‘He was completely focused’: Queen’s Brian May remembers Freddie Mercury’s

[QUOTE] [b]TomP63 wrote:[/b]

Gerry, I think that Brenski made some valid and good point about Freddie. Freddie isn't a rock singer, Freddie was a rock singer. In the 70s Freddie was a pure rock singer, with a different appraoch, he could sing very nasty, . The likes a Plant and Ronnie James Dio are in my humble opinion real rock singers. Hell I even throw in Graham Bonnet, or even Mark Farner, these guys are rock singers. Tom[/QUOTE]

@TomP63:
d'you know what? i nearly said Graham Bonnet - but thought i'd get flamed - as pure rocks singers go, i'd put "His Skegness" up here with Dio and Plant - most people remember his Rainbow/MSG stuff...but he sounds good on the impelliteri and alcatrazz stuff - as he did on that early marbles album

@Gerry:
There is very little from "The Game" onward that can be considered true "Rock Vocals" from Freddie:
Put Out The Fire/Tear It Up/Hammer To Fall/Vision/Prize/Princes/I Go Crazy/ Kashoggi/Breakthru/I Want It All/Innuendo/
I don't include the two "rock tracks" on the Innuendo album - as they're not sung with a rock tone.
So that's approx 11 true rock vocals in 50-odd tracks.

he was NOT a rock vocalist in the 80s - no more than he was a musichall/vaudeville singer in the 70s - despite the SHA/Opera/Races dalliances into this genre.

@TomP63:
d'you know what? i nearly said Graham Bonnet - but thought i'd get flamed - as pure rocks singers go, i'd put "His Skegness" up here with Dio and Plant - most people remember his Rainbow/MSG stuff...but he sounds good on the impelliteri and alcatrazz stuff - as he did on that early marbles album

Brenski, I think that the Rainbow period with Bonnet is a class apart, okay he could not measured up to the Dio standards, but hell who could, Turner? Nah!Doogie White? Nah! For that matter Dio was grandeur excellence in Sabbath. But I must stop now taklin' and writing about the late GREAT Ronald James Padavona, otherwise I might upset some people........
Can you see this Brenski: Love Token, done in this line up:
Dio Vocal
Neill Murray Bass
Cozy Powell Drums
the Doctor with his axe........man what a band this could have been!

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]

Brenski:
firstly appologies yes i mentioned Black Sabbath which was wrong, i meant Deep Purple
still those groups are ten a penny.
You ARE mad if you think Plant or Dio had better rock orientated voices than Freddie did.
Why is it then that Freddie has been voted "THE" Greatest voice in Rock music ever?
Sure Queen used synths on Hot Space in 1982, but they wanted to experiment after all
the new romantic groups had arrived like Duran Duran, Human League, etc.... Queen
were very brave for jumping into new territory even though many fans disliked the album
due to the lack of Mays guitar and more of the synths.
But there was a few great tunes on there like, Mays "Dancer" and Mercurys "Staying Power"
At least you cannot accuse Queen of turning out the "old same as" like many of the heavy groups.
[/QUOTE]

VH - was there something you were intending to say?

Gerry I think you are arguing about a subject you either no little about or choice to turn a blind eye to the facts. If you weren't so wrapped up in this Freddie is the greatest mentality you maybe could see or accept things in a more open manner.

Both Dio and Plant are better Rock singers than Freddie. Dio in that classic rock style, Plant in the older blues influenced style. Neither of which Freddie could do as well or as convincingly.

Calling bands like Deep Purple ten a penny, was that a serious moment. As musicians their ability leaves Queen on the starting line. . . Did anyone in Queen have the keyboard skills of Jon Lord? No is RT a better drummer than IP? No doesn't come close. Was Blackmore as good as BM, hell yes. Even the musicians who replaced Lord and Blackmore are better than any members of Queen.

BM's strength as a guitarist was the way he used the guitar and the sound he produced. The chords and note sequences in most Queen songs are not hugely challenging to a competent player. There are many players who play more complex and harder parts to learn and play. I think anyone who plays BM guitar part will tell you the same. The challenge is to emulate his style and sound. He isnt the greatest rock guitarist in the world, but he is one of, if not the, most distinctive.

What Freddie was good at was going from one style to the other. He wasn't the best Rock vocalist just as he wasn't the best pop, soul or opera singer in the world. But was there anyone who would dare step into so many styles? No. Does this make him the best? Not sure. But it is where Queens problem comes from now. There are many great singers, but none of them are Freddie

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

VH - was there something you were intending to say?[/QUOTE]

Yes,
see above. I finally got round to it. Hadn't realized the system had deleted what I had written!

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]

Brenski: Have to disagree with you, when you said Freddie was NOT a musical pillar of force, well he was and you cannot compare him to rubbish like sammy hagar, Black sabbath, Genesis, Freddie was mega talented and may be other groups could replace there ordinary band members but Queen will never be able to do this.
Sure Queen have made mistakes with albums and every member who has gone solo in Queen has not set the charts on fire, but as that unit Queen, they have been more successful than most other groups around.
If you do not think Freddie was incredible then i suggest you are not a real Queen fan.
To name sammy Hagar, Genesis, Sabbath in the same breath as the great Freddie Mercury is un-forgivable,
as Mr. Mercury has the greatest voice ever in Rock music.
Personally i love "A kind of magic" "The Works" & "Hot Space" all offer something different in the bands abilities.[/QUOTE]

So, essentially, you are now a musical Taliban - Freddie is a god, thou shalt not speak ill of Him, He is not to be compared to other artists, infidels should be punished, etc. Good luck with the mental healthcare while the sane people amongst us enjoy a somewhat wider musical horizon.

Thomas:
i do have a wide span of musical tastes from the Beatles,
Abba, E.L.O, Status Quo, Tina Turner, Boston, etc........
but Freddie is my hero, so please do not assume that i am narrow minded because some fools on here say i am..
There is always two sides to a coin. Do not judge, ask first yeah.

This is when a discussion should end, you guy's are going around in circles...Queen weren't the be all end all of music, and that goes for Freddie as well....Could we all agree that Queen are possibly in the top 10 of the greatest bands of all time?...Sabbath is probably in there as well...In Gerry's defense it's one thing replacing ozzy with the great Dio....It's a different story replacing the great Mercury with adam lambert..In vocal Harmony's defense, I don't think Gerry knows jack shit about rock music if he puts down Sabbath and Purple....end the madness now!

[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]

Gerry I think you are arguing about a subject you either no little about or choice to turn a blind eye to the facts. If you weren't so wrapped up in this Freddie is the greatest mentality you maybe could see or accept things in a more open manner.

Both Dio and Plant are better Rock singers than Freddie. Dio in that classic rock style, Plant in the older blues influenced style. Neither of which Freddie could do as well or as convincingly.

Calling bands like Deep Purple ten a penny, was that a serious moment. As musicians their ability leaves Queen on the starting line. . . Did anyone in Queen have the keyboard skills of Jon Lord? No is RT a better drummer than IP? No doesn't come close. Was Blackmore as good as BM, hell yes. Even the musicians who replaced Lord and Blackmore are better than any members of Queen.

BM's strength as a guitarist was the way he used the guitar and the sound he produced. The chords and note sequences in most Queen songs are not hugely challenging to a competent player. There are many players who play more complex and harder parts to learn and play. I think anyone who plays BM guitar part will tell you the same. The challenge is to emulate his style and sound. He isnt the greatest rock guitarist in the world, but he is one of, if not the, most distinctive.

What Freddie was good at was going from one style to the other. He wasn't the best Rock vocalist just as he wasn't the best pop, soul or opera singer in the world. But was there anyone who would dare step into so many styles? No. Does this make him the best? Not sure. But it is where Queens problem comes from now. There are many great singers, but none of them are Freddie
[/QUOTE] Saying all that, I would put Freddie in the top 2 or 3 pop/rock singers of all time overall...I agree he wasn't the best in any one style, but it's pretty rare for a singer too sing so many styles so well...Brian is in the top 15?....not so bad if you ask me...No reason to put Queen down just to make you're point...

Mike: it was purely a mistake on my behalf putting down sabbath instead of deep purple.
i know a lot about rock music as it has been a hobby of mine for at least 40 years.
you are right we are going around in circles but guess what mike, vocal harmony
started all this shit with his bitch remarks so do not blame me he started it.
i just wanna chat about Queen after all this is the Queen zone.
Queen are not possibly in the top 10 as you suggest they are the no 1 greatest group of all time.

Not a fan of all these bands, but as far as overall impact I'll say....Beatles, Stones (not a huge fan though)...Zep, the Who, Hendrix Experience, Floyd, Queen, The Doors, Sabbath, Rush?.....What do you guy's think of that list? I'm not the biggest fan of some these bands but you have to give credit when do...

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]Mike: it was purely a mistake on my behalf putting down sabbath instead of deep purple..[/QUOTE] no. it was a mistake of YOURS putting down EITHER sabbs OR purple. it unmasks your ignorance for ALL to see

[QUOTE] [b]gerry wrote:[/b]Queen are not possibly in the top 10 as you suggest they are the no 1 greatest group of all time.[/QUOTE] no. they aren't. they maybe second (on a good day) to the Beatles. (they'll always be my favourite band - but even I accept they weren't the best)

[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]





He wasn't the best Rock vocalist just as he wasn't the best pop, soul or opera singer in the world.
[/QUOTE]

Vocal harmony you have very good points and I can see you know a lot about music.


I am not saying Freddie was the best pop singer but it is impossible for me to find pop male singer that I could say that is better than Freddie.

I am just curious and would like hear your opinion. which one you think is better? just curious....

I do admit that I haven’t heard (till now) any other pop male singer with fuller and richer tone than Freddie’s. And remember I am talking about his best live moments, like Newcastle Dec 79, Live Aid etc.



Thanks.

I like Mike G's take:

"Queen weren't the be all end all of music, and that goes for Freddie as well....Could we all agree that Queen are possibly in the top 10 of the greatest bands of all time? In Gerry's defense it's one thing replacing ozzy with the great Dio....It's a different story replacing the great Mercury with adam lambert."

Queen's catalogue will arguably be next to The Beatles in terms of timelessness, sales whatever criteria when all is said and done. Freddie is in the pantheon with Elvis, John Lennon, etc. He wrote arguably the greatest song ever. He was arguably the greatest singer in rock ever. He was arguably the greatest rock frontman ever. He arguably had the greatest performance by a rock musician at what was arguably the biggest rock concert ever. Give one person one of those and they'd be special. He achieved all of those, arguably. So replacing him even for a tour or two with a performer of Adam Lambert's stature? Like replacing Picasso with a guy form Starving Artist's at your local mall. They both paint, that's where the comparison ends.