freddie and brian were the most improtant members of queen

Mike, get yourself a life... you are on a Queen forum discussing about something on what you are extremely wrong...

Queen is the only band in the world, in which all the members wrote a No. 1 hit.

There might be many other bass players, as you have mentioned... but John Deacon was as importante as Freddie, Brian, or Roger...

I love The Beatles too... but where´s Ringo´s No. 1????

mike hunt wrote:

what's your point? to the one who say's john is the greatest bass player, your kidding right? he was a good bass player, nothing more, i never heard anyone mention him as an influence, that doesn't mean he sucks, but he didn't have his own style, like brian and freddie. ringo starr is a much bigger influence in music than john deacon. i don't wanna sound like a deacon basher beause he's actually a fantastic song writer, i like all his songs, but don't give me this B.S about queen couldn't have done it without him. listen to other bass players, like geddy lee and les clay and entwisle, now those are great bass players.

You're so missing the point. I'm one of those people who claim Queen wouldn't be Queen without John, or Roger, or Bri or Freddie. Is John the best or the worst fuckin bassist in the world is totally irrelevant. Yes, of course Queen could do it without him. Or even without Brian. There are many other great guitarists out there. The thing is, IT WOULDN'T BE QUEEN ANY MORE. Plus, as someone already mentioned, without John Queen wouldn't be the only band in history who's all members wrote No1 hits. Of course they'd do it somehow, if you put it that way, theoretically they could do it even without Freddie. The rest three of them are all great musicians and they'd sure make some good music with some other singer. But Freddie was Freddie. And John is John. That's it. There are no compromises. If you make any, it's not Queen any more. End of story.

Without John there would be no songs, such as I Want To Break Free, therefore there would be no Queen dressing up in womens clothes! That would be devastating!

Seriously though, every Queen member contributed to the group in their own way.

You know i love old music i know about all great bands and musicians. I play the guitar and i know a great musician when i see one, and those four guys, Roger, Brian, Freddie and John have (had) alot of talent. Their music wouldn't be what it is without anyone of them. Freddie said it himself, " We are are four equal guys"

Point made

~H

Freddie was great with or without Queen, how many great songs did Brian, John, or Roger have without Freddie. I'm going to see Queen with Paul Rodgers in July but it won't Queen because Freddie is not there.

Were The Beatles still The Beatles with Andy White/Jimmy Nicol/Pete Best?

IGSM-

You are talking about Ringo not being there...

Not nearly as important as John or Paul being gone.

Freddie & Brian are like The Beatles John & Paul.

Yes I agree Brian and Freddie were the most significant followed by Roger and then John but all were significant members and contributors.......agree with Scott M. with the Beatles analogy.......Queen has gone full circle: it's funny how Brian and Roger had really started this thing way back with Smile and now it's still them keeping us rocking...just so glad they are doing new stuff....sad that we don't have Freddie but those are the cards that life dealt....Queen+ a new phoenix risen from the ashes...

It´s like in every band in the world,it doesn´t matter how great all the members are to us, people always recognize the name of the lead singer or the guitar player.
ex. U2=Bono-The edge/ Guns= Axl-Slash..and so on.
Don´t make such a big deal, whe know who Queen were and who they are now, and that is enough.

Whoever said that John is not a great bass guitar player a few posts earlier apparently has limited knowledge of the bass guitar. John's bass lines rarely stayed on the root of the chord, as most traditional bass players do; rather, he wandered around other consonant tones within the chord structure, almost like creating a melody in the bass line. This is EXACTLY how Paul McCartney played bass and he is revered for his innovative bass lines....not to mention that John had a nack for writing great pop songs.

jcrawford79 wrote:

Whoever said that John is not a great bass guitar player a few posts earlier apparently has limited knowledge of the bass guitar. John's bass lines rarely stayed on the root of the chord, as most traditional bass players do; rather, he wandered around other consonant tones within the chord structure, almost like creating a melody in the bass line. This is EXACTLY how Paul McCartney played bass and he is revered for his innovative bass lines....not to mention that John had a nack for writing great pop songs.

I wholeheartedly agree with that!!! John was certainly not a flashy bass player, but he had some nice bass lines.....if anyone doubts that, just have a good listen to A Day At The Basses, er, I mean Races....hehe.....

Holland!!! wrote:

Well, I still think John Deacon is one of the greates/thight playing bass players ever!

Just look at songs as "the fairy feller's master-stroke, You and I, another one bites the dust, under pressure, spread your wings etc. etc.

Those bass lines are incredible!!!

Millionaire Waltz too!

like i sai before john is a good, ok very good bass player, but don't be silly and say he was one of the best. like i said no one mentions john as a big influence and that's a fact.

keep trying, if you try hard enough eventually someone will mention john as an influence, but you will be waiting a long time.

That's not a valid argument because people rarely mention bass players as influences unless the bass player also sings, writes most the the songs, or is the mouthpiece for the band. Merely playing the bass will typically not garner a large following. Besides, if you subscribe to Bass Player magazine, you will see that lots of bass players cite him as an influence.