Brian May Or Roger Taylor Solo, Who's Better?

both not very good. I agree with the one who said Roger at least didn't take himself so seriously at the time of his first album. I think Fun in Space is the best of all Queen solo albums though, and the 7" before that is probably better.

The Cross albums are just boring macho rock and Happiness? is one of the worst albums i've ever heard. I can't wrap my head around what people like about it. Old Friends has redeeming qualities but the rest is incredibly bad. I revisited Another World after not having heard it for a long time and that didn't age well either. I really liked My Boy when I heard it again after years though.

I do have all the solo stuff though. It all worked just so much better when the four of them were together.

Roger Taylor is much better...also with The Cross....Fun on Earth is brilliant and Mad Bad and Dangerous.Brian is not a good singer but back to the light album was a good album...another world was ok ..and now he is doing only things i am not interested in like starmus and kerry ellis...pity.Roger has brilliant tracks like foreign sand,magic is loose or be with you.

Both very weak solo artists.

Some good tracks on their solo albums.

I prefer Freddie solo.

Of all the solo albums Barcelona and Mr Bad Guy are the better ones.

roger by far but i still love brians solo stuff

It's pretty cool how varied our opinions are on this.

Brian is clearly the perfectionist of the two...and you can tell by listening to his two albums that he was probably the main driving force in arranging Queen's songs, in terms of quality control at least - his stuff is very production heavy... more glamour than substance. However, Brian's albums are more concise and a better rounded listen.

Roger, especially if considering the Cross as part of his solo work, was by far the most active. And, where most of his tunes fall flat - he really did have a higher output of quality material in comparison to Brian.

So, if you had to weigh the two based on be it, number of great songs, number of albums, longevity, ability to keep with the times, etc... Roger, Roger & Roger...

Would it be so bad if they did a May & Taylor venture, much like Page & Plant... don't call it Queen - two of them working together on one album with backups... no stars. I really think that's something they should be doing rather than teaming up with Lambert or Rodgers.

[QUOTE] [b]Day dop wrote:[/b]

Of all the solo albums Barcelona and Mr Bad Guy are the better ones.[/QUOTE]

I agree.

Me too.

Fun on Earth on 3rd place.

Don't know much about their solo career (and I don't care to be honest) but I would say Roger. Brian is good as a backing vocal guy but as a front man, his voice is too weak. As for Roger, he has a strong voice and can be very high pitched...but for the details of their solo careers I couldn't say.

well, I'm a big fan of Queen like the rest of you and IMO Brian's solo stuff is the best; and most Queen-like among the four members (including John's No Turning Back). Queen's distinctive rock sound comes form Brian's Red Special. Freddie, Roger or John's solo works are lighter; more like pop most of the time and I can't say I like them as a whole. though Brian's solo work is a bit heavier, it is much more better than the rest of the group. I like all the songs in Back to the Ligt and Another World. I had big expectations when I bought Roger's Happiness? years ago, but the only song I could stand listening was Foreign Sand. I gave it another chance when he released Electric Fire; but it was worse. I did not like one single track in that album and never listened to it again. I'd never buy another solo stuff from Roger again.

I think the difference in RT's solo work compared to Queen shows the amount of input and influence the band must of had on a lot of RT's input. As a solo artist I like what he does because it is different.

As has been pointed out BM has much more of the Queen sound inherent in what he produces, but that in it's self makes some of his work lack the inclusion of the other members of Queen.

That said, there are moments on Back to the Light and Another World that sound much more like Queen than a lot of the Cosmos album!

Picking one above the other, not sure, but both produced better albums than Mr Bad Guy which kind of sounds like a bunch of carefully mapped out demos for Queen to work on!

for me Roger - every time.
reasons?:

Brian's stuff always seemed overindulgent and maudlin in places to such extremes as to be unlistenable. it's possible to do relationship songs without doing "pity me"

Roger has/had the George Harrison factor - ie years of being the lesser light song-writing, wise. Then in the 80s he flexed his creative muscles outside of the group - some of this stuff equaled or bettered queen's output over the same period

Roger writes good pop songs, and his albums show more range than Brian's. Also he is a better singer, and a much better frontman.

Brian takes himself much too seriously on his solo material, and most of it just sounds like subpar Queen material. Roger's stuff sounds distinctive.

In short: Roger.

Brian for me.

I love the Back to the Light Album since the day it came our. I never get tired of Resurrection, Love token, Back to the Light, too much Love and Driven by you!
Taking into account that also Headlong and I can't live with you were meant to be for Back to the Light, in my opinion
it is one of the strongest Queen - Solo effort.

Another World also has some strong moments, like China Belle but is much weaker than BTTL.

'Dream of thee' and 'What are we made of' not to be forgotten, as well as 'Let me out' and also I consider 'Dangerland' as kind of a Brian Solo effort.

And I like Brians Version of 'hot Patootie' a lot.

I wish Brian would have been more productive, and I would prefer a Brian Solo Tour a lot over Queen + AL.