| david (galashiels) 07.11.2010 17:45 |
was the ,cosmos rocks,promoted enough?. what did we have,one single(cleb),not enough. maybe if they promoted songs more it would have appealed to a wider audiance. there was a time when an album was released there would be 2 or 3 singles from it. i feel that if the album had more tv coverage it would have been better. what did we get.all murray(like him but needed more exposure). the ocasional mention on radio(radio 2 album of the week). as a group,band,project.it could have been projected to the public more. a band such as queen or queen+paul could have had more exposure on national tv and radio. emi and q,productions did not do enough to advertise and push this album to the general public. i loved the album from a queen fan point of view,and feel if they had publicised it more that queen+paul could have gone on to bigger things. ok the tour was a sell out(i think),but more was needed to promote the album songs. hell ,the cosmos rocks , warboys ,and still burnin,were classic album songs that needed single releases. in a time of uk record(or cd)sales,reclining.what would be a better time for emi to say,,,,,, ok here it is,from one of the biggest band ever to come from the uk,queen and the legend that is paul rodgers.. that would have been easy for them to say........ but?????????? a wee bit of advertising,a single song,and a tour that was at best advertised a very few times on tv or raadio,. cmon emi.queen productions.and who ever was involved in this,...you should have pulled your f.....g finger out and went for glory. you treated some rock legends very bad with shit advertising,and even bigger shity releases.. good job all is a queen fan or we would never have had screen time..... from a personal point of view,fantastic album,and as a first kids(10 and 16)concert spectacular. but still,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,not enough to promote the album. maybe in london the local radio played more songs(in galashiels its local radio),maybe not. if you imagine the recent ,take that forthcoming tour.sold out in hours. 1 million tickets............now some will say if it was fred then it would be the same,but. take that had a f.....g lot of adverts,on tv radio, so why o why did we not get the same for queen+. where i live(the darkest regions of scotland where men are men and sheep are scared),i heard 1,yes 1 advert for the ,concert/ album. now even in the darkest places,you need to advertise something that will sell big time....... for christ sake i heard more adverts for the local car boot sale than queen+paul...... so please emi or queen productions,or whoever makes the adverts...... move with the times.........advertise more,release more singles from future albums,and make sure you advertise in more remote regions.......... life wont start and finish in london.. |
| PrimeJiveUSA 07.11.2010 20:51 |
^ like this post! |
| YannickJoker 07.11.2010 20:55 |
Right! |
| guild93 07.11.2010 21:33 |
As someone said before, the album was a bucket of piss and making people buy would just create a lot of pissed consumers if they waste their money on it. |
| jpf 08.11.2010 02:26 |
Saw Q+PR on the "Return Of The Champions" tour and that was great. "Cosmos" sucks. It should have been named Paul Rodgers + Special Guests Brian May and Roger Taylor. It ended up being a Paul Rodger's solo cd. |
| queen79luca 08.11.2010 03:30 |
I THINK THE COSMOS ROCKS IT S A GOOD ALBUM WITH GOOD MUSIC. NOT A SUPER-ALBUM LIKE INNUENDO OR ANATO, BUT LET S CONSIDER GUYS FOR A MOMENT ONE THING. WE COMPLAIN, I COMPLAIN ABOUT QUEEN PRODUCTION, BOX SET ETC..ETC... I WANT U ARE HONEST NOW... WHO THOUGHT THAT AFTER FRED DIED BRIAN AND ROGER WILL TOUR AGAIN AS QUEEN?????? NO ONE! IT WAS GREAT AND LOT OF HAPPINESS TO SEE THEM!FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT NEVER SAW QUEEN LIVE WAS MIND-BLOWING! SOMETIMES WE ARE TOO CRITICAL! |
| Vali 08.11.2010 03:43 |
jpf wrote: "Cosmos" sucks. It should have been named Paul Rodgers + Special Guests Brian May and Roger Taylor. It ended up being a Paul Rodger's solo cd. /////////////////////////////////// Have read many similar comments since TCR release and I will never agree to that. "Call Me": written by Paul and it's maybe the more Queen-sounding track in the album. Cosmos Rockin', Small, We Believe, C-lebrity, SINT, Some Things That Glitter, Surf's Up .... not many Free/Bad Co or Paul's solo tracks sounding like those, I think. Oh yes, ok, there's "Voodoo" ..... but there was also "My Baby Does Me" in The Miracle. |
| john bodega 08.11.2010 05:17 |
Let's do a little roleplay. You're the guy with the responsibility to put together some kind of promotional budget for this album. You've heard the album. You can spend a shitload of money promoting a stale piece of work that will never be a massive success, or you can just let it coast along and get sales from old Queen fans (the only people who would've bought the thing anyway). I know what I'd have done! |
| john bodega 08.11.2010 05:18 |
Keeping in mind that I'm not even someone who hates the album - I think it had some nice moments. But come on. Be real. This is not an album that would've ever set the world on fire. The songs are not ones that will be discussed in 40 years. |
| pittrek 08.11.2010 07:15 |
Am I the only one here who loves that album ? |
| Vali 08.11.2010 07:32 |
pittrek wrote: Am I the only one here who loves that album ? No, Peter, you're not alone :) I still play it and enjoy every listening. |
| pittrek 08.11.2010 07:44 |
Thanks :-) |
| Wiley 08.11.2010 12:21 |
I enjoy it too. Haven't heard it in a while but I may do it later today. Also, anybody thinking this sounds like a Paul Rodgers album has clearly never heard a Paul Rodgers album (or Free or Bad Co. for that matter). Songs like Still Burnin', Call me and C-lebrity (even Cosmos Rockin') have "Queen" written all over them. It's just that they will never be considered Queen because Freddie never sang them. Performance-wise, I think Brian sounds a bit sloppy in a few tracks but Roger and Paul shine on every song. |
| The Real Wizard 08.11.2010 12:31 |
I think a lot of Queen fans revealed themselves to be "Freddie fans" after TCR was released. It may not be an excellent record, but it is still a very good record. There are 4 or 5 very strong tracks on the album. It was doomed to fail with the general public, but I honestly expected a lot more from Queen fans, as I thought they'd appreciate the fact that Brian and Roger were still creating new music, and decided not to work with another Freddie wannabe when it was finally time to make a new Queen record. It's what they had wanted for 15 years, and as always, some people can never be pleased and will find something to complain about. Most Queen fans have chosen to create a box for what Queen music should be, and as a result they set themselves up for disappointment on this one. If fans can't get past the fact that the singer didn't sound like Freddie Mercury and that there wasn't another Innuendo in the bag, then it's their own fault as they're missing out on a lot of great, fresh-sounding music made by three legends. |
| kosimodo 08.11.2010 13:27 |
^^ Paul Who?? Kidding aside.. I never liked it.. it has a few moments. Sound is great, but songs are weak. But I will take it with me in the car 2morrow and give it ago again:) |
| Holly2003 08.11.2010 13:40 |
Sir GH wrote: I think a lot of Queen fans revealed themselves to be "Freddie fans" after TCR was released. It may not be an excellent record, but it is still a very good record. There are 4 or 5 very strong tracks on the album. It was doomed to fail with the general public, but I honestly expected a lot more from Queen fans, as I thought they'd appreciate the fact that Brian and Roger were still creating new music, and decided not to work with another Freddie wannabe when it was finally time to make a new Queen record. It's what they had wanted for 15 years, and as always, some people can never be pleased and will find something to complain about. Most Queen fans have chosen to create a box for what Queen music should be, and as a result they set themselves up for disappointment on this one. If fans can't get past the fact that the singer didn't sound like Freddie Mercury and that there wasn't another Innuendo in the bag, then it's their own fault as they're missing out on a lot of great, fresh-sounding music made by three legends. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ I don't think I fall into any of those categories, yet I still found the album disappointing. Only Some Things That Glitter really stands out, with some good but forgetable songs like Time to Shine. But overall it's just not very good. It is so underwhelming to hear a guitar legend play simple 12-bar riffs or generic heavy metal drudge like Still Burning. Rodgers is a pretty good singer in his own genre of blues-rock, but he doesn't have the range to sing the Queen catalogue. In concert, he instead tried to create blues-rock versions of every Queen song he was asked to sing, with mixed results. They had badly-chosen set lists, designed to bring in the punters, instead of picking songs best suited to Rodgers' voice. But that's another story, I suppose. |
| Pim Derks 08.11.2010 14:55 |
Cosmos Rocks is better than the 80's crap Queen put out. The only thing I miss is a real bombastic old-style Queentrack - which they still had on No-One But You in 1997. People complaining about the setlist seem to forget that Queen in the old days played 90% the same setlists for months on an end - and did not throw in tracks for 1 or 2 nights only - like QPR did with Las Palabras, Warboys, Time To Shine, The Stealer and many other tracks during this tour. |
| Holly2003 08.11.2010 16:20 |
Pim Derks wrote: Cosmos Rocks is better than the 80's crap Queen put out. The only thing I miss is a real bombastic old-style Queentrack - which they still had on No-One But You in 1997. People complaining about the setlist seem to forget that Queen in the old days played 90% the same setlists for months on an end - and did not throw in tracks for 1 or 2 nights only - like QPR did with Las Palabras, Warboys, Time To Shine, The Stealer and many other tracks during this tour. ========================================================================================= Err... that's not my 'complaint' about setlists. I quite enjoyed some of the live stuff with Rodgers singing, especially when he did his own songs. However, his voice wasn't suited to many of Queen's hits. |
| matt z 08.11.2010 16:26 |
I think it's probably a GOOD thing the album didn't get much promotion... they should've at least sat on that egg an extra 8 months... so they'd clip the dull bits out and thrown in some solo tracks... no one would mind if roger or bri sang a complete song ... rog tends to be more inventive... sadly i'm inclined to agree that a lot of it treads on "MOR" rock... :-/ however, i think their LIVE IN UKRAINE should have gotten a fair deal of more attention and promotion. That was exceptional and showed beyond a doubt that they WERE in fact a powerful force even as QPR. |
| Holly2003 08.11.2010 17:15 |
matt z wrote: I think it's probably a GOOD thing the album didn't get much promotion... they should've at least sat on that egg an extra 8 months... so they'd clip the dull bits out and thrown in some solo tracks... no one would mind if roger or bri sang a complete song ... rog tends to be more inventive... sadly i'm inclined to agree that a lot of it treads on "MOR" rock... :-/ however, i think their LIVE IN UKRAINE should have gotten a fair deal of more attention and promotion. That was exceptional and showed beyond a doubt that they WERE in fact a powerful force even as QPR. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Except it should be called 'Live sounds recorded in Ukraine and later in a studio somewhere' |
| PrimeJiveUSA 08.11.2010 18:35 |
I love The Cosmos Rocks...shoot me. There are two tracks(in particular) that are classics that i will always play...We Believe and Small...love most of the others too. OIf course it isn't on the level of Queens' albums with Freddie...but it's all we've got...and I love the album anyways. |
| Micrówave 08.11.2010 18:56 |
When you look at the album from a Radio Friendly perspective, though, there's not much on there worth promoting. Frankly, I'm not sure who they would be promoting it to. You're certainly not going to be able to put the cardboard QPR standup in front of Lady Gaga... unless you want to go out of business quicker than most music stores seem to be heading. So if you can't get any visibility in a store like Best Buy, the only other way to promote it is directly to the fans, which is the road they took. More people are gonna buy the Santana duet guitar-doodling 101 album before they pick up what's left of Queen twenty years later. Who knows? Maybe if Brian and Roger took the Santana Supernatural approach years ago, we'd be having Nas rapping to Play The Game instead of Back In Black. The new Santana album sucks, but it has already sold more than Cosmos and it's only been out a month!!! |
| david (galashiels) 09.11.2010 04:35 |
dont get me wrong.i liked the album. thought cosmos rokin was great. but feel the album was not pushed enough. |
| smilebrian 09.11.2010 06:16 |
Listened for a week, never played since and will never play it again. You guys must have ALOT of spare time to still be giving this a spin. I flip open my CD storage drawer and thumb through the real Queen albums and could never bring myself to waste listening time on Cosmos. C'mon, you can't seriously like it? It's what happens when a bunch of old rockers, way past their creative prime, sit in a room with people telling them how good they are. It's simply an atrocious waste of time. Unfortunately Brian still thinks he's creative and Roger just could never shake off the rock and roll lifestyle so they continue to delude themselves that they can create a "Queen" album. It's embarrassing quite frankly. They're entitled to do it of course, it's their life and their band, but you can't say it was justifiably under promoted!!! What is there to promote? |
| Micrówave 09.11.2010 07:28 |
yes, I'm a little curious how Queen fans think this should have been promoted. We've already determined that Queen doesn't sell in todays market... just look at how well the last few releases have done. What kind of "promotion" do you guys think Cosmos should have had? The free T-Shirt at Sam Goody didn't work out too well... I wore mine once but didn't feel any different. Where was the Queen "street team" we heard about. Anybody run into them? |
| john bodega 09.11.2010 08:14 |
"I think a lot of Queen fans revealed themselves to be "Freddie fans" after TCR was released." I ain't one. How can you speak so generally?? Speaking as someone who's as big a fan of Brian as he is of Freddie, I just can't understand a statement as vague and inaccurate as this... It's entirely possible that the album just wasn't that outstanding and that not everyone liked it. As I've said, I liked some of the songs. There was nice moments. |
| Vali 09.11.2010 08:39 |
The big issue here, as endlessly debated, is the use of the name "Queen". I'm among those who didn't care Brian and Roger using it and, as said above, I really liked the album. But, on the other hand, I'd really have prefered they had gone a different direction and considered starting this adventure, as Brian said, "like a new band". Audioslave, Chickenfoot and Them Crooked Vultures are the most recognizable examples of this kind of supergroups. In that case, I think they could have promoted the band much easier, gaining the respect much media, Queen fans and general public automatically denied them just for the use of the name "Queen" and the inevitable comparisions between Paul and Freddie. Rog and Brian were caught in a difficult situation from wich they knew they could never succeed: A - still call themselves "Queen" -> audience guaranteed at gigs in big arenas... but press/many fans criticism guaranteed. B - bill themselves as ie: May-Rodgers-Taylor -> the band had been automatically condemned to (very much) smaller halls and much less press coverage... but they'd have earned respect from the very start just for the fact of being Brian May, Roger Taylor and Paul Rodgers joining in a new and unexpected supergroup. They tried "A", I guess, just for the pleasure of feeling and enjoying again the big crowds as in the old times. The recording of TCR could have fitted in "B", but the decision of using the Queen brand was already decided, so .... |
| Vali 09.11.2010 08:41 |
sorry double post |
| Wiley 09.11.2010 09:21 |
I just listened to it last night with my girlfriend. She told me I used to play that album a lot a couple of years ago and she even sang along to "Small" and "Say it's not true". I genuinely like it, the way I like "Fun in Space" and "Hot Space". It's personal preference, I guess. I have to admit that I expected more from Brian on that album. His playing was sub par on a few tracks. Also, the lack of a proper bass player hurt some songs. Overall, the album actually exceeded my expectations. I thought they were going to release a 10 track album with 12-bar blues and corporate rock songs about Paul Rodgers having a hard on (like Bad Co.) Instead we got a 14 track album, with rock n' roll tracks, some ballads, one country flavored song, a straight-up bluesy number and an instrumental reprise which I think closes the album beautifully. Surf's Up... School's Out is THE LAST THING I thought I would hear from Queen and Paul Rodgers. I think that song was an indication of good things to come, had they chosen continuing working together. |
| *goodco* 09.11.2010 11:22 |
I'll second what Zebonka wrote (and then add some). The first 45 I ever purchased was 'Movin' On' (pity QPR only did this during soundchecks). I've taken the Paul tracks from ROTC and placed them as bonus tracks on my 'Bad Company' cdr (my only Bad Co. purchase). TCR provided him with the best backing band in the history of rock music. More promotion wouldn't have done a thing. More dual LVs, trade off LVs, and just Brian or Roger doing LVs would have worked better for me....just as I enjoyed the 70's Queen LPs more with Freddie not doing all of the LVs. Van Halen is the only band I can think of where a change of the main lead vocals continued a band's success (or increased it, depending on who you argue with). Queen fans bought the album. Or did not buy it. Perhaps 3% of the sales were by the casual listener. More promotion might have bumped this up to 4%. But the return on the extra investment would have been nil. Just my opinion. On another thread where I discussed Styx' recent tour and their 'Cyclorama' LP.....Dennis DeYoung was the leader on stage and the 'definitive' voice of the band (Tommy Shaw and James Young had their 'hits' but were the Brian and Roger of the band). Their one original studio LP after DDY limited Lawrence Gowen to two tracks (thank goodness). And I still give most of this release a spin, 2/3 of it sounded like the original band, and the songs were pretty damn good. That's what I wish TCR had done. Musically.....it was better than Hot Space (other than 'Call Me'). I will admit.....I dreamed of what Mr. Mercury would have sounded like occasionally on it. 'We Believe'.........that their hearts weren't totally into this. It was not a half-assed effort, but it lacked 'something'. Call it a lack of 'hunger', a lack of 'angst', or just plain old age....but it just did not entirely 'reach' their audience. gawd bless 'em for trying, and am grateful that we got to see their concerts two times over on this side of the pond. Forever grateful for the New Jersey '06 show. It will never happen, but I'd love a remake with Brian and Roger doing the LVs with a more Freddie-ish singer filling in the occasional gap. Or a karaoke version, where I can dream my own vocals. |
| The Real Wizard 09.11.2010 12:17 |
Zebonka12 wrote:
"I think a lot of Queen fans revealed themselves to be "Freddie fans" after TCR was released." I ain't one. How can you speak so generally??I didn't think I was speaking generally. I certainly didn't imply that everyone who didn't like TCR was a Freddie fan and not a Queen fan. |
| Pim Derks 09.11.2010 14:40 |
I was very surprised that the promotion of Cosmos Rocks was limited to a couple of magazine interviews and a tv-appearance almost half a year before the album was released. I had hoped they would perform at Jools Hollands show, maybe a TV-special about the recording of the album on VH1 or an other 'serious' music channel, a performance at Jonathan Ross.... Ofcourse they weren't going to get a number 1 smash millionseller - but I think it should've sold a bit more than it did. |
| john bodega 10.11.2010 09:46 |
"I didn't think I was speaking generally." You did, kind of. Saying 'a lot' of fans are a certain way inclined, is a vague enough statement. The only other group of fans that you refer to either by implication or omission are the fans that liked the album a lot and recognised it for the great piece of work that you feel that it is. I don't want to be seen as giving you an unfair amount of bullshit on this topic because you are a most reasonable guy and all, but whenever a topic like this comes about, it seems that people only perceive there to be two kinds of fan - the ones who loved TCR, and the "I hope Paul Rodgers dies in a fire" crowd. I belong to neither group, and I have good reasons that don't at all include "RIP QUEEN 1991". It's wearing a little thin, is all. |
| Sebastian 10.11.2010 13:03 |
Indeed: not everybody who likes TCR is an anti-Freddie Maylor-stepford who wants to suck the doctor's nuts and would die for at least smelling what comes out of Paul's anus. And not everybody who dislikes TCR is an anti-Maylor Freddie-stepford who wants to smack the doctor to death and pour salt in his eyes while having an orgasm thinking about Freddie's genitalia. There are many, many, MANY people who don't belong in either group and simply judge TCR (or anything else for that matter) by what it is: if it pleases them, they like it; if it doesn't, they don't. Simple as that. |
| mike hunt 10.11.2010 13:43 |
The already forgotten TCR.......i'm not gonna say's the albums crap, shit or whatever word people love to call their least favorite albums, but will say it's my least favorite queen related CD, or at least one of my least favorites. only some of roger's stuff with the Cross is below it. I'm not Excatly a huge fan of all of Brian's solo work, but both his albums are better IMO. i could hear "sir" ready to call me a freddie only fan, but the only problem with that is Brian Just happens to be my favorite guitarist. The album doesn't do it for me, but some nice moments Include "some things that glitter" Voodoo" "say it's not true." |
| Gregsynth 10.11.2010 13:56 |
I like The Cosmos Rocks. I don't compare it to any Queen record--because you can't compare it (Freddie/John aren't on it, new singer, etc). I just view it as a "good" record (I don't even mention Queen in it). |
| kansas666 10.11.2010 15:10 |
I was very disappointed in the album. So much potential...so little delivered. I am a big Bad Co./Free/Paul Rodgers fan. And I wouldn't be here if I weren't a Queen fan. Every album Paul Rodgers has been involved in - even The Firm is better than TCR. Brian May's solo stuff is miles better than TCR. Roger Taylor's solo output is....Roger Taylor's solo output. But still I thought the 3 of them would come together and produce a down and dirty Queen album, full of Paul's gritty vocals, Brian's soaring guitar and Roger's....uhhh....drums! Throw in a bunch of harmonies and pro-tools it to death and they could have come up with a masterpiece. But instead we got TCR. |
| AlexRocks 10.11.2010 15:58 |
Uhhh....whatever! "The Cosmos Rocks" is one of me favorite Queen studio l.p.s!!! |
| Micrówave 11.11.2010 05:23 |
Perhaps they could have "sold" more albums a lot easier. Simply raise your concert ticket price $10 and give a copy of Cosmos with each ticket. Counts as a unit sold. How many people attended QPR concerts? A few bands are using this (Prince's) idea... |
| Sebastian 11.11.2010 05:49 |
One year after TCR, they realised there was another way they could easily sell a lot more. They took the same old hits and re-re-re-re-re-re-re-released them. Voila! |
| mike hunt 12.11.2010 14:18 |
PrimeJiveUSA wrote: I love The Cosmos Rocks...shoot me. There are two tracks(in particular) that are classics that i will always play...We Believe and Small...love most of the others too. OIf course it isn't on the level of Queens' albums with Freddie...but it's all we've got...and I love the album anyways. you're allowed to like the album. nothing wrong with that. some cools songs are on it, but "We believe"? .......not my cup of tea. 'small' is a nice little ballad i must say. |
| john bodega 12.11.2010 23:10 |
We Believe didn't do much for me. I guess there's good preachy and bad preachy. White Man = well written, and has a point. We Believe = crap, which undermines the message entirely. Say It's Not True wasn't that bad, probably my 2nd favourite on the album actually. Although that song connected better with me because Roger and Brian sang it, and I have an emotional investment with those two singers that I don't have with Paul Rodgers. |
| Martin Packer 13.11.2010 05:32 |
IMHO We Believe builds nicely. It could've been more but I like it anyway. The start is, I agree, a bit of a plaintive vocal rant. Actually there's much I DO like about Cosmos Rocks. And it would've been nice to see more of it on tour... The tour was a bit safe. |
| PrimeJiveUSA 13.11.2010 19:27 |
I forgot to mention Say It's Not True from the Cosmos Rocks...truly epic. |
| Michael Allred 16.11.2010 04:38 |
Micrówave wrote: Perhaps they could have "sold" more albums a lot easier. Simply raise your concert ticket price $10 and give a copy of Cosmos with each ticket. Counts as a unit sold. How many people attended QPR concerts? A few bands are using this (Prince's) idea... Shame they didn't use that approach |
| The Real Wizard 16.11.2010 09:46 |
It's a great idea, but $10 wouldn't be enough. Prince isn't on a major label, so it was a far better business decision for him. The executives and bean-counters at major labels, however, take at least that much from a record sale, so QPR wouldn't have turned in a profit unless it was $15. No doubt, it would have raised the number of sales by far, into the millions. But it's hard to know if it was even possible, with the record company calling the shots. They have more power to run the music business than most people realize. |
| Soundfreak 17.11.2010 10:48 |
EMI had little say in promoting this album as their role was mainly limited to do the distribution. Looking back there were many mistakes. The single was already performed on tv months before the release. Taking away any "excitement". The cover looked horrible, the idea may have been nice but it didn't really work on a small cd. There was no second or third single release, the songs didn't really find their way into the shows. And then - I'm not sure if the moderate sales are indicating a lack of quality. Even other big names from the 70s and 80s do not sell huge quantities these days. Whether it's the Rolling Stones or Paul McCartney or at the moment Phil Collins. I have heard so many great albums from new bands that " fell through commerciall"y.....it's also a question of the right timing. Me personally I liked the idea of them doing this album. It was interesting to hear, what they are doing and thinking these days. I did not expect them to come up with another "night at the Opera", they have done that twice already. And it was always part of the attraction of Queen to come up with something new - even with the risk of failure like "Hot Space". So for me it's fine that they did that album. Sure it was no milestone - but what is a milestone these days? I haven't heard any for ages. So should all musicians give up? |
| PrimeJiveUSA 17.11.2010 11:28 |
Excellent post! I couldn't have said it any better...I too am glad they did it...would have been great if it had been successful as it would have spurred them on to even greater work imo. Love the part about"it's not a milestone...but what is today". Very funny PRECISELY because it is so true. |
| mike hunt 17.11.2010 12:26 |
|
| chris the unhappy sheep 20.02.2011 23:43 |
terrible album that shouldn't of been released imo. nothing against paul, i consider him the best vocalist thats been in rock music. i have real trouble understanding some 'rock stars'. you'd think they'd be itching to start being creative and releasing 'good' product. i can't believe that the boys thought this album was 'good'. the same old, same old. you often hear 'stars' saying that they didn't like this or that lp of theirs. then don't release the thing, its simple! god knows you get months to work on it, how can you record shit songs? personally i hope that no other recordings get released as queen. the way roger and brian are going they'll be in the same league as hendrix. the amount of hendrix stuff thats come out since his death is unbelievable. basically stuff fans have already heard before. |
| rhyeking 21.02.2011 00:46 |
Sir GH wrote: I think a lot of Queen fans revealed themselves to be "Freddie fans" after TCR was released. It may not be an excellent record, but it is still a very good record. There are 4 or 5 very strong tracks on the album. It was doomed to fail with the general public, but I honestly expected a lot more from Queen fans, as I thought they'd appreciate the fact that Brian and Roger were still creating new music, and decided not to work with another Freddie wannabe when it was finally time to make a new Queen record. It's what they had wanted for 15 years, and as always, some people can never be pleased and will find something to complain about. Most Queen fans have chosen to create a box for what Queen music should be, and as a result they set themselves up for disappointment on this one. If fans can't get past the fact that the singer didn't sound like Freddie Mercury and that there wasn't another Innuendo in the bag, then it's their own fault as they're missing out on a lot of great, fresh-sounding music made by three legends. ************************** I agree 100%, Sir GH. Two things I'd like to add... It always seems to come down to a combination of "I don't like it, therefore it's a steaming pile of crap that Queen should never have attempted," "it's not a certified masterpiece, therefore it's not worth my time," and anything considered 'filler,' 'weak,' 'beneath them' or too far outside the classic rock mode is lambasted mercilessly. I'm not saying anyone is wrong for not liking something. We're all individuals with unique tastes and preferences. What I continually fail to understand is both the sense of entitlement some fans approach this band with, and the value judgments placed on the band's creative process. Not liking The Cosmos Rocks is fine. Slamming Queen for being a party to it is to deny the artists their voice and their right to creative exploration. |
| chris the unhappy sheep 21.02.2011 01:09 |
oh great, now everything i wrote doesn't come out, bollocks! i'm not gonna write the whole thing again. [shortened version] basically i for one didn't expect the album to be a masterpiece, and i don't expect any future recording to be so either. old rock stars have had their day in the sun, as far as being a relevant creative force, you see it with all of them. however i don't expect them to release a weakened version of the same old formula and think fans will be happy. try something a little different, take a chance. i'm sure it would be more satisfying. |
| john bodega 21.02.2011 01:38 |
"Slamming Queen for being a party to it is to deny the artists their voice and their right to creative exploration." I really don't think so. They are still able to take part in their craft; any barrier to that is purely a perceived one on the part of someone who can't cope with negative feedback (which, admittedly, takes a bit of getting used to). 'I like this album' is just as valid a comment as 'I don't like it', when you consider that most people can't be arsed backing those sentiments up with any kind of thought-out criticism. If anyone has seen their share of lame critiques, it's Brian and Roger, and (I think) they should be able to handle it by now. Although Roger is probably a bit better at it than Brian. Just saying. |
| rhyeking 21.02.2011 02:02 |
"I like it because of X, Y and X" is fine. "I hate it because of X, Y and Z" is also fine. Saying it's "crap" is personal opinion. Fine, as well. We're all entitled. That fuels discussion if we're all open to other viewpoints. Saying, "Queen shouldn't have tried X, Y and Z" and "It's not Queen, it's a pitiful excuse...etc." is applying a value judgment on the process of creating, not the end result. I can't help but wonder if such statements stem from an inherent lack of understanding the motives of the artist, the climate (internal and external) of creativity at the time or an overriding sense of entitlement held by the audience. That's the point where it's enlightening to know as much about where a work came from, what decisions the artist made and what was going on in their life at the time, and to do so without prejudice, assumption and expectation. |
| pittrek 21.02.2011 06:09 |
I am listening to this album right now. I almost forgot how great it is. You can "feel" that you're listening to musicians who enjoy what they're doing. It's a shame the album was never successful |
| Holly2003 21.02.2011 09:52 |
pittrek wrote: I am listening to this album right now. I almost forgot how great it is. You can "feel" that you're listening to musicians who enjoy what they're doing. It's a shame the album was never successful -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There's that word again -- "great" -- what's great about it exactly? Songwriting? Playing? Artwork? SInging? Concept? All distinctly average imo. Not a patch on any truly great Queen albums from the 1970s and not a great non-Queen album either. They didn;t challenge themselves in any way and that doesn't make for greatness |
| AlexRocks 21.02.2011 10:53 |
I think it is great in all of the things you listed and the sounds of Roger Taylor's drums sound the most amazing I've ever heard of anyone's drums. I think "The Cosmos Rocks" is one of their best studio l.p.s. There was no excuse for it to not sell better and be promoted better. I've always said that you can sell anything...you just have to know how to do it. Whoever was in charge either did not know how to do it or it was not a prioritized enough. |
| GratefulFan 21.02.2011 13:29 |
rhyeking wrote: "I like it because of X, Y and X" is fine. "I hate it because of X, Y and Z" is also fine. Saying it's "crap" is personal opinion. Fine, as well. We're all entitled. That fuels discussion if we're all open to other viewpoints. Saying, "Queen shouldn't have tried X, Y and Z" and "It's not Queen, it's a pitiful excuse...etc." is applying a value judgment on the process of creating, not the end result. I can't help but wonder if such statements stem from an inherent lack of understanding the motives of the artist, the climate (internal and external) of creativity at the time or an overriding sense of entitlement held by the audience. That's the point where it's enlightening to know as much about where a work came from, what decisions the artist made and what was going on in their life at the time, and to do so without prejudice, assumption and expectation. ================================ I think an artist earns my interest in their creative process in the same way they earn my hard earned money - by creating something compelling and interesting. Most of us would given a whole lot to have been a fly on the wall for ANATO or DATR or NOTW or any other of the great albums. But if what comes out the other end of a "creative process" is largely dull and uninspiring and indicates to one's own sensibilities that artists failed to appreciate that their various "motivations" were going to be unequal to the task of producing something of sufficient quality, why wouldn't it be a perfectly valid critique to say they shouldn't have gone down some road or other? We're not parents marveling at the inherent brilliance of every wanton crayon scribble. If you are motivated to evaluate music on a complicated rubric that includes what the artists had for breakfast or whatever, knock yourself out. But it's probably pretty "entitled" to expect everybody else to do the same. |
| rhyeking 21.02.2011 14:02 |
I agree, GF, if they try something and fail, the end result is open to scrutiny and criticism, and rightly so. Saying they never should have tried "this direction," "that style," or "that approach" is what I feel denies them their creative expression, their 'voice' if you will. They are allowed to explore different avenues. We're allowed to not be interested. The entitlement I talk about perceiving occurs when I hear fans say things like Queen are betraying Queen by doing X, and are betraying fans by doing Y (X and Y being a creative choices). |
| GratefulFan 21.02.2011 15:30 |
rhyeking wrote: I agree, GF, if they try something and fail, the end result is open to scrutiny and criticism, and rightly so. Saying they never should have tried "this direction," "that style," or "that approach" is what I feel denies them their creative expression, their 'voice' if you will. They are allowed to explore different avenues. We're allowed to not be interested. The entitlement I talk about perceiving occurs when I hear fans say things like Queen are betraying Queen by doing X, and are betraying fans by doing Y (X and Y being a creative choices). ====================================== I don't think we completely agree because I think the *entire process* is open to scrutiny and criticism, and not just the end result. Again, I think it's a valid criticism to say a particular artist should not have tried X or Y if their trying it indicated a failure to appreciate somewhere along the way that they were failing to achieve anything significant. If Chad Kroeger was to get up tomorrow morning with a burning desire to sing opera at the Met, do we not have grounds to see that as self indulgent, ill advised or generally lacking in good artistic judgement? |
| rhyeking 21.02.2011 16:39 |
The Chad Kroeger example is a little extreme, but if he in fact did something like that, it's still his artistic right. Where artists attempt to explore new things, they tend to at least research the medium before focusing their creativity in that direction. Some don't and the results are mixed. They could end up discovering latent aptitude and influencing other artists to explore further. Or it could be a dismal failure. It's easy to forget that artists need to push themselves in varying directions, to challenge themselves, in order to keep themselves interested. That happens way before the audience ever hears it and by the time the fans buy the album, the artist has little sense of perspective, having lived with the work for weeks, months or years. Hopefully they're happy with it at the end, or at least satisfied that it says what they wanted it to say. Sometimes it doesn't, or after a period away from the work, they look at it again say, "what was I thinking?" The audience does the artist (and themselves, I believe) an injustice by dismissing the effort without understanding what is behind it. If the artist admits the effort was flawed, superficial or base, that can help paint our view of the end result, forcing us to ask if it really is art and if the representation of ideas has merit. Still, though, the artist doesn't owe the audience depth, just as the audience doesn't owe them their hard-earned money. |
| GratefulFan 21.02.2011 23:15 |
I don't want to belabour the point, so these are my last thoughts on this and you can have the last word if you like. Few would argue the value of the creative process to artists or that they have the 'right' to do whatever they please. Any artist is free to wander down any path he or she pleases, but if that wander results in a product being presented to the public it's all fair game. It's nonsensical to me to unhitch the process from the result to the point that it's ok to say that an album sucked, but every decision that went into it that caused it to ultimately suck must be considered sacrosanct. Where else does life work that way? I know I'm certainly held accountable for the quality of my judgement at my job, which has a significant creative component, as any number of choices get strung together to create a final result. |