pootle50 27.06.2008 17:37 |
Well. Paul Rodgers wants F**king shooting. That was shit. |
Rick 27.06.2008 17:47 |
Wow, six posts. You must be God. |
Knute 27.06.2008 17:50 |
Slide down a slide of razor blades into a pool of alcohol you piece of shit troll. |
Treasure Movement 27.06.2008 18:14 |
pootle50 wrote: Well. Paul Rodgers wants F**king shooting. That was shit.You need shooting you f*cking F*ck face - get some respect! Go have a look in the mirror and have a good w*nk at your own ego. |
TheAmazingEvent 27.06.2008 21:24 |
newbie or not he;s entitled to his opinion even if it is wrong......chill guys. |
Richard Orchard 27.06.2008 21:45 |
i thought it was OK. But - was the artists present the best representation of who would want to honor Nelson Mandela? Given the universal appeal of Mandela, i am surprised more bit A list people weren't there. |
Tero 28.06.2008 04:34 |
Richard Orchard wrote: But - was the artists present the best representation of who would want to honor Nelson Mandela? Given the universal appeal of Mandela, i am surprised more bit A list people weren't there.I don't mean to sound overtly negative or cynical, but is that really a surprise? Brian May organises an internationally televised charity concert just a few months before his own band launches a European tour (with new material which is weak, to say the least based on the songs so far), and you expect him to gather around the biggest stars in the world? :D This was an advertisement campaign for QPR, designed to highlight their own mediocre performance when compared to the crap around them... All the reports are going to say they stole the show, and all the highlight programmes are going to show their performance, and that wouldn't have been possible if there had really been an "stellar lineup" to compete with. |
pittrek 28.06.2008 04:40 |
It was a very good concert. Not great, "only" very good. Paul definitely needs to learn the lyrics of "One Vision" if they want to play in on the tour |
pootle50 28.06.2008 05:16 |
Rick wrote: Wow, six posts. You must be God.Depends how you look at it. Either I only speak when something is worth saying or i change my name occasionally... :0) |
Cwazy little thing 28.06.2008 09:00 |
Tero wrote:You failed! That is the one of the most cynical posts Ive ever read on this board! You honestly think Brian organised this as an attempt to raise publicity for the new album - you must think he's one sick person! Why are you even here if you have such a low opinion of him!?Richard Orchard wrote: But - was the artists present the best representation of who would want to honor Nelson Mandela? Given the universal appeal of Mandela, i am surprised more bit A list people weren't there.I don't mean to sound overtly negative or cynical |
Cwazy little thing 28.06.2008 09:03 |
pittrek wrote: It was a very good concert. Not great, "only" very good. Paul definitely needs to learn the lyrics of "One Vision" if they want to play in on the tourWith respect, I think Paul knew the song better than Brian last night, who was the reason it was an average version of the song! Paul only forgot one line, while Brian mucked up the riff on the intro at least twice, and then threw everyone (including Spike who was trying to sing the "Cold wind blows..." line) out by changing chords too early in mid section. |
Tero 28.06.2008 09:13 |
Cwazy little thing wrote: You failed! That is the one of the most cynical posts Ive ever read on this board! You honestly think Brian organised this as an attempt to raise publicity for the new album - you must think he's one sick person! Why are you even here if you have such a low opinion of him!?So what's your explanation? Either Brian was really terrible at his job, or he deliberate made a poor job out of it. It's interesting to see that even the "46664 - Leave your birthday wishes to Nelson Mandela" web page has an advertisement of a free QPR download (the "generously donated" Say It's Not True video) with every greeting you leave... I can almost touch Brian's sincereness and genuine belief in the cause! |
Cwazy little thing 28.06.2008 09:34 |
Tero wrote:Most of the artists there were those who have been involved in the 46664 cause all along, and its likely the only reason the likes of Peter Gabriel/Bono didnt perform was an availability issue.Cwazy little thing wrote: You failed! That is the one of the most cynical posts Ive ever read on this board! You honestly think Brian organised this as an attempt to raise publicity for the new album - you must think he's one sick person! Why are you even here if you have such a low opinion of him!?So what's your explanation? Either Brian was really terrible at his job, or he deliberate made a poor job out of it. It's interesting to see that even the "46664 - Leave your birthday wishes to Nelson Mandela" web page has an advertisement of a free QPR download (the "generously donated" Say It's Not True video) with every greeting you leave... I can almost touch Brian's sincereness and genuine belief in the cause! And the other artists were those people who are new on the scene and "hot" hence Leona Lewis and Amy Winehouse. Those two almost certainly have a higher public profile than Queen at the moment, and I think you might notice that a lot of the media coverage doesnt even mention Queen - I watched an ITN news report this morning which was all about Winehouse, Leona and Will Smith doing a concert for Mandela - there was only one shot of the encore where you could see Brian and Paul. So I dont see your point. Its not Brians fault Queen can still blow most of these people off stage easily. But then again, they always could - look at Live Aid. Name an "A list" band or artist who is involved with 46664 who could outperform QPR on the kind of form they were in last night? Also - if it was all about the new album then isnt it great that they played so much new material last night...... oh wait. :) Say its not true was written FOR 46664 and Nelson Mandela, long before a new album was concieved. |
steven 35638 28.06.2008 09:44 |
So many people look at Brian and Roger as if they are blood sucking demons. While the two may not be perfect, I doubt they are primarily trying to suck the money and pride out of their fans. It is not a shun for these gentlemen to want to make music together, because they have been doing it almost their entire career -- even before they met Freddie and John. And, as so many have protested, the Queen name should have died the moment Freddie died. That makes very little sense to me. Brian and Roger were just as much Queen as the others were. John had the choice of staying with the band, but he decided against it for personal reasons. He accepts what Brian and Roger are doing. As for Freddie, he must have known his band mates wouldn't lay under a rock after his death. I couldn't see him ever giving a damn about what goes on with the entitlement of the band afterwards -- it is only common sense for them to carry the torch that is Queen. No sense in pouring water over it! As for the concert, they quite simply rocked. They have chemistry together, it's undeniable at this point. |
Negative Creep 28.06.2008 10:00 |
Not a great performace - mediocre. They really don't gel together as a unit. Nice to see Roger has been practising hard inbetween tours aswell..... NOT. LOL @ Steven. |
steven 35638 28.06.2008 10:04 |
LOL @ Negative Creep. Your name fits your personality. |
Queengirl47 28.06.2008 10:14 |
They ROCKED!!! I loved it!! keep showin em hows it's done!!! I can't WAIT for the album and tour!!!! |
Adam Baboolal 28.06.2008 10:20 |
It always seems to come up these days, doesn't it? The hate of whatever Brian and Roger do. Nothing seems good enough. Well, I pity those who must find fault in Bri n Rog cause I'm happy to see/hear them and enjoy what they do. Not everything, of course. Back on subject, I too, hate what ITV were doing. What a waste of time. They started at 9pm and started showing highlights from earlier in the day. Fine, I thought. But after an hour, I realised, we'd never see any live stuff happening in the background. What a flippin mistake. Why couldn't they be smart and show some highlights and then switch live to the stage for the big stuff?? BBC3's coverage of Glastonbury does this and it works nicely. Oh well, I look forward to a programme showing the concert or a download. Heh...and ITV wonder why they're not known for quality output! Adam. |
Knute 28.06.2008 11:47 |
Tero wrote:LMAO!Richard Orchard wrote: But - was the artists present the best representation of who would want to honor Nelson Mandela? Given the universal appeal of Mandela, i am surprised more bit A list people weren't there.I don't mean to sound overtly negative or cynical, but is that really a surprise? Brian May organises an internationally televised charity concert just a few months before his own band launches a European tour (with new material which is weak, to say the least based on the songs so far), and you expect him to gather around the biggest stars in the world? :D This was an advertisement campaign for QPR, designed to highlight their own mediocre performance when compared to the crap around them... All the reports are going to say they stole the show, and all the highlight programmes are going to show their performance, and that wouldn't have been possible if there had really been an "stellar lineup" to compete with. As predictable as you are, I wasn't really expecting anything this transparent. Awww poor wittle jaded Tero |
Tero 28.06.2008 11:51 |
Cwazy little thing wrote: Most of the artists there were those who have been involved in the 46664 cause all alongWhy should you limit to those artists who have been involved from the start? None of the current artists have been involved in the cause since Nelson Mandela's imprisonment, so obviously there is room for new acts? Cwazy little thing wrote: Also - if it was all about the new album then isnt it great that they played so much new material last night...... oh wait. :)If they had played any of the material, the current ticket holders would have burned their tickets in anger. ;) They played the old hits because they are selling the concert as if they are still the Queen of 1986. Simple as that. Cwazy little thing wrote: Say its not true was written FOR 46664 and Nelson Mandela, long before a new album was concieved.That's hardly the point, is it? How come none of the other 46664 songs are available as free downloads for sending birthday greetings? Honestly, I think it's Brian's reward for arranging the event... That and the other free advertising, of course. |
Tero 28.06.2008 11:52 |
Knute wrote:Don't worry, it's no more predictable than you writing glowing reviews of any mediocre QPR performance. ;)Tero wrote:LMAO! As predictable as you are, I wasn't really expecting anything this transparent. Awww poor wittle jaded TeroRichard Orchard wrote: But - was the artists present the best representation of who would want to honor Nelson Mandela? Given the universal appeal of Mandela, i am surprised more bit A list people weren't there.I don't mean to sound overtly negative or cynical, but is that really a surprise? Brian May organises an internationally televised charity concert just a few months before his own band launches a European tour (with new material which is weak, to say the least based on the songs so far), and you expect him to gather around the biggest stars in the world? :D This was an advertisement campaign for QPR, designed to highlight their own mediocre performance when compared to the crap around them... All the reports are going to say they stole the show, and all the highlight programmes are going to show their performance, and that wouldn't have been possible if there had really been an "stellar lineup" to compete with. |
Knute 28.06.2008 11:55 |
Tero wrote:HAHA.Knute wrote:Don't worry, it's no more predictable than you writing glowing reviews of any mediocre QPR performance. ;)Tero wrote:LMAO! As predictable as you are, I wasn't really expecting anything this transparent. Awww poor wittle jaded TeroRichard Orchard wrote: But - was the artists present the best representation of who would want to honor Nelson Mandela? Given the universal appeal of Mandela, i am surprised more bit A list people weren't there.I don't mean to sound overtly negative or cynical, but is that really a surprise? Brian May organises an internationally televised charity concert just a few months before his own band launches a European tour (with new material which is weak, to say the least based on the songs so far), and you expect him to gather around the biggest stars in the world? :D This was an advertisement campaign for QPR, designed to highlight their own mediocre performance when compared to the crap around them... All the reports are going to say they stole the show, and all the highlight programmes are going to show their performance, and that wouldn't have been possible if there had really been an "stellar lineup" to compete with. Like you would ever acknowledge a great QPR performance. How could you even claim this was mediocre when absolutely everything they do is mediocre to you? |
kingogre 28.06.2008 12:06 |
After seeing last nights stunning show and reading some of the comments here I can safely say that it wont matter what the f*ck they do, it still wont please some people. Its the same thing with Brian. He could give away his entire fortune to fight world hunger and some people would still find this a proof of "the wickedness of Mr May". |
Tero 28.06.2008 12:12 |
Knute wrote: Like you would ever acknowledge a great QPR performance. How could you even claim this was mediocre when absolutely everything they do is mediocre to you?Have they ever had a great performance? :P Seriously though, I have NEVER critisised QPR's work on Paul's songs. I critisise QPR's work on the Queen songs because no-one in the "band" is willing to change their own style to make the combination sound more like a genuine new band. If you don't believe me, read my notes from this topic link |
kingogre 28.06.2008 12:13 |
Tero wrote:So you dont think that the 90th birthday of the worlds most admired political leader of our time is enough reason for celebration?Richard Orchard wrote: But - was the artists present the best representation of who would want to honor Nelson Mandela? Given the universal appeal of Mandela, i am surprised more bit A list people weren't there.I don't mean to sound overtly negative or cynical, but is that really a surprise? Brian May organises an internationally televised charity concert just a few months before his own band launches a European tour (with new material which is weak, to say the least based on the songs so far), and you expect him to gather around the biggest stars in the world? :D This was an advertisement campaign for QPR, designed to highlight their own mediocre performance when compared to the crap around them... All the reports are going to say they stole the show, and all the highlight programmes are going to show their performance, and that wouldn't have been possible if there had really been an "stellar lineup" to compete with. If your "theory" is correct then hats off to Brian who managed to fool a surprising gathering of artists and other people to appear in his "commercial" including Bono, The Edge, Joan Baez, Annie Lennox and even Nelson Mandela. Theyre just the kind of people wholl do anything for money! |
Tero 28.06.2008 12:20 |
kingogre wrote: So you dont think that the 90th birthday of the worlds most admired political leader of our time is enough reason for celebration? If your "theory" is correct then hats off to Brian who managed to fool a surprising gathering of artists and other people to appear in his "commercial" including Bono, The Edge, Joan Baez, Annie Lennox and even Nelson Mandela. Theyre just the kind of people wholl do anything for money!The party idea may have been a sincere one, but I doubt the obviously half-hearted attempt at reaching artists of any international stature was genuine. This was a three(?) hour event, and you list a whopping two musicians who took the time to come the event, and one video entry... I bet Brian spent months on that. |
Knute 28.06.2008 12:23 |
Tero wrote:I'll give you credit for at least giving the stuff a listen and a critique.Knute wrote: Like you would ever acknowledge a great QPR performance. How could you even claim this was mediocre when absolutely everything they do is mediocre to you?Have they ever had a great performance? :P Seriously though, I have NEVER critisised QPR's work on Paul's songs. I critisise QPR's work on the Queen songs because no-one in the "band" is willing to change their own style to make the combination sound more like a genuine new band. If you don't believe me, read my notes from this topic link At least you are not like the trolls who call for Paul to be shot. But to suggest that this whole thing was a calculated plan from Brian and Roger of promoting the album and tour is is excessively cynical and jaded. I do think they are proud of the QPR project and are eager to show the world, but that's an understandable attitude. It's like a world class athlete in the locker room before he heads out onto the field. He's in there shouting, jogging in place and pumping his fists getting himself psyched out and he's full of confidence. Why didn't they announce a new album coming out? |
kingogre 28.06.2008 12:40 |
Tero wrote:The artists who appeared were essentially those who are involved in the 46664-project what else did you expect. I thought the idea was great with something of a meeting between African and European music. And honestly I thought a lot of the african artists were great.kingogre wrote: So you dont think that the 90th birthday of the worlds most admired political leader of our time is enough reason for celebration? If your "theory" is correct then hats off to Brian who managed to fool a surprising gathering of artists and other people to appear in his "commercial" including Bono, The Edge, Joan Baez, Annie Lennox and even Nelson Mandela. Theyre just the kind of people wholl do anything for money!The party idea may have been a sincere one, but I doubt the obviously half-hearted attempt at reaching artists of any international stature was genuine. This was a three(?) hour event, and you list a whopping two musicians who took the time to come the event, and one video entry... I bet Brian spent months on that. Secondly you missed the point of what I wrote completely. That said they had obviously saved some by using a house band or having artists perform acoustically. It would have been a LOT more expensive to have multiple stadium-headlining artists come in and perform a'la Live Aid and I seriously think that the 46664-foundation have a lot of better ways to spend their money than that. I thought the evening worked fine with the exception of Simple Minds and Josh Groban who were boring. And it was obvius that people who were there enjoyed themselves. |
Tero 28.06.2008 12:41 |
Knute wrote: But to suggest that this whole thing was a calculated plan from Brian and Roger of promoting the album and tour is is excessively cynical and jaded. Why didn't they announce a new album coming out?The WHOLE thing wasn't a calculated plan, but it certainly was a lucky coincidence for the band. I'm quite certain Brian would have been able to secure a more "commercially appealing" line-up if he'd genuinely tried, but that didn't happen. A big part of that must also be his ego, because it also doesn't allow him to play to smaller audiences as a solo artist. ;) There's no point in advertising the new album because a) very few people are going to buy the new album anyway, and b) Brian gets his kicks (and money) from touring and selling the old albums, and the best way to do both of those is to play the biggest hits live, as close to the original versions as possible... Like happened yesterday. If I may ask YOU something, would you give an honest opinion? Are the Queen songs (as heard yesterday) the best possible versions these people can come up with, or would they benefit from new (less like Queen '86) arrangements? |
kingogre 28.06.2008 12:52 |
Tero wrote: There's no point in advertising the new album because a) very few people are going to buy the new album anyway, and b) Brian gets his kicks (and money) from touring and selling the old albums, and the best way to do both of those is to play the biggest hits live, as close to the original versions as possible... Like happened yesterday.Are you serious? Do you really think Brian sat in the boarding room at QPR and agreed with executives that "No-ones gonna buy the new album anyway so we wont play any of the songs". And why did they even make an album in that case, cause you thats not cheap on this level.. ;) Only the hits? What did you expect at from a 30-minute set at a shared bill like this. Did you think that Queen would play Funny how love is in a jazz-fusion-version at Live Aid as well? ;) Are you here because you love the music of Queen or because you want to express your hate for somebody? So you dont like QPR, its youre right not to but why never anything positive about anything else? In the end were all here because we love Queen. :) Any way.. All the best! :) |
Knute 28.06.2008 12:54 |
Tero wrote:I really don't see how they could change the arrangements without making it a completely new song.Knute wrote: But to suggest that this whole thing was a calculated plan from Brian and Roger of promoting the album and tour is is excessively cynical and jaded. Why didn't they announce a new album coming out?The WHOLE thing wasn't a calculated plan, but it certainly was a lucky coincidence for the band. I'm quite certain Brian would have been able to secure a more "commercially appealing" line-up if he'd genuinely tried, but that didn't happen. A big part of that must also be his ego, because it also doesn't allow him to play to smaller audiences as a solo artist. ;) There's no point in advertising the new album because a) very few people are going to buy the new album anyway, and b) Brian gets his kicks (and money) from touring and selling the old albums, and the best way to do both of those is to play the biggest hits live, as close to the original versions as possible... Like happened yesterday. If I may ask YOU something, would you give an honest opinion? Are the Queen songs (as heard yesterday) the best possible versions these people can come up with, or would they benefit from new (less like Queen '86) arrangements? Let's take an example. Brian is going to play the same accompaniment lines over WATC that he has always done, and that's only natural. After all it always has been him. Every guitar line and every drum fill is integral to the composition of the song and are lovely just by themselves. There's no need to change it just because there is a different vocalist over it. And as far as the vocals, Paul is sticking with the melody as he should since it's what defines the song. Just like Brian sticks with Paul Kossoff's lines during the All Right Now solo because that's such an integral part of that tune. |
Knute 28.06.2008 13:05 |
Another thing I believe is that songs live independently from the people that created them. Songs are meant to be eternal long after the mortal coil that gave birth to them has passed on. So Q+PR becomes in effect stewards of the integrity of the songs. People weren't clapping in synchronous fashion because it was Paul Rodgers on stage. It's because of the song and one hundred years from now, long after ALL of us are gone, when Brian's great great great grandchild's band plays WWRY at Hyde Park, the entire audience will clap in time there as well. |
Richard Orchard 28.06.2008 13:25 |
I don't think it was calculated or anything - definitely not by Brian. I think that the band's management / marketing team can't help themselves though... I think that the artist list is a little shallow though. Not that i am a big fan (anymore) but what about Elton John? He is a big AIDS campaigner. I watched most of the show - but i think that they didn't really go deep enough into why AIDS is a big problem in Africa (~25% of South African population are infected). And - perhaps an "explanation" or mini-bio on Nelson Mandela's life. |
Tero 28.06.2008 13:26 |
Knute wrote: I really don't see how they could change the arrangements without making it a completely new song.Let's start with an easier example than WATC... In WWRY during the verse, Paul's vocal sounds a bit flat and monotonous, and lacks the power you would need for those lyrics. On the other hand the adlibs in the chorus are a new idea for Queen (as far as I know), and suit Paul's style really well. The drum fill after the chorus isn't the same as recorded on the album, but it sounds more groovier and more like you would expect from Paul's band. So why not drop the verses altogether and stick the chorus-singalong in a medley somewhere. The song as a whole sounds sloppy, but that would be a VERY good minute. Knute wrote: Let's take an example. Brian is going to play the same accompaniment lines over WATC that he has always done, and that's only natural. After all it always has been him. Every guitar line and every drum fill is integral to the composition of the song and are lovely just by themselves.I know Brian's stuck in a rut with every Queen song, but that's exactly the problem. They can NEVER be the original compositions again with a different singer, so it's absolutely pointless to try replicate the rest perfectly either. Knute wrote: There's no need to change it just because there is a different vocalist over it.No, that's the perfect reason to change it if the new version suits the singer better, and therefore sounds better. Now we can get to WATC. Paul has a nice tone to his voice, but it just doesn't sit in with the piano part of the verse. I say drop the piano part altogether, and sing it acappella, or with minimal synthesiser backing. The build-up to the chorus sounds just about fine as it is, so that can be left alone. The most annoying part about the QPR version of the song is the chorus. Brian and Roger do their best Wembley '86 imitation, but that doesn't fit in with Paul's vocals. As long as Paul keeps singing the lines in his own style, Roger's backing vocals aren't clicking with him very well. It's like one of them is a bar behind or ahead half of the time. Do we need to have the constant backing vocals here at all? Knute wrote: And as far as the vocals, Paul is sticking with the melody as he should since it's what defines the song. Just like Brian sticks with Paul Kossoff's lines during the All Right Now solo because that's such an integral part of that tune.NO, Paul does not stick to the original melody, and that's his style. That's the problem in a nutshell. The Free / Bad Co songs were written with his style in mind, and work perfectly well when Brian and Roger stick to the original lines. Paul doesn't stick to the original melody lines of the Queen songs, so there's very little point for Brian and Roger to do faithful copies either. THAT is what makes them sound like a karaoke/cover band: They have the original "backing tracks" for the Queen songs, but the vocals don't quite seem to match them most of the time. |
Richard Orchard 28.06.2008 13:31 |
Paul has a sort of "R & B" voice, you know, with lots of oohh-ing, etc... Very few artists don't do this sort of thing nowadays. Tragically - i don't really like this "sound". Freddie didn't "R & B" things... So there is a big difference there. |
Tero 28.06.2008 13:43 |
Richard Orchard wrote: Paul has a sort of "R & B" voice, you know, with lots of oohh-ing, etc... Very few artists don't do this sort of thing nowadays. Tragically - i don't really like this "sound". Freddie didn't "R & B" things... So there is a big difference there.Se now we have "rock" songs that were written for Freddie's voice by Queen, and an "R&B" singer to perform them. Something has to change, or it's going to continue as the mismatch it is. I'd say it would be better to change the songs, but if others would rather see them change singer... |
Knute 28.06.2008 14:22 |
Paul does stick with the melody for the most part. The melody is the skeleton and then Paul adds his own muscle tissue ligaments and blood..lol But it's still faithful to the original melody. I would say it's close to 85-90% I mean give me an example on the Mandela performance where he radically changes the melody. |
Tero 28.06.2008 14:41 |
Knute wrote: Paul does stick with the melody for the most part. The melody is the skeleton and then Paul adds his own muscle tissue ligaments and blood..lol But it's still faithful to the original melody. I would say it's close to 85-90% I mean give me an example on the Mandela performance where he radically changes the melody.The example is his "R&Bing", or warbling all around the actual melody... You know, the muscle tissue he adds. If the arrangement of the song doesn't take it into account at all, it ends up sounding very unprofessional in an almost cover-band way. I would say an average karaoke singer in the local pub will stay in melody 90% of the time, and you wouldn't call that a very good performance. ;) |
Bobby_brown 28.06.2008 15:24 |
It was a great show by Q+PR. I really enjoyed it! And if other artists weren't there, maybe they couldn't make it, or weren't invited, or declined it. That's no big deal. Considering the setlist i don't think that they were promoting the new album. Major acts are on tour, or preparing to go on tour, and it's not easy to put them all at the same concert. But i enjoyed it! Take care |
violonbleu 28.06.2008 16:02 |
The most important thing is that they have a good time together, and I'm sure that for many people (as for me) it's perfect, just because QPR are enjoying their music so much. I understand each critic, I find some of them very well explained, but definitely, we can't judge and love at the same time, imo. The problem, maybe, is that I can't help loving what they do... |
Tero 28.06.2008 17:17 |
I'll just add one more comment before leaving this topic until the next performance. ;) Paul's vocal strengths compared to Freddie (I think) are in singing with minimal accompaniment, and singing in harmony with the guitar parts. These are the common things with any of the five Free/Bad Co songs I can remember. :P Any of the harmony parts between vocals and instruments would be instantly lost due to Paul singing differently than Freddie, and additionally Queen songs rely heavily on vocal harmonies and a sort of duet between the vocals and other instruments. (E.g. We Will Rock You, We Are The Champions) Because of what Paul is used to, he has great troubles in keeping his vocal performance within the limits of the original songs. The end result sounds like an unrehearsed mess, just like yesterday. It could be remedied if he sang in a different way, and some of the songs were slightly rearranged. An easy fix would be to choose songs that are better suited to his style of singing. But we all know nothing of the sort is going to happen, and this topic will keep reappearing. ;) |
Major Tom 28.06.2008 17:53 |
Yeah, it was ok. It didn't blow me away and I think they should have rehersed One Vision more than once. |
Knute 28.06.2008 18:24 |
What a load of tosh Tero, but thanks for your input anyways. You make it sound as if he struggles mightily to even keep up, when the truth of the matter is he barely breaks a sweat. Just like he has always done since 1968. If you were REALLY spot on, you would have all kinds people backing you up saying, yeah I think you are right, this sounds like a mess. But that is not what is happening. He sounded fantastic last night. It was a strong performance. You just refuse to appreciate his style applied to Queen material. That's fine. You are certainly not alone, but don't kid yourself that the majority of people who has seen last night's show share your viewpoint. |
Adam Baboolal 28.06.2008 20:13 |
You know, I have to speak up about Paul's singing. Last night, for the first time, I really felt "wow" when I heard him singing the songs I'd heard him do many times before and felt like he was stronger than ever. And I have to agree with Knute's post above. Well put and to the point. Adam. |
kingogre 28.06.2008 20:55 |
Knute wrote: What a load of tosh Tero, but thanks for your input anyways. You make it sound as if he struggles mightily to even keep up, when the truth of the matter is he barely breaks a sweat. Just like he has always done since 1968. If you were REALLY spot on, you would have all kinds people backing you up saying, yeah I think you are right, this sounds like a mess. But that is not what is happening. He sounded fantastic last night. It was a strong performance. You just refuse to appreciate his style applied to Queen material. That's fine. You are certainly not alone, but don't kid yourself that the majority of people who has seen last night's show share your viewpoint.I agree with this. In fact it was Paul who led the band through the performance yesterday. Sure the Queen material sounds different, SMGO had a lot more of a soulful feel something that I actually liked a lot. As far as Im concerned he made the songs his own effortlessly yesterday and the chemistry with his voice and the Queen-sound was fabulous. |
Donna13 28.06.2008 23:50 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: You know, I have to speak up about Paul's singing. Last night, for the first time, I really felt "wow" when I heard him singing the songs I'd heard him do many times before and felt like he was stronger than ever. And I have to agree with Knute's post above. Well put and to the point. Adam.I agree. I also had a "wow" moment when Paul was singing his first few lines of One Vision. I was thinking, "Oh, my gosh, he is amazing." I mean, you realize you are watching one of the best singers ever. |
john bodega 29.06.2008 02:04 |
It's just not to everyone's taste, that's all there is to it. Screwups aside, the real thing here is whether or not you like Paul Rodgers singing Queen music. For example, I think his voice suits One Vision, but I don't like what he does to The Show Must Go On. A lot of the time I get irritated by his endless bluesy trills on the ends of notes, the way it seems like he can't pronounce words properly.. I can appreciate the power behind his voice, obviously. You'd have to be a retard (ie. Treasure Moment) not to. I'm still hanging out for him to sing White Man. Headlong could be interesting, even if people regard it as one of Queen's less spectacular songs. These things often become a different beast when played live... it could work. |
Tero 29.06.2008 15:53 |
Knute wrote: You make it sound as if he struggles mightily to even keep upActually I didn't say anything even remotely like this, but I'll give your effort 3/10 for not calling me any names like most people would. Knute wrote: You are certainly not alone, but don't kid yourself that the majority of people who has seen last night's show share your viewpoint.If we just forget about all the other people who had negative things to say about last nights performance (who are moaning wothout even listening to it, right?), we can conclude that this one actually works both ways. You've heard what, a hundred positive comments (obviously the diehard fans and those are clinging for any chance to see "Queen" live) on a few message boards and suddenly think everyone loves this combination? Like fd loves to say on that other message board where I was run off from a couple of years ago, the vast majority of people just don't care about how the band sounds: they are happy just to hear the Queen songs played live, regardless of the quality. |
Donna13 29.06.2008 15:58 |
Zebonka12 wrote: It's just not to everyone's taste, that's all there is to it. .... A lot of the time I get irritated by his endless bluesy trills on the ends of notes ....Same here. It seemed to me he didn't do that on One Vision. (The Youtube segment is not on my computer right now - so I hope I am right about this.) If he got rid of those bluesy trills on the Queen songs, just think what he could sound like! |
dobo 29.06.2008 16:59 |
to be honest Paul was the best out of the 3 yesterday with Brian been the worst, he fluffed a few riffs e.g One Vision but Paul made the performace for me. It was as though he had been singing these songs since the 70's and the magic is still there !!!!! |
koldweather123 29.06.2008 18:06 |
In terms of the voice, I think Paul did a really good job actually yesterday but One vision did sound a mess, mind you even in 1986 at the start of the magic tour they tended to make a hash of that song sometimes compared with the normal high standards. |
kingogre 29.06.2008 18:14 |
I actually think that Paul has trimmed down his improvisations since the last tour. It is like he has learned how to handle the Queen-material instead of just doing his thing. And thats no small feat considering the difference between his style of singing and his stage personality and Freddies. (Even though they share that amazing ability to make their voice effortlessly suit both extremely beautiful, soulful and rocking songs.) TSMGO is a good example of how far he has come, on the last tour I thought it was a song that would never fit him and on this performance it arguably was the highlight. He still gives the songs his own sound and so makes them sound different and in a new light, with a blues- and souledge which I actually likes a lot. To me it doesnt matter at all to hear to just hear the Queen-songs live again (and remember how awful performances like Amsterdam 2002 were) I just think that the way QPR sounds is f*cking amazing to my ears. |
Cwazy little thing 29.06.2008 18:55 |
kingogre wrote: I actually think that Paul has trimmed down his improvisations since the last tour. It is like he has learned how to handle the Queen-material instead of just doing his thing. And thats no small feat considering the difference between his style of singing and his stage personality and Freddies. (Even though they share that amazing ability to make their voice effortlessly suit both extremely beautiful, soulful and rocking songs.) TSMGO is a good example of how far he has come, on the last tour I thought it was a song that would never fit him and on this performance it arguably was the highlight. He still gives the songs his own sound and so makes them sound different and in a new light, with a blues- and souledge which I actually likes a lot. To me it doesnt matter at all to hear to just hear the Queen-songs live again (and remember how awful performances like Amsterdam 2002 were) I just think that the way QPR sounds is f*cking amazing to my ears.Spot on. This is definately about whether or not you like Paul Rodgers, I genuinely dont think (One Vision aside) you could fault the band the other night- easily the best Ive seen them together, which is a shame since most of the songs were cut down! I think it bodes very well for the tour, and despite what snippets Ive heard of the new material, my expectations for the new album have been raised slightly - because they felt like a real band on Friday. |
Brian_Mays_Wig 29.06.2008 23:45 |
Cwazy little thing wrote:kingogre wrote: I actually think that Paul has trimmed down his improvisations since the last tour. It is like he has learned how to handle the Queen-material instead of just doing his thing. And thats no small feat considering the difference between his style of singing and his stage personality and Freddies. (Even though they share that amazing ability to make their voice effortlessly suit both extremely beautiful, soulful and rocking songs.) TSMGO is a good example of how far he has come, on the last tour I thought it was a song that would never fit him and on this performance it arguably was the highlight. He still gives the songs his own sound and so makes them sound different and in a new light, with a blues- and souledge which I actually likes a lot. To me it doesnt matter at all to hear to just hear the Queen-songs live again (and remember how awful performances like Amsterdam 2002 were) I just think that the way QPR sounds is f*cking amazing to my ears.Spot on. This is definately about whether or not you like Paul Rodgers, I genuinely dont think (One Vision aside) you could fault the band the other night- easily the best Ive seen them together, which is a shame since most of the songs were cut down! I think it bodes very well for the tour, and despite what snippets Ive heard of the new material, my expectations for the new album have been raised slightly - because they felt like a real band on Friday. |
Brian_Mays_Wig 29.06.2008 23:48 |
Brian_Mays_Wig wrote:Because they felt like a real band on friday? Thats pants! With the exception of TSMGO (which sounded like the only song they had rehearsed), this was probably the worst performance Ive seen!Cwazy little thing wrote:kingogre wrote: I actually think that Paul has trimmed down his improvisations since the last tour. It is like he has learned how to handle the Queen-material instead of just doing his thing. And thats no small feat considering the difference between his style of singing and his stage personality and Freddies. (Even though they share that amazing ability to make their voice effortlessly suit both extremely beautiful, soulful and rocking songs.) TSMGO is a good example of how far he has come, on the last tour I thought it was a song that would never fit him and on this performance it arguably was the highlight. He still gives the songs his own sound and so makes them sound different and in a new light, with a blues- and souledge which I actually likes a lot. To me it doesnt matter at all to hear to just hear the Queen-songs live again (and remember how awful performances like Amsterdam 2002 were) I just think that the way QPR sounds is f*cking amazing to my ears.Spot on. This is definately about whether or not you like Paul Rodgers, I genuinely dont think (One Vision aside) you could fault the band the other night- easily the best Ive seen them together, which is a shame since most of the songs were cut down! I think it bodes very well for the tour, and despite what snippets Ive heard of the new material, my expectations for the new album have been raised slightly - because they felt like a real band on Friday. I had very high expectations when the One Vision intro started, a few goosebumps, just like the old days....and then got a swift kick in the bollocks! |
Ken8 30.06.2008 03:28 |
I can only hope this performance was indeed under rehearsed because it was a mess. |
Borhap80 30.06.2008 03:48 |
Dobo wrote: "...with Brian been the worst, he fluffed a few riffs e.g One Vision...". - Ok Dobo, you need your ears checked. Yes he struggled on One Vision. But after that song he played it better than ever. Just listen to the solos in The Show Must Go On, the harmonizing in We are The Champions, and the solo in All Right Now... Brian played brilliantly. And for the set being under-rehearsed? Well... One Vision could certainly been better, but the other songs where brilliant - Best performance of The Show Must Go On i have heard live in any form. In Champions Paul hit all the high notes - even Fred struggled on those. And Allright Now was pure bliss. |
gnomo 30.06.2008 04:05 |
kingogre wrote: I actually think that Paul has trimmed down his improvisations since the last tour. It is like he has learned how to handle the Queen-material instead of just doing his thing. And thats no small feat considering the difference between his style of singing and his stage personality and Freddies.I do agree - One Vision sounded slightly improvised (but then I heard it was a last-minute addition) but on the rest of their set he was brilliant - I am looking forward to the forthcoming tour... |
Cwazy little thing 30.06.2008 06:27 |
Thomas Tønnesen wrote: Dobo wrote: "...with Brian been the worst, he fluffed a few riffs e.g One Vision...". - Ok Dobo, you need your ears checked. Yes he struggled on One Vision. But after that song he played it better than ever. Just listen to the solos in The Show Must Go On, the harmonizing in We are The Champions, and the solo in All Right Now... Brian played brilliantly. And for the set being under-rehearsed? Well... One Vision could certainly been better, but the other songs where brilliant - Best performance of The Show Must Go On i have heard live in any form. In Champions Paul hit all the high notes - even Fred struggled on those. And Allright Now was pure bliss.Im glad some people were hearing the same show as me! As we both said - One Vision aside, a top performance - I really have no idea what some people are saying was bad about the other songs? |
FriedChicken 30.06.2008 08:28 |
I just saw the performance again and I was stunned. I can't believe how good it all sounded. As if Paul has been their singer since 1970! All the songs, even the under-rehearsed One Vision, sounded like All Right Now. With this I mean that Paul has really taken the Queen songs and sings them like it were songs of his own. This was a really great performance. I can't wait to see the 8 concerts I'm going to! |
Dan C. 30.06.2008 11:56 |
Eight? REALLY?! |
maxpower 30.06.2008 13:45 |
for fucks sake just watched it on youtube its not that bad, so what he went to the middle eight instead of the 2nd verse for a second, give Paul Rodgers a break, he's doing a fine job in a difficult spot filling in for one of the all time greats. |
kingogre 30.06.2008 18:03 |
Eight concerts! After seeing the perforamce on Friday I have to say Lucky you! |
john bodega 01.07.2008 02:24 |
I truly think that people hear what they want to hear. There hasn't been an objective post in this thread yet, and I'll probably have to include myself in on that. I thought the show was okay. Only as many flubs as an 80's Queen gig - people who heap excess praise (or vitriol) on it are just being melodramatic. |
Ken8 01.07.2008 03:54 |
Zebonka12 wrote: For example, I think his voice suits One Vision, but I don't like what he does to The Show Must Go On. A lot of the time I get irritated by his endless bluesy trills on the ends of notes, the way it seems like he can't pronounce words properly.. I can appreciate the power behind his voice, obviously. You'd have to be a retard (ie. Treasure Moment) not to.I agree |
Ken8 01.07.2008 03:58 |
Zebonka12 wrote: Only as many flubs as an 80's Queen gig - people who heap excess praise (or vitriol) on it are just being melodramatic.Except Queen in the eighties didn't rely on a teleprompter. |
Sheer Brass Neck 01.07.2008 06:25 |
Zebonka12 wrote: I truly think that people hear what they want to hear. There hasn't been an objective post in this thread yet, and I'll probably have to include myself in on that. I thought the show was okay. Only as many flubs as an 80's Queen gig - people who heap excess praise (or vitriol) on it are just being melodramatic.Amen. Some people think Paul Rodgers put on a show a la Hendrix at Woodstock, others think he's not suitable for American Idol. The show was okay, absolute unmemorable, and as Ken8 said, Queen didn't need teleprompters in the old days. If you're a "this isn't Queen" fan, you'll take that context free comment as an indictment of Paul Rodgers, and if you like the new line-up, you'll defend Paul's use of a teleprompter to the ends of the earth. |
kingogre 01.07.2008 11:13 |
I honestly thought it was fabulous and I am neither a mad teenage-fan nor melodramatic. We all have different opinions and that is simply the way it is. |
Mr Mercury 01.07.2008 11:39 |
FriedChicken wrote: I just saw the performance again and I was stunned. I can't believe how good it all sounded. As if Paul has been their singer since 1970! All the songs, even the under-rehearsed One Vision, sounded like All Right Now. With this I mean that Paul has really taken the Queen songs and sings them like it were songs of his own. This was a really great performance.Thats exactly what my mate Jim - a Free/Bad Company fan - said. He has made those Queen songs into his now, and not been disrespectful of Freddie by trying to copy him completely. |
Mr Mercury 01.07.2008 11:47 |
Ken8 wrote:I would bet there was times when they wished they did rely on one, like when Freddie forgot the words to Bo Rhap in Japan in the 70's or during Radio Ga Ga. There is more but I cant be bothered to look them all out.Zebonka12 wrote: Only as many flubs as an 80's Queen gig - people who heap excess praise (or vitriol) on it are just being melodramatic.Except Queen in the eighties didn't rely on a teleprompter. Also, you will notice that, apart from the mistake with One Vision, Paul never looked at the thing again. |
john bodega 01.07.2008 12:52 |
Ken8 wrote: Except Queen in the eighties didn't rely on a teleprompter.Really quite irrelevant. If Queen had toured in 1964 instead of 1984, they wouldn't have been able to rely on something as commonplace as foldback speakers, either. You've performed on stage before, right? It never hurts to have the lyrics somewhere. It's no different than having the setlist in some convenient place... even if you never look at it, it's still there in case something goes wrong. Since I don't recall seeing any of the band glued (figuratively speaking) to their teleprompters during that last 46664 show, I'm not quite sure how seriously I'm meant to take your post. Ah well! |
TheAmazingEvent 01.07.2008 18:39 |
isn't the whole point with these comments that Pauls voice doesn't go with Queen music mean no matter how good a singer he is Mr Roger's should never have been asked to join the band in the first place. He sings his own stuff great but the R&B bollox he does to Queen really kills the performance for me. As for Mandela concert One Vision was a total balls ups really, otherwise typical QPR. |
Knute 01.07.2008 19:05 |
TheAmazingEvent wrote: isn't the whole point with these comments that Pauls voice doesn't go with Queen music mean no matter how good a singer he is Mr Roger's should never have been asked to join the band in the first place. He sings his own stuff great but the R&B bollox he does to Queen really kills the performance for me. As for Mandela concert One Vision was a total balls ups really, otherwise typical QPR.My whole point is that he sounds great with them. Totally different than Freddie, but that's what I appreciate. So who is right? Me or you? |
TheAmazingEvent 01.07.2008 20:25 |
if you're going to sing Queen sing it in Freddie's style OR rearrange the songs to fit the new voice OR choose another singer (i'm not a paul hater BTW). Jeff Scott Soto did a fine job on his convention recording. |
Ken8 01.07.2008 22:13 |
Zebonka12 wrote:Not so junior. How old do you think the teleprompter system is?Ken8 wrote: Except Queen in the eighties didn't rely on a teleprompter.Really quite irrelevant. |
Ken8 01.07.2008 22:33 |
Mr Mercury wrote:You miss the point. Despite the luxury of a teleprompt, Rodgers still stuffed it up, and what on earth did Brian think he was playing there?Ken8 wrote:I would bet there was times when they wished they did rely on one, like when Freddie forgot the words to Bo Rhap in Japan in the 70's or during Radio Ga Ga. There is more but I cant be bothered to look them all out. Also, you will notice that, apart from the mistake with One Vision, Paul never looked at the thing again.Zebonka12 wrote: Only as many flubs as an 80's Queen gig - people who heap excess praise (or vitriol) on it are just being melodramatic.Except Queen in the eighties didn't rely on a teleprompter. Look, I watched it again last night and it's not too bad at all, "One Vision" must've put me in a bad mood!......but I wish they'd change the setlist a bit for these type of events. I'm starting to fear they could become a little cliched, if not already. "Show Must Go On" is one of my all time favourite songs, but it should go from the setlist for these type of events. I know Brian wrote most of it, but it is such a "Freddie song" and it sucks the joy out of the show. They also decided to play it on the VH1 Rock Honors show and it virtually killed proceedings there too. In such a short set, do you need it AND "Champions"?? Especially when "WWRY" & "Champions" MUST be performed at every appearance. What really sent it home for me was the audience's response to "All Right Now" They went nuts. Surely there's more to the back catalogue that's a bit more accessable and just plain "fun" that could be dragged out from time to time. Having said that, it was a nice touch by Roger Taylor to come dressed as Freddie in the "I Want It All" video as a tribute. Andrea Corr's top was a nice touch too. Did I see a nipple? |
john bodega 01.07.2008 23:27 |
Ken8 wrote: Not so junior. How old do you think the teleprompter system is?Don't junior me, grand-dad! Loudspeakers are way older than purpose built foldback speakers, the same way we've had teleprompters in one form or another since long before 1986. That doesn't mean that bands made common use of them at the time. Who would bother, back then, to set up one of those clunky things? It's different now. I can't say I could avoid putting my foot through one of the damned things if I saw one on stage, but having a screen with words on it is heaps easier now than it was then. I'm sure someone will seize on this as proof that Paul, Brian and Roger should retire, but - come on, they're of 'a certain age' now. They might forget which limo to get into, nevermind the lyrics to some songs. Hah. I do agree that they could work on the setlist a bit, though. Show Must Go On is much too dirge-like, the way they're playing it. It's never been the most cheerful of songs, admittedly. |
Knute 01.07.2008 23:57 |
TheAmazingEvent wrote: if you're going to sing Queen sing it in Freddie's style OR rearrange the songs to fit the new voice OR choose another singer (i'm not a paul hater BTW). Jeff Scott Soto did a fine job on his convention recording.This whole notion "re-arrange it to fit his voice" is a complete load of crap(no offense). Imagine how pissed off the detractors would really get if they went monkeying with the arrangements of the songs. What do you suggest? Should Miranda play a Larry Graham style pop and slap bass line over everything? Should they flavor TSMGO with a disco beat Should they change the 4/4 meter of WWRY into a waltz? Should they nab the Pips from Gladys Knight and have them interject horn-like vocal oohhs and ahhs to everything? I mean it's just straight-up a stupid idea. If Paul's voice was really that much of a mismatch and that out of whack with the sensibilities of this music, people would fucking boo and hiss. So in other words it's just a highly subjective perception on your part because you don't like his style over it. You don't like a blusey-flavor added to Queen music. He's a great rock vocalist and Queen plays rock music, so it sounds great to my ears(and many other's ears as well) I do NOT want a person who approximates Freddie up there with Brian and Roger. That would be completely tacky and in bad taste. I guarantee you that most of the people who aren't keen on Q+PR would cum in their pants if Gary Mullin was on stage with Bri and ROg Because that's what they want. That's understandable but that is why bands like One Night Of Queen exist. They fill that need so Brain and Roger are then free to take the music into a new direction which in comparison is ultimately far more respectful to Freddie then getting a clone of him up there. As far as JSS, I've watched clips of him at the Queen conventions and it does nothing for me, and by the looks of the crowd it doesn't do much for them either. He's close enough towards Freddie's approach without the wonderful tone and warmth that it's actually dull. I'd much rather see One Night of Queen. The payoff would be greater. There's a reason Brian and Roger hesitated and eventually backed off from doing anything with JSS. |
Tero 02.07.2008 03:05 |
Knute wrote: I do NOT want a person who approximates Freddie up there with Brian and Roger. That would be completely tacky and in bad taste.No, what you want is Brian and Roger playing the original backing tracks like a karaoke machine, and Paul singing on top of that... To me that's tacky and in bad taste, not to mention disrespectful to everyone currently and previously involved with the songs. |
kingogre 02.07.2008 03:52 |
Tero wrote: To me that's tacky and in bad taste, not to mention disrespectful to everyone currently and previously involved with the songs.No one of them agrees with you though. |
Tero 02.07.2008 04:54 |
kingogre wrote:Well thank god my opinion has nothing to do with any of those guys!Tero wrote: To me that's tacky and in bad taste, not to mention disrespectful to everyone currently and previously involved with the songs.No one of them agrees with you though. It's also great that on this website I can post opinions that are contrary to the gospel of Brian and Roger. |
Adam Baboolal 02.07.2008 05:30 |
This is starting to get ridiculous Tero. Calling what Brian and Roger play, "backing tracks"?? That's just wrong. There's no argument, it's just plain insulting without good reasoning behind it. If that's what they (Queen+PR) like and (lest we forget) that's the way the songs go anyway, what's the problem? There isn't one. It simply comes down to who likes listening to Queen after 1991. They've been onto this stuff for the last 4 years now so, if you don't like it, why keep coming back to trash whatever they do, here? I just don't get that. It's as annoying as a stepford jumping up and down happily at everything they do. You are the Smith to the Stepfords' Neo! I guess, you're here to create "balance". Well, I dunno, I'm starting to get bored of these people who have nothing good to say...ever. Adam. |
Tero 02.07.2008 05:49 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: Calling what Brian and Roger play, "backing tracks"?? That's just wrong. There's no argument, it's just plain insulting without good reasoning behind it. If that's what they (Queen+PR) like and (lest we forget) that's the way the songs go anyway, what's the problem?How is it wrong, when it's a perfect description of what they are doing. They set out to play the tracks as they've always been done, with no room for creativity. They even go out of their way to play only the biggest hits, regardless of whether they suit the current band. That's what karaoke tracks do. That's what cover bands do. It only becomes insulting when the vocal majority of Queen fans cry out in the bands defence at any dissenting opinion. Perhaps there's a bit of overcompensation coming from the fact that I might actually have a point? Adam Baboolal wrote: It simply comes down to who likes listening to Queen after 1991.No, that's a whole different argument. Adam Baboolal wrote: They've been onto this stuff for the last 4 years now so, if you don't like it, why keep coming back to trash whatever they do, here? I just don't get that.As an equal member of this community, I like to discuss the matters that interest me. Is that so hard to believe? And it's not a question of hating everything they do. It's a question of liking some of the bits they do (the Free / Bad Co songs), and recognising the potential for improvement in some of the other bits. I come here to have a civilised discussion about the merits and flaws of the pair of people who are calling themselves Queen. Unfortunately it seems there isn't much discussion to be had, as about 95% of the messages seem to be "QPR kicked ass, One Vision will be great once they rehearse it" with no deeper thoughts anywhere near. Adam Baboolal wrote: It's as annoying as a stepford jumping up and down happily at everything they do. You are the Smith to the Stepfords' Neo! I guess, you're here to create "balance". Well, I dunno, I'm starting to get bored of these people who have nothing good to say...ever. Adam.The problem here isn't that I'm constantly complaining about everything. The problem is that people like "you" who moan about me pick and choose the bits of my messages they want to, and ignore the rest. A few paragraphs above I just aknowledged that Paul's material sounds good, and even said that there is potential in the Queen songs. Does that sound like I have nothing good to say? Does that sound like the polar opposite of the stepford fans who haven't said anything besides "QPR rocked Hyde Park"? |
kingogre 02.07.2008 06:33 |
There are actually lots of people here who thinks QPR are great and want to talk about what they do. It is tiresome to never be able to do that cause the same few people keep repeating the same few arguments no matter what is said in return to them. Of course it is your right to express your opinion but try to do it in a respectful way. It isnt the rest of us who constantly keeps crossing the line with harsh language, nasty remarks, provocations or quite frankly insults to the bandmembers for that matter. Doing that and on the same time trying to make yourself appear like some kind of martyr is weird. Especially when all you seem to want to do is pick a fight. |
Tero 02.07.2008 07:08 |
kingogre wrote: There are actually lots of people here who thinks QPR are great and want to talk about what they do. It is tiresome to never be able to do that cause the same few people keep repeating the same few arguments no matter what is said in return to them. Of course it is your right to express your opinion but try to do it in a respectful way. It isnt the rest of us who constantly keeps crossing the line with harsh language, nasty remarks, provocations or quite frankly insults to the bandmembers for that matter. Doing that and on the same time trying to make yourself appear like some kind of martyr is weird. Especially when all you seem to want to do is pick a fight.How is a message from me stopping you from posting? I can ignore posts I don't want to answer to (and posters I don't want to read), and surely you must have that same ability? Here's the thing... My opinions about the band are no more negative or extreme than your opinions about my posts. We'll both see what we want to see, and your description of my(?) posts could just as easily be interpreted as picking a fight. You do understand that, don't you? |
kingogre 02.07.2008 08:07 |
Everytime a new topic is started it ends up with the same "its not Queen"- or "Brian/Roger/Paul is crap"-discussion. Why never just discuss it for what it is. Personally I think its great. I find it somewhat insulting that my opinion, that I know is shared by lots and lots of people, is constantly being down-graded by others, not specifically referring to you, who say "these stepford-fans will praise anything that Brian and Roger do", "theyre biased", "theyre hysterical teenage-fans" or even "they hate Freddie" or "theyre stupid" as Ive read somewhere on this board. The same goes with those who say that Brian, Roger and John are only mediocre musicians who has got Freddie to thank for everything theyve ever achieved. To me it is like saying that those of us who love the songs theyve written, their musicianship and their solo-records as well as Freddies has an inferior taste in music. Im not trying to pick a fight with you in any way, Im just saying how I feel about this discussion. No hard feelings from my side at all. Take care anyway!:) |
Tero 02.07.2008 08:24 |
I don't have any hard feelings about you either, I'm just saying what the situation is. Why don't we take this topic as an example of discussion here at QZ. There are a few "QPR sucks" and a few dozen "QPR is great" messages. The dissenting opinions haven't stopped the discussion at all. What's stopped it is that 90% of the people don't seem to be able to write more than 10 word replies, or to elaborate on their views at all. |
john bodega 02.07.2008 11:03 |
Tero wrote: What's stopped it is that 90% of the people don't seem to be able to write more than 10 word replies, or to elaborate on their views at all.I dunno, a bit of eloquence never hurt anyone. Imagine if we all wrote like Yara. |
Daniel Nester 02.07.2008 11:57 |
Were there backup singers onstage? I thought I saw a trio of ladies clapping with mics in front of themselves. Or maybe I was hallucinating. Also: Richard mentioned a lack of A-listers. Amy Winehouse, love her or hate her, is about as A-list as one can get these days. |
Daniel Nester 02.07.2008 11:58 |
Also: Anyone pick up the Miranda flub in All Right Now? Just before the second verse, he went into the bass break. Maybe they were thinking of abbreviating that song as well? |
Mr Mercury 02.07.2008 14:33 |
Daniel Nester wrote: Also: Anyone pick up the Miranda flub in All Right Now? Just before the second verse, he went into the bass break. Maybe they were thinking of abbreviating that song as well?Quite a few of us noticed it. |
kingogre 02.07.2008 14:49 |
Tero wrote: I don't have any hard feelings about you either, I'm just saying what the situation is. Why don't we take this topic as an example of discussion here at QZ. There are a few "QPR sucks" and a few dozen "QPR is great" messages. The dissenting opinions haven't stopped the discussion at all. What's stopped it is that 90% of the people don't seem to be able to write more than 10 word replies, or to elaborate on their views at all.I have to say i kind of agree with you on that one, that is probably the reason way the same arguments keep turning up everywhere these last few years. But everyone has the right to post whatever they like as long as it is respectful and not racist, homophobic etc of course. I guess this is just something we have to learn to deal with on these meaasge boards.:) Ive read your remarks about the Hyde Park gig on another place and now know that you generally give good motivations to your opinions and that you really look up on things before making up your mind. I think it is very nice that we can have this discussion in a civilized manner like we are now:) Sincerely all the best! |
TheAmazingEvent 02.07.2008 15:07 |
Brian & Roger are fab musicians - no question Paul is a great blues singer - no question The styles don't match up that well quite often and it's a damn shame, his habit of singing almost off time is annoying to me. What i'll say to the QPR are great people who seem to think the 'haters' are a minority is have you seen the poll result on the home page? Speaks volumes. |
Tero 02.07.2008 15:07 |
The best to you as well, and for the band as well, as long as that good future demonstrates the creativity and talent of all the people involved. |
YourValentine 03.07.2008 03:58 |
The weird thing about One Vision was to hear Freddie's voice in the intro, very much like in the chorus of WWRY on the 2005 tour which came from tape, too. Also - why does Spike Edney act like he is playing keyboards to TSMGO when it obviously comes from tape (and why from tape??)? When he acts he should at least act in sync. I liked the performance but I agree with everybody who says that it's getting boring to hear the same old 3 songs all the time on such events. |
Mr Mercury 03.07.2008 06:13 |
TheAmazingEvent wrote: What i'll say to the QPR are great people who seem to think the 'haters' are a minority is have you seen the poll result on the home page? Speaks volumes.No it doesnt speak volumes. Why? Because unfortunately it is (or was - maybe Richard has sorted that problem out now) very easily rigged. I for one have voted several times on it (I dont bother with these things nowadays). |
Ken8 03.07.2008 06:38 |
Zebonka12 wrote:You whippersnapper!Ken8 wrote: Not so junior. How old do you think the teleprompter system is?Don't junior me, grand-dad! |
Harry_queenrecordings 03.07.2008 06:49 |
To hear 2 or 3 old songs over and over again on such big events can maybe get boring indeed for us as Queenfans, but as long the audience is getting wild and thrilled then they will do it. It probably seems to work everytime. |
Sheer Brass Neck 03.07.2008 11:09 |
Harry_queenbootlegs wrote: To hear 2 or 3 old songs over and over again on such big events can maybe get boring indeed for us as Queenfans, but as long the audience is getting wild and thrilled then they will do it. It probably seems to work everytime.And there's the conundrum of the whole argument for QPR lovers and people who are accused of being QPR haters. The lovers talk about what an awesome performance it was, if it was the same performance I watched, I didn't see a whole lot of wild and thrilled fans. They seemed pretty subdued, and though it's hard to get a read on the energy level while watching a concert on TV, it seemed very run-of-the-mill to me. Must make me a hater. |
Cwazy little thing 03.07.2008 11:30 |
Harry_queenbootlegs wrote: To hear 2 or 3 old songs over and over again on such big events can maybe get boring indeed for us as Queenfans, but as long the audience is getting wild and thrilled then they will do it. It probably seems to work everytime.The fact is they will always always always play WWRY, WATC and probably Allright now and TSMGO at these sorts of things for a number of sensible reasons. The first three of those are, Bo Rap aside, Queen's best known tracks and Paul's best known track, and at such an event with a short set and an audience who arent necessarily the sort of Queen fans we all are bands know that to go down well they have to cater to that audience and play the best known stuff that they are expected to. The show would bomb if they had played White Queen, Football Fight and Machines, as delighted/curious/shocked as the rest of us may have been as to how those sounded! TSMGO gets a look in everytime because its been made clear it's Paul's favourite Queen track, and he probably feels he can give a more impressive performance on something he's really into, and the guys are probably still excited to be able to play it live, as opposed to Now Im Here or something else they ran through a million times with Freddie. I think One Vision was an attempt to play something no one was expecting, but which was ideal for the occasion, and fair play to them - now they've just got to learn to play it right. Finally, just to repsond to Tero's comments above, respectfully, I have to disagree about how much the guys are/should change Queen tracks to suit Paul. Its a matter of opinion whether the two styles mix well, and my feeling is that they do, and produce an interesting result already. Furthermore, I dont think that Queen need to change their songs very much at all in style to suit Paul: Paul's songs are essentially the same, just with a "Queen" sound to them, just as the Queen tracks are essentially the same just with a "Paul Rodgers" sound to them. Changing the style of a song is an incredibly difficult thing to do if you're talking about major changes, and I disagree they are just going through the motions and playing everything exactly as they used to anyway: The addition of a second guitar and more backing vocals have altered the sound of some tracks particularly if you ask me, and on things like WATC frees Brian up to play the lead bits similarly to the record whilst maintaining the thicker sound - to me this sounds very different from the Freddie era, and unlike any version of the song, studio recorded or otherwise. Those BV's also create a new feel which is difficult to describe. I dont just accept these things because its Queen, and Im by no means a "stepford", I just happen to like it! |
YourValentine 03.07.2008 12:56 |
Cwazy little thing wrote: The fact is they will always always always play WWRY, WATC and probably Allright now and TSMGO at these sorts of things for a number of sensible reasons. The first three of those are, Bo Rap aside, Queen's best known tracks and Paul's best known track, and at such an event with a short set and an audience who arent necessarily the sort of Queen fans we all are bands know that to go down well they have to cater to that audience and play the best known stuff that they are expected to. The show would bomb if they had played White Queen, Football Fight and Machines, as delighted/curious/shocked as the rest of us may have been as to how those sounded!Sorry but now I have to disagree respectfully :) Playing these same 3 songs again and again and again makes them look like these poor one-hit wonders who play the same song their whole life because otherwise nobody would know who is on the stage. This is not the case for Brian, Roger or Paul Rodgers, they are big stars and really do not need to cater to an uneducated audience. Just look at Brian's appearance in the Wembley Arena with McFly in 2006: it was a teenaged audience and the reception was exceptional. I think Brian had not heard so much screaming since Japan in the 70s. Or look at Tromsoe 2005, another 46664 concert. Brian played with Jivan Gasparyan and with Zucchero, the audience was thrilled although he did not perform any Queen stuff at all. He is Brian May, for heaven's sake. They are big stars and excellent musicians, they should do something more artistically challenging. The crowds are not that stupid, they would certainly appreciate it. |
Cwazy little thing 03.07.2008 15:24 |
YourValentine wrote:Oh, I absolutely agree that its more interesting when something like the Tromsoe appearance from Brian happens, and Im not saying that a lot of people dont know the most of the tracks on Greatest Hits 1 and 2, cos they do - this is Queen after all. The Mcfly thing is down to the fact that DSMN is still big with younger people today and those people are aware its a Queen track, so it was a big deal for Brian to appear with Mcfly to do that. Do you honestly think the Tromsoe crowd wouldnt have gone even wilder though for a Queen set?Cwazy little thing wrote: The fact is they will always always always play WWRY, WATC and probably Allright now and TSMGO at these sorts of things for a number of sensible reasons. The first three of those are, Bo Rap aside, Queen's best known tracks and Paul's best known track, and at such an event with a short set and an audience who arent necessarily the sort of Queen fans we all are bands know that to go down well they have to cater to that audience and play the best known stuff that they are expected to. The show would bomb if they had played White Queen, Football Fight and Machines, as delighted/curious/shocked as the rest of us may have been as to how those sounded!Sorry but now I have to disagree respectfully :) Playing these same 3 songs again and again and again makes them look like these poor one-hit wonders who play the same song their whole life because otherwise nobody would know who is on the stage. This is not the case for Brian, Roger or Paul Rodgers, they are big stars and really do not need to cater to an uneducated audience. Just look at Brian's appearance in the Wembley Arena with McFly in 2006: it was a teenaged audience and the reception was exceptional. I think Brian had not heard so much screaming since Japan in the 70s. Or look at Tromsoe 2005, another 46664 concert. Brian played with Jivan Gasparyan and with Zucchero, the audience was thrilled although he did not perform any Queen stuff at all. He is Brian May, for heaven's sake. They are big stars and excellent musicians, they should do something more artistically challenging. The crowds are not that stupid, they would certainly appreciate it. What Im really getting at is that your average person at one of these events who may not have ever seen Queen before is likely to feel a bit short changed if during a 20 min set they didnt get the WWRY and WATC experience. Even as a serious fan, if I hadnt seen them at Manchester in 2005, Id be slightly disappointed not to get both of those if Id been there the other night. As it was, Id have been delighted to see Dragon Attack, White Queen (which Id love them to play this tour instead of Magic or IWTBF) and Fire and Water or suchlike - but Ive seen them before and realistically you know what to expect from short sets - a greatest hits compliation: the crowd just wants to go wild for the big numbers, do that hand clapping and the swaying etc. Marvelling at the Brian's clever use of delays and sweet tone during the wonderful solo in White Queen (you know, like when they played it in the 70's) is for a proper, full length Queen show. :) Hope you're having a nice evening. |
YourValentine 03.07.2008 19:45 |
I don't know how the Tromsoe audience would have responded to Queen material. They responded well to Brian's contribution, it was a magical night and one of my all time favourite Brian moments. It was appropriate and I don't see that so much in last week's Wembley performance. One Vision was a great choice but TYMD??? I mean it was Nelson Mandela's 90th birthday and an AIDS charity event, songs like TYMD and WWRY just do not quite fit, it has something compulsive to play them again and again no matter in which context. I understand the crowd pleasing aspect and maybe they were a bit discouraged by the not so great reception of 46664 material like "The Call" but they have so much more to offer. In a normal concert it does not matter if they play the WWRY/WATC routine, you have 20 more songs so it's not a problem. It won't bother me a bit on the upcoming tour. |
rhyeking 03.07.2008 19:56 |
test |
Sheer Brass Neck 03.07.2008 20:58 |
"Marvelling at the Brian's clever use of delays and sweet tone during the wonderful solo in White Queen (you know, like when they played it in the 70's) is for a proper, full length Queen show." Except on the last tour the set list was pretty similar to the previous two tours. Queen plays first and foremost to their singles fans. People always say, "if they played White Queen, Long Away, She Makes Me, etc.", no one would react. Great! If they're artists, do something artistic! Brian played a snippet of Long Away last tour. I think he, of all people, has no idea how much some of those old gems mean to people. He'll play Last horizon, which has no emotional connnection to most Queen fans because he likes it, but can't pull anything that we've heard a million times to put in a nugget each show. No one is asking for a set of totally obscure, never before played songs, just a bone thrown their way once in a while. |
Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira 03.07.2008 22:19 |
YourValentine wrote: [...] Tromsoe [...] was a magical night and one of my all time favourite Brian moments. [...]Agreed! Cheers, Ogre- |
Cwazy little thing 04.07.2008 08:09 |
Sheer Brass Neck wrote: "Marvelling at the Brian's clever use of delays and sweet tone during the wonderful solo in White Queen (you know, like when they played it in the 70's) is for a proper, full length Queen show." Except on the last tour the set list was pretty similar to the previous two tours. Queen plays first and foremost to their singles fans. People always say, "if they played White Queen, Long Away, She Makes Me, etc.", no one would react. Great! If they're artists, do something artistic! Brian played a snippet of Long Away last tour. I think he, of all people, has no idea how much some of those old gems mean to people. He'll play Last horizon, which has no emotional connnection to most Queen fans because he likes it, but can't pull anything that we've heard a million times to put in a nugget each show. No one is asking for a set of totally obscure, never before played songs, just a bone thrown their way once in a while.Again - I definately agree - I dont think Brian is aware of how happy he'd make most of the people here and many others if they delved a little deeper for their set lists. That said - last time out was their first tour in 19 years, so a greatest hits set was always likely, Im hopeful that this time out we might get something a bit more special here and there, although understandably that may be difficult seeing as they have to include new material as well. Last time out they gradually started being a bit bolder with the set, although it never got to a point where there was anything truly special in there, you know, first Long Away got a brief airing, then Under Pressure snuck in, then Dragon Attack, and they went a bit further with Paul's stuff as well - Fire and Water, Rock n Roll Fantasy. Its quite possible Brian and Roger dont look upon their less successful very early output with the same reverence we do - maybe they see it as their formative days before they really got it right? |
Daniel Nester 04.07.2008 11:12 |
I can see them playing only the hit songs at a thing like the 46664 concert, but I totally agree they ought to vary the set lists much much more than they do now -- which is not at all. Brian's recent response post that there will not be two different set lists for some upcoming gigs is disappointing. My guess is that Paul Rodgers wants to do different songs, while Bri and Roger not so much? The "Red House" rendition on the close of the North American tour was all PR, right? I would love to hear them just PLAY. |
Daniel Nester 04.07.2008 11:28 |
I can see them playing only the hit songs at a thing like the 46664 concert, but I totally agree they ought to vary the set lists much much more than they do now -- which is not at all. Brian's recent response post that there will not be two different set lists for some upcoming gigs is disappointing. My guess is that Paul Rodgers wants to do different songs, while Bri and Roger not so much? The "Red House" rendition on the close of the North American tour was all PR, right? I would love to hear them just PLAY. |
Ken8 07.07.2008 23:25 |
YourValentine wrote:Cwazy little thing wrote: The fact is they will always always always play WWRY, WATC and probably Allright now and TSMGO at these sorts of things for a number of sensible reasons.Look at the 46664 audience response to the Queen numbers, going through the motions mostly. Then look at their reaction to "All Right Now"...strangely they go nuts in a way they didn't for the Queen numbers. |
12yrslouetta 14.07.2008 17:48 |
i was fortunate to go the gig, the tickets were free so it was all good. And i got to hear Mr Mandela speak so you cant top that, and i thought eddy grant was great. The funny thing about queen now is is that most of the songs are like folklore and everyone immediately knows them, so when they hit the stage it turned into a huge karaoke. Everyone already knew the words, everybody already knew the hand actions so it didnt seem to matter whether Queen were good or not. Didnt matter whether mistakes were made or not either. I think paul rodgers is a great singer and he sings the songs fine but he has very little stage presence. I dont mean that as a bad thing, its just that it allows the crowd to settle back and sing the songs that theyve known all their life without having to take much notice of the stage. Thats what it seemed to me at the time anyway. He didnt really bring any visual performance if you know what i mean. On the whole I thought they were, erm, ok but that didnt really matter cos everyone was singing all the words and looking at each other and smiling. I dont know if anybody else went but i got the feeling they could have but on the greatest hits cd and the reaction would have been the same. |