NONE of us would have ever heard of the band "Queen" because they wouldn't even have a gotten a record contract.
Adam Lamberace is not an "artist" he is a vapid karaoke vocalist with a polarizing tone.
I know I'm not alone in accusing Lambert of hubris for agreeing to this gig with ole senile Brian and Roger
Um - who exactly has said Lambert is as good as Mercury?
Should Brian and Roger just stop doing what they love to do because their singer died?
Lambert, like him or not, is one of two people who have inspired Brian and Roger to do a world tour in the past 20+ years. Some of us are going to enjoy seeing half of Queen live, possibly for the last time. Some of us are going to whine. Enjoy !
YAFF wrote:
NONE of us would have ever heard of the band "Queen" because they wouldn't even have a gotten a record contract.
Adam Lamberace is not an "artist" he is a vapid karaoke vocalist with a polarizing tone.
I know I'm not alone in accusing Lambert of hubris for agreeing to this gig with ole senile Brian and Roger
Doesn't AL have his OWN recording contract?
Why would he be denied one as the singer of Queen.
Another quite ridiculous thread here, sorry. First of all, it makes no sense whatsoever to imagine Queen starting out with AL as lead singer, because it is just... ridiculous. It's a totally different story, man. Also, give the guy a break please. He's not one of JLS singers anyway, so why bother making such a fuss. Especially that he does have a lot of vocal strength and signs of stage personality (although not "persona" yet), built a lot on Freddie's work. Obviously, NO-ONE can replace Freddie, but I don't think this is what the whole thing is about, really.
TS: there's a whole subforum dedicated to AL. If you really can't restrain yourself, put it on there. A healthier alternative would be to just ignore the whole thing. I don't like this whole debacle either, but I choose to simply ignore it and pay attention to interesting music instead. Whatever you do, stop posting pointless crap about AL in a forum where it doesn't belong.
FACT. The last major Queen+ tour ended in South America in 2009 with neither BM or RT wanting to repeat the experience they had endured. They then found Lambert, by chance. It's obvious to all but the most stupidly inward looking moron that Lambert has given BM and RT a new lease of life to once again function within the Queen format. The current tour is the most successful the band have played since 1982 outside Europe.
They are enjoying doing what they do, and being who they are. But still there are narrow minded clowns on here who criticise and presume that they are the people with ultimate taste and are positioned to say yes or no to decisions that they don't no the first thing about.
This is becoming a Queen hate site hiding under the pretence of being a fan site
Actually it's too difficult a question to answer. For starters, Adam Lambert was born in a completely different time, works in a completely different way (in his solo stuff I mean), and is working at a time when rock music is a fully mature art form.
Freddie Mercury was at the forefront of what became modern rock, from the Jimi Hendrix era, immediately post-Beatles, and Freddie himself was partly responsible for the popularisation of stadium rock.
If Queen hadn't existed before 2015, but we still had stadium rock (Def Leppard, Aerosmith, Bon Jovi, etc), and Queen put out their first album as it sounded in 1973, we'd probably not pay too much attention to them because although it's musically very good, it's so off the wall by today's (often watered down) standards that it would be shot to shit out of the charts. In fact in 1973 it didn't chart did it? It was very nearly the end for Queen a few times, and Freddie would be embarking on his retirement as an art teacher in an inner city comprehensive school, or perhaps art college, by now, and he'd be Mr Bulsara to his pupils, but there'd be no Freddie Mercury except for in his own mind.
Adam Lambert has a completely different voice to Freddie, completely different way of singing. He's far more powerful than Freddie was on early Queen albums, but he doesn't have the same beauty of tone. He has the impressive 'wow' factor voice, but doesn't quite have the same communication.
For me, personally, I don't think one is better than the other, in terms of being an actual singer. As an artist, Freddie most definitely has a level of class that nobody else, or at least very few others, have. But then, Adam Lambert is young, times are very different, artistry is not at the forefront of the modern music business.
I think the marriage of Adam Lambert plus Brian and Roger, has been a very good thing. It has reawakened a new generation to Queen, and that wouldn't have happened without this partnership. Queen would have been the band that the parents and grandparents spoke about, but there wouldn't be this surge of activity and interest. I know some people don't like Adam, and are uncomfortable with the Queen legacy being tampered with, but really, it's OK. It's only entertainment. It's nice to see that Roger and Brian can actually still play, and it's hie to see them out there doing it, rather than putting their feet up and resting on their laurels. I'm sorry that John Deacon hasn't found it in himself to go out on tour, but he has his reasons, and the simple fact that he doesn't want to is a good enough reason in itself.
I'm rambling.