The mighty Queen has been gone for 26 years and even longer since their last performance was on August 9, 1986 at Knebworth.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they are Queen minus 2 members now. And Queen minus 2, plus Adam Lambert doesn't add up to just Queen never mind Queen+. And that's why lots of fans aren't interested. Get it now?
Iron Butterfly · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]SweetCaroline wrote:[/b]
The mighty Queen has been gone for 26 years and even longer since their last performance was on August 9, 1986 at Knebworth.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they are Queen minus 2 members now. And Queen minus 2, plus Adam Lambert doesn't add up to just Queen never mind Queen+. And that's why lots of fans aren't interested. Get it now?
[/QUOTE]
Good luck with that. She hasn't gotten it once since Q+AL started touring.
SweetCaroline · Member since
I never said that Queen + Adam or Paul is Queen! I agreed that the mighty Queen has been gone since August 9, 1986! That doesn’t mean their music has been gone and it is shameful that some people resent that Brian and Roger still want to pass it on LIVE to current generations.
Holly2003 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]SweetCaroline wrote:[/b]
I never said that Queen + Adam or Paul is Queen! I agreed that the mighty Queen has been gone since August 9, 1986! That doesn’t mean their music has been gone and it is shameful that some people resent that Brian and Roger still want to pass it on LIVE to current generations.
[/QUOTE]
Shameful? What planet do you live on? Shameful is poverty, deprivation, war etc. Commenting on music is a pastime.
I notice you didn't actually respond to my point. Do you see why so called Queen+ might not be of interest to some Queen fans? Has the penny dropped yet?
Iron Butterfly · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]SweetCaroline wrote:[/b]
I never said that Queen + Adam or Paul is Queen! I agreed that the mighty Queen has been gone since August 9, 1986! That doesn’t mean their music has been gone and it is shameful that some people resent that Brian and Roger still want to pass it on LIVE to current generations.
[/QUOTE]
You don't care about Queen except for AL singing the Queen songs. Thats all that matters for you. Suddenly, you 'agree' that Queen is "gone" since 1986. What do you think of the Freddie Tribute from 1992, and Made In Heaven may I ask? Both are more Queen than anything Q+AL ever did and ever will be.
Queen has never gone away. And no, that's not because of Adam. There are many reasons why Queen is legendary, and again not because of Adam. Adam isn't the super hero l you want and need him to be. Queen were legends before the +'s, and they will be after...but not because of Adam.
Were you not resentful when Lady GaGa and Nate from Fun joined Brian and Roger for a song? Yes dear, you were resentful, bitter ad butthurt because you felt they took away from Adam. On this board you said the Q+AL shows are Adam's time to shine. Anyone who has read your posts, especially from both Queen boards can pretty quickly figure out the way you think.
I think it's awful and embarrassing the way that you use Queen boards the way you have for years now. You use both boards to praise, defend and promote AL.You can't even answer if you know about the history of DOOL, you'd much rather rant on and lash out. Oops, your true colors show at times and you are tripping over yourself once again.
By the way, why the random CAPS in so many of your posts? Does your finger get stuck on that or something?
Iron Butterfly · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]SweetCaroline wrote:[/b]
I never said that Queen + Adam or Paul is Queen! I agreed that the mighty Queen has been gone since August 9, 1986! That doesn’t mean their music has been gone and it is shameful that some people resent that Brian and Roger still want to pass it on LIVE to current generations.
[/QUOTE]
Shameful? What planet do you live on? Shameful is poverty, deprivation, war etc. Commenting on music is a pastime.
I notice you didn't actually respond to my point. Do you see why so called Queen+ might not be of interest to some Queen fans? Has the penny dropped yet? [/QUOTE]
The planet is called planet firece. No kidding that's a thing in the Glambert world. LMAO.
She won't answer. But going by her reaction above, that's the answer itself. Cue more from her about people being negative and haters.
5 years of touring with Lamebird = 5 years of utter embarrasment
Vocal harmony · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]
5 years of touring with Lamebird = 5 years of utter embarrasment[/QUOTE]
The fact that no one has agreed with you and they are selling thousands upon thousands of tickets around the world = 5 years of utter success I would say.
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
I think you're both guilty of enormous hyperbole in opposite directions. It's not a dramatic failure and it's not a great success either. Kind of a middling thing. Because, let's be honest, any band with name-recognition like Queen's is going to sell quite a few tickets regardless of what they're putting on stage, and if it were a dramatic failure it wouldn't have gone on for five years.
I'm pretty sure neither side in the 'great debate' is going to like this observation much, but it's becoming pretty clear to the disinterested observer that this whole thing is basically just about making a profit, giving Brian and Roger an ego-boost (let's face it, it would be hard for anyone to go from worldwide stardom to relative obscurity, and as much as we Queen-fans would like it to be otherwise, that is what gradually happened to the guys after '91) and the company that owns Adam Lambert working to up his market value. If it's enjoyable to some/many fans, that's icing on the cake, but it was never the main purpose.
Vocal harmony · Member since
Thomas I absolutely agree with you, apart from one thing.
Yes it's obviously a way to make money, but I'm not sure it's what is driving this current tour. My reasoning is that if it were a pure money making exercise why tour with a 22 trailer production and well over 70 crew. The design/production costs are huge. They are touring in (relatively) short bursts, committing to tour extensions roughly six months in advance, which means they are paying retainers on crew that aren't doing much for 8 to 12 week periods, somtimes longer. It also means that production rehearsals have to be done at significant cost if only to check the equipment is all working and re jog memories so that band and crew actually know what they are doing.
Also they are shelling out money for storing the equipment when the tour is taking a break. All of this points towards a band who are touring because they are enjoying it and only doing so when they feel they want too. I'm not saying it's not earning them money but dates closer together with a smaller production would yield a bigger return
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
I think there are a few things going on here:
1) Touring is, physically and mentally, very rough. Brian and Roger just can't handle that sort of thing for months on end anymore, or at the very least don't want to do it for months on end. They're certainly in a position to make demands, and it makes business sense not to wear them out by doing too many concerts in too short a space of time - not to mention that shorter bursts of concerts will likely mean more demand for tickets than constant touring, because of perceived scarcity.
2) I mentioned three objectives, and I don't think money-making is vastly more important than the other two - I think we can safely say that, based on several decade of observation, Brian is the kind of person who really needs attention and affirmation to feel good about himself (actually quite common), so for him, the enthusiastic crowds are probably the most important - he probably wants to play primarily for *devoted* crowds, but not to such an extent that it wears him out completely. For the AL-side, marketing their product (Adam) is obviously most important - they would probably want as many shows as possible in as many different areas as possible and to keep the Q+AL association going as long as it helps raise Adam Lambert's profile (and thus, his value to them), with ticket prices high enough to have a precedent later on, but low enough to attract large crowds. Then, there are the general corporate interests behind organizing the tour(s), who simply want to make as much money out of this as possible. The whole thing seems to be about balancing those different desires and interests. Note that I don't mention Roger - I really don't have a clue what is motivating him.
3) I've never looked into the logistical side of this tour, but I wouldn't be surprised if the crew are not working exclusively for Q+AL, so they might just get fairly low retainers when not working on the tour. It is entirely possible that only a handful of key personnel is retained, while other functions are filled in as needed.
Vocal harmony · Member since
The problem with paying low retailers is that you risk losing people. Crew who choose to work (and I'm not saying you're wrong by any means) for other acts during down time are limited by time to what they can do, certainly any act touring at arena level will usually book Europe, U.K. and US dates as a continuation and would need crew who could tour over long periods. It's usual for most crew members to be employed on a tour through the PA, lighting or video company they work for, and usually teams are put together so that the touring party has a certain consistency and familiarity. In theory it makes for better and more productive working relationships.
FOH sound and lighting operators tend to be kept long term. Trip worked for Queen for many years, and then Queen+PR. He wasn't available in 2012 and since then because of commitments to Kiss and Roger Waters, I believe he left the Roger Waters tour last year and has since possibly retired.
Your point about Brian needing that audience reaction is true and I'm sure that is the kind of thing driving him to do this, but I think that fits my idea that they are doing this for enjoyment rather than purely economic reasons. I think Roger is in a similar position, quite simply does he play Radio GaGa to 1200 people or upwards of 12,000. He is more reserved then Brian on stage but he laps the adulation just as much. As you say Lambert is different because he has a current career to build and needs to be seen, but I also think that those rehearsed lines about Freddie and how much he appreciates stand on that stage actually do carry an honest sentiment.
I firmly believe that they could tour a production half the size they are doing, as they did in 2005 with Paul Rodgers and stand to make a greater profit.
