Queen crest Queenzone

The Uniqueness of Queen

38 posts Page 2 of 3
Thread

Posts in chronological order

· Member since
One of the things that made Queen stand out is their professionalism.
From day 1 they wanted to dominate the music business and they were able to adapt during the years. There are very few bands who were able to do so. U2 did also for example. But some bands like Aerosmith didn’t do after their success in the 70s, they totally lost it in the first half of the 80s. Because of intense external pressure (record company) they were starting to make records that fitted the era.
Queen did all that by themselves with songs like Radio GaGa and Magic for example.

They were intelligent human beings that were not only great musicians. They were great entrepreneurs. I know that many dont like to hear it but Queen always has been a company, a brand with value (added value in everything they did) and this didn’t start when Freddie died, it always was like that.

Because they were so professional, they didn’t use too many drugs compared to nearly all bands from the 70s, that made them survive harder times like the early 80s but also early in their career when they were nearly bankrupt. It made them think clear and take the right decisions.
You ain't seen nothing 'till your down on the muffin...;)
· Member since
I would say Queen took more care than most in what they did. And they probably still do.

"More care" shows up most in record production, but secondly in show planning and execution.
Martin
· Member since
U2 is always mentioned in contexts like this. I don't get it. How many U2 songs can an average person name? How many Queen songs? Queen's music is by far better known around the world and a larger part of everyday life.
· Member since
U2 is a world class band, they sell out stadiums on all continents for the last 30 consecutive years. You have to acknowledge that fact.
Like a Queen song, everybody can recognize a U2 song on the radio, it’s a very distinctive sound yet they were always able to renew themselves.
And that is regardless whether you care for their music or not.
You ain't seen nothing 'till your down on the muffin...;)
· Member since
U2 never possessed the sheer musical talent of Queen. I think they even acknowledge themselves that they could barely play in the early days. But they share the professionalism and ambition of Queen, plus have a distinctive vocalist and guitar sound
· Member since
U2 also puts on an incredible show. Bono isn’t as engaging as Freddie was, but the each band’s performances are as energetic as are the lighting and stage designs.

Musically, I agree, Queen surpasses u2 by a long shot. Lyrically, they’re in the same league. Song writing and arranging, they are also in the same league. Which is why there are about the same number of each u2 or Queen hits that can be easily identified. However, quality of the production goes to Queen - ie use of harmonies, clever changes in tempo, Brian’s playing, Freddie’s voice, John/ roger vs Adam/Larry - you cant beat Queen.

U2 still doesn’t have a bohemian rhapsody to call their own. A beautiful day was as close as they got and is more of a chant like we are the champions and even there, not nearly as catchy. However, Achtung Baby and Joshua Tree were exceptional albums. And rival most of queen’s output - in regards to complete albums.

Each band has unique qualities, but neither are unique relative to musical history.
· Member since
U2 is very overrated. The Edge relies too much on effects that are apart from his playing, Bono is too full of himself and too simpleminded (according to me), and the sound has stayed too much the same through the years.
They are great only in comparison with other band at this time. To me they are nothing special and just bland and lack innovation, inspiration and originality these days. And as an added detail, the singer can't pronounce his own name. It's pronounced Bono, no Bonno as he keeps insisting. It's spelled Bono so his name is Bono. I find him to be quite the doofus.
· Member since
This ^
Socialism: There's one for you, nineteen for me Should five per cent appear too small Be thankful I don't take it all
· Member since
[deleted]
· Member since
[deleted]
· Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Stick wrote:[/b]

U2 is very overrated. [/QUOTE]

I disagree. No one counts them as the most talented, or greatest of all time, yada yada... they never crack the top 5 or top 10 of any list... they are well-rated.

They are the people's band, much like Queen were. They put sales before art. Music was a business first and foremost. Yes Queen was better - but you have to face it, if you look at what U2 has achieved, it's not dumb luck.

They were/are not naturally talented by any means. They wrote catchy songs and gave the people what they wanted. Then they worked at their craft and drew heavy help from their producers (Lanois, Eno).

Bob Dylan, Neil Young, Frank Zappa, Scott Walker, pre-90s Bruce Springsteen, Kate Bush, Peter Gabriel, Pink Floyd, Radiohead, The Beatles, etc many others - these were artists that put their craft before sales.

Anyways, that's my take on U2 - I like 'em, but they are quite low on my top 100.
· Member since
This discussion about U2 is sheer nonsense.
Is the Edge the most technical player of all times? No but Brian May isn’t either.

They were very revolutionary in terms of live shows , the way they communicated their message (whether you like it or not, they succeeded in that). Also look at the ZOO TV tour that was groundbreaking.
Their songs stood the test of time, The Edge uses his guitar in a way no one did before plus the bass player gets much more room than in traditional bands.
Bono can sing and has, just as Freddie, the talent to reach the back of a Wembley. Few frontman can do that.
There is a reason why they are 40 years at the very top. You can’t do that with mediocrity.
You ain't seen nothing 'till your down on the muffin...;)
· Member since
So different opinions on U2 posted here are sheer nonsense but yours had to be added because it isn't? Not to mention the straw men and odd facts you use in your argument.
Nice to know Sunshine is a sarcastic nickname.
· Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Stick wrote:[/b]

So different opinions on U2 posted here are sheer nonsense but yours had to be added because it isn't? Not to mention the straw men and odd facts you use in your argument.
Nice to know Sunshine is a sarcastic nickname. [/QUOTE]

No my arguments are not sheer nonsense of course otherwise i wouldn't have written them:)
You ain't seen nothing 'till your down on the muffin...;)
· Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Jimmy Dean wrote:[/b]

Song writing and arranging, they are also in the same league.[/QUOTE]

I'd like to see Bono arranging the harmonies of 'Bohemian Rhapsody', The Edge arranging the guitar jazz band of 'Good Company', Larry arranging and playing guitar harmonies like the ones on 'A Kind of Magic' or Adam arranging something as clever and coherent as 'You're My Best Friend'.
John hated Hot Space. Frederick's favourite singer was not Paul Rodgers. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' 'Bohemian Rhapsody' hasn't got 180 vocal overdubs.