Ive read alot of Adam Lambert is not the right singer for Queen. And before that Paul Rodgers is not the right singer for Queen. Anyone have any idea who the right singer for Brian and Roger at this point actually is? And why.
For me my enjoyment comes from listening to the 4 piece so i dont care BUT having said that i dont think Mr Lambert is a bad shout actually. Hes not a ROCK singer (I never heard Queen as a rock band anyway) and he can bring more interesting influences to Taylor and May if they do record
You know what. I honestly actually agree with Queen not being a rock band as such. At least, not in a traditional way. They started off as rock band, but the sheer number of genres they have had a go at during their years with Freddie (and John) has always made me feel that just calling Queen a rock band would be misrepresentative of their legacy. I'd call them something like a variety band, or variety rock band. I don't think there's a proper genre for them, which is why most of us must like them so much in the first place. Categorizing is boring.
The right singer for Queen at the moment? In my opinion, there isn't one that would fit the bill properly. They're welcome to utilise anyone to their current goals as long as they can keep themselves doing what they do best, but no one will ever be as good as you'd wish to, and this will leave some of us unhappy about it. If Adam learned how to use his voice more expressively, he would be a brilliant vocalist for Queen, but in his current form, he's just needlessly overdoing it. Apart from that, he's probably the only singer that can garner the attention that the Queen brand requires at the moment - young, energetic, good stage persona, great vocal range, and a relatively successful (yet fresh enough) solo artist on his own merit (and American Idol) to drag in his own fans.
I'd still without hesitation call Queen a rock band.....a rock band with the capability of playing a lot of different styles, but still a rock band at heart! "Rock" encompasses a lot of different things, after all....blues-rock, jazz-rock, funk-rock, hard rock, psychedelic rock, etc, etc....
And I find it weird when people say Adam (or whoever) isnt a "rock singer".....for one thing, I think he sounds just fine singing rock, but aside from that, since when do you have be a certain type of singer to sing rock?
And how many times I can use the word "rock" in one post??? :D
The right singer for Brian and Roger would be... Brian and Roger.
Brian and Roger should write and perform new songs as Brian and Roger, record them under the name of Brian and Roger and tour as Brian and Roger.
That would prove for the world that Brian and Roger are able musicians, and that Brian and Roger have gotten over their past and moved onto the present of Brian and Roger.
And if the Brian and Roger album doesn't happen to sell millions of copies, or the Brian and Roger tour would only be played in 2000 seat theatres instead of 10000 seat arenas, Brian and Roger would be happy for themselves and their life as Brian and Roger, instead of pretending to be Queen.
anyone calling queen not a rock band should listen to the music.
if you listen to those extended parts of "spread your wings (BBC)" or the later "somebody to love" performances you'll easily notice they have fun by doing things coming from the heart.
Queen nowadays, are almost a parody of themselves - just like the Beach Boys - but they can of course do what they want, but I think they should at least have an older singer with them.
He's not in prison.
George Michael maybe twenty years ago, but not now. I like him though, and it would be cool if they could just do a one-off show with him and Deaky joining Brian and Roger. That would sell out in minutes.
tero! 48531 wrote:
The right singer for Brian and Roger would be... Brian and Roger.
Brian and Roger should write and perform new songs as Brian and Roger, record them under the name of Brian and Roger and tour as Brian and Roger.
That would prove for the world that Brian and Roger are able musicians, and that Brian and Roger have gotten over their past and moved onto the present of Brian and Roger.
And if the Brian and Roger album doesn't happen to sell millions of copies, or the Brian and Roger tour would only be played in 2000 seat theatres instead of 10000 seat arenas, Brian and Roger would be happy for themselves and their life as Brian and Roger, instead of pretending to be Queen.
But what about Brian and Roger? Why dont we talk about Brian and Roger? LOL..........(maybe we should just refer to them by one name, like Brangelina, or Beniffer.......its Brodger!)
Seriously though....I think you might have answered your question (not that it WAS a question, but nm)....I think part of the reason they're still calling themselves Queen is just the fact that that will sell tickets a hell of a lot faster then "Brian May and Roger Taylor"!
I would have had absolutely NO problem with a Brian and Roger album/tour.......I think though, that they both like having someone else as frontman.....and besides, I seriously doubt Brians voice is up to sharing co-lead vocal duties any more......maybe 15-20 years ago, but now?
No way, his voice is thinner and whinier than ever. As a guitaris he's probably better than he's been for 10-15 years though, at least judging from what I saw of the NYE concert.
Oscar J wrote:
No way, his voice is thinner and whinier than ever. As a guitaris he's probably better than he's been for 10-15 years though, at least judging from what I saw of the NYE concert.