Star*
Queen are a much special band than all those groups that you listed they had the greatest front man ever, and that is why Queen have made a massive mistake carrying on.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
rockchic65
[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]
Rockchic i do not give a flying fuchsia if they are touring next year cos they wont be getting my money so all is good.
The point of this post was just to tell you what Freddie said back in 1986 so keep your hair on .
At least Freddie had the intelligence to see Queen was four special musicians that got together to make that Queen trademark sound legendary and when the four of them where not together it was NOT Queen and it still is not. They maybe called Queen + Adam Lambert but they are not the complete Queen group so its not a complete, we had this argument on here years ago.
No John Deacon No Freddie Mercury now how can they call themselves Queen?
[/QUOTE]
As already pointed out to you they call themselves
Queen + .... not Queen, you've even just used that in your comment. And as also pointed out to you this quote is cherry picking, Freddie said lots of things at different times, he also said do what you like with my music just never make me boring. Brian & Roger also said Queen were done after Freddie died, but time moves on and things change, they love performing and are having fun as are the people at the shows. And as you said, they won't be getting your money so from your perspective it doesn't really matter what they do, or shouldn't.
Rockchic i do not give a flying fuchsia if they are touring next year cos they wont be getting my money so all is good.
The point of this post was just to tell you what Freddie said back in 1986 so keep your hair on .
At least Freddie had the intelligence to see Queen was four special musicians that got together to make that Queen trademark sound legendary and when the four of them where not together it was NOT Queen and it still is not. They maybe called Queen + Adam Lambert but they are not the complete Queen group so its not a complete, we had this argument on here years ago.
No John Deacon No Freddie Mercury now how can they call themselves Queen?
[/QUOTE]
As already pointed out to you they call themselves
Queen + .... not Queen, you've even just used that in your comment. And as also pointed out to you this quote is cherry picking, Freddie said lots of things at different times, he also said do what you like with my music just never make me boring. Brian & Roger also said Queen were done after Freddie died, but time moves on and things change, they love performing and are having fun as are the people at the shows. And as you said, they won't be getting your money so from your perspective it doesn't really matter what they do, or shouldn't.
Star*
That is your opinion, but i agree with Freddie.
Star*
Hardly cherry picking because it is true. Sure May changes his mind all the time, only today i a magazine he says he will not apologise for the Hot Space album, yet back in 1982 he hated it
but now he says it got Queen out of a rut!
but now he says it got Queen out of a rut!
Star*
Only today i read in a magazine that Brian refuses to apologise for the Hot Space album as he said it got Queen out of a rut. Back in 1982 he hated the album, now he likes it.
rockchic65
Well everyone will have an opinion but I'm just happy they're still playing and I'll definitely be there if they play the UK.
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]
Queen are a much special band than all those groups that you listed they had the greatest front man ever, and that is why Queen have made a massive mistake carrying on.[/QUOTE]
Sabbath invented metal, and are arguably more influential on the evolution of music than Queen. Virtually every kid who picks up a guitar wants to learn how to play Iron Man.
AC/DC have sold as many records as Queen. Plenty would argue that Bon Scott was at least as good a frontman as Mercury was.
You clearly have problems differentiating between your opinions and facts. Your reasoning wouldn't even land you onto a high school debate team.
Queen are a much special band than all those groups that you listed they had the greatest front man ever, and that is why Queen have made a massive mistake carrying on.[/QUOTE]
Sabbath invented metal, and are arguably more influential on the evolution of music than Queen. Virtually every kid who picks up a guitar wants to learn how to play Iron Man.
AC/DC have sold as many records as Queen. Plenty would argue that Bon Scott was at least as good a frontman as Mercury was.
You clearly have problems differentiating between your opinions and facts. Your reasoning wouldn't even land you onto a high school debate team.
Star*
Wizard You are talking rubbish, Queen have influenced more bands than any other rock group ever.
Queen remain the nations number one rock band and many artists like Eric Clapton Slash, Def Leppard etc .... have the most respect for Queen.
Other rock bands are the run of the mill, but Queen were different and the most intelligent rock band ever as far as qualifications are concerned.
Freddie is miles better than Bon Scott and a legend so please dont write ridiculous clap trap.
Queen remain the nations number one rock band and many artists like Eric Clapton Slash, Def Leppard etc .... have the most respect for Queen.
Other rock bands are the run of the mill, but Queen were different and the most intelligent rock band ever as far as qualifications are concerned.
Freddie is miles better than Bon Scott and a legend so please dont write ridiculous clap trap.
user1
Freddie's right. "Queen minus" is one of the most embarrassing things in popular music ever.
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]
Queen have influenced more bands than any other rock group ever.[/QUOTE]
The Beatles are by far the most influential artists of the 20th century (and not just within rock). This isn't even remotely debatable.
Clapton influenced Brian - not the other way around. Cream came before Queen.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]
Other rock bands are the run of the mill[/QUOTE]
Then why do you care about what they think about Queen? Clearly your favourite band's influence wasn't too great if they still couldn't become great themselves in your eyes.
And something tells me you're not smart enough to understand this paradox.
I can't even be bothered to continue with the rest of your pious nonsense. You are delusional.
It's time for everyone at this forum to stop replying to this idiot. He is either trolling or utterly incapable of critical thought. We don't need another ten page thread of trying to educate someone in basic music history when Wikipedia can do.
Queen have influenced more bands than any other rock group ever.[/QUOTE]
The Beatles are by far the most influential artists of the 20th century (and not just within rock). This isn't even remotely debatable.
Clapton influenced Brian - not the other way around. Cream came before Queen.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]
Other rock bands are the run of the mill[/QUOTE]
Then why do you care about what they think about Queen? Clearly your favourite band's influence wasn't too great if they still couldn't become great themselves in your eyes.
And something tells me you're not smart enough to understand this paradox.
I can't even be bothered to continue with the rest of your pious nonsense. You are delusional.
It's time for everyone at this forum to stop replying to this idiot. He is either trolling or utterly incapable of critical thought. We don't need another ten page thread of trying to educate someone in basic music history when Wikipedia can do.
princetom
@"Mr Right"... ok, ok. you've made your point. but would you please stop nagging to do it over and over again ? there ARE people amongst us who still like the music and performances of the remaining members. whether called "queen", "queen+" or "the noodles". they carry a legacy. they have fun doing it. and surely there will be no pure "queen" after 1991. if you don't like what those great musicians do... skip them !
and by the way...@the real wizard is somewhat right in showing up what exceptional bands have lost some members and continue to play.
to sumn it up... if i get you right you tend to argue about a value in music history that had devalued since 1991. right ? your point. a good one. but just accept that there are other people on this planet who enjoy music for the music's sake. it's not about "being the same band" it's about those guys who have fun on stage and audiences who share their kind of taste.
and by the way...@the real wizard is somewhat right in showing up what exceptional bands have lost some members and continue to play.
to sumn it up... if i get you right you tend to argue about a value in music history that had devalued since 1991. right ? your point. a good one. but just accept that there are other people on this planet who enjoy music for the music's sake. it's not about "being the same band" it's about those guys who have fun on stage and audiences who share their kind of taste.
AlbaNo1
Should have been AC/DC + Brian Johnson
Saint Jiub
Am I missing out by only skimming this thread?
Should I re-skim this topic after it reaches page 8 on the off-chance this topic becomes riveting reading with valuable information?
Should I re-skim this topic after it reaches page 8 on the off-chance this topic becomes riveting reading with valuable information?
Thistle
^ Not gonna happen lol. The most valuable info has already flown over the OP's head.
Makka
[QUOTE] [b]AlbaNo1 wrote:[/b]
Should have been AC/DC + Brian Johnson[/QUOTE]
Now it's just AN/GUS + :)
Should have been AC/DC + Brian Johnson[/QUOTE]
Now it's just AN/GUS + :)