I just deleted my original post which was a reply to the question you asked, because that would probably have been considered rude... Suffice it to say that you can't expect to have only positive responses to a topic where you ask for opinions.
Also, it would be a good idea to start Q+PR topics in the Q+PR area, instead of the Queen area. I know I wouldn't have such a strong reaction if you weren't blurring the lines between those two, and it would be easier to avoid topics like this if they were in a more suitable area.
Thank you.
I just deleted my original post which was a reply to the question you asked, because that would probably have been considered rude... Suffice it to say that you can't expect to have only positive responses to a topic where you ask for opinions.
Also, it would be a good idea to start Q+PR topics in the Q+PR area, instead of the Queen area. I know I wouldn't have such a strong reaction if you weren't blurring the lines between those two, and it would be easier to avoid topics like this if they were in a more suitable area.
Thank you.
While it's true Queen without Freddie and John isn't the real deal, I respect the remaining members' guts to go on stage and give their best. I will support them by buying the album and going to a concert.
I'm disappointed by C-Lebrity. The tune is okay, but the lyrics sound like a frustrated teen rant - too much bitterness over an irrelevant subject.
I also miss a good bass line and frankly, I don't like Paul all that much. Not expressive enough for blues, not big enough for rock, and a songwriter boring as hell, he's essentially been a session musician for aged stars ever since Free.
EDIT: While everyone's entitled to their opinion, misguided as it might be, no, THE_HUNKY_BACKHANDER, everybody doesn't "know" Paul was a better singer than Freddie at any phase. Quite the contrary, in fact. And Paul's not even among the best. Listen to some James LaBrie, or if you like it jazzier, Stevie Wonder. Those guys measure up to Freddie. Paul doesn't come close.
I'm sure you all have seen this before...
Peter Freestone on Queen + Paul Rodgers:
"I am 100% sure that Freddie would not have wanted everything to grind to a halt just because he wasn’t around anymore….That’s why he was happy to record as long as he could…because there was so much more that Queen could give… and now they are able to do it."
THE_HUNKY_BACKHANDER wrote: And we must remember Paul Rodgers is 58 years old - well past his prime. Anybody knows Paul Rodgers in his Free days was the best singer ever. Freddie Mercury doesnt even come close.
He is better now than he ever was in Free in my opinion. His vocal tone is 10 times better and his control is better also. He's living proof that your voice can still improve when near 60 if you really work at it.
Micrówave wrote: I'm sure you all have seen this before...
Peter Freestone on Queen + Paul Rodgers:
"I am 100% sure that Freddie would not have wanted everything to grind to a halt just because he wasn’t around anymore….That’s why he was happy to record as long as he could…because there was so much more that Queen could give… and now they are able to do it."
You forgot the rest of the quote, which actually talks about the current situation as opposed to tracks like the MIH sessions which Freddie participated in:
"I just hope they record more; you know, something new, something that can become definitively their’s."
Even Peter Freestone thinks that Q+PR shouldn't be cashing in on the past success. ;)