Time For Marc Martel To Move 0n 2.0 (Revised)

I definitely have some curiosity about what a Queen + MM set would sound, look and, perhaps most importantly, feel like. But those whose arguments include the assertion that Martel is not an 'impersonator' are on shaky ground. He clearly deliberately took on parts of Freddie's tone and delivery at times and is on record claiming mimicry as one of his talents. It's certainly not a criticism - as a talented musician and highly skilled vocalist he made perfect artistic choices for the gig he had as a tribute artist. So it's worth I think a bit more contemplation about the optics and feel of it all through the eyes of Brian and Roger, right or wrong. The whole thing is clouded by the association in time with the Adam Lambert collaboration which generally ranged from ill advised to ridiculous. One considers Martel and sees in him so much more fundamentally important to the experience of live music than Lambert and his vocal histrionics, tubs of eyeliner and muppetskin jackets. It's easy to forget that there really is a dilemma of sorts in playing with your own tribute act.

[QUOTE] [b]YAFF wrote:[/b]
I've heard some nitwits say they are better than Queen
[/QUOTE]

I only saw one way over-enthusiastic person claim that. In context, I think they meant that QE PERFORMS Queen music better than the CURRENT incarnation of Queen+. If they actually did mean QE is a better band that Queen overall, then yeah, that's crayzeee.

[QUOTE] [b]GratefulFan wrote:[/b]
But those whose arguments include the assertion that Martel is not an 'impersonator' are on shaky ground. He clearly deliberately took on parts of Freddie's tone and delivery at times and is on record claiming mimicry as one of his talents. It's certainly not a criticism - as a talented musician and highly skilled vocalist he made perfect artistic choices for the gig he had as a tribute artist. [/QUOTE]

He doesn't have to mimic Freddie though. There are some songs (Love of My Life, Somebody to Love) that he more or less does with his own voice and style, and his performance doesn't suffer for it -- the songs still sound "right." If he was doing a Queen+ gig, I imagine they'd want him to do the songs his own way rather than doing the exact mimicry that he does in QE.

[QUOTE] [b]GratefulFan wrote:[/b]
The whole thing is clouded by the association in time with the Adam Lambert collaboration which generally ranged from ill advised to ridiculous. One considers Martel and sees in him so much more fundamentally important to the experience of live music than Lambert and his vocal histrionics, tubs of eyeliner and muppetskin jackets. [/QUOTE]

To be fair, the vast majority who saw Q+AL live loved the shows, and if they didn't love AL going in, they loved him afterwards. Most of the people still complaining about Q+AL are those who have only seen the YouTube vids.

No Martel, no Lambert - bring back Mr. Paul Rodgers!!!!!

I couldn't help but notice that there are a few things Marc didn't do that would make him seem even more like a Freddie impersonator. For example, I couldn't help but notice that, at least in the show I was at, he didn't say "I still love you" at the end of LoML in the way that Freddie did. That struck me a bit, as it really seemed to show that he was respecting Freddie by not using one of his little trademarks. Also, nobody did a Freddie-esque vocal impromptu or call and response with the audience, again Freddie trademarks that they pretty much just left alone.

[QUOTE] [b]YAFF wrote:[/b]
I find it disgusting and utterly daft at the number of numbskulls who are crying out for Brian & Roger to perform with Marc Martel. Why on earth would they do that? Martel is close but he isn't Freddie. Freddie Mercury wasn't just a voice. ZeBONKER's says "the kid deserves a s shot." Why? Huh? Let's see.... has he written a song anywhere near as good as Freddie Mercury? Has he exhibited the uncanny ability to captivate a crowd of 300,000 people? What has he done to "earn a shot"?
.[/QUOTE]
my own opinions on the many queen+ collaborations are well-known around here, so i won't regurgitate my distaste.

hwoever, i will spew my distaste for your utterly banal and vacuous statement. let's examine your rather stupid comments:

1. he's close but not freddie? well that's a darn sight better than any other collaboration (so far) none of which have ever been "close"
2. what the fuck had freddie written when he started out with queen in 1971? nada that's what
3. freddie was pretty audience shy in the early days, and from what i recall, the old "marquee, wardour street" never held 300,000...maybe about 700 people...everyone has to start somewhere, otherwise in your benevolent world Freddie would never have been given that chance either...idiot

now perhaps you can start a thread in future that actually makes an accurate point?

[QUOTE] [b]YAFF wrote:[/b]
It's one thing to sanction and give support to a tribute band but to reduce yourself to one is just the bottom.
[/QUOTE]
And this is what Yes have done - twice now. Still not sure how I ultimately feel about it.

I saw them with Benoit David, and it was an excellent show. It's still not the same without the spiritual presence that is Jon Anderson, but the entire act can't be written off because one person has been replaced. Howe, Squire and White want to keep playing the music, so what other option do they have?

Should Bach be the only person allowed to play or conduct his music in front of an audience?

[QUOTE] [b]waunakonor wrote:[/b]
I couldn't help but notice that there are a few things Marc didn't do that would make him seem even more like a Freddie impersonator. For example, I couldn't help but notice that, at least in the show I was at, he didn't say "I still love you" at the end of LoML in the way that Freddie did. That struck me a bit, as it really seemed to show that he was respecting Freddie by not using one of his little trademarks. Also, nobody did a Freddie-esque vocal impromptu or call and response with the audience, again Freddie trademarks that they pretty much just left alone.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for that. This is what I meant by saying Marc seems to have genuine respect for remaining Queen and Freddie and he wouldn't try to upstage Brian and Roger, they would have their proper spotlight. He doesn't come across as full of himself, not brash or outlandish. What's not to like about the guy?

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]YAFF wrote:[/b]
It's one thing to sanction and give support to a tribute band but to reduce yourself to one is just the bottom.
[/QUOTE]
Should Bach be the only person allowed to play or conduct his music in front of an audience?[/QUOTE]
problem with that statement is - generally you are dealing with stepfords and morons who couldn't give a fuck about Bach. pity tho, as it was probably the most accurate reflection of opinion of the "reasoned" queen fan, doesn't matter whether you think what they are doing sounds like a bag of shit, it's still their right to do it

Adam "I only saw one way over-enthusiastic person claim that. In context, I think they meant that QE PERFORMS Queen music better than the CURRENT incarnation of Queen+. If they actually did mean QE is a better band that Queen overall, then yeah, that's crayzeee.

I may have skated on that remark, not sure, however, if so I meant what you said here. As for your saying everyone enjoyed AL live more than on youtube...well of course! The excitement of a live concert would produce such. As for me, on limited budget I would rather see QE than Q+AL and I based my original opinion of QE from youtube. AL grates on my nerves, guess I'm getting old? I seriously seriously doubt that if I saw Q+AL live that I would like it any better than what youtubes I've viewed.

I'm just not understanding how anyone who loves Queen could be offended by Marc Martel doing gigs with Brian and Roger? Being a Freddie fan myself, this reasoning is beyond me.

Missreclusive, it wasn't you. The person I'm thinking of made the bold claims that QE is better than Queen, and the entire QE band should join up with Queen, not just Marc. :o

[QUOTE] [b]waunakonor wrote:[/b]
Also, nobody did a Freddie-esque vocal impromptu or call and response with the audience, again Freddie trademarks that they pretty much just left alone.
[/QUOTE]

But Marc's not above stealing from the best for his own shows!!! At the Downhere concert I went to, not only did he do vocal improv (though nothing as elaborate as Freddie) and audience call-and-response, but he picked an encore song that most of the audience knew such that he stopped singing at the middle section and the audience sang it back to him!

I would just like to point out that I think that Queen Extravaganza are better at performing Queen music than Queen themselves. That's why Queen better figure out how to move forward because they are being SHOWED UP BOYS AND GIRLS!!! So they will have to take Marc Martell as a full time member!!! HA!!!

[QUOTE] [b]...and AdamMethos was all like:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]I was like:[/b]
Also, nobody did a Freddie-esque vocal impromptu or call and response with the audience, again Freddie trademarks that they pretty much just left alone.
[/QUOTE]
But Marc's not above stealing from the best for his own shows!!! At the Downhere concert I went to, not only did he do vocal improv (though nothing as elaborate as Freddie) and audience call-and-response, but he picked an encore song that most of the audience knew such that he stopped singing at the middle section and the audience sang it back to him![/QUOTE]
That's interesting. I don't know much about Downhere, so maybe I should do a little more research on Marc Martel before I start trying to make points about him.

However, Queen are definitely not the only band who allow the audience to sing parts of songs for them. Also, were the vocal impromptu or call-and-response sessions really that much like the way Freddie did them, because Freddie has kind of a distinct style. If they weren't all that similar, then that's probably just being influenced by Queen--perfectly acceptable--not actually stealing from them.

From the Downhere vids I've watched, and even from before Marc was with QE, he had his own style. Yes, he sounds a bit like Freddie even before QE. I don't see him ever "trying" to copy Freddie in any sense except where called for with QE and even then, he did it with grace.

[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]

my own opinions on the many queen+ collaborations are well-known around here, so i won't regurgitate my distaste.
hwoever, i will spew my distaste for your utterly banal and vacuous statement. let's examine your rather stupid comments:
1. he's close but not freddie? well that's a darn sight better than any other collaboration (so far) none of which have ever been "close"
2. what the fuck had freddie written when he started out with queen in 1971? nada that's what
3. freddie was pretty audience shy in the early days, and from what i recall, the old "marquee, wardour street" never held 300,000...maybe about 700 people...everyone has to start somewhere, otherwise in your benevolent world Freddie would never have been given that chance either...idiot
now perhaps you can start a thread in future that actually makes an accurate point?
[/QUOTE]

I had a good laugh at the tragic irony you created here. After calling my statements "utterly banal and Vacuous...stupid" you proceed to make banal and stupid statements and show you didn't have the intellectual acumen to even comprehend what you dismiss as vacuous. I guess you have no shame.

Anyway, point one is that many people want MM to sing with Queen because he comes close to Freddie but since it's not as good as the real thing then why bother? It's better to have a singer singing in his/her own style.

My remarks were based on someone saying MM had "earned it" and I think not. George Michael is a star of his own so he would have "earned" it

Point two Mark has been a professional musician for years and played with his own band for years. Nothing brilliant has emerged. It didn't take long for Freddie to come up with masterpieces.

Point three. You're just talking out yer ass there. My comment had to do with why MM had "earned" to sing with Queen as a Freddie impersonator.

Point 4. You're an imbecile.

[QUOTE] [b]AdamMethos wrote:[/b]
I only saw one way over-enthusiastic person claim that. In context, I think they meant that QE PERFORMS Queen music better than the CURRENT incarnation of Queen+. If they actually did mean QE is a better band that Queen overall, then yeah, that's crayzeee.[/QUOTE]

That would've been me. What I meant was that QE are more capable of doing justice to Queen's music than most of the current Queen + incarnations - I think I made that pretty clearly when I said it actually. I definitely didn't say they were a better band than Queen overall anyway.. :P