Queen had never been a real rock band

Just to be pedantic, they didn't cover *all* genres. They covered some of them, and quite well, but not by any means *all*.

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

Just to be pedantic, they didn't cover *all* genres. They covered some of them, and quite well, but not by any means *all*.[/QUOTE]

Well the "all" wasn't meant literally but they covered a large amount, enough to make them not just a rock band which was the point.

Since the OP just took my sentence out of any context and is still going on about it, is here my explanation:

The OP was of the opinion, that Lambert can’t sing Queen songs, because he can’t sing rock. And that ONLY rock singers were the first tier, when it comes to live singing, while everyone else (including Michael Jackson, Madonna or Elton John) were one step lower. He was debating that with another member of this forum.
This was part of his discussion with The Real Wizard:

bucsateflon wrote:
[quote]
let me rephrase:
"The greatest live music performers are ONLY in the ROCK AND ROLL roam/genre/category/style of music"
the rest are one step lower.
[/quote]

[quote]
bucsateflon wrote:
AL cant rock cause he aint a rocker, screaming some metal garbage lines dont make you a rock singer, you got to like ROCK music(and hate DSMN)
...as Brian May and RT do
[/quote]

Then I answered:
[quote]
sealion wrote:
If only ROCK counts in your eyes, then you are a fan of the wrong band. Queen had never been a real rock band. [/quote]

Now my explanation:
1. Queen mixed a lot of genres and always pushed boundaries, as I mentioned before. Sure, they were mainly playing rock. But in comparison to other rock groups, they always mixed a lot of other genres in. And in the eighties they also did rather a lot of pop and funk for instance. All the genres were discussed in a thread, that rockchick has already linked to in the second post in this thread.

2. And actually the reason, why I answered in that other thread:
I remember sitting at home and watching the tribute concert in 1992. A lot of rock groups came and played Queen songs. Some okayish, some really bad. I was actually pretty down and shocked, that -for me- nobody of these great rock singers was able to sing Queen‘s songs in a satisfactory way. The best? George Michael.
A rock singer, right? ;-)

I only found the statement wrong, that rock singers are better live performers than performers in every other genre. I think it’s a question of talent. Not of genre.

I think I will watch this discussion from a safe distance :)

[QUOTE] [b]rockchic65 wrote:[/b]

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

Just to be pedantic, they didn't cover *all* genres. They covered some of them, and quite well, but not by any means *all*.[/QUOTE]

Well the "all" wasn't meant literally but they covered a large amount, enough to make them not just a rock band which was the point.

[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I know, and I agree. I was just being annoying, anal and literal, which is sort of my thing - check my signature!

Queen was a full fledged rock band get it thru your tiny narrow brain, exceptions to the rule do not count on the whole.
When you say something out of stupidity like "Queen was never a REAL rockband" its like saying Adam Lambert is not a real singer, or MJ was not a real pop star.
Its pure insult put on writen words on the bands no1 community.
SO, get the fuck outta here dumb girl and take with you that other one that said "Queen almost always presented themselves as a rock band on stage"

Queen always had a bit of rock n roll in every album they recorded and saying they were not a real rock band was a silly. Rock was there stamp there trade mark check out "Queen to The Game" albums. These days they they have gone very limp to what they were in the good old days.

Never heard of the "Queen to The Game" album. What's on it?

"Queen" was the bands debut album back in 1973 it was all rock and roll and "The Game" album was released in 1980 and the bands most popular album to date in the USA,

Setting things strait

When I think about Queen, I do think of them as a rock band. That said, rock isn't all they did. I also enjoy the pop and the other genres they did.

me too, but their core reasoning for existing as a band was Rock music. And live they were 100% a rock band.

I can't believe this has run to two pages based on a miss quote.

Typical idiotic Glambert fans would think of a thread like this. No values no musical taste and obviously no brains.

The ultimate rockband.