| IsilwenGilraen 05.04.2008 20:53 |
Sorry if this was already discussed, but I didn't see it anywhere. What do you all think about the new tours going on with Paul Rodgers? Do you think it's worth it to see them? Personally I don't like his voice very much, but I might be biased. I'm really curious about this because Freddie died before I was born and I'm debating whether it would be good to see them play. Obviously it won't be the same, but it could be interesting I guess, right? Or should I just resign myself to collecting Queen concerts on DVD? |
| Knute 05.04.2008 21:49 |
Was it all worth it? Yes, it was a worthwhile experience. :P Yeah, I think it would be a great concert to go see if you simply look at it like a celebration of Queen's music with a great singer sitting in. I mean if you ever have loved Brian's guitar work or Roger's drumming then it's so worth it that I can't even begin to tell you. I've seen lots of different concerts, including Queen and I rank the Q+PR gigs up there with the all time best concerts in my life. They are class A rock shows that will make you feel good. I guarantee it. |
| The Real Wizard 05.04.2008 23:42 |
If you're stuck in a place where you are comparing any other singer to Freddie, then you probably won't enjoy Queen + Paul Rodgers. However, if you're open to the fact that they're not replacing Freddie but rather have essentially created a new band with another rock legend, then you certainly may enjoy them. |
| Mr Faron Hyte 06.04.2008 00:11 |
IsilwenGilraen wrote: Sorry if this was already discussed, but I didn't see it anywhere. What do you all think about the new tours going on with Paul Rodgers? Do you think it's worth it to see them? Personally I don't like his voice very much, but I might be biased. I'm really curious about this because Freddie died before I was born and I'm debating whether it would be good to see them play. Obviously it won't be the same, but it could be interesting I guess, right? Or should I just resign myself to collecting Queen concerts on DVD?For what its worth, I've seen them several times, and it felt like a Queen show to me. Not literally of course, but the spirit of it felt like a Queen show. A celebration of the Queen legacy and moreover just a great night of music by great musicians. It may not be for you, but its definitely for me. |
| Dan C. 06.04.2008 00:26 |
Queen... Paul Rodgers... what's not to like? Of course it's worth it. |
| Tero 06.04.2008 03:37 |
If you are in any doubt before hearing them, it probably isn't worth it. Paul Rodgers is a fine singer, we all get that. That has never been the issue! The problem is that he's forced to sing the most commercial Queen songs, which don't really suit him, and that makes both him and the songs sound mediocre. There's an easy fix to that problem as well, but a "new band" using the Queen name isn't going to take the chance of not playing the Queen hits. (And that also means that for me it's not worth the trouble to see this combination in concert again.) |
| jcomber 06.04.2008 10:06 |
Paul Rodgers is a fine Singer? Al Murray's Show the outro part with Alright now! How come I could hear Al Murray quite clearly over the vocals of PR, maybe it was a mic thing, but my opinion being most of the Queen Songs are a tall order for most vocalists and this includes Paul Rodgers, but give him his due he gives it 100%. No! I wouldn't pay to go and watch Paul Rodgers before his ego disappears where the Sun don't shine, but the original line up of Queen YES! As Brian said at Wembley 86 'Thanks for making this the hottest ticket this country has ever seen' Where was Paul Rodgers? Only two decent/classic songs by PR. Alright Now and Feel like makin Love, the others I'd rather listen to the shipping forecast. |
| Fenderek 06.04.2008 10:12 |
Tero wrote: If you are in any doubt before hearing them, it probably isn't worth it.What a RIDICULOUS statement... So what? You haven't seen a band live, you don't know if they are good or not. What do you do? NOT go, because it means it's not worth it? Must be many gigs you see... I do understand that you are against the whole thing, but please... TO THE ORIGINAL POSTER- You know- listen to as many bootlegs (and don't forget ROTC DVD) as you can and try to find your OWN opinion on the music- imagine yourself at the gig; seeing Brian playing those chords, seeing Roger drumming his heart out; and listening to Paul Rodgers. If you can IMAGINE yourself in that environment and ENJOYIONG yourself- be it only for Brian's guitar- than go. If you are ABSOLUTELY sure that you wouldn't - than I agree, it isn't worth it. But some doubt... I mean if you haven't heard it (or actually seen them live)- of course there is going to be some doubt!!! You're going to be in doubt right until they start playing. Every time I go out to see a band I haven't seen live before I'm in doubt. There is always this little thing "man, maybe they will suck?", but it's coupled with "man, I'm going to the gig!!!". And than it starts... and after 2-3 songs you definitely know if that was worth it or not... But if I followed that "if you're not sure- don't go, not worth it" suggestion- I wouldn't leave house... totally ridiculous statement... jcomber wrote: but the original line up of Queen YES!Good luck with it... *rolls eyes* And to end on a personal note- seen them seven times in 2005. Enjoyed every second of it. I became a Queen fan only few months before Freddie died. I KNEW that I wasn't going to see them live. And I never imagined that I will ever get to see Brian and Roger together on stage. Most people here are arguing about the name- but in my opinion they treat the name as more important than anything else. I mean- what does QUEEN mean to you? I couldn't care less that it means they are rock legends, I couldn't care less about their legacy, about the fact that in 1975 they released brilliant album that sold millions. All that- associated with the name- means NOTHING to me. What QUEEN means to me is EVERYTHING that I ever felt. The fact that when I was 12 I was running in my bedroom with tennis rocket and playing air guitar to NOW I'M HERE. That's what QUEEN means to me. The fact that they touched MY life, that they changed MY life. And all those feeling throughout the years were dissapearing- the band was releasing crappy compilations (ROCKS, GHIII), the gigs we already knew (Montreal, Wembley), re-releasing DVD-As that we already knew (because they found GOD SAVE THE QUEEN- OMG... but actually the first mix of the whole album was so much better)- I dunno... and all thiose Robbie Williams / 5ive / Pepsi and other stuff... my feelings for the name QUEEN and the fact that they changed my life- it was all disappearing; i found many other bands that touched me... But when I saw those two guys together in Brixton... when the courtain fell... when Roger banged his cymbals and Brian started TYMD... all my life I was waiting for that... I knew I would never see them with Freddie- but it would be really stupid to deny myself pleasure of seeing Brian and Roger... This is as close as you'll EVER get to see the real thing. Sure- you can have original line-up DVDs, bootlegs... But anyone thinking that DVD at home and BEING at the venue is similar is an idiot... or never went to the rock gig before... or is the most boring person on planet... If you like rock music- there is NOTHING more satisfying than this rush of adrenaline when the whole things start... This is the ULTIMATE rock experience- the live gig... You can watch DVDs at home as long as you like- it's only a fracture of what you can experience at the venue... Hell- you can even e |
| Tero 06.04.2008 11:06 |
Fenderek wrote:In all its simplicity, here's the argument:Tero wrote: If you are in any doubt before hearing them, it probably isn't worth it.What a RIDICULOUS statement... So what? You haven't seen a band live, you don't know if they are good or not. What do you do? NOT go, because it means it's not worth it? Must be many gigs you see... I do understand that you are against the whole thing, but please... If you have to ask other people whether you want to see a band, you aren't seeing the band for the right reasons, and most likely YOU don't want to see the band at all. If you're genuinely interested in the material they perform or the performers themselves, you'll know it without anybody else's help. |
| jcomber 06.04.2008 12:32 |
Fenderek, I respect your personal point of view, Yes Queen and their songs have touched so many music fans lives, and I am glad they bring you great enjoyment as well.... Yes I felt a sense of excitement prior to the QPR performance, but PR sorry he isn't the ticket the Queen Songs are too much for him. Yes I heard ROTC, MUSIC Bri&Rog was great, PR struggled manfully the best I can say, his renditions of the Queen songs, in particular heavy parts was shit, but PR was good with his own material. This not I hate PR protest vote, I think even Freddie at 60 would be struggling. Elton John is 60ish, and he croaks his way through too. My personal view is they need a younger vocalist with more energy and gusto this is what the Queen sound demands Not Robbie Williams though the guy is a clown and not a capable singer. |
| *Rain Must Fall* 06.04.2008 12:41 |
If I could see them I would do it in the blink of an eye. |
| Fenderek 06.04.2008 13:26 |
Tero wrote: In all its simplicity, here's the argument: If you have to ask other people whether you want to see a band, you aren't seeing the band for the right reasons, and most likely YOU don't want to see the band at all. If you're genuinely interested in the material they perform or the performers themselves, you'll know it without anybody else's help.But you assume that when someone isn't sure- that means they DON'T want to see the band. C'mon...! I've seen MANY bands that released GREAT records yet live they weren't that good. And now if I want to see some new band- I ask those who've seen it before, those that I trust... Because if I only know albums- it doesn't necessaraly mean I'll enjoy the gig... I could agree with part of your statement- but definitely not the whole sentiment of "if you are asking- you don't really care that much". |
| Tero 06.04.2008 14:30 |
Fenderek wrote:Before the internet age it really was like you said (that great records didn't mean great live shows and you had to see the band before knowing), but it really isn't the case anymore.Tero wrote: In all its simplicity, here's the argument: If you have to ask other people whether you want to see a band, you aren't seeing the band for the right reasons, and most likely YOU don't want to see the band at all. If you're genuinely interested in the material they perform or the performers themselves, you'll know it without anybody else's help.But you assume that when someone isn't sure- that means they DON'T want to see the band. C'mon...! I've seen MANY bands that released GREAT records yet live they weren't that good. And now if I want to see some new band- I ask those who've seen it before, those that I trust... I could agree with part of your statement- but definitely not the whole sentiment that "if you are asking- you don't really care that much". In addition to the thousands of opinions that the internet provides on the previous concerts, it also gives you video and audio recordings of the previous shows. That's a lot more reliable way to see if you're interested in a particular band instead of finding out what other people think. For the benefit of discussion I'm going to assume that the original poster has already read some of the opinions on this message board, and seen a concert dvd from the previous tour (and if he hasn't, that should have been the first step!). Once we're past that stage, you'll know if you want to see that band live. I honestly cannot recommend anybody still in doubt to attend the shows. |
| Micrówave 07.04.2008 12:52 |
IsilwenGilraen wrote: Sorry if this was already discussed, but I didn't see it anywhere.Thank you for bringing this up. I was wondering if anyone was going to touch on this most satisfying of subjects. Thank so so very much. You have made my day! Awesome! I would very much love to discuss this subject and tell you my feeling on this whole issue. There are many sides and shades to the Freddie/Paul thing, so let me basically give you my overview and feelings on the matter: I just think that, yeah. |
| IsilwenGilraen 10.04.2008 17:15 |
Wow, a little heavy on the sarcasm, huh "Microwave?" No one was forcing you to reply... Anyways, thanks for everyone's opinions. I never really liked Paul Rodger's voice no matter what he sings, but the only reason I'm considering it is that it would still be Queen music with half the band. I definitely think I'm going to go see a show. |