Maybe they think AC-DC did it but to me it is a diferent case , you can get anybody to sing old queen songs to make people remember good times to tribute queen and
freddie but replace John and Freddie sorry but is impossible
Thread
Posts in chronological order
People need to chill out with this "wrecking the legacy" talk. It's not like Roger and Brian are burning the master tapes to Night at the Opera.
I would love for Brian, Roger, and Paul to cut a stuido album. That said, I don't think they should use the name "Queen" because it's only half of the original members.
I would love for Brian, Roger, and Paul to cut a stuido album. That said, I don't think they should use the name "Queen" because it's only half of the original members.
Here we go with the idiot parade....again.
Well, in an ideal world:
1. Rodgers would leave and do his own thing
2. Brian and Roger, feeling reinvigorated from touring again, would call up John and somehow convince him to join them again
3. The three would then decide to record a new album of original material with different vocalists for each track and credit the album to Queen + Friends. One of them could be George Michael, whom I feel has great chemistry with the band. I'd probably get Elton John again, Paul McCartney, even get Paul Rodgers to return to do his worst, not to mention some collaborations with some contemporary - yet decent - acts; Robbie Williams, Coldplay, whoever (I don't really pay attention to current Top 40). I think this way, they won't be alienating anyone - people can't bitch that they're cashing in on the Queen name and there's no risk of anyone claiming the band are trying to replace Fred, since they're more or less customising their sound to fit the new lead singer. Then of course, there's the inevitable cover of past glory, perhaps Tie Your Mother Down or something. You never know, they could even release a bonus disc with the same artists covering both Queen and their own material. How interesting would it be to hear BM, RT and JD do a cover of a Beatles track with McCartney on vocals? If it ends up a successful thing, it could be a regular thing with new vocalists on each album.
Many celebs have actually suggested the band do this, namely Elton John and Bob Geldof. I think it will be a great idea! A mixture of the past, present and future!
But wake me when it happens...
1. Rodgers would leave and do his own thing
2. Brian and Roger, feeling reinvigorated from touring again, would call up John and somehow convince him to join them again
3. The three would then decide to record a new album of original material with different vocalists for each track and credit the album to Queen + Friends. One of them could be George Michael, whom I feel has great chemistry with the band. I'd probably get Elton John again, Paul McCartney, even get Paul Rodgers to return to do his worst, not to mention some collaborations with some contemporary - yet decent - acts; Robbie Williams, Coldplay, whoever (I don't really pay attention to current Top 40). I think this way, they won't be alienating anyone - people can't bitch that they're cashing in on the Queen name and there's no risk of anyone claiming the band are trying to replace Fred, since they're more or less customising their sound to fit the new lead singer. Then of course, there's the inevitable cover of past glory, perhaps Tie Your Mother Down or something. You never know, they could even release a bonus disc with the same artists covering both Queen and their own material. How interesting would it be to hear BM, RT and JD do a cover of a Beatles track with McCartney on vocals? If it ends up a successful thing, it could be a regular thing with new vocalists on each album.
Many celebs have actually suggested the band do this, namely Elton John and Bob Geldof. I think it will be a great idea! A mixture of the past, present and future!
But wake me when it happens...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The Flash Danny Project wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, in an ideal world:
1. Rodgers would leave and do his own thing
2. Brian and Roger, feeling reinvigorated from touring again, would call up John and somehow convince him to join them again
3. The three would then decide to record a new album of original material with different vocalists for each track and credit the album to Queen + Friends. One of them could be George Michael, whom I feel has great chemistry with the band. I'd probably get Elton John again, Paul McCartney, even get Paul Rodgers to return to do his worst, not to mention some collaborations with some contemporary - yet decent - acts; Robbie Williams, Coldplay, whoever (I don't really pay attention to current Top 40). I think this way, they won't be alienating anyone - people can't bitch that they're cashing in on the Queen name and there's no risk of anyone claiming the band are trying to replace Fred, since they're more or less customising their sound to fit the new lead singer. Then of course, there's the inevitable cover of past glory, perhaps Tie Your Mother Down or something. You never know, they could even release a bonus disc with the same artists covering both Queen and their own material. How interesting would it be to hear BM, RT and JD do a cover of a Beatles track with McCartney on vocals? If it ends up a successful thing, it could be a regular thing with new vocalists on each album.
Many celebs have actually suggested the band do this, namely Elton John and Bob Geldof. I think it will be a great idea! A mixture of the past, present and future!
But wake me when it happens...[/QUOTE]Queen + Robbie Williams = the reason John Deacon retired
1. Rodgers would leave and do his own thing
2. Brian and Roger, feeling reinvigorated from touring again, would call up John and somehow convince him to join them again
3. The three would then decide to record a new album of original material with different vocalists for each track and credit the album to Queen + Friends. One of them could be George Michael, whom I feel has great chemistry with the band. I'd probably get Elton John again, Paul McCartney, even get Paul Rodgers to return to do his worst, not to mention some collaborations with some contemporary - yet decent - acts; Robbie Williams, Coldplay, whoever (I don't really pay attention to current Top 40). I think this way, they won't be alienating anyone - people can't bitch that they're cashing in on the Queen name and there's no risk of anyone claiming the band are trying to replace Fred, since they're more or less customising their sound to fit the new lead singer. Then of course, there's the inevitable cover of past glory, perhaps Tie Your Mother Down or something. You never know, they could even release a bonus disc with the same artists covering both Queen and their own material. How interesting would it be to hear BM, RT and JD do a cover of a Beatles track with McCartney on vocals? If it ends up a successful thing, it could be a regular thing with new vocalists on each album.
Many celebs have actually suggested the band do this, namely Elton John and Bob Geldof. I think it will be a great idea! A mixture of the past, present and future!
But wake me when it happens...[/QUOTE]Queen + Robbie Williams = the reason John Deacon retired
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]TheImpossibleMan wrote: [/QUOTENAME]People need to chill out with this "wrecking the legacy" talk. It's not like Roger and Brian are burning the master tapes to Night at the Opera.
I would love for Brian, Roger, and Paul to cut a stuido album. That said, I don't think they should use the name "Queen" because it's only half of the original members.[/QUOTE]HALF THE F**KING MEMBERS!!!!!!!!!!
IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spike Edney has been a member since the late 80s. so he was there when Freddie died. He left the Band in 1992 after the Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert! He returned for the current tour.
Also Freddie had his affairs in order, He felt that Brian, Roger, And John would never be more popular than the day he died.
Brian went on a spiritual guilt trip for not attending freddies last video tapings, this led to him considering suicide. John and Roger convinced him that it was the wrong choice. I say "he saved the mans life, let him do as he pleases" about john.
I would love for Brian, Roger, and Paul to cut a stuido album. That said, I don't think they should use the name "Queen" because it's only half of the original members.[/QUOTE]HALF THE F**KING MEMBERS!!!!!!!!!!
IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spike Edney has been a member since the late 80s. so he was there when Freddie died. He left the Band in 1992 after the Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert! He returned for the current tour.
Also Freddie had his affairs in order, He felt that Brian, Roger, And John would never be more popular than the day he died.
Brian went on a spiritual guilt trip for not attending freddies last video tapings, this led to him considering suicide. John and Roger convinced him that it was the wrong choice. I say "he saved the mans life, let him do as he pleases" about john.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]S**tdude wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The Flash Danny Project wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, in an ideal world:
1. Rodgers would leave and do his own thing
2. Brian and Roger, feeling reinvigorated from touring again, would call up John and somehow convince him to join them again
3. The three would then decide to record a new album of original material with different vocalists for each track and credit the album to Queen + Friends. One of them could be George Michael, whom I feel has great chemistry with the band. I'd probably get Elton John again, Paul McCartney, even get Paul Rodgers to return to do his worst, not to mention some collaborations with some contemporary - yet decent - acts; Robbie Williams, Coldplay, whoever (I don't really pay attention to current Top 40). I think this way, they won't be alienating anyone - people can't bitch that they're cashing in on the Queen name and there's no risk of anyone claiming the band are trying to replace Fred, since they're more or less customising their sound to fit the new lead singer. Then of course, there's the inevitable cover of past glory, perhaps Tie Your Mother Down or something. You never know, they could even release a bonus disc with the same artists covering both Queen and their own material. How interesting would it be to hear BM, RT and JD do a cover of a Beatles track with McCartney on vocals? If it ends up a successful thing, it could be a regular thing with new vocalists on each album.
Many celebs have actually suggested the band do this, namely Elton John and Bob Geldof. I think it will be a great idea! A mixture of the past, present and future!
But wake me when it happens...[/QUOTE]Queen + Robbie Williams = the reason John Deacon retired[/QUOTE]Only Elton and David could get john to re join
1. Rodgers would leave and do his own thing
2. Brian and Roger, feeling reinvigorated from touring again, would call up John and somehow convince him to join them again
3. The three would then decide to record a new album of original material with different vocalists for each track and credit the album to Queen + Friends. One of them could be George Michael, whom I feel has great chemistry with the band. I'd probably get Elton John again, Paul McCartney, even get Paul Rodgers to return to do his worst, not to mention some collaborations with some contemporary - yet decent - acts; Robbie Williams, Coldplay, whoever (I don't really pay attention to current Top 40). I think this way, they won't be alienating anyone - people can't bitch that they're cashing in on the Queen name and there's no risk of anyone claiming the band are trying to replace Fred, since they're more or less customising their sound to fit the new lead singer. Then of course, there's the inevitable cover of past glory, perhaps Tie Your Mother Down or something. You never know, they could even release a bonus disc with the same artists covering both Queen and their own material. How interesting would it be to hear BM, RT and JD do a cover of a Beatles track with McCartney on vocals? If it ends up a successful thing, it could be a regular thing with new vocalists on each album.
Many celebs have actually suggested the band do this, namely Elton John and Bob Geldof. I think it will be a great idea! A mixture of the past, present and future!
But wake me when it happens...[/QUOTE]Queen + Robbie Williams = the reason John Deacon retired[/QUOTE]Only Elton and David could get john to re join
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]mike hunt wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Once upon a time I was proud to be a queen fan, knowing my favorite band was the only band in history (I think) that had all of it's original members from their first to last album, thanks to brian and roger they ruined that cherished legacy forever.[/QUOTE]
I actually see where you're coming from, as you raise a very good point. Not many long-lasting bands keep the same lineup from beginning to end, but I don't think the legacy is being ruined. They just won't have that statistic to their name anymore.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]TheImpossibleMan wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I would love for Brian, Roger, and Paul to cut a stuido album. That said, I don't think they should use the name "Queen" because it's only half of the original members.[/QUOTE]
Should the Rolling Stones, Chicago, Pink Floyd, and The Who change their names too?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]S**tdude wrote: [/QUOTENAME]HALF THE F**KING MEMBERS!!!!!!!!!!
IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spike Edney has been a member since the late 80s. so he was there when Freddie died. He left the Band in 1992 after the Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert! He returned for the current tour.[/QUOTE]
No need to react by calling someone else an idiot in caps, especially when you're wrong. Never once has Spike formally been a member of Queen.
I actually see where you're coming from, as you raise a very good point. Not many long-lasting bands keep the same lineup from beginning to end, but I don't think the legacy is being ruined. They just won't have that statistic to their name anymore.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]TheImpossibleMan wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I would love for Brian, Roger, and Paul to cut a stuido album. That said, I don't think they should use the name "Queen" because it's only half of the original members.[/QUOTE]
Should the Rolling Stones, Chicago, Pink Floyd, and The Who change their names too?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]S**tdude wrote: [/QUOTENAME]HALF THE F**KING MEMBERS!!!!!!!!!!
IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spike Edney has been a member since the late 80s. so he was there when Freddie died. He left the Band in 1992 after the Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert! He returned for the current tour.[/QUOTE]
No need to react by calling someone else an idiot in caps, especially when you're wrong. Never once has Spike formally been a member of Queen.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The Flash Danny Project wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If the rumours are true, why don't Brian, Roger and Mr. Rodgers just form a new f*cking band already and let the Queen banner retain an ounce of credibility? If you're out performing Queen and Bad Company songs, it PROBABLY is logical to call yourself Queen + Rodgers... but why the hell would you insist on using the Queen name when you're recording brand new material that has nothing to do with the musicians' previous glories?[/QUOTE]
good point !!
good point !!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sithmarauder wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I think it's safe to say that the new album will be a studio recording based on the fact that the
report indicates that it will be the first release in 10 years. If it was going to be live again, it would not be the first release in ten years [/QUOTE]
Great! Let's hope in some new material! In any case I'm going to get it!
Btw, it it true that the new album by Axl Rose, Chinese Democracy, has more that 30 songs and some of them have Brian on guitar?
I think it's safe to say that the new album will be a studio recording based on the fact that the
report indicates that it will be the first release in 10 years. If it was going to be live again, it would not be the first release in ten years [/QUOTE]
Great! Let's hope in some new material! In any case I'm going to get it!
Btw, it it true that the new album by Axl Rose, Chinese Democracy, has more that 30 songs and some of them have Brian on guitar?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"thanks to brian and roger they ruined that cherished legacy forever."
You fucking people can't go 5 seconds without abusing words like 'legacy' that don't actually *mean* anything to soulless cowards like yourself.
If you love the old Queen so much *GO AND LISTEN TO IT* and shut the hell up. The original music cannot be 'ruined' by choices they make today. You might disagree with them, I might disagree with them, but the old music (great as it is) will always be there.
What a bloody waste of space this 'ruined legacy' crap is; I reckon every post that uses words like that should be filtered into a "Bullshit Forum".[/QUOTE]
I agree
You fucking people can't go 5 seconds without abusing words like 'legacy' that don't actually *mean* anything to soulless cowards like yourself.
If you love the old Queen so much *GO AND LISTEN TO IT* and shut the hell up. The original music cannot be 'ruined' by choices they make today. You might disagree with them, I might disagree with them, but the old music (great as it is) will always be there.
What a bloody waste of space this 'ruined legacy' crap is; I reckon every post that uses words like that should be filtered into a "Bullshit Forum".[/QUOTE]
I agree
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]mike hunt wrote: [/QUOTENAME]This is it, I read queen will release a new album. how will it sell?...will it be welcomed by fans, or will queen fans feel brian and roger are making a mockery of the queen name?...Is this news true or false?...My opinion is mixed, I'm glad brian and roger are working together, and Im curious to see what kind of material they came up with. On the negative, brian and roger have made some bad choices since 1991, why do they insist on using the queen name?...Once upon a time I was proud to be a queen fan, knowing my favorite band was the only band in history (I think) that had all of it's original members from their first to last album, thanks to brian and roger they ruined that cherished legacy forever. [/QUOTE]
It will probably be some album released in America to coincide after the concerts over there, or yet another re-packaging of songs for somewhere like Japan just like Jewells 1 and 2. I do hope a new album does materialise but I will believe it when I see it or hear it and then but a copy myself.
It will probably be some album released in America to coincide after the concerts over there, or yet another re-packaging of songs for somewhere like Japan just like Jewells 1 and 2. I do hope a new album does materialise but I will believe it when I see it or hear it and then but a copy myself.