Q+AL - a musician's perspective

I agree with the opinion that situation is way too escalated. But as I know - Queen always were perfectionists and they always had the highest goals - that´s the reason why I´m so disappointed of this cooperation - Lambert is in fact only part of the issue.

I´m going to use the example of another band to describe my opinion. Black Sabbath´s 13 album was huge success last year - in fact, for me it was major disappointment. It was the album which was like "we are back in 1970 and we are making a follow-up of first debut record" - and they simply denied all the development of the band (especially in case of Iommi), music etc. which happened. I know - it was deliberate act, but it was much more "calcul" than decision of real artist. At the end - to me 13 seems like Black Sabbath album from 2nd hand store - if you know Black Sabbath´s old albums, you heard everything which they did on 13.... Why I´m saying that? Because current Queen+ scenario is very similar. I´m a bit suprised by the article which said that they see QPR era as "not working" - because they obviously changed their minds. At the very beginning Queen with PR was NOT meant as following in Queen history - it was much more described and it really looked like supergroup - which of course had roots in Queen and PR´s history. But I never felt that it was something like Queen Mark 2..... As I said somewhere else - I considered TCR as very good debut album from new band and I believed they (Brian / Roger) see it the same - at least they always said that. Now? That twist in opinions seems desperate. I cant help myself, but I dont see any real "artistic goal" in QAL - what´s the point of that tour? QPR was obvious - first tour was meant like "finally we found first singer which sounds good with us and we like it - so we are going to try it" (and that chemistry among them was obvious from very first moment and during the tour there were really challenging moments), 2nd tour was with new album, so again - there was challenge..... But I dont see any real challenge with Lambert at all.

Setlist is in fact based on structure of 2nd tour with Paul Rodgers (they just replaced Free / Bad Company tracks and did new opening - probably due to release of Rainbow gigs), So what´s really NEW in this project regarding music? Roger / Rufus duel? It´s just follow-up of Roger/Danny bass/drum solo in 2008 (at that time it was something new)..... Maybe that touring itself is challenging enough for them, but I really do not see any real new artistic work in this project - the first QPR had at least new interpretations of BC / Free songs, what´s here? I cant find anything. Spitting to the audience? It´s disgusting! Couch? You must be kidding.... I hate that pretending that they are following where Queen ended in 86 - it´s simply fake. I felt that QPR was honest project - from their musical hearts and that it was challenging for them..... QAL? I feel that its mainly confusion. If you ask me what I would like them to do different - it would be very easy! Rely on music, not calculated theaterics (which is really disgusting in some parts), make shows as natural as you can (do you remember any calculated, pre-planned or scriped "choreography" during Queen, QPR shows?) and finally make the setlist different - as I said it´s just next part of 2008 Tour, change the scheme of the setlist.... It just seemed like they said "we want to go on tour, but we want to work (rehearse) on it as less as we can, therefore we will use songs from TCR Tour (we will probably remember them), make a new opening because we were arguing about it in 2008 and otherwise - we will learn just couple of very short or shortened songs - it´s gonna be enough for them..." AL´s performances is another thing, but it´s really matter of taste.

I recently traveled to the US and attended the Queen + Adam Lambert date at The Forum while I was there. It was an excellent show, and I certainly never expected to see Brian and Roger perform a full set of Queen classics again. Adam Lambert is a good choice; a competent and entertaining front-man, a powerful voice with character and a theatricality that lends itself well to the music. My only real complaints with Lambert's performance were the repetitive and borderline asinine a capella sections of Somebody to Love and We are the Champions. His brief deviations to Fat Bottomed Girls and The Show Must Go On for instance were good and enough to personalize his performances without yelling out Mariah Carey runs repeatedly. It would also be good to see him put some effort into the Under Pressure "why" scream.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]una999 wrote:[/b]

where the fuck do people get time to write passages like these. do people on this site actually have a life? i really wonder not being smart just being serious. [/QUOTE]

Bach used to churn out one choral piece per week for the church. You've be surprised at what people with a life, passion and drive can pack into their day. For starters, I skip the videos of cats falling down stairs and don't watch reality TV.

It took me a couple weeks to write the article. A few minutes here, a few minutes there.
[/QUOTE]

Let's bring in some numbers: Bob's post contained 1,203 words. Assuming he's not a professional typist but can still use a computer keyboard well enough, he'd probably type about 60 words per minute: 20 minutes to type this whole thing... half an hour if we add the time it could've taken him editing or stopping to think about what to write next, etc. Half an hour are 2% of a day, 0.3% of a week, 0.07% of a month and 0.006% of a year, so it's entirely possible to type something like that and still have a life, using the remaining 98% of the day, 99.7% of the week, 99.93% of the month and 99.994% of the year for something else.

Perhaps the Real Wizard should change his name to the Artful Dodger:

Holly wrote:

"I didn't dismiss it, I said ASPECTS of it are different for you and them so just being "a musician" doesn't necessarily mean you are qualified to comment on how multi-millionaire musicians tour. Besides, you comment on many things -- religion, for example -- yet you're not a minister or a priest or a rabbi. Does that disqualify you from commenting?"

I haven't seen a reply to Holly's question ye on commenting about topics you're not familiar with.  A few weeks back I asked a similar question to the the Real Wizard about binary thinking which I felt he was exhibiting, and asked him if was a member of parliament in Canada because if he wasn't I wondered how he could criticize the government?  No response was forthcoming.  

You know, I'm anonymous by choice, but I'd guess I'm the most decorated athlete on this board by a mile. The Real Wizard is a professional musician but until he plays an arena as an opening act, he'll never know what I know about achievement and talent.  Having said that I would never say that his viewpoints on any topic or anyone's comments on athletics aren't worthy of discussion. But just because he is better guitarist than the rest of us, i don't understand  why that means that he knows more about me than peak performance, quality of performance etc. than the rest of us.  In the grand scheme of things, musically, you are Brian May to us banging out a bad, untuned song in a garage, so you are right.  However, from an accomplishment, performance, quality of point of view, I am playing Wembley while you are in a cover band doing Bon Jovi tunes.  I would never dismiss your POV like you have done to people who don't buy your POV.   This could be the most smug and condescending post in QZ history, all the more sad coming from a very intelligent poster.

And further to this, I just stumbled upon a clip of Brian doing a solo acoustic version of STL from 2012, first time AL went out with them. If I saw that I would have bawled my eyes out, as Brian's emotion was so palpable you you could taste it. People who saw that would have been amazingly lucky. Would have lived to be have been there for that moment. For me, emphasis on me, I don't buy AL as a rock singer so pretty certain won't miss a lot by skipping them this time around.. I'm happy they're getting out there and playing, but for me, it's a nostalgia show. Does that make me or others a bad person? You seem to think so. That's as narrow minded and ill informed as me calling you and others who are happy at the tour/collaboration Stepfords and suckers. Most people who son't like it aren't trying to change people's minds, they just aren't into it. Doesn't make them hateful bitter people. IMHO.

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]

Let's bring in some numbers: Bob's post contained 1,203 words. Assuming he's not a professional typist but can still use a computer keyboard well enough, he'd probably type about 60 words per minute: 20 minutes to type this whole thing... half an hour if we add the time it could've taken him editing or stopping to think about what to write next, etc. Half an hour are 2% of a day, 0.3% of a week, 0.07% of a month and 0.006% of a year, so it's entirely possible to type something like that and still have a life, using the remaining 98% of the day, 99.7% of the week, 99.93% of the month and 99.994% of the year for something else. [/QUOTE]

This is why we love you. Please don't ever change.

[QUOTE] [b]Sheer Brass Neck wrote:[/b]

I haven't seen a reply to Holly's question ye on commenting about topics you're not familiar with.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe I just didn't want to dignify Holly with a congenial response. Why would I waste my time on someone who has already made up their mind and isn't interested in genuine dialogue? But just to humour you both, obviously I understand that someone can intelligently talk about the weather without being a climatologist. Don't patronize me, please.

[QUOTE]I am playing Wembley while you are in a cover band doing Bon Jovi tunes.[/QUOTE]
And you're calling me smug? Dear me...

If I ran for politics, half the people would hate me on day one of my campaign. The ratio here seems to be a lot better than that, so do you think I'm losing sleep over the fact that 2 or 3 people didn't respond well to my post?

[QUOTE]I'm happy they're getting out there and playing, but for me, it's a nostalgia show. Does that make me or others a bad person? You seem to think so. That's as narrow minded and ill informed as me calling you and others who are happy at the tour/collaboration Stepfords and suckers. Most people who son't like it aren't trying to change people's minds, they just aren't into it. Doesn't make them hateful bitter people. IMHO. [/QUOTE]
Of course. But nowhere have I said that I was addressing every single person who didn't like the collaboration with Lambert, nor was I trying to characterize said entire lot of people in a single way. That part you (and Holly) just made up, so don't put words into my mouth. Pretty much everyone else here seems to understand that, and you two are pretty smart, so I'm not sure why it bypassed you both. So now that I've clarified that, just restore your claws to their original stowed position and we can all be friends again.

^^^

Agreed Sir. I just read your post as an "As a mudican I've done this type of gig and I know what they're doing and nobody else does" post, which dismissed any non-musicians opinions as invalid because we've never been in their shoes. I don't agree with that. as mentioned, so my reply was pissy. I'm irked too by the board quality and you (and Holly) are very intelligent contributors. It's just that there's a tone that people who don't like what Q+AL are doing are homophobic, neanderthal haters who live in the past. That is so narrow a scope to look it as I'm reasonable and rational about my positions (which are as worthy/worthless as anyone else's) and my feelings about the collaboration are based on solid reasoning. BTW, the me at Wembley and you in a club analogy was a cheep shot as I know you'e a splendid musician and was a poor way to make a point, my apologies.

It's all good, brother.

I love when rationality prevails here.

Brian, Roger and Adam's collaboration are my universes colliding. I'm truly biased so rather than opinion, let me share my observations having attended two shows of the tour including Dallas (The United Center is lucky to still have a roof.) Thousands of teens will attend a show of this tour. These are kids that are spoon fed crap by radio programmers that play pop because the pay-o-la is good. Freddie's music has to live on....it is too incredible to die with him. They LOVE the show, how wonderful they can experience music this special. (We can still listen to Mozart, can't we?)

Brian, Roger and Adam, my sincerest gratitude for granting Freddie immortality by keeping his music alive and sharing with 4 generations of both existing and new fans.

On a biased note, their chemistry is unmistakeable. Brian and Roger recognize that Adam is someone very special. Set aside that he ranks at the top of tenors on the planet, Adam loves and respects Freddie. He has from the moment he first played his dad's vinyl. Honestly, if he wasn't such an amazing vocalist with a stage presence to match, the negative comments would have been cut in half. Have you so little faith in the miracle that was Freddie? That's sad and quite a shame.

:/

An observation I might make is that musicians/creative types are often given to hyperbole. The initial post is a bit off the mark, and so are a lot of the responses. Taken as an aggregate, I can totally get what you're all saying though. Allow me my own hyperbole in making further observations.

Being a musician really doesn't offer any valuable perspective on this topic. It's like saying 'as a parent, I think it's okay to whack my kids'. It really depends who you ask. The kids might have other notions.
I'm a musician, and I know a lot of musicians who'd either sit above me or below me on the music ladder - there's no real correlation in their opinions of Q+AL vs. how seriously they take their music or how much time they put into it. I know some serious fuckers who are behind this Q+AL thing. I know average punters who think he's fucking awful. And I know of the reverse, too!

There's just a lot of factors that go by the wayside in these discussions. There's a bit of crowd hysteria, confirmation bias, choice-supportive bias - live shows are a unique experience and your opinion will be different from how it would be if you watch the same show on Youtube.
But, and this is a biggie - that doesn't for a second negate the worth of an evaluation made by someone who only saw the show on Youtube. If the recording is any good, then their opinion is arguably just as valid. They're unencumbered by fond memories and the sizzle of a decent sound system doing its THANG.
To me, it's like being lectured by stoners about virtually any topic of worth - sure, you were in your field somewhere chewing straw and keeping a hilarious notepad of great ideas for later, but I didn't touch the green shit and I'm of sound mind (at least comparatively).

The wrenchingly awful sound of Adam Lambert 'searching' for notes (as he often does) or his off-key adlibs might well be offset by the overall good mood at these shows, to say nothing of the chance people are having to see 1/2 of Queen again. If it weren't for my travel plans, I'd be going to one of these shows myself.
Lambert might sound like drunk Oprah at a karaoke night, but I'm actually very glad that the tour is going ahead regardless. I'm a lot happier to see Brian and Roger with big smiles on their faces than I am to be stuck reading his Soapbox and hearing about how great Kerry Ellis is. (She isn't that amazing).

But it really comes across as though people who go to these shows want them to be all things to all people. Adam Lambert is not that versatile. The combination is not that stellar. I'm really appreciating and even liking some bits of the tour and it looks like a fun time - a good, competent arena tour. Let's not lie about its qualities; for me, it sort of spoils the fun of discussing it in the first place.

It must be exhausting and it would be at any age, but also, the body and mind tend to adjust and adapt to demanding circumstances. It sounded like Brian had a little anxiety about making the decision to tour and about the "no turning back now" aspect of the commitment, but that is probably completely normal at any age. The best thing about the tour, I am assuming, is that they are able to interact with the audience. Just based on a feeling about it, I don't think this will be the last tour.

"It sounded like Brian had a little anxiety about making the decision to tour"

Brian in a nutshell.

You have said what I am feeling so well. Everyday I read so many positive reviews about Queen's tour but there is always that die-hard "supposed" Queen fan who just can't get over themselves and need to hate on Adam. I am 55 years old and have loved Queen all my life. When Adam came onto the scene in 2009, I can't explain the joy I had hearing this unbelievably God-given voice. He should be heard....and he happens to sing Queen songs very well. I have little tolerance for these people who think they have a right to bury Queen and their incredible live performance capabilities. They don't need to attend the shows. They are selling plenty of tickets.

I appreciate your message and will share it with all my Glamberts who are enjoying this tour so much. I've been to two shows and trying desperately to get to more. This is the best rock concert I've seen ever! And Adam Lambert could sing nursery rhymes and I'd pay hundreds to hear them. God has blessed this man with unbelievable vocal ability and stage presence. I think too many brain-washed Queen fans can't admit or don't want to hear how good he is, so they trash him. That's ok, I'm enjoying this ride. It may be the last time I see Queen live.

Your grammar needs some work.....but so do you....what a goofy thing to say.