Come on guys what Post Freddie Queen stuff has been any good ?.
'No-One But You' is one of my favourite Queen songs, with or without Freddie.
'No-One But You' is one of my favourite Queen songs, with or without Freddie.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
'No-One But You' is one of my favourite Queen songs, with or without Freddie.
POODLE you wrote:
"Can't see it Paul Rogers has got too many other commitments ie Bad Company, Free etc.
Come on guys what Post Freddie Queen stuff has been any good ?.
Did "will rock you" by Queen + Five turn you on ? NO it was crap and cheapened the name Queen. Looking back Brian knew it was a mistake.
Did you like Robbie stepping into Freddie's shoes
on "Champions" ? No that was crap too."
Paul Rogers has no commitments with Free ??????
Made in Heaven ?????????
Queen & Five weren't that bad and introduced their music to the youngsters
Robbie has the greatest respect for Robbie.
For Gods sake get a life .........
You havn't got a clue
PS How old are you ?
"Can't see it Paul Rogers has got too many other commitments ie Bad Company, Free etc.
Come on guys what Post Freddie Queen stuff has been any good ?.
Did "will rock you" by Queen + Five turn you on ? NO it was crap and cheapened the name Queen. Looking back Brian knew it was a mistake.
Did you like Robbie stepping into Freddie's shoes
on "Champions" ? No that was crap too."
Paul Rogers has no commitments with Free ??????
Made in Heaven ?????????
Queen & Five weren't that bad and introduced their music to the youngsters
Robbie has the greatest respect for Robbie.
For Gods sake get a life .........
You havn't got a clue
PS How old are you ?
Sorry meant to put:
BRIAN has the greatest respect for Robbie.
BRIAN has the greatest respect for Robbie.
Robbie has the greatest respect for Robbie.
How very, very true. ;)
I just wanted to say that i think its really not good that everyones condeming the tour to be a failure because its "not Queen".
Well i think thats crap, i wasn't even born when queen stoped touring, i wernt around till 1988 on the tail end of queen, so all i could do was grow up listnin to the stuff, ok that may make me not a proper queen fan cos i havn't bin there and got the t-shirt. but this tour is the closest im going to get to seeing them live!!
im going to cardiff and im gonna have the best night of my life!!
Well i think thats crap, i wasn't even born when queen stoped touring, i wernt around till 1988 on the tail end of queen, so all i could do was grow up listnin to the stuff, ok that may make me not a proper queen fan cos i havn't bin there and got the t-shirt. but this tour is the closest im going to get to seeing them live!!
im going to cardiff and im gonna have the best night of my life!!
excuse me MR. PERMED POODLE!! but i totally disagree with you on this subject. of course the band have a right to tour as queen sure their still two original band members that are touring. the band was never called freddie mercury and queen plus queen have fans of all ages and maybe they just want to see the band perform because they might have never seen them perform. im dying to see them perform but unfortunately they are not coming to ireland and i was born after the band stopped doing live performances.infact i only became a fan about a year ago. so those going to the gig should not be ashamed of themselves dont burn your tickets guys and girls just be happy ye are going to thir concerts!!!!!!!!
It's interesting that Genesis and Iron Maiden should be mentioned in here... I would think they are examples that prove against your point.
Sure, Genesis replaced Peter with Phil. But that was before they were famous... When they tried to replace Phil after twenty years, the band fell apart!
The same thing almost happened to Iron Maiden, but they were saved by getting Bruce back. :P
Well, no. It isn't any prove against my point.
1) There were more lineup changes in Genesis (you lessen it to vocal change only). On Trespass played guitar Anthony Phillips and drums John Mayhew. And Trespass itself is very good record. But if they stopped playing that time, we never had next great records with Peter Gabriel. And with Phil Collins then. And don't remember Steve Hackett left after Wind And Wuthering LP. But they continue playing. And even Calling All Stations with Ray Wilson isn't that bad album at all (better than some Genesis with Collins ones). My point here is, that it's possible to continue even with lineup changes (not only on vocal place) with success. Sometimes it could be better, sometimes worse, but in many many cases we (=fans) could get fine portion of music.
2) Same for Iron Maiden here. You maybe don't know about Paul Di'Anno (voc) on their 2 first LP. And - trust me (or not, I don't mind) - Maiden first LP is one of their best IMO (Phantom Of The Opera song is great).
Well, it should be about Queen, isn't it :-)
So - for BPP - I hope, if this Queen + PR tour goes well, they should do something new in a studio (and it could be under any band name), and then we could have some new songs maybe. Better than the musical and repeating the old things round and round. Give them a chance!
Libor
PS. Thanks for all your 'me for president' votes. :-))))) I appreciate it a lot, even that I'm not the right one really :-)
PS1: To Tero: how have you meant Genesis hasn't been famous before Collins on vocal? I didn't catch you there (or, if I did, it's really nonsense).
No sir it is YOU who is not the real fan. God Queen wasn't just Freddie Mercury they had other members too. I have to admit I didn't like the idea at first but then I thought why not? There is nothing wrong with them wanting to do something for about 19 years.... Not paying respect to Freddie? Um I don't think so I think Freddie would want them to tour.
God it's obvious you are not a Queen fan you are a Freddie Mercury fan.
God it's obvious you are not a Queen fan you are a Freddie Mercury fan.
I wouldn't go as far to say these people should burn there tickets, I mean by all means if you bought them go. That is go and get DISAPPOINTED. Its sad that some people are that obsessed with seeing Queen live that there willing to go see a watered down version of them. I'm glad I don't have this problem. They left me plenty of great music to listen too and I don't need to go waste my money on a second rate act. You got to realize though dude you come in here and say something that makes sense you got alot of morons in here (you know who you are) that just want to drag you down and bash you. Don't let it get to you, there just faceless people whom you will never meet. For all you know you could be talkin to a automated bot or some shit....LoL.......I think a wise fan knows who Queen is and who Queen is not and Queen is not Brian and Roger with whom ever they could go dig out from underneath a rock somewheres to get on stage with them. I can't wait to see them come over here to the states and fall flat on there ass's, because they nowhere's near hold the kind of power and fascination over here as they do over there. Who knows maybe next year they can get Michael Jackson to front them and it will be called Queen (version 7.0) since any and everybody can get on stage with them these days. Enjoy your nostalgic concert, I'll be doing much more better things like watching the grass grow........Peace
Well, no. It isn't any prove against my point.
1) There were more lineup changes in Genesis (you lessen it to vocal change only).
---
2) Same for Iron Maiden here. You maybe don't know about Paul Di'Anno (voc) on their 2 first LP.
---
PS1: To Tero: how have you meant Genesis hasn't been famous before Collins on vocal? I didn't catch you there (or, if I did, it's really nonsense).
Trust me, I do know that Tony and Mike are the only members who have been in Genesis from the start, and Steve is the only one who has been in Iron Maiden from the beginning. :P
Since even you know that, I can't really understand why you are even trying to compare bands with constant lineup changes into Queen, a group which toured and recorded with the same four members for two whole decades?
For all we know, Queen could have been just as succesful after replacing it's members in the mid seventies, but now we can never know that. Instead we have legendary a group with four names set in stone for eternity.
Now if we get back to Genesis for a while...
The Peter Gabriel years were of course artistically excellent, and my favourite Genesis albums are from those years. (Selling England being the best IMO.) But it doesn't mean they were commercially succesful during that time!
They had very limited international recognition, and even less chart success. Both of those changed during the time Phil was the singer, and after he left, the group lost again much of its appeal in the eyes of the public.
Have you no respect for Freddie ?.
IT IS NOT QUEEN
Queen died as a live band in August 1986.
Why is it only John Deacon can see the light ?
The tour should be renamed Brian May/Roger Taylor + Paul Rogers.
QUEEN SHOULD NOT AND I REPEAT NOT BE USED IT IS BEING DISRESPECTFUL TO FREDDIE'S MEMORY.
BURN YOUR TICKETS AND PROTEST ON MASS.
Does it really matter or not goes to the tour or not? If you don't like us goind, tuff titty. It's just another 'tribute' to Freddie.
If you're real fan- I'M NOT. If that's what being a real fan means- I don't even wanna be. Period.
I wouldn't go as far to say these people should burn there tickets, I mean by all means if you bought them go. That is go and get DISAPPOINTED. Its sad that some people are that obsessed with seeing Queen live that there willing to go see a watered down version of them. I'm glad I don't have this problem. They left me plenty of great music to listen too and I don't need to go waste my money on a second rate act. You got to realize though dude you come in here and say something that makes sense you got alot of morons in here (you know who you are) that just want to drag you down and bash you. Don't let it get to you, there just faceless people whom you will never meet. For all you know you could be talkin to a automated bot or some shit....LoL.......I think a wise fan knows who Queen is and who Queen is not and Queen is not Brian and Roger with whom ever they could go dig out from underneath a rock somewheres to get on stage with them. I can't wait to see them come over here to the states and fall flat on there ass's, because they nowhere's near hold the kind of power and fascination over here as they do over there. Who knows maybe next year they can get Michael Jackson to front them and it will be called Queen (version 7.0) since any and everybody can get on stage with them these days. Enjoy your nostalgic concert, I'll be doing much more better things like watching the grass grow........Peace
Well, to my mind, as well as enjoying four musicians' body of work as they recorded it and played it live, I also enjoy listening to any interpretation of that work, even if I only chose to listen to it once!!!
So I'm looking forward to seeing some great musicians playing Queen music live.
That is why I also like the musical and am not adverse to a decent covers band. It's all in the music for me.
look im only 14 i havn't had the opitunity to see the actuall Queen. This is the closest im ever gunna get, no one thinks paul rodgers can replace Freddie but he will put on an outstanding show in tribute to Queen in one last finaly.
So fuck you im going to go and bloody well enjoy myself.
So fuck you im going to go and bloody well enjoy myself.
Trust me, I do know that Tony and Mike are the only members who have been in Genesis from the start, and Steve is the only one who has been in Iron Maiden from the beginning. :P
Since even you know that, I can't really understand why you are even trying to compare bands with constant lineup changes into Queen, a group which toured and recorded with the same four members for two whole decades?
For all we know, Queen could have been just as succesful after replacing it's members in the mid seventies, but now we can never know that. Instead we have legendary a group with four names set in stone for eternity.
Now if we get back to Genesis for a while...
The Peter Gabriel years were of course artistically excellent, and my favourite Genesis albums are from those years. (Selling England being the best IMO.) But it doesn't mean they were commercially succesful during that time!
They had very limited international recognition, and even less chart success. Both of those changed during the time Phil was the singer, and after he left, the group lost again much of its appeal in the eyes of the public.
OK, maybe we could end this debate in some way. I wanted express, that it's possible successfuly continue playing even with essential lineup changes. It has nothing to do with the fact Queen never changed anyone. Now it's time they try it (and it is hard to find somebody to Freddie place), but it could be worth to try. Maybe it won't end well (and if it isn't success, I don't think the world will end), but it's not necessary to judge it before it even start.
Shortly to Genesis: I like the most their era with Gabriel too (Selling England By The Pound and Foxtrot), but I think they were very well known and successful even then. Of course, massive success they reached in 80's. But without 70's (counting Phil era to it also) it probably won't be anything in 80's.
Well, nothing more to add to this from me. Have a fine day.
Libor