Queen +Adam Lamber on X Factor

[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]

So much hatred here towards Adam Lambert, and his only crime is that he isn't Freddie.[/QUOTE]

Well put.

I guess that's what I meant in my little essay a few months back when I said how the only thing that'll please some people is if Brian and Roger perform a resurrection.

If only the arenas weren't full they might care.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]
Following YOUR advice I genuinely stepped back from "Gezza Correctitude"[/QUOTE]
Ha ! Yeah, well ... I can't lie, it's actually kind of fun.
[/QUOTE]
it's become a sport round here...it'll almost be a pity if he leaves or gets booted out.
you have to think - it's got to be impossible for someone with only one head to think and utter such crap - but somehow our beloved Gezza manages it. Not only that, but to a level that makes you feel he's got a whole backing team of Village Idiots working 24/7 script-writing new garbage and idiocy for him to type.

Yeahh okay, i wasnt going to say anything but i think i shall

okay i wanna put this out there, Adam is not Freddie (obviously)
i was okay with Paul Rodgers singing with Brian and Roger, but i do prefer Adam over Paul
I agree with Wizard entirely, some people will not be happy unless Brian & Roger are in the cemetery or wherever Freddie lies, with a group of witch doctors performing the Resurrection!
But personally i recall after the Cosmos Rocks tour, Brian started to look older, and as soon as he started touring again and keeping himself busy... i dunno for me he looks younger in his looks and of course the hair is looking healthy again!

When Adam first did the concerts with Queen back in 2012 i was a little unsure, but ill be honest he has grown on me a lot, especially after the iHeart shows, and im going to the New Years Eve show, and 5 dates on the tour with excitement to see what i know will be a great show, but most importantly of all, im going in with an open mind

Cheers Guys

[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]

Adam Lambert also has the advantage of vocal coaching.

Freddie comes from the time when rock singers just sang their balls off. Adam Lambert comes from the time when technique is everything. Different aesthetic.


So much hatred here towards Adam Lambert, and his only crime is that he isn't Freddie.

[/QUOTE]

Wow, that's a seriously lame assed post.

What advantage is vocal coaching to Adam Lambert? I'd say it teaches him how to sing the notes, but not how to express the notes. That's a serious disadvantage.

Technique is everything? Neil Young is 3000 leagues below Adam Lambert as a singer. Neil Young has packed more emotion into one song than Adam Lambert has his entire catalogue. As someone posted in this thread (and a ton of other threads) AL is a great singer, but has no soul. Firmly agree. Give me a Gary Cherone with his wonky notes but believability every day of the week over AL.

His only crime is that he is the closest to a Freddie in range (maybe even better) but with no soul. He's a Broadway child in a man's game, and the man he's "replacing" is in John Lennon/Elvis Presley/Jimi Hendrix level of greatness. People around here act like he's replacing David Fucking Lee Roth. His role is impossible. Good singer, nice range, out of his league as a rock singer. Definitive post on the subject, thank you, goodnight.

[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]
Not only that, but to a level that makes you feel he's got a whole backing team of Village Idiots working 24/7 script-writing new garbage and idiocy for him to type.[/QUOTE]

Much like the American Tea Baggers :)

read the sentence

"Adam Lambert comes from the time when technique is everything"

I didn't mean by that, that I think technique is everything. I mean, there is a whole industry dedicated to the vocal technique of singers in rock bands and musical theatre singers, that has sprouted up in the last 15 years, that wasn't there before - at least not in the same way or to the same level of saturation that it is present now.

Sheer Brass Neck, what I would like to know is, were you born without manners or did they wear off with age? I mean, just coming out with 'that's a seriously lame assed post' without either reading what I wrote properly, or even asking me exactly what I meant if you didn't get it, is the absolute height of bad manners.

Incidentally technique is not simply the ability to hit the notes. Technique strengthening the ability to communicate the music to your audience - the range, the notes, the tone, and most importantly the emotional content, the light and shade, the humour or the weight of the song, whatever is in that song that needs to be expressed. Yes, it's true, there are many, many singers who know exactly what emotion to communicate and can do so without having a particularly great technique, and there are many singers who are technically (or, rather, gymnastically) excellent (think about hordes of Russian pianists, Korean Opera Singers, American Musical Theatre Singers, etc), but they get so caught up in being right, that they completely miss the point. In either case we're talking about someone with a limited technique, although the latter is worse because they should know better.

Personally I don't think Adam Lambert falls into the category of a cold hearted gymnast. I think he is a complete singer.

By the way I don't think John Lennon was all that great either, I don't see what the fuss was about on that one. Jimi Hendrix and Elvis Presley were definitely greats.

Anyway I'm happy to read your definitive post on the subject, and I feel, your absolute lack of humanity or manners aside, that I should kneel in the presence of your greatness, and stand humbled and corrected after, ready to face my lame-assed life safe in the knowledge that I'll never be you, and even happier that I'll never meet you or even really know who you are.

[QUOTE] [b]oliverd05 wrote:[/b]


When Adam first did the concerts with Queen back in 2012 i was a little unsure, but ill be honest he has grown on me a lot, especially after the iHeart shows

[/QUOTE]


That's pretty much just about how I felt! I was very skeptical of the whole thing when I first heard of it..........before I had even ever heard him sing......hes totally grown on me since............

[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]


By the way I don't think John Lennon was all that great either, I don't see what the fuss was about on that one.

[/QUOTE]


I seriously agree with ALL of your post there, except for THAT...........Lennon was a genius (living in every pore? lol).....part of the most influential rock band of all time and one of the greatest songwriters ever......(definitive post on Lennon! lol)

Lambert can hit the notes but so can an alley cat and I prefer Don't Stop Me Now to Don't Stop Meooow :)

Listen to Lennon singing Working Class Hero (or even something like Beautiful Boy) and then imagine (ahem) Lambert singing the same songs. After you've done that, please do come back here and say Lambert is great at expressing emotion, or that he has soul etc., because I could do with a good laugh.

- that's totally fine that you disagree :) some people don't even like Freddie Mercury!

OK, I'll retract a little - I do understand that John Lennon was a great, but what he could do never really floated my boat. His work with the Beatles was his best work IMHO, and a little like Queen, the Beatles were stronger as a band and brand than they were as solo projects.

I suppose artistically speaking there have been excellent projects from Queen solo - Barcelona was excellent, especially now it's been orchestrated properly (if only Freddie could hear it), and I actually love Happiness. Brian's albums are very good, accomplished pieces of work too. For some reason though, none of these projects really did all that well commercially, which is sad. This is a total non sequester to the thread so I'm going to stop now....

[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]

I suppose artistically speaking there have been excellent projects from Queen solo - Barcelona was excellent, especially now it's been orchestrated properly (if only Freddie could hear it), and I actually love Happiness. Brian's albums are very good, accomplished pieces of work too. For some reason though, none of these projects really did all that well commercially, which is sad.[/QUOTE]

Because they were in a band with Freddie Mercury. There is no other band so popular that is so intrinsically identified with a single person dominating people's image of said band than Queen. As far as the general public is concerned - The Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin and Floyd each have at least two people associated with the name. Queen don't. Brian's name has been in the UK press a lot lately (and deservedly so), but - he's still not Freddie Mercury.

It's why The Cosmos Rocks failed commercially too. It's not because it was bad. Many of the songs were good. Freddie's shadow is just too big, no matter what they do.

Commercially speaking, touring with Adam Lambert is the first time they've been taken remotely seriously in about 20 years. Like him or not, that is the reality. People are talking. Queen are buzzing. And our boys are reveling in it. And this may be their last high point. Surely they realize it.

Concert tours where they play the old songs are one thing. New music is another. Not everyone can be as lucky as Rush where you have the same lineup for 40 years and consistently put out new music that is reviewed positively (and sells well). There is no algorithm to calculate these things. They just happen as they do.

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

What advantage is vocal coaching to Adam Lambert? I'd say it teaches him how to sing the notes, but not how to express the notes. That's a serious disadvantage.[/QUOTE]

Not if you have a good coach.

Like this guy:

http://www.nextavenue.org/blog/why-harry-connick-jr-couldnt-sit-idle-during-idol

[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]


By the way I don't think John Lennon was all that great either, I don't see what the fuss was about on that one.

[/QUOTE]

People hate me for this but, I agree with you about Mr Lennon.

Wizard, you're totally right. Freddie completely dominated Queen in the minds of the public (even if not in practice). But actually Mr Bad Guy didn't do very well, Barcelona was a moderate success (perhaps in the mind of the public it was too far off the beaten track - personally I love it), so it seems that the public wanted Queen with Freddie as the dominating performer, rather than Queen members on their own.

And again, you're totally right, Queen are back in a way that they weren't with Paul Rodgers. Over here people aren't talking about "Queen + Adam Lambert", generally people just say Queen, and accept that Adam Lambert is singing (well they're not going to get Freddie are they!).

I hope that in the future, after Queen, Adam Lambert will continue to be accepted as a great artist and singer in his own right. I'm sure he will. He seems to know what he is doing.

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

[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]

I suppose artistically speaking there have been excellent projects from Queen solo - Barcelona was excellent, especially now it's been orchestrated properly (if only Freddie could hear it), and I actually love Happiness. Brian's albums are very good, accomplished pieces of work too. For some reason though, none of these projects really did all that well commercially, which is sad.[/QUOTE]

Because they were in a band with Freddie Mercury. There is no other band so popular that is so intrinsically identified with a single person dominating people's image of said band than Queen. As far as the general public is concerned - The Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin and Floyd each have at least two people associated with the name. Queen don't. Brian's name has been in the UK press a lot lately (and deservedly so), but - he's still not Freddie Mercury.

It's why The Cosmos Rocks failed commercially too. It's not because it was bad. Many of the songs were good. Freddie's shadow is just too big, no matter what they do.

Commercially speaking, touring with Adam Lambert is the first time they've been taken remotely seriously in about 20 years. Like him or not, that is the reality. People are talking. Queen are buzzing. And our boys are reveling in it. And this may be their last high point. Surely they realize it.

Concert tours where they play the old songs are one thing. New music is another. Not everyone can be as lucky as Rush where you have the same lineup for 40 years and consistently put out new music that is reviewed positively (and sells well). There is no algorithm to calculate these things. They just happen as they do.[/QUOTE]


Hmmm, I see where you are coming from. Id say Queen are well recognised as having at least two major players. Brian May is very famous in UK.


Of the bands you note only Paul McCartney and John Lennon had much solo success. Page and Plant didnt even do that great on their No Quarter/Walking into Clarksdale do albums in terms of sales.