| philip storey 14.06.2017 16:37 |
As most people seem to hate Adam Lambert I would have had Gary Cherone as the lead singer.I think he would have been a far better choice. |
| mike hunt 14.06.2017 18:18 |
No one, Brian and Roger should have kept putting out albums as May/Talyor and working with guest singers/Muscians. Maybe they wouldn't be selling out concerts, but they would of been putting out some good music. Real music fans look at Queen/lambert as a Joke. How do you go from having steve Howe as guest muscian on Innuendo and Brian playing with Cozy and Jeff Beck to Adam Lambert? The Rodgers era should have been called Rodgers/May/Talyor. |
| Freddie rey 14.06.2017 19:05 |
I will never understand why Brian/Roger/John never did an album and tour together on 1997. What's the problem with No-One But You? It sounds more queen than anything that bri and rog did since then, and on the credits of that song on queen rocks they say that that song isn't queen...anyway, my choice will be Justin Hawkins, or even Eric Nally or maybe Luke Spiller, they could fit more with bri and rog than adam, but now is too late, i preefer now that they retired |
| Saint Jiub 14.06.2017 19:23 |
I would prefer Brian & Roger sharing lead vocals, with Spike on keyboards, and either Tim, Mike, Barry or Doug on bass. Gary Cherone on lead vocals really "helped" Van Halen become a "blockbuster" band again. |
| huhnad 14.06.2017 19:35 |
As others said, nobody (with preference to Roger and Brian sharing lead vocals). But if they were to do a Queen+ arrangement, I think George Michael would've been the best fit. |
| Thistle 14.06.2017 20:17 |
Des O'Connor. |
| master marathon runner 15.06.2017 00:19 |
No one. |
| Sebastian 15.06.2017 06:58 |
Whoever's good enough for them. It's their choice. |
| Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira 15.06.2017 08:20 |
Sebastian wrote: Whoever's good enough for them. It's their choice.Of course, but I will stick to the question posed by the poster. Jeff Scott Sotto is the one that would give them a rockier edge. He is a fantastic rock singer and the most passionate singer I have ever seen singing Queen songs (appart from the band, obviously). That counts a lot to me. Cheers, Ogre- |
| Vocal harmony 15.06.2017 08:55 |
Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira wrote:Out of the singers listed I would agree that Jeff Scott Sotto would have been great, and almost was at one point! But also Seb's comment is right.Sebastian wrote: Whoever's good enough for them. It's their choice.Of course, but I will stick to the question posed by the poster. Jeff Scott Sotto is the one that would give them a rockier edge. He is a fantastic rock singer and the most passionate singer I have ever seen singing Queen songs (appart from the band, obviously). That counts a lot to me. Cheers, Ogre- This thread has clearly pointed out the problem that they faced. Everyone has a different opinion about what they should do and who they should work with. Someone says they should have done something in the mid 90's. Read the interviews with Brian And Roger, neither felt like they wanted too or could do anything then. George Micheal sung brilliantly at the Freddie Tribute but has Roger said, he's thing was miles away from who they were and RT even mentions in an interview that he winced at the volume they played at. So that's another singer who wouldn't have worked. Being part of a band is so much mote than being able to sing or play the notes. Some on here don't quite understand that. |
| dysan 15.06.2017 10:35 |
Cliff Richard |
| matt z 15.06.2017 12:46 |
Either myself or AntonioCatBoy ...I'm leaning towards Cat Boy |
| cmsdrums 15.06.2017 13:56 |
I'm a huge Extreme fan but Cherone's vocals are the weakest point in that band. Great on his day but generally sings in too high a key to suit his voice and so ends up straining and missing notes. His 'Hammer to Fall' on the tribute concert release is an overdubbed vocal and not the live one as he was so flat on the day. If you want to see HTF covered vocally with ease live, you can do a lot worse than this: link |
| Holly2003 15.06.2017 15:50 |
Klaus Meine of course. link link |
| Michael Scapp 15.06.2017 15:58 |
Mike Patton |
| Holly2003 15.06.2017 16:23 |
Michael Scapp wrote: Mike PattonThat would be fun! But mad of course. But if mad is the standard, how about Serj Tankian? link |
| Costa86 15.06.2017 16:37 |
Elton John. If Deaky re-joined Queen and they did a tour with Elton as lead singer, it would sell out. |
| people on streets 15.06.2017 16:45 |
Paul Rodgers was nice. They should've retired "Queen" after that. It's becoming pathetic. Would love to see May / Taylor solo! |
| mike hunt 15.06.2017 16:47 |
Yea, imagine Elton singing Tie Your Mother Down? Or any other hard rock song. I get the point though, two respected artists working together. |
| Vocal harmony 15.06.2017 17:03 |
Holly2003 wrote:That would be mad and brilliant, but if you want to go completely mad how about Diamanda GalasMichael Scapp wrote: Mike PattonThat would be fun! But mad of course. But if mad is the standard, how about Serj Tankian? link |
| k-m 15.06.2017 17:37 |
It's very easy to speculate. But the truth is each of the abovementioned (even if considered for the role) would have had their own demands, own music profile, fan base etc. Mike Patton & Queen? Come on, as much as I like the guy. I'm likely to think there was some truth in the gossip around George Michael and Elton at the time, but... there must have been "a but". George would have been good imo and might have challenged his own self by taking on the role, but still, pure speculation. In order to answer the question though, I think Matt Bellamy from Muse could fit well. Paul Rodgers only fitted some of the heavier / rocky stuff imo and did well on such songs. I enjoyed his own stuff tried with Queen as well. Adam Lambert provides the entertainment and I wouldn't actually criticise him all that much, as there seems to be something genuine there and many songs do sound ok, imo (again). They need to try something new though. Not new in terms of material, but the more obscure stuff for sure. |
| Jake12 15.06.2017 19:22 |
Tom Chaplin for me. I think he's 100x better than lambert.. I hate lambert! link |
| Saint Jiub 15.06.2017 20:54 |
mike hunt wrote: Yea, imagine Elton singing Tie Your Mother Down? Or any other hard rock song. I get the point though, two respected artists working together.Off hand, I can think of up to 5 hard rock songs just from Goodbye Yellow Brick Road: Saturday Night's Alright for Fighting Love Lies Bleeding Dirty Little Girl The Ballad of Danny Bailey (1909–34) All the Girls Love Alice |
| master marathon runner 15.06.2017 20:59 |
Eltons voice and key, in its day, we're superb. |
| The Fairy King 15.06.2017 23:50 |
Glad it's Adam, cause if was up to you nubs to choose someone we'd get some really awful shit. :D |
| matt z 16.06.2017 02:26 |
The Fairy King wrote: Glad it's Adam, cause if was up to you nubs to choose someone we'd get some really awful shit. :DJeff Scott Soto is good. Nobody else would really fit unless it was a global trial. Lambert is ATROCIOUS for ROCK ...dunno what ur on about. He sounds like a boy and its pretty pathetic considering the material. However. ...his selection has gotten much better. |
| Sheldon 16.06.2017 04:47 |
Elton would be awesome, but overall Lambert fits the Queen image best. Especially since he has stopped oversinging many songs. Rodgers with his blues influences was horrible and so was George Michael with all his oversinging. Queen was never about that, Queen was about strong, powerful, straight-forward classic rock vocals with very little howling and blues/soul-inspired stuff when the singer just goes on and on and on, even though he should have shut up a minute ago. Just listen to any WATC from 2012 with Lambert, makes me want to kill myself. What I would prefer? Lambert or maybe Martel, but with many more songs sung by Brian and Roger. What I really would prefer? A hologram or even video screen with Freddie throughout the whole show. |
| Costa86 16.06.2017 10:08 |
I'd be happy with Brandon Flowers also. |
| kosimodo 16.06.2017 15:02 |
Paul rodgers didnt do it for me. Lambert is much better then him. Enjoyable in a live show. Should stay away from the harder rocking macho songs.. wwtlf suits f.e. rather well. Stc totally not. |
| matt z 16.06.2017 15:10 |
^ speaking of holograms. ...I wouldn't even go see hologram DIO .....that's so crass and disreputable. I can only imagine. 10 years from now you'll get a Freddie hologram (*originally sold for a gazillion dollars) in a karaoke booth in some seedy crap joint in las Vegas. Broken tables and everything. "YEH hey check it out. Used to be a big thing around 2020...got em cheap. $3 a song it is. " |
| mike hunt 16.06.2017 17:04 |
I never said Elton is a poor singer, he did sing some rock songs in his yellow brick Road prime, but I'm not talking about that version of Elton. I'm talking about late 90's to the present Elton. He would have sung the ballads ok, but how about stoned cold crazy? I guess they could have stuck with stuff that fit his voice and they would have played Eltons songs as well. Could have been huge and respected by real Muscians. Unlike Queen/Lambert. |
| Costa86 16.06.2017 17:47 |
^ Agree with this, but I don't think Elton would be prepared to be a cover version of Freddie. He's Elton John. But hypothetically, yes that would have been great. |
| musicland munich 16.06.2017 23:09 |
|
| musicland munich 16.06.2017 23:35 |
After the FM Tribute, George Michael was the natural prospect for that job. Around 93' and 94'the media was quiet interested in that subject. Brian May statement " he convinced us" ( translated ) |
| musicland munich 17.06.2017 00:16 |
Roger Taylor refused : "cheap knock-off" |
| Costa86 17.06.2017 17:48 |
I think that few singers with a great ongoing solo career would be prepared to step-in as a cover for a lead singer of another band. George Michael was still big in the 90s. |
| dysan 19.06.2017 02:46 |
Bump |
| Invisible Woman 19.06.2017 04:18 |
Rag'n'Bone Man maybe.In fact,no one, because Freddie is irreplaceable. |