[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]bgordon88 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]It's likely to sound like a Paul Rodgers solo album.
[/QUOTE]
Add in elements of Queen a see what happens?
For all the other posters, I'm open for good music regardless of how thet label it.
Call it Queen, call it Q+PR or call it something else.
If it is good I'll listen. If it isn't good then I won't listen.
I find it funny that people can say it's sh!t without having heard a thing.
I'm sympathetic to those who say the name should be changed but legally they can call it what they want including Queen.
Time to get back to life.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Dan Corson II: The Revenge! wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I'm interested to see what comes out. But, I DO want Brian and Roger to sing some.[/QUOTE]
I absolutely agree! I would love to have some new stuff by Brian and Roger. I hope they sing more than the "token" one song on the album and not let PR hog all the vocals.
I absolutely agree! I would love to have some new stuff by Brian and Roger. I hope they sing more than the "token" one song on the album and not let PR hog all the vocals.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]innuendo1991 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I can't even watch the 2005 tour songs sung by retard because he puts so many fancy bits in which aren't Queen. He can't reach all of the notes but thinks he can.[/QUOTE]
"Fancy bits in which aren't Queen" mean that something original is being done with Queen's music. Having a Freddie wannabe would be boring. I love the fact that Paul injects his own personality into Queen's music while never insulting the original. And for your information, Paul's vocal range in the 05-06 concerts was just generally as good as Freddie's live range, if not better.
once agian proving you know nothing about singing. you might know about guitars, but singing you have no clue.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]NJQueenFan wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I think it'll be quite good. Those are 3 extremely talented musicians there. Honestly, I think Freddie and John were somewhat detrimental to Queen at some points. They were the ones that convinced Rog and Bri to stary from hard rock in the 80s....and we were left with crap like Hot Space and 1/2 of AKOM. I'm afraid of what Queen would've been in the 80s had Bri and Rog not been there backing up their rock roots. [/QUOTE]
Very good observation.
a horrible obvseration, it was rogers decision to go in a pop direction.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Boy Thomas Raker wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Another Roger (re) said:
"What a narrowminded way to see Queen. If Brian and Roger want to call it Queen, than it is Queen."
According to you, Brian, Roger and anyone who doesn't care who Queen is. To dismiss everyone else's opinion is ironically narrow minded.[/QUOTE]
This is a classic argument. It's okay for the first person, S.M., to be closed-minded and intolerant of anything but Fred-Bri-Rog-John, but it's not okay for Another Roger to react and be "intolerant" (if you will) of S.M.'s intolerance. This is the same kind of thing people say when one is "intolerant" of another's intolerant religious beliefs or political stance. With that kind of argument, nobody should have strong opinions on anything, because they'll be criticized for one reason or another.
[/QUOTE]
"Fancy bits in which aren't Queen" mean that something original is being done with Queen's music. Having a Freddie wannabe would be boring. I love the fact that Paul injects his own personality into Queen's music while never insulting the original. And for your information, Paul's vocal range in the 05-06 concerts was just generally as good as Freddie's live range, if not better.
once agian proving you know nothing about singing. you might know about guitars, but singing you have no clue.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]NJQueenFan wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I think it'll be quite good. Those are 3 extremely talented musicians there. Honestly, I think Freddie and John were somewhat detrimental to Queen at some points. They were the ones that convinced Rog and Bri to stary from hard rock in the 80s....and we were left with crap like Hot Space and 1/2 of AKOM. I'm afraid of what Queen would've been in the 80s had Bri and Rog not been there backing up their rock roots. [/QUOTE]
Very good observation.
a horrible obvseration, it was rogers decision to go in a pop direction.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Boy Thomas Raker wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Another Roger (re) said:
"What a narrowminded way to see Queen. If Brian and Roger want to call it Queen, than it is Queen."
According to you, Brian, Roger and anyone who doesn't care who Queen is. To dismiss everyone else's opinion is ironically narrow minded.[/QUOTE]
This is a classic argument. It's okay for the first person, S.M., to be closed-minded and intolerant of anything but Fred-Bri-Rog-John, but it's not okay for Another Roger to react and be "intolerant" (if you will) of S.M.'s intolerance. This is the same kind of thing people say when one is "intolerant" of another's intolerant religious beliefs or political stance. With that kind of argument, nobody should have strong opinions on anything, because they'll be criticized for one reason or another.
[/QUOTE]
I might have fucked up the quotes. I just want to say "sir" you know nothing about singing, check out freddie's range in live at the bowl than listen to rodgers. even live at wembly freddie blows rodgers away. Just listen to "who wants to live forever" how can you be taken seriously when you talk such bullshit!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]mike hunt wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I might have fucked up the quotes. I just want to say "sir" you know nothing about singing, check out freddie's range in live at the bowl than listen to rodgers. even live at wembly freddie blows rodgers away. Just listen to "who wants to live forever" how can you be taken seriously when you talk such bullshit![/QUOTE]
Nup. Sir GH is right, in this instance it's you who knows nothing.
Wembley was overdubbed. Even with WWTLF, the song on which your argument rests, Paul Rodgers can hit said notes. Rodgers easily matches that performance in 'range', but since WHEN THE FUCK was range important anyway?!?
Nup. Sir GH is right, in this instance it's you who knows nothing.
Wembley was overdubbed. Even with WWTLF, the song on which your argument rests, Paul Rodgers can hit said notes. Rodgers easily matches that performance in 'range', but since WHEN THE FUCK was range important anyway?!?
"sir" is the one always bringing up range, I personally think the sound of a persons voice is much more important.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]mike hunt wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"sir" is the one always bringing up range, I personally think the sound of a persons voice is much more important. [/QUOTE]
Well if thats where the discussion is headed...
Paul Rodgers, I like his voice mostly, its good for his kind of music. Things that sorta irk me about his singing is the way he sings the 'ooh' sound, and sometimes when he sings too rough he sounds more like a saxophone.
Other than that... I've no real objection to him as a vocalist, but I've sure got others I prefer more.
Well if thats where the discussion is headed...
Paul Rodgers, I like his voice mostly, its good for his kind of music. Things that sorta irk me about his singing is the way he sings the 'ooh' sound, and sometimes when he sings too rough he sounds more like a saxophone.
Other than that... I've no real objection to him as a vocalist, but I've sure got others I prefer more.
As far as the band name goes, if Freddie came up with it, then maybe he would be happy for it to continue, and with at least two original members in there, they can call it what they wish. I would also imagine that when the band name is released, Brian and Roger will give their reasons for naming it as they so wish. I do feel as though the best years for Queen were when the four of them were there, and so as others have mentioned, call the band Queen+
PR/Queen+Paul Rodgers/Q.P.R. This is a new band name for new fans, and something that a large majority of more veteran Queen fans will appreciate. It just seems right to come back with a new name, for a new band built upon the greatest of Queen (1973-1995). Plus they'll most probably make reference to Freddie somehow, for the first few new albulms, if they'll be a few albulms. Who knows, wait and see,
B.R
PR/Queen+Paul Rodgers/Q.P.R. This is a new band name for new fans, and something that a large majority of more veteran Queen fans will appreciate. It just seems right to come back with a new name, for a new band built upon the greatest of Queen (1973-1995). Plus they'll most probably make reference to Freddie somehow, for the first few new albulms, if they'll be a few albulms. Who knows, wait and see,
B.R
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]mike hunt wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"sir" is the one always bringing up range, I personally think the sound of a persons voice is much more important. [/QUOTE]
Well if thats where the discussion is headed...
Paul Rodgers, I like his voice mostly, its good for his kind of music. Things that sorta irk me about his singing is the way he sings the 'ooh' sound, and sometimes when he sings too rough he sounds more like a saxophone.
Other than that... I've no real objection to him as a vocalist, but I've sure got others I prefer more.[/QUOTE] I agree with you, it's not like I hate his voice, but it's not nearly one of my favorites.
Well if thats where the discussion is headed...
Paul Rodgers, I like his voice mostly, its good for his kind of music. Things that sorta irk me about his singing is the way he sings the 'ooh' sound, and sometimes when he sings too rough he sounds more like a saxophone.
Other than that... I've no real objection to him as a vocalist, but I've sure got others I prefer more.[/QUOTE] I agree with you, it's not like I hate his voice, but it's not nearly one of my favorites.
Unfortunately, most of my favourites are dead or ruined by age!
You're all talking about an album is not out yet.
I'm gonna say it's shit or not once is in my hands.
I'm gonna say it's shit or not once is in my hands.
i hope its great but it seems like the are headed in a bluesy boring direction.i find most of Pauls studio work uninteresting at best.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]***God*** wrote: [/QUOTENAME] not once is in my hands.[/QUOTE]
God, you're talking all jibbly-jabbly again.
God, you're talking all jibbly-jabbly again.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Freddies Delilah wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I just wish they had found a new band name. To me, if they had wanted to record something with Paul, then they should've just gone ahead with it - just not with the name Queen. To me, Queen won't ever be Queen without Freddie.
But who knows? I just hope I don't start talking ot Queen about someone and they start saying how much they like their lead singer, Paul.
By we'll just have to wait. Que Sera Sera. (or however you spell it)[/QUOTE]
Dude, just stop worrying about the legistics and listen to the music.
But who knows? I just hope I don't start talking ot Queen about someone and they start saying how much they like their lead singer, Paul.
By we'll just have to wait. Que Sera Sera. (or however you spell it)[/QUOTE]
Dude, just stop worrying about the legistics and listen to the music.
I want to know what Brian's idea of 'epic' is... while a lot of people hated The Call for it's rant-like nature, I reckon the instrumentation was top notch on that track, and if we get more songs like that, I won't complain.