In the history of Rock N Roll, there were some truly great bands. And every musician has several artists that have influenced them, and they must, if they are good, try to outdo them, and achieve some measure of recognition, and accomplishments during the life of a band/musician.
But I wonder if musicians today think like how PGA golfers must have thought when Tiger Woods entered a tournmant. Why bother? Everyone else is playing for second place.
Queen was the best, in the history of Rock And Roll. Yes, they are that great, whether critics choose to recognize it or not.
Queen was the best band ever.
Professional musicians, even bands like U2, must deep down think and admit, they can never equal Queen. Never. Sure, they may sell more records, win more Grammies, and generally receive more mainstream critical acclaim, but deep down, most musicians must believe Queen was the best. That is why they are literally rock gods, legends.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]In the history of Rock N Roll, there were some truly great bands. And every musician has several artists that have influenced them, and they must, if they are good, try to outdo them, and achieve some measure of recognition, and accomplishments during the life of a band/musician.
But I wonder if musicians today think like how PGA golfers must have thought when Tiger Woods entered a tournmant. Why bother? Everyone else is playing for second place.
Queen was the best, in the history of Rock And Roll. Yes, they are that great, whether critics choose to recognize it or not.
Queen was the best band ever.
Professional musicians, even bands like U2, must deep down think and admit, they can never equal Queen. Never. Sure, they may sell more records, win more Grammies, and generally receive more mainstream critical acclaim, but deep down, most musicians must believe Queen was the best. That is why they are literally rock gods, legends.[/QUOTE]
Listen- it's only your opinion that Queen were the best.
,Music is not a sport. There's no such thing as "to measure the greatness of the band". Your Queen is the best is someone else's Metallica's the best is someone else's Led Zeppelin were the best and so on and so on. It's not a bloody race, and thank god for that. If Queen were thinking like you do back in 1970- they wouldn't have started thinking "The Beatles are the best -why bother?"
But I wonder if musicians today think like how PGA golfers must have thought when Tiger Woods entered a tournmant. Why bother? Everyone else is playing for second place.
Queen was the best, in the history of Rock And Roll. Yes, they are that great, whether critics choose to recognize it or not.
Queen was the best band ever.
Professional musicians, even bands like U2, must deep down think and admit, they can never equal Queen. Never. Sure, they may sell more records, win more Grammies, and generally receive more mainstream critical acclaim, but deep down, most musicians must believe Queen was the best. That is why they are literally rock gods, legends.[/QUOTE]
Listen- it's only your opinion that Queen were the best.
,Music is not a sport. There's no such thing as "to measure the greatness of the band". Your Queen is the best is someone else's Metallica's the best is someone else's Led Zeppelin were the best and so on and so on. It's not a bloody race, and thank god for that. If Queen were thinking like you do back in 1970- they wouldn't have started thinking "The Beatles are the best -why bother?"
Yeah, I agree with Fenderek. I'd even add the most important thing, we're all individuals and that's what drives the process for a lot of musicians. We strive to make what we like and what we want.
These days, it's very easy to get it all done (seriously) at home. Something which I think is both good and bad as it stops some people from really trying to break into the business. That and, of course, the business just keeps getting worse. Ohhh... so many variables!
Peace,
Adam.
These days, it's very easy to get it all done (seriously) at home. Something which I think is both good and bad as it stops some people from really trying to break into the business. That and, of course, the business just keeps getting worse. Ohhh... so many variables!
Peace,
Adam.
I love Queen and think that they were the greatest band ever. However, your Tiger Woods analogy is ludicrous. When he wins a tournament he has objectively beaten all competitors with no grey areas. Low strokes win. Queen can only be the best band ever subjectively. Further, "most" musicians do not think that highly of Queen. Whenever there is an "albums that changed my life" or "greatest albums" feature in a mag, Queen is rarely mentioned. They are loved, admired and respected by musicians, but they were never a "popular" band amongst their fellow musicians, unlike The Who or The Beatles who influenced tons of people. Queen were sadly thought of as lightweights, something I've never understood.
What about?:
The Beatles
The Who
The Undertones
T-Rex
David Bowie
Thin Lizzy
The Beatles
The Who
The Undertones
T-Rex
David Bowie
Thin Lizzy
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Adam Baboolal wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Yeah, I agree with Fenderek. I'd even add the most important thing, we're all individuals and that's what drives the process for a lot of musicians. We strive to make what we like and what we want.
These days, it's very easy to get it all done (seriously) at home. Something which I think is both good and bad as it stops some people from really trying to break into the business. That and, of course, the business just keeps getting worse. Ohhh... so many variables!
Peace,
Adam.[/QUOTE]
Great post, Adam!
These days, it's very easy to get it all done (seriously) at home. Something which I think is both good and bad as it stops some people from really trying to break into the business. That and, of course, the business just keeps getting worse. Ohhh... so many variables!
Peace,
Adam.[/QUOTE]
Great post, Adam!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Dan Corson wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Adam Baboolal wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Yeah, I agree with Fenderek. I'd even add the most important thing, we're all individuals and that's what drives the process for a lot of musicians. We strive to make what we like and what we want.
These days, it's very easy to get it all done (seriously) at home. Something which I think is both good and bad as it stops some people from really trying to break into the business. That and, of course, the business just keeps getting worse. Ohhh... so many variables!
Peace,
Adam.[/QUOTE]
Great post, Adam![/QUOTE]
Sometimes, just sometimes...I have a moment of clarity!
Peace,
Adam.
These days, it's very easy to get it all done (seriously) at home. Something which I think is both good and bad as it stops some people from really trying to break into the business. That and, of course, the business just keeps getting worse. Ohhh... so many variables!
Peace,
Adam.[/QUOTE]
Great post, Adam![/QUOTE]
Sometimes, just sometimes...I have a moment of clarity!
Peace,
Adam.
There's a line between best and favorite, though. What are the barometers to judge how great music is? Chart position? Number of singles sold? Album cover? Lyrics? Guitar solo? It's based on opinion...I honestly doubt U2 are aspiring to be Queen because they're successful and revered in their own right. It's not about competition or being number one, just about playing music and sending out whatever message you think should be said.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]In the history of Rock N Roll, there were some truly great bands. And every musician has several artists that have influenced them, and they must, if they are good, try to outdo them, and achieve some measure of recognition, and accomplishments during the life of a band/musician.
But I wonder if musicians today think like how PGA golfers must have thought when Tiger Woods entered a tournmant. Why bother? Everyone else is playing for second place.
Queen was the best, in the history of Rock And Roll. Yes, they are that great, whether critics choose to recognize it or not.
Queen was the best band ever.
Professional musicians, even bands like U2, must deep down think and admit, they can never equal Queen. Never. Sure, they may sell more records, win more Grammies, and generally receive more mainstream critical acclaim, but deep down, most musicians must believe Queen was the best. That is why they are literally rock gods, legends.[/QUOTE]
Any good and talented musician will tell you; okay, so they won't tell YOU, but any good and talented musician will surely admit that Queen was a fairly great band with an excellent array of musicians/songwriters. However, any of those good and talented musicians will also say that Queen wasn't the best band to ever grace the ears of the world or of the generation from which they arose. Why? Because they weren't. Simply put.
They were amazing beyond a lot of amazement. But they weren't/aren't the best band.
Believe it or not, but there IS difference.
Cheers
But I wonder if musicians today think like how PGA golfers must have thought when Tiger Woods entered a tournmant. Why bother? Everyone else is playing for second place.
Queen was the best, in the history of Rock And Roll. Yes, they are that great, whether critics choose to recognize it or not.
Queen was the best band ever.
Professional musicians, even bands like U2, must deep down think and admit, they can never equal Queen. Never. Sure, they may sell more records, win more Grammies, and generally receive more mainstream critical acclaim, but deep down, most musicians must believe Queen was the best. That is why they are literally rock gods, legends.[/QUOTE]
Any good and talented musician will tell you; okay, so they won't tell YOU, but any good and talented musician will surely admit that Queen was a fairly great band with an excellent array of musicians/songwriters. However, any of those good and talented musicians will also say that Queen wasn't the best band to ever grace the ears of the world or of the generation from which they arose. Why? Because they weren't. Simply put.
They were amazing beyond a lot of amazement. But they weren't/aren't the best band.
Believe it or not, but there IS difference.
Cheers
Since when was it a competition?
If you are an artist you will create art whether there is a chance for commercial success or not.
Any musician/band creates music for the creative expression. And some will create great music because of that.
If you are an artist you will create art whether there is a chance for commercial success or not.
Any musician/band creates music for the creative expression. And some will create great music because of that.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]teleman wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Since when was it a competition?
If you are an artist you will create art whether there is a chance for commercial success or not.
Any musician/band creates music for the creative expression. And some will create great music because of that. [/QUOTE]
Amen.
Cheers
If you are an artist you will create art whether there is a chance for commercial success or not.
Any musician/band creates music for the creative expression. And some will create great music because of that. [/QUOTE]
Amen.
Cheers
It's getting to the point where I detest the stepford fans as much as the BPP types.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]LadyMoonshineDown wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]teleman wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Since when was it a competition?
If you are an artist you will create art whether there is a chance for commercial success or not.
Any musician/band creates music for the creative expression. And some will create great music because of that. [/QUOTE]
Amen.
Cheers[/QUOTE]
Id have to agree. Kiss and Aerosmith agreed that
"once you're at the top, you realize there's room for more than one"
If you are an artist you will create art whether there is a chance for commercial success or not.
Any musician/band creates music for the creative expression. And some will create great music because of that. [/QUOTE]
Amen.
Cheers[/QUOTE]
Id have to agree. Kiss and Aerosmith agreed that
"once you're at the top, you realize there's room for more than one"
Queen are still the best. Hahahah...
No look, anyone with a half a brain doesn't think 'why bother'.
Basically, I've got a guitar magazine with a Brian May interview, and he's describing what it was like for young guitarists like himself when they first heard Jimi Hendrix. They basically took it more seriously from then on, because if they were serious about competing with someone like him they'd have to up their skills somewhat, or just give up for reasons of mediocrity.
If anything, having a vastly superior band as an influence is more of a challenge to be better. In my opinion I'll never be the guitarist that Brian May is, but my idea is that we already *have* Brian May, why the fuck would I want to be him?
No look, anyone with a half a brain doesn't think 'why bother'.
Basically, I've got a guitar magazine with a Brian May interview, and he's describing what it was like for young guitarists like himself when they first heard Jimi Hendrix. They basically took it more seriously from then on, because if they were serious about competing with someone like him they'd have to up their skills somewhat, or just give up for reasons of mediocrity.
If anything, having a vastly superior band as an influence is more of a challenge to be better. In my opinion I'll never be the guitarist that Brian May is, but my idea is that we already *have* Brian May, why the fuck would I want to be him?
Queen are still the best. Hahahah...
No look, anyone with a half a brain doesn't think 'why bother'.
Basically, I've got a guitar magazine with a Brian May interview, and he's describing what it was like for young guitarists like himself when they first heard Jimi Hendrix. They basically took it more seriously from then on, because if they were serious about competing with someone like him they'd have to up their skills somewhat, or just give up for reasons of mediocrity.
If anything, having a vastly superior band as an influence is more of a challenge to be better. In my opinion I'll never be the guitarist that Brian May is, but my idea is that we already *have* Brian May, why the fuck would I want to be him?
No look, anyone with a half a brain doesn't think 'why bother'.
Basically, I've got a guitar magazine with a Brian May interview, and he's describing what it was like for young guitarists like himself when they first heard Jimi Hendrix. They basically took it more seriously from then on, because if they were serious about competing with someone like him they'd have to up their skills somewhat, or just give up for reasons of mediocrity.
If anything, having a vastly superior band as an influence is more of a challenge to be better. In my opinion I'll never be the guitarist that Brian May is, but my idea is that we already *have* Brian May, why the fuck would I want to be him?