE] [/QUOTE][QUOTE][b]So what? Why does John Petrucci allegedly being a better guitarist than Brian have anything to do with Queen and Green Day? [/b]
> My parents, and most of yours, and grandparents have heard WWRY guitar solo and can probably hume it note by note
Good for them. Which doesn't change that if John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, then John Petrucci is a better guitarist than Brian, simple as that.[/QUOTE][QUOTE][b]Which has nothing to do with Queen and Green Day, or the fact that John Petrucci is not as good a guitarist as Nuno Bettencourt. [/b]
> It's not like Brian is Bruce Springsteen or Billy Joe Armstrong on guitar
Saying he's not the best is not the same as saying he's not very good. A person who's 6 ft tall is not a dwarf, but he's not the tallest person in the world. There are literally millions of people who can play guitar and none of them can hold a candle to Brian; but there are also several people (dozens?, hundreds? several in any case) who can play better than him. And Petrucci's one of them.[/QUOTE][QUOTE][b]John Petrucci may be tall or short. Brain May is tall. Nuno Bettencourt is short. Billy Joe Armstrong is short also. Nuno Bettencourt is a better guitarist than either of them. So what? [/b]
> Thousands of kids on YouTube are "better" than Brian.
Not thousands, but some may be, and he's kind and clever enough to accept so. [/QUOTE][QUOTE][b]Maybe millions, you don't have the data to dispute my statement.[/b][/QUOTE][QUOTE] [/QUOTE]
Mercuryking · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
I see where you're coming from, and on some points you're certainly correct.
But without strong musicianship and innovation, they're nowhere near being the new Queen.
If any band these days can be called the new Queen, it's Muse.
[/QUOTE]
You must be kiddin. Muse sound NOTHING like queen ,by you saying that shows me that you know little about queen.
Their song starlight sounds like the cardigans for gods sake.
ParisNair · Member since
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZYGxHVyCwI
Sebastian · Member since
> So what? John Petrucci isn't as good a guitarist as Nuno Bettencourt. Does this mean Extreme is more similar to Queen,
or Green Day, than DT.
Now, Extreme are indeed more similar to Queen than GD or DT, but that's not directly related to Nuno's expertise.
> The thread is about Queen and Green Day similarities, or lack thereof.
However, you wrote a long-winded message dealing with other aspects.
> Why does John Petrucci allegedly being a better guitarist than Brian have anything to do with Queen and Green Day?
Why does John Petruci allegedly being a better guitarist than Brian allegedly having anything to do with Queen and Green Day have anything to do with Queen and Green Day?
> Which has nothing to do with Queen and Green Day, or the fact that John Petrucci is not as good a guitarist as Nuno Bettencourt.
So what?
> John Petrucci may be tall or short. Brain May is tall. Nuno Bettencourt is short. Billy Joe Armstrong is short also. Nuno Bettencourt is a better guitarist than either of them. So what?
If Nuno's better than them, then Nuno's better than them.
> Maybe millions, you don't have the data to dispute my statement.
So what? I don't have the data to say Billie Joe is a man, for all we know he could be a crocodile dressed as a man, and as none of us (as far as I know) has analysed his DNA, then none of us can guarantee he's not a crocodile, or a penguin, etc. Sure, penguins have feathers, but maybe Billie Joe is the one penguin that has hair instead. Or maybe the hair was purchased via p-bay (Penguin's bay). As I haven't got any way to prove that's false, then it must be true...
There are YT people who play better than Brian, and I seem to remember he did acknowledge it once or twice. But not millions.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Mercury SingerOfLife wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
If any band these days can be called the new Queen, it's Muse.
[/QUOTE]
You must be kiddin. Muse sound NOTHING like queen ,by you saying that shows me that you know little about queen.
[/QUOTE]
Where did I say Muse sounds like Queen? That shows me that you know little about reading comprehension.
Furthermore, if you're using only one example to illustrate your point, that shows me that you know little about Muse. There are elements of their sound and approach that are influenced by Queen.
Jimmy Dean · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Mercury SingerOfLife wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
If any band these days can be called the new Queen, it's Muse.
[/QUOTE]
You must be kiddin. Muse sound NOTHING like queen ,by you saying that shows me that you know little about queen.
[/QUOTE]
Where did I say Muse sounds like Queen? That shows me that you know little about reading comprehension.
Furthermore, if you're using only one example to illustrate your point, that shows me that you know little about Muse. There are elements of their sound and approach that are influenced by Queen.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed with Sir GH... a good example is "Muscle Museum" on their debut album... Queen influenced...but not like Queen at all. I find the vocal line, melody and song structure to be very Queen influenced with a tinge of Radiohead over-dramatization.
Mercuryking · Member since
sir GH: When you say that they are the next queen , what does that automatically mean? that they must SOUND like queen , how else are they the next queen? Just having some influence from queen doesnt make them the next queen.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Mercury SingerOfLife wrote: [/b]
sir GH: When you say that they are the next queen , what does that automatically mean? that they must SOUND like queen , how else are they the next queen?
[/QUOTE]
Michael Jackson is considered to be my generation's Elvis. Did MJ's music sound anything like Elvis?
There's more to music than what's on the surface. To me, Muse certainly are worthy of being called the next Queen (if such a thing exists, conceptually or literally) for many reasons:
a) They are all strong musicians
b) They have progressed from one record to the next, bringing in new influences, taking risks by exploring different genres, and never doing the same thing twice
c) Their albums are bringing them success, not just their singles
d) They did two nights at Wembley on their last tour
e) They didn't start off with a smash record or two, which allowed them to build their sound and reputation over time, and didn't leave them having to meet a standard with each subsequent record
f) After their fifth record, they are now doing the big arenas in North America - just like Queen after A Day At The Races.
How many other bands in the mainstream meet these qualifications? Very few, if any at all.
Jimmy Dean · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Mercury SingerOfLife wrote: [/b]
sir GH: When you say that they are the next queen , what does that automatically mean? that they must SOUND like queen , how else are they the next queen?
[/QUOTE]
Michael Jackson is considered to be my generation's Elvis. Did MJ's music sound anything like Elvis?
There's more to music than what's on the surface. To me, Muse certainly are worthy of being called the next Queen (if such a thing exists, conceptually or literally) for many reasons:
a) They are all strong musicians
b) They have progressed from one record to the next, bringing in new influences, taking risks, and never doing the same thing twice
c) Their albums are bringing them success, not just their singles.
d) They did two nights at Wembley on their last tour.
e) After their fifth record, they are now doing the big arenas in North America
How many other bands in the mainstream meet these qualifications? Very few, if any at all.
[/QUOTE]
Actually... Green Day fits your letters A through E perfectly....
a) They are all strong musicians... maybe not Billie Joe on the guitar...he's ok... but Dirnt and definitely Tre Cool are very proficient musicians... I mean Tre Cool is hands down better than Roger... without exception... listen to Jesus of Suburbia or Burnout (on the their 3rd album)... A-class drumming.
b) Green Day's progression is definitely more varied than Muse... Showbiz and Resistance aren't nearly as varied as Dookie and Warning are., or even American Idiot.... so if anything Green Day fits that description better
c) Green Day's albums are more recognizeable than Muse's, if anything... everyone owns a copy of Dookie and American Idiot... every Green Day fan owns a copy of Insomniac (their cult classic)
d) Green Day is an *American* band... and they filled Wembley for 1 night, with other venues in the country during the same week..
e) Green Day began to grow on people by their 4th record (Nimrod) with Good Riddance (Time of Your Life)... a major hit... [Boh Rhap on Queen's 4th album, anyone?]... and they achieved recognition with Warning/Minority on their 5th album [Somebody to Love/Tie Your Mother Down] and finally got their anthem on their 6th album with American Idiot/Boulevard of Broken Dreams [We Will Rock You/We Are The Champions]
I don't think those 5 criteria really fit the bill... Green Day is NOT the *next* Queen... and I very much doubt Muse is either. But I can easily throw any other band's name out there and we can sit and go through all the reasons why or why not...
Coldplay has the same thing going for them... but since someone already dubbed them the next U2... they aren't compared to Queen.
Sebastian · Member since
I beg to differ (or maybe dream and differ) about Tre Cool vs Roger. I'm not a Taylor maniac or anything, I do know there are several drummers who play better than Rog, but IMO Tre Cool's not one of them.
And regarding the 'anthem' thing, IMO [i]Basket Case[/i] is still their signature track, not BBoBD, though I adore them both. Same with the AI eponymous track.
And indeed, many bands have all members as strong musicians.
Jimmy Dean · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]
I beg to differ (or maybe dream and differ) about Tre Cool vs Roger. I'm not a Taylor maniac or anything, I do know there are several drummers who play better than Rog, but IMO Tre Cool's not one of them.
And regarding the 'anthem' thing, IMO [i]Basket Case[/i] is still their signature track, not BBoBD, though I adore them both. Same with the AI eponymous track.
And indeed, many bands have all members as strong musicians.
[/QUOTE]
good pickup on the basket case... but not recognizable to the average music fan as much as boulevard and good riddance... to the average rock fan... yes Basket Case would be it....
and tre cool is definitely more proficient than roger... if anyone's heard each of the bands albums 100 times over like I have... they should all agree that tre cool outshines roger.
of course there are better drummers than either of them... bonham, peart, carey, bruford, krupa, etc...
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Jimmy Dean wrote: [/b]
b) Green Day's progression is definitely more varied than Muse... Showbiz and Resistance aren't nearly as varied as Dookie and Warning are., or even American Idiot.... so if anything Green Day fits that description better
[/QUOTE]
Excellent post overall. I certainly agree with most of your comparisons, but I have to disagree about Green Day's music progressing and never doing the same thing twice.
The last two records, great as they are, are very formulaic. Most songs are 5 chords and cliche. They even used Pachebel's Canon in Jesus of Suburbia. Muse are the far more adventurous and diverse band. Their last two records have been all over the map. The trumpet solo in City of Delusion was daring and unexpected, and the melodies and chord progressions in Knights of Cydonia are more interesting and progressive than anything in Green Day's catalogue, as far as I'm concerned. And that's even before mentioning all the classical influences.. !
Green Day, however, is far more accessible, at least in North America. They may use every cliche in the book, but they do it perfectly and everyone cheerfully eats it up. They've earned it.
Jimmy Dean · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Jimmy Dean wrote: [/b]
b) Green Day's progression is definitely more varied than Muse... Showbiz and Resistance aren't nearly as varied as Dookie and Warning are., or even American Idiot.... so if anything Green Day fits that description better
[/QUOTE]
Excellent post overall. I certainly agree with most of your comparisons, but I have to disagree about Green Day's music progressing and never doing the same thing twice.
The last two records, great as they are, are very formulaic. Most songs are 5 chords, and they use every cliche in the book. They even used Pachebel's Canon in Jesus of Suburbia. Muse are the far more adventurous and diverse band. Their last two records have been all over the map. The trumpet solo in City of Delusion was daring and unexpected, and the melodies and chord progressions in Knights of Cydonia are more interesting and progressive than Green Day's entire catalogue combined, as far as I'm concerned.
[/QUOTE]
I never said Green Day doesn't do the same thing twice.... they've actually done every album twice, lol! Kerplunk=Dookie, Insomniac=Nimrod, Warning=Stop, Drop & Roll!, American Idiot=21 Century Breakdown... however, the styles of each of these groupings are different .... bubblegum punk rock, punk rock, kinks/garage rock, the who/emo rock
The problem with Muse.. is that, if you listen to each of their albums in a row... the "sound" is the same... the overdramatic chord progressions, the heavy usage of minor chords, the wailing, etc... it's used in every one of their albums... again, great great albums, and yes, Knights of Cydonia is a great track... and yes very progressive an interesting chord changes... something Green Day never does... they keep it tight and concise in most cases... and I agree, they do not take chances with their chord progressions... but they have thrown some unexpected stuff our way.... the trumpet solo in King For a Day, lol...sorry.. you brought it up...
to sum up... Muse does outweigh Green Day in the pushing music forward category, because Green Day does not do that, they don't try to push the envelope, they just take what's been done and they try to do their own version of it... and they are good at that, at least.
Alas, both bands, i don't think are the "next Queen" in any way....esecially not Green Day! I find Muse a little more similar to Queen in the pushing the enveolope sense... that absolutely goes to them.. Queen, more than most bands, especially since the Beatles, tried to diversify music....and achieved their own "sound" in doing so. Muse has their own "sound", unlike most bands of today. I just find them a little too overbearing for my taste.
Sheer Brass Neck · Member since
Sorry to jump on you Seb, but I just here too much of the "Brian's not as good as...", and I think it's ridiculous. Here's Steve Vai talking about Brian. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]
"I don't think enough is really said about the brilliance of[b] Brian May[/b]'s guitar playing, inthe sense that it's overshadowed by the music itself. The Queen II album was one of those pivotal moments that just nailed me to the wall.
"He's probably one of the top identifiable guitar players, even more so than Beck, Page, and Clapton. They're all so identifiable, but Brian May has such a tone in his head and in his fingers. It speaks volumes. His contribution to orchestrated guitars is unprecedented. There was nothing like it before him. To me, it was like when Edward Van Halen came along and reshaped the sound of electric guitar. That's what I heard in Brian May's playing. It's something that's inherent in the brain of the guitar player.
"I remember working with Frank Zappa for the first time. I had just moved out to Los Angeles, and nobody knew me. I was 21. I went out to the Rainbow Bar and Grill, and Brian May was there. I couldn't believe it. I mustered up every little bit of courage and went up to him and said, 'Thank you so much for everything you've done. I play guitar. I'm here in town with Frank Zappa.' He said 'Oh really? Why don't you come down to our rehearsal?'
"I went down and he brought me up on the stage, and he let me play the guitar-the guitar that he built with his dad [the "Red Special"]. I couldn't even believe that I was touching this instrument! He was so kind and so warm, and for who? This kid, you know? And I played his guitar, and it sounded like Steve Vai. Then when he played it, it sounded just like Brian May. It was very apparent to me that his tone is in his fingers and his head.
"He's a class act from head to toe, and it shows in his playing. I can listen to any player and pantomime their sound, but I can't do Brian May. He's just walking on higher ground."
Maybe John Petrucci is walking on a higher ground than Brian, but virtually nobody in the world of guitar who values originality in tone and playing would think of John Petrucci in the same breath as Brian May. Maybe John Petrucci is faster, cleaner, more diverse (don't know if any of that is true), but those are components of guitar playing. If you dismiss originality, tone and orchestration as creations of the mind and not the act of playing guitar, I understand. But to me, you can't separate the two, which makes Brian no better or worse, just more unique than virtually anyone. Again, Billy Sheehan can (probably and reputation wise) play circles around John Deacon, but can't write therfore play melodic lines like Deacon, which makes Deacon a more pleasing (although maybe not as flash) player than Sheehan, same with Brain and Petrucci.
