Wembley VS Milton Keynes.

I like budapest over wembley,because they sound better in budapest,Freddie hits higher notes and he has more energy.

hello

i think MILTON KEYNES is better.
because of the set list and how they presented
the songs in their right.
see staying power somebody to love love of my life.
te extra’s on dvd2 are really poor.

WEMBLEY STADIUM 1986 is very good too.
it has been released too often and i have
seen it too many times.
the set list is good they played a good show.
the extra’s on dvd2 are reeally super.
but seen too many times.

i prefer a dvd of the 70s an example.
houston 1977
earls court 1977
hammersmith odeon 979
paris 1979

Sebastian wrote:

At Wembley Freddie was a showman.

At Milton Keynes Freddie was a musician.

Good point that!! He played less keyboards as well at Wembley freeing him up to posture around a lot more.

Wembley does it for me as I was at the Friday gig! Wembley appealed to the wider audience as this was a greatest his set wheras MK was an album promotion tour.

The band probably knew that Magig was their last tour so decided to go out on a bang!

Not everyone will agree with this but that's my opinion

<font color=#CC0066 face="Bradley Hand ITC"> The Mir@cle </font> wrote:

It surprised me how good they where during Live AID. The crowd (not all Queen fans) went totally crazy. Super!!

They were simply superb at Live Aid - no question!

The only band to really understand that Live Aid was a global jukebox! 17 mins of sheer brilliance!

Never surpassed to this day and richly deserves to have been voted the greatest gig of all time!!

ive downloaded Queen live @ knebworth from this site THANKS!!!!.
And everyone says that the picture quality and soundquality sucks but,The picture is not so bad to watch but i only wish that the guy had come a bit to the front and filmed the action on the stage.
and the sound is good because mine has got 2 audio tracks:one from the Camera itself and one from an audience recording.

SO for me its: Knebby:P

to be honest the only concerts ive seen are wembly and MK (cant find the links to download knebworth and others), but i like MK better, just because its the only recording of the hotspace songs i like (hate the album versions). But wembly is awesome too, i wish they did Tutti Frutti and that at MK...

MK not that wembley isnt good but i just think it isnt as good ill compare them

MK-it has great songs like somebody to love dragon attack play the game and a lot of people will disagree with me here but it has songs from hot space im not saying it was a great album (it was okay)but alot of the songs are good live like action this day. but the main reason i like it better is it has more early songs which are often better live songs than latter ones.

Wembley-kicks of with one of the better live songs from the 80s one vision and has a few has one of the best of queens live performences with in the lap of the gods revisited and has other great live songs like radio ga ga and hammer to fall.

actually now that i think about it maybe wembleys better because of in the lap of the gods but i dont like rogers hair looks in this concert but it dosnt bother me that much.

okay there both great lets just leave it at that

Wembley is flabby and a litle dull. Compare Brighton Rock in both concerts. The Milton Keyne's version is technically not as good as Wembley, but a much more exciting performance.

Wembley!!!!!!!!,And one Compilation disc from the live killers set.

This is a wonderful synopsis. I agree.

Sebastian wrote:

At Wembley Freddie was a showman.

At Milton Keynes Freddie was a musician.

Dusta wrote:

This is a wonderful synopsis. I agree.

Sebastian wrote:

At Wembley Freddie was a showman.

At Milton Keynes Freddie was a musician.

I beg to differ. Freddie was more of a musician - and he was already a pretty good one - when he started "losing" - I don't have a better word - his voice than when he could do wonders with it, just like in Milton Keynes. Technically and musically speaking, some of his late performances are jewels, in my most humble opinion. For those who, like me, are interested in how good musicians find their way to circumvent their physical and psychical limitations, the late Queen is of great musical interest.

By 1985-1986, Freddie's technique is just awesome: there's so much intelligence and musical reasoning behind some of his performances around that period that, wow, it's really a joy to listen to, and I'm in no way a fanatic as far as Queen is concerned. It's a joy to listen to because there are plenty of musical reasons to do so, it's really not only about an emotional attachment to the band.

Late Freddie, as a good musician he was, can teach a lot for those who study music and sing. I have not been naturally endowed with such a wonderful talent as Freddie's; so I try to learn some - in no way all - of his technique to improve my own singing.

In Mannheim, 1986, for example, he failed; in Berlim, 1986, however, Germans were given what he tried to do in the beginning of "In the Lap of the Gods revisited" and couldn't achieve in Mannheim: a quite remarkable modulation in a verse he intended to sing as if he had to sing it in his single, last breath - that's the impression he succeeds in conveying (quite deliberately, I guess, he tried to do that in Mannhein but it didn't work) when he sings "to talk...about". There's a sense of one's constant, though clearly artificial for conveying such impression of anguish, struggle with his own breath and energy - it was the beginning of the concert lol - in order to express his pain before he passes away. It's quite touching, very intelligent, and he does such things on a regular basis in his last performances (1985, 1986). There's a lot of intelligence behind his singing: music is shouting right into my face when I hear it. I forget he's also a wonderful showman.

That's not to say, of course, I don't like Freddie's virtuosism of "Save Me" in "On Fire at the Bowl", Rock Montreal, Wembley 80, Vienna (2nd night, especially) 1982, and so on. It's wonderful, as it was a joy to listen to the clearness, fullness, purity and brightness of tune he displayed in 1974 and 1975.

As a fan, 1973-1975, as far as Queen is concerned, are the most exciting years, either in studio or live. As a music student, however, I find much more interesting stuff in 1985-1986.

So there's where I disagree: I think in Milton Keynes he was a great singer and great musician, no doubt; by 1985-1986, Freddie, I think, had clearly evolved from 1982 as a musician and singer in terms of technique.

Take care you all. It's always an honour to participate in the threads, as similar as they happen to be over time: there are always some good posts which add to my knowledge and newcomers who come with that eagerness to learn more about Queen and music in general, I guess.

I wish you well!

I've counted the votes and it is 48-40 to Milton Keynes and even those, who voted for Wembley said they chose it because of the factors such as better crowd, better setlist, better DVD production, better camera work etc. and not necesarilly for the better performance musically-speaking.

My vote goes for Milton Keynes also, because for me the music is what counts, the crowd is not so important. In the seventies they never played to the audiences such as on Wembley or in Rio, and Freddie wasn't so much of a showman, but the music was far superior. I'm waiting now for Montreal'81, because I've read somewhere that this is their best official release to date MUSIC-WISE (even if the crowd sucks). I'll watch it and then post my opinion.

I'm gonna go with Milton Keynes. I thought the crowd was better, and believe it or not I think it had a better setlist. Action and Staying Power were made to have a more rock feel, and just sounded better. Plus, "Someobdy to Love" from MK is arguably the finest live performance by anyone ever.

MK, because of the set list. On Wembley there's almost only hits, and those have we heard before...

I like the Hot Space songs. Great performance!

But Houston 77 is my favorite...