QueenZone discussion #531413
Does all this "Its not really Queen" disrespect John Decon?
| Scott_Mercury 09.05.2005 23:39 |
What do I mean? I'll tell you. There are some boo hoo'ers here who will still.... for the 1,000th time post: RIP QUEEN 1973-1991...etc But for every post you read that says No Freddie = No Queen How many do you read where people are concerned about John?? I would say about 1 in every 20.. "It can't be Queen without Freddie"... or "Stop the tour".... type messages I read will someone say: No Freddie No John = No Queen Actually, everyone's favorite (Sharon G) is usually the one who brings up John. Now, its obvious that a majority feel that Freddie was much more important to the group than John. By the way... this is a undeniable fact. But to what degree do you feel John was important?? I mean... he has the writing credit on hits like: I want to break free Spread your wings Another One bites the dust Your my best friend But now, Brian and Roger speak as though the "John hits" wouldn't have happened without Freddie. I have Brian on an interview from 1997 saying "Another One Bites the Dust very well could have been a split writing credit between John & Freddie. John had the bass line, and a idea of the lyrics, but it took Freddie to put the song together, arrange it where we were all positive about it, and what Roger would call *Queen up the lyrics*. John was perfectly willing to share writing credit with Fred on that one... but Freddie insisted that the song was all John." In a way... I get the feeling the even Brian & Roger have hinted that John MAYBE wasn't a KEY member of the group. Let me ask this, on top of all this other food for thought.... of the 4 Queen members... Who was the most key member in making Queen, Queen? |
| Serry... 10.05.2005 06:04 |
Scott, do a favour - please stop post such topics, at least in this forum! There's Queen+Paul Tour forum, we ALL are tired of discussions about real Queen, about what should or should not they to do! "Go and fuck yourself, get a life, John rules, there can be only one" - that's what you'll get plus some other meaningless fights. |
| Scott_Mercury 10.05.2005 07:19 |
Serry Fucknut- How is this about the 2005 tour? This topic us about the importance of various original members. |
| BEF 10.05.2005 07:23 |
|
| Serry... 10.05.2005 07:38 |
Serry Fucknut can't agree with this. Because Serry Fucknut (that's the only one argument as I see) as well as other Queenzoners are tired to research what's the real Queen! "This topic us about the importance of various original members." What are you awaiting for?! Do you really think that some Queen fans would tell you "John is not important at all"? "How is this about the 2005 tour?" If there would not be the tour - you'd never ask such question! And if you respect John then spell his last name not as 'Decon'! |
| Oberon 10.05.2005 07:41 |
Serry Funster wrote: Serry Fucknut can't agree with this. Becuase Serry Fucknut as well as other Queenzoners are tired to research what's the real Queen! "This topic us about the importance of various original members." What are you awaiting for?! Do you really think that some Queen fans would tell you "John is not important at all"?Then ignore the topic. Nobody forces you to read it or debate it in any way shape or form. If you're not interested, then don't get involved. |
| Oberon 10.05.2005 07:46 |
I think various comments and quotes has proved that Fred tended to have an influence on John and Roger's songs. Take Radio Ga Ga and AKOM. I've read that Fred changed the arrangements to make them more commercial - or more "pop". I don't think that AKOM would have reached (2 or 3?) in the UK in the version which is on the end of the Highlander film over the credits. From what I've heard the album version was as a result of Fred's input. Similarly, Radio Ga Ga and some of John's songs. Conversely, I've not heard of Fred having the same input to Brian's songs. So this indicates that Fred and Brian were alway the two primary song writers, but that doesn't mean that John or Roger were not important. Some their songs are big hits, and they would've come up with the basics of them. Can you imagine if AOBTD had not even been conceived by John? How much would that have changed Queen's standing in the states? Quite a lot I think. The combination of that and CLTCL really set them up. |
| Serry... 10.05.2005 07:48 |
Oberon wrote:I wouldn't debate 'till this guy started to call me 'Fucknut'. And I didn't discuss - I just wrote that we don't need in dozen of topics about real Queen at each day.Serry Funster wrote: Serry Fucknut can't agree with this. Becuase Serry Fucknut as well as other Queenzoners are tired to research what's the real Queen! "This topic us about the importance of various original members." What are you awaiting for?! Do you really think that some Queen fans would tell you "John is not important at all"?Then ignore the topic. Nobody forces you to read it or debate it in any way shape or form. If you're not interested, then don't get involved. For me Queen are: Brian, Roger, John and Freddie, but I'm not talking about it any given hour. |
| Sharon G. 10.05.2005 08:12 |
I have always felt that Queen was 4 people: Freddie John Roger Brian and only them. Queen + PR is 1/2 Queen plus friends. What gets my nose out of joint is the media stating that PR is replacing Freddie . Not True. No Freddie No John = No Queen I remember how it was before And I am holding back the tears no more.......... |
| alibat 10.05.2005 09:07 |
I am fed up of people getting a really hard time from some Queenzoners for daring to suggest anything about this not being Queen. I was at the Sheffield show last night. It was fantastic. Probably the best concert I've been to since 1986 (I can't remember who I saw now). However, not only did I miss Freddie, I also greatly missed John. John was a very important part of Queen. For me, its not Queen without both John and Freddie. But, what we have is very special and superb in its own right. As a fan of Paul Rodgers as well as Queen, this is almost best line up for a concert I can hope for these days. I say almost. No disrespect to the other guys, but my dream line today up would have been just Brian, Roger and John with Paul Rogers. Fifteen or more years ago, it would have had a different singer obviously. Just one last note. Please can people respect each others opinion. It might be different from yours but please don't slag people off. |
| Fairy 10.05.2005 09:14 |
I have to admit that for me John has always been the least important member of Queen. Maybe because he never sings? I don't know. In any case, they're all important but to me Freddie = Queen. The others are great and allowed him to shine, but he is the essence of Queen and more... Fairy |
| wstüssyb 10.05.2005 11:46 |
John is not left out, do you know he is making more money from this tour then any one else makes in a year at this forum? =) there is always some one least important, no one is ever equal in team or band situations. Every one has thier part. |
| Oberon 10.05.2005 12:07 |
Fairy wrote: I have to admit that for me John has always been the least important member of Queen. Maybe because he never sings? I don't know. In any case, they're all important but to me Freddie = Queen. The others are great and allowed him to shine, but he is the essence of Queen and more... FairyFreddie != Queen. Freddie's solo stuff didn't do anywhere near as well as Queen stuff, and I don't think it would have done even if he'd done more. They are all necessary to make Queen, but Fred and Brian's input was greater. But without Roger and John, I think the band would have been a completely different entity and probably much more unbalanced, and perhaps might have suffered from break ups etc much more without the right mix, which the four of them were |
| Wombat 10.05.2005 12:45 |
Scott_Mercury wrote: Serry Fucknut-lol :) sign this petition to ban this idiot from queenzone. i need your vote /queenzone/530028.html |
| Munchsack 10.05.2005 14:58 |
The only thing that matters is that all four band members approve of the tour. Brian and Roger obviously do, John does as well, and obviously if Freddie were still with us Paul wouldn't be needed, but he was a huge fan of Paul's and of Free (possibly Bad Company as well) so he would probably be pleased. If you don't like it, don't go to the gigs. |
| escuderodelareina 10.05.2005 15:18 |
i think, brian is the musical brain of the band. the queen's fans know that very well. yes freddie is the best singer in the world, but brian is the musical heart of the group. about john, he was like Bill Wyman (rolling stones bass player), a shy guy, but very important for queen. |
| Scott_Mercury 10.05.2005 15:47 |
Brian may be the most consistant songwriter in Queen... But Brian's best work cannot equal Freddie's best work in my honest opinion. As far as the musical vision.... Brian was the only member in Queen who didn't... on a regular basis ...take his material to Freddie, and say "do something with this". So Brian knew what he wanted his own songs to sound like... However, and very importantly... John and Roger took their songs....Radio Ga Ga, Kind of Magic, AOBTD, I want to break free...etc...to Freddie to "do something with". I think that is important to note that 2 out of 3 Queen songwriters trusted Fred with their new works...to "do something with". That pretty much says it all. |
| merc 10.05.2005 20:53 |
Queen were all different. Thats what made them work. Do you really have nothing better to do than start a stupid pointless topic like this one?! Sorry, i've never picked on someone elses post before but hey, there's a first (and probably last) time for everything! Seriously, starting a topic like this..you must be struggling for ideas. How about we start one like 'Some people say that Freddie wasn't the most flamboyant or well known member of Queen.' Any idea what the responses would be?!! Or how about, 'Some people think Brian couldn't play guitar at all.' |
| Scott_Mercury 10.05.2005 22:35 |
Seriously- I thought the intelligence level was higher here. What you guys are telling me with your replies is equivelent to: "We know that John Deacon was just an average bass player, that could have been replaced by anyone...in fact, on this new tour... you can't even tell he's missing." The POINT of my topic is simply this- Everyone...and I mean everyone has a part of them that knows that Freddie was a HUGE part of Queen. Queen's sound...Queen's look... Queen's image. Then I basically went on to state that for every 20 people that say that you cannot have Queen without Freddie... maybe 1 person will say the same about John. ___________________________________________________ My question + statement is A) Do you agree with this? B) The disrespect part was me saying...how do you think Deacon himself would feel if he was reading this forum?? I would assume that he would conclude that he was a part of Queen... wrote some hits... is well respected.... BUT HE WOULD HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT HE WILL NEVER MEAN TO FANS WHAT FREDDIE DOES. ___________________________________________________ By the way... how is this a dumb topic?? We have dumbasses putting up ebay auctions that some pimp ho-dad in bum fuck Egypt has...and if we really think Frddie signed it. Who gives a shit. People like to talk about band dynamics. This question is geared at that topic. |
| Grantcdn 10.05.2005 23:19 |
They have always said that Queen was greater than merely the sum of their parts....Freddie wasn't very good WITHOUT Brian.......and when Freddie went of on a tangent he did the terrible selling Hotspace....and his own solo album which aside from his vocals and perhaps some piano wasn't very good....Freddie really needed Brian to make himself better....Brian needed a great singer to bring out his songs and Freddie was the best to have....so that's why the rockers were so good....I think Roger and John needed both of them.....although Roger not as much because he was a great singer and could play guitar as well.......I think this IS really Queen though because Roger and Brian are together (half the band) and the others aren't really because they can't....For those who say Queen isn't Queen without Freddie....does that mean that Drowse, Someday One Day, I'm In Love With My Car, and Fight From the Inside, and No One But You were not Queen songs? Just food for thought??? |
| Scott_Mercury 11.05.2005 00:36 |
Grantcdn- While I don't agree with everything you said...that was the kind of answer I was looking for. You didn't whine and say "but on Oct. 24th, 2004, at 10:19 p.m. we already talked about this" You just answered the question...way to go!! My opinion on what you said: Yep, Freddie's solo stuff is weak compared to Queen. A great singer needs a great band too....food for your thought. Also... I'm not so sure that I don't have guitar students that couldn't write better material than has appeared on Brian or Roger's solo efforts. I know that will offend some... but I feel all of the Queenies solo stuff has been lame compared to what they could do together. For example: You can take everything of Rogers solo projects...including The Cross...and even if you took the 10 best tracks...put them on one cd... You still wouldn't have a album near Queen quality. |
| mike hunt 11.05.2005 04:09 |
freddie without queen was brilliant. MR, bad guy was average, but the amazing barcelona is simply one of the greatest albums in my collection and that includes queen. get the facts straight. freddie and brian were the essence of queen, i'm sick of people trying to say who was better, cos they needed each other, brought the best out of each other. |
| _amadeus_ 17.05.2005 09:30 |
In my opionion, John Deacon, according to many reliable sources, is responsible for creating such songs as Another One Bites the Dust and Under Pressure. Another One Bites The Dust was #1 in North America for longer than any other Queen songs. |