Queen crest Queenzone

Brian May: Egomanic

92 posts Page 6 of 7
Thread

Posts in chronological order

Search forum
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]

I beg to disagree. Brian's vocals in this verse are very emotional but in terms of voice control he sounds very weak. When Freddie takes over the second verse you hear the difference between an occasional singer and one the world 's best vocalists. The song deserved the best vocalist imo. I always wondered why Brian sang some of his songs on the albums when he had the best possible singer around. Freddie never played lead guitar on one of his own songs, did he?
[/QUOTE]

I agree with that. Brian's vocals are not only weak, but he is really stretching to sing like he does. He has a timbre similar to Paul McCartney's, but he has no volume to speak of. From a technical standpoint, some would probably say Brian may be doing damage to his voice to sing like he does, as there appears to be no technique.

Some of Brian's solo material would be much stronger with a lead singer.... but when Brian's first solo came out, what singer would want that gig?? I'm being serious.... that person would be like "so I have to sing for a guy thats worked with Mercury for 20+ years?".....NO PRESSURE THERE!
Having a smoking area in a restaurant is like having a pissing section in a swimming pool
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Scott_Mercury wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Brian's singing at the beginning of WWTLF works very well... Brian can do a very close Freddie soft voice.... [/QUOTE]

I agree.
"You are only young once, but you can stay immature indefinitely." - Ogden Nash
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]> To me, being a musician consists of three things: technical ability, composition, and feel.

So in your opinion Yo-Yo Ma isn't a musician? Kiri Te Kanawa? Christoph Eschenbach? Montserrat Caballe? Elvis Presley?[/QUOTE]

Christoph Eschenbach arranges which to me counts just as much as composition, and Yo-Yo Ma has written and arranged a few pieces as well. As for the others, yes, I do not rate them nearly as high as "musicians". I see them as singers and performers. The true musicians are the ones who wrote the music for them to sing.
Queenzone is overrun with trolls and circling the drain - join us here instead: http://queenforum.net
" Brian's vocals in this verse are very emotional"

Singing is emotion is singing!

No, I do get what you mean though and completely understand. I simply feel that the start of that song was one instance where it kinda worked.
However, it's not really a sore point either way - we all got to hear Freddie have a turn at it!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Singing is emotion is singing![/QUOTE]

AMEN!
"You are only young once, but you can stay immature indefinitely." - Ogden Nash
> As for the others, yes, I do not rate them nearly as high as "musicians". I see them as singers and performers. The true musicians are the ones who wrote the music for them to sing

All right ... I agree to disagree then :)
John hated Hot Space. Frederick's favourite singer was not Paul Rodgers. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' 'Bohemian Rhapsody' hasn't got 180 vocal overdubs.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]> As for the others, yes, I do not rate them nearly as high as "musicians". I see them as singers and performers. The true musicians are the ones who wrote the music for them to sing

All right ... I agree to disagree then :)[/QUOTE]

Ah yeah... that's the beauty of the arts... it all comes down to philosophies... what's true for you, rather than what's universally true.
Queenzone is overrun with trolls and circling the drain - join us here instead: http://queenforum.net
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Freddie's #1 Fan Forever wrote: [/QUOTENAME]

By the way, like all of Brian May's early releases, I suspect that "Prophet's Song" would have tanked. The melody is weak, and Freddie Mercury sounds like a girl. While "Bohemian Rhapsody" possessed a funny, campy quality, the self-serious quality that you find in "Prophet's Song" is stifling. [/QUOTE]

I greatly enjoy prophets song as do many of my friends so I'm not sure it would've tanked. I have no idea how it would've compared to Boh Rhap though
17, and obsessed with Queen lol
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Freddie's #1 Fan Forever wrote: [/QUOTENAME]the release of the mediocre "Prophet's Song" in place of the brilliant “Bohemian Rhapsody”
[/QUOTE]

Not only a die-hard stepford, also a musical moron.

No one with an education in music, experience as a musician or anything similar could agree with you in a straight face.

If you don't like the song, fine. If you deny the song's qualities: you are very, very dumb.[/QUOTE]

I agree 11111000000%
17, and obsessed with Queen lol
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Freddie's #1 Fan Forever wrote: [/QUOTENAME]OK Guys,
Someone above was saying that "Prophet's Song" has great musical qualities. I cannot disagree more.

I think that one of the great things about "Bohemian Rhapsody" is the extent to which it is so very tightly written. At no point does it lose your interest. "Prophet's Song," on the other hand, is just plain boring. I mean, essentially half of the song is made up of what sounds like stupid, pretentious noise and no melody. The "Now I Know, Now I Know, Now I know, Listen to the Wise Man" part is not only boring, but its self-serious elements are so ridiculously inflated that it becomes inadvertently funny. Let's face it, although it may be cool for hard-core Queen fans to list "Prophet's Song" as among their favorites, this piece of music sucks and has no business on any Greatest Hits compilation whatsoever.

On the other hand, "Bohemian Rhapsody" is a truly brilliant song. As far as I am concerned this brilliance is rooted in its humorous qualities. To me, this humor is associated with the way that it turns hard rock and heavy metal into something that is also simultaneously very gay. What a funny and original thing to do! On the other hand, there is nothing funny or original about "Prophet's Song." It drones on and like something that some pilgrim wrote 200 years ago. My God, give me a break.
[/QUOTE]

Do you have any idea how irritating you are? You probably do and do this simply to annoy people.
17, and obsessed with Queen lol
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Scott_Mercury wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]

I beg to disagree. Brian's vocals in this verse are very emotional but in terms of voice control he sounds very weak. When Freddie takes over the second verse you hear the difference between an occasional singer and one the world 's best vocalists. The song deserved the best vocalist imo. I always wondered why Brian sang some of his songs on the albums when he had the best possible singer around. Freddie never played lead guitar on one of his own songs, did he?
[/QUOTE]

I agree with that. Brian's vocals are not only weak, but he is really stretching to sing like he does. He has a timbre similar to Paul McCartney's, but he has no volume to speak of. From a technical standpoint, some would probably say Brian may be doing damage to his voice to sing like he does, as there appears to be no technique.

Some of Brian's solo material would be much stronger with a lead singer.... but when Brian's first solo came out, what singer would want that gig?? I'm being serious.... that person would be like "so I have to sing for a guy thats worked with Mercury for 20+ years?".....NO PRESSURE THERE![/QUOTE] Don't you think your overating freddie just a tad?... Freddie truly was a one off, but their must have been plenty of great singers of high quailty who would have loved to sing on brians albums. Brian sings a good ballad, so "nothin but blue" or "just one life" could have stayed the way they are, but for "back to the light" and other up beat songs he could have used a better singer. some singers who come to mind are paul rodgers, joe walsh, singer from "boston" (forget his name) among some other singers that were brilliant who would have made a great combination with brian may. again, freddie wasn't overated, he's definitly my number 1 singer, but he's not the be all end all of singers.
Imo, Brian sang his songs brilliantly, even the heavy ones (e.g. 'Love Token', 'Business'). But perhaps some other singer could have made them work better, yes ... 'Resurrection' sung by somebody like Bruce Dickinson would have been ace!
John hated Hot Space. Frederick's favourite singer was not Paul Rodgers. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' 'Bohemian Rhapsody' hasn't got 180 vocal overdubs.
Resurrection could've used more cowbell.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]mike hunt wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Don't you think your overating freddie just a tad?... Freddie truly was a one off, but their must have been plenty of great singers of high quailty who would have loved to sing on brians albums. Brian sings a good ballad, so "nothin but blue" or "just one life" could have stayed the way they are, but for "back to the light" and other up beat songs he could have used a better singer. some singers who come to mind are paul rodgers, joe walsh, singer from "boston" (forget his name) among some other singers that were brilliant who would have made a great combination with brian may. again, freddie wasn't overated, he's definitly my number 1 singer, but he's not the be all end all of singers.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. Good post.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]'Resurrection' sung by somebody like Bruce Dickinson would have been ace![/QUOTE]

Haha yeah, you're right!
Queenzone is overrun with trolls and circling the drain - join us here instead: http://queenforum.net
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Resurrection could've used more cowbell.[/QUOTE]

Personally, Just One Life and Too Much Love Will Kill You could've used more cowbell. AND kazoo. But that's probably why I'm not a professional musician.