But Queen in their prime were over-rehearsed and clinical if anything, most certainly professional. [/QUOTE]
Is there such a thing as over-rehearsed? Don't think so.
Remember that this "over-rehearsed" thing you say, gave them the edge on LIVE AID.
Also it was necessary for them to play things as "Staying Power" live and stay tight and firm.
They had highly demanding material.
As for CLINICAL...with Freddie in charge Queen were vibrant and adventurous all the time. Faaaar from clinical.
[/QUOTE]
Yes rehearsal certainly gave an edge in Live Aid, along with big stadium experience that other bands didnt have.They had the vision, intelligence and ambition to prepare properly
Even even when touring with Thin Lizzy in the 70s, they impressed their support band greatly with their ability BUT Lizzy also felt Queen delivered the same show night after night, Thats clinical. Its hardly playing off the cuff. They were highly professional.
Stelios · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]AlbaNo1 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Stelios wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]AlbaNo1 wrote:[/b]
But Queen in their prime were over-rehearsed and clinical if anything, most certainly professional. [/QUOTE]
Is there such a thing as over-rehearsed? Don't think so.
Remember that this "over-rehearsed" thing you say, gave them the edge on LIVE AID.
Also it was necessary for them to play things as "Staying Power" live and stay tight and firm.
They had highly demanding material.
As for CLINICAL...with Freddie in charge Queen were vibrant and adventurous all the time. Faaaar from clinical.
[/QUOTE]
Yes rehearsal certainly gave an edge in Live Aid, along with big stadium experience that other bands didnt have.They had the vision, intelligence and ambition to prepare properly
Even even when touring with Thin Lizzy in the 70s, they impressed their support band greatly with their ability BUT Lizzy also felt Queen delivered the same show night after night, Thats clinical. Its hardly playing off the cuff. They were highly professional.[/QUOTE]
I don't know cos i wasn't there. However clinical is a very heavy word.
What would you call a Madonna show then?Or even most of todays live acts (with all the samples/pre-recorded vocals and stuff)? Zombies?
Chief Mouse · Member since
I believe Queen was hardly clinical. For me every show of them is different more or less, particulary because of Freddie.
Now, take a look at Michael Jackson's shows from the same tour. Although I like him, I would get a bit bored to see 20 shows of his in a row. Even the songs he sings live sound about the same every night. The dancing differs though sometimes. But I think he probably intended to do everything 100% as rehearsed because he was perfectionist. Mercury liked to have fun on stage, for Jackson I believe it was pure dedication and work to give the audience the perfect show.
That said, I also don't think Queen were overrehearsed. They had lots of bloopers live, which I actually think makes the concert more interesting to watch & listen to.
Perhaps these 2 musical acts can't be compared but anyway, just my 2 cents.
Mike G · Member since
Roger was in decline in the 80's, and got worse in the 90's and beyond...Brian is still good.
