QueenZone discussion #1129643

AmeriQueen wrote: Before I list reasons why, I just want to first say that I NEVER had any problem with Queen + Paul Rodgers prior to the Cosmos Rocks album. Here are my reasons for turning on the use of Queen in their label: 1. It doesn't sound as much like Queen as it does Paul Rodgers doing a cover album with guest cameos by Brian May and supposedley Roger Taylor. I hear Traveling Wilbury's, Stevie Ray Vaughn-ish country like here in Texas(which is exactly what I like in Queen's total opposite style of sound, and I hear bits of Free and Bad Company and The Firm with Queen's illegible fingerprints lightly touching small bits of certain songs. Good or bad it would be Queen if only it was loaded with harmonic vocals, tight drumming ala RT, and bukoos of Red Special/Deacy Amp sounds. 2. The Hitman, Pain Is So Close To Pleasure, Friends Will Be Friends, Mustapha and Don't Try Suicide are Dylan-esque lyrical poetry in comparison with "Still Burnin, Still Yearnin.... Rock'n'Roll Never Dies..... I Want to be a face on TV..... Call Me if you need my love..... You got my number, you got my name.... etc..." DUMB lyrics worse than Roger Taylor's cheesiest solo song. 3. By promoting the band Queen + Paul Rodgers on tour you get a wider audience expecting all the token classics from Crazy Little Thing to Bites the Dust to WWRY to We are the Champions to Bo Rhap. Had they chosen an original name like The Firm was chosen, then the die hards would still fill the seats enough to make a fat profit, and the original entity advertised could populate PR and Queen classics for true fans without the obligation to supply anymore than the traditional Brighton Rock solo and a majority of classic songs, preferably for the real fans and i'd imagine for the band's preference in what they play these songs could be It's Late, White Man, Prophet's Song, The Night Comes Down, Long Away, etc... 4. All this will do to ignorant music fans acquainted with Queen is justify their shallow arguments that Freddie was Queen and that BM and RT don't carry enough stature to give the name credit. The sad thing here is that Another World, Back to the Light, Fun In Space - Electric Fire(minus some Cross songs) and even Smile do the Queen name so much more justice than this appears early on to offer. 5. Queen will cash in aa bit on the name and end up tarnishing it pretty bad in terms of when the + is associated, and it will be a legitimate case of musical false advertising regardless of who is with Paul Rodgers. The sound is a very generic based copycat obviousness to a bunch of non-Queen styles using a very minor Queen influence that's half of what either one of the two Queen members use on their own when solo. The desperate appearance of a band cashing in on old glory to pave lesser material is not something cool to see happen to men whose own name has branded several of the greatest rock albums which were solo or at the very least dominated by the individual. 6. The very essence of Queen music was always to be clever, witty, creative and original, taking ideas at times but always disguising them well within the vastly broad Queen sound. Now I hear obvious copy cat versions of songs I didn't like long before with the original, or didn't think it had a Queen potential within it's use, nor could I ever have seen Queen covering such lower material, nor does it sound like they wanted to make a creative piece of music. 7. The saddest thing about this is how easily fixable it would be for them to correct most of the problem by further working on some of the simple songs, while replacing others potentially with the Runaway cover they teased us about, a studio version of Take Love which was awesome, a studio cover of any 1 or 2 queen songs that could use a PR new version such as Hammer To Fall's slower version or a blues friendly remake of Doing Alright, White Man, Sleeping on the Sidewalk or even Queen's sound fronted by the Red Special taking a stab at Rock N' Roll Fantasy or Wishing Well. 8. Last but not least is the simple fact that all the defending myself and a lot of you did with Queen being attacked under BM and RT only, plus the additional new entitiy, has all been given a huge shot in the face by all the doubters and pessimistic losers out there. I now find myself strangely regarding the Cosmos Rocks collaboration with the shocking resurection band that blew my mind 3 concerts around 2 to 3 years back. Now I see the union as primarily a result of Rodgers awesome voice and unique blues vocal style mixing with Queen songs while Queen made good of mostly Bad Company songs which turns out to be that voice having worked with a oh so Queen-like Mick Phelps on guitar, formerly of Mott the Hoople, the band Queen first toured with and opened for exclusively after following it up as a headliner infinitely greater than ol' Mott.

AmeriQueen wrote: Before I list reasons why, I just want to first say that I NEVER had any problem with Queen + Paul Rodgers prior to the Cosmos Rocks album. Here are my reasons for turning on the use of Queen in their label: 1. It doesn't sound as much like Queen as it does Paul Rodgers doing a cover album with guest cameos by Brian May and supposedley Roger Taylor. I hear Traveling Wilbury's, Stevie Ray Vaughn-ish country like here in Texas(which is exactly what I like in Queen's total opposite style of sound, and I hear bits of Free and Bad Company and The Firm with Queen's illegible fingerprints lightly touching small bits of certain songs. Good or bad it would be Queen if only it was loaded with harmonic vocals, tight drumming ala RT, and bukoos of Red Special/Deacy Amp sounds. 2. The Hitman, Pain Is So Close To Pleasure, Friends Will Be Friends, Mustapha and Don't Try Suicide are Dylan-esque lyrical poetry in comparison with "Still Burnin, Still Yearnin.... Rock'n'Roll Never Dies..... I Want to be a face on TV..... Call Me if you need my love..... You got my number, you got my name.... etc..." DUMB lyrics worse than Roger Taylor's cheesiest solo song. 3. By promoting the band Queen + Paul Rodgers on tour you get a wider audience expecting all the token classics from Crazy Little Thing to Bites the Dust to WWRY to We are the Champions to Bo Rhap. Had they chosen an original name like The Firm was chosen, then the die hards would still fill the seats enough to make a fat profit, and the original entity advertised could populate PR and Queen classics for true fans without the obligation to supply anymore than the traditional Brighton Rock solo and a majority of classic songs, preferably for the real fans and i'd imagine for the band's preference in what they play these songs could be It's Late, White Man, Prophet's Song, The Night Comes Down, Long Away, etc... 4. All this will do to ignorant music fans acquainted with Queen is justify their shallow arguments that Freddie was Queen and that BM and RT don't carry enough stature to give the name credit. The sad thing here is that Another World, Back to the Light, Fun In Space - Electric Fire(minus some Cross songs) and even Smile do the Queen name so much more justice than this appears early on to offer. 5. Queen will cash in aa bit on the name and end up tarnishing it pretty bad in terms of when the + is associated, and it will be a legitimate case of musical false advertising regardless of who is with Paul Rodgers. The sound is a very generic based copycat obviousness to a bunch of non-Queen styles using a very minor Queen influence that's half of what either one of the two Queen members use on their own when solo. The desperate appearance of a band cashing in on old glory to pave lesser material is not something cool to see happen to men whose own name has branded several of the greatest rock albums which were solo or at the very least dominated by the individual. 6. The very essence of Queen music was always to be clever, witty, creative and original, taking ideas at times but always disguising them well within the vastly broad Queen sound. Now I hear obvious copy cat versions of songs I didn't like long before with the original, or didn't think it had a Queen potential within it's use, nor could I ever have seen Queen covering such lower material, nor does it sound like they wanted to make a creative piece of music. 7. The saddest thing about this is how easily fixable it would be for them to correct most of the problem by further working on some of the simple songs, while replacing others potentially with the Runaway cover they teased us about, a studio version of Take Love which was awesome, a studio cover of any 1 or 2 queen songs that could use a PR new version such as Hammer To Fall's slower version or a blues friendly remake of Doing Alright, White Man, Sleeping on the Sidewalk or even Queen's sound fronted by the Red Special taking a stab at Rock N' Roll Fantasy or Wishing Well. 8. Last but not least is the simple fact that all the defending myself and a lot of you did with Queen being attacked under BM and RT only, plus the additional new entitiy, has all been given a huge shot in the face by all the doubters and pessimistic losers out there. I now find myself strangely regarding the Cosmos Rocks collaboration with the shocking resurection band that blew my mind 3 concerts around 2 to 3 years back. Now I see the union as primarily a result of Rodgers awesome voice and unique blues vocal style mixing with Queen songs while Queen made good of mostly Bad Company songs which turns out to be that voice having worked with a oh so Queen-like Mick Phelps on guitar, formerly of Mott the Hoople, the band Queen first toured with and opened for exclusively after following it up as a headliner infinitely greater than ol' Mott.

AmeriQueen wrote: You didn't like it? Wilderness Child, Why Don't We Try Again, On My Way Up, the riff from China Girl.... I loved that album.