QueenZone discussion #622985
WHY PAUL RODGERS VOICE COULD BE BETTER THAN FREDDIE'S LIVE
| hotspacerules 16.09.2005 15:51 |
ive been listening to return of the champions, and here is my theory: I've noticed that Freddie's voice cracks alot on past live albums - a comparison ive made is listen to A kind of magic on Wembley, and then kind of magic of return of the champions - paul's voice is always smooth and silky........ |
| boy of destiny 16.09.2005 16:18 |
Well he should be well rested... he takes about half of the evening off. |
| brENsKi 16.09.2005 17:13 |
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaahahahahaahhahahahahah hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaahahahahaahhahahahahah hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaahahahahaahhahahahahah you serious? Paul's a very good singer...but Freddie's vocal range he ain't!!!! |
| Sebastian 16.09.2005 18:07 |
Read what I put in the How Can I Go On thread, I think Fred wasn't "that" great live. I've never heard Paul so I can't judge |
| GiantSpider 16.09.2005 18:30 |
To be totally honest I think that Paul Rodgers has one of the best voices that Britain has ever made. He doesn't have Fred's range no but I would still say Paul is better. |
| deleted user 16.09.2005 18:33 |
hotspacerules wrote: ive been listening to return of the champions, and here is my theory: I've noticed that Freddie's voice cracks alot on past live albums - a comparison ive made is listen to A kind of magic on Wembley, and then kind of magic of return of the champions - paul's voice is always smooth and silky........i find it rather humorous that your using the one live album they released where freddies voice was lacking to compare to return of the champions try comparing anything on return of the champions to live killers or live at the bowl |
| Sharon G. 16.09.2005 18:40 |
Paul better singer than Freddie? NEVER! |
| david (galashiels) 16.09.2005 18:57 |
your taking the piss,,,,,,,,,,,although not a how can i put it,,,,,,,,,,,freddie i want to have your kids,,,,i must say the voice range of mr mercury was estonishing and very few singers reach those hights,,,,,paul is good but not in the classic voice range of fred,,,,,,,,,,,good singer but not freddie |
| Mr Mercury 16.09.2005 19:05 |
boy of destiny wrote: Well he should be well rested... he takes about half of the evening off.When I went to see him (Paul Rodgers that is) on his own show, he was only on stage for just under 80 minutes. That included the encore - singular, not plural. Freddie, on the other hand usually did about 2 hours plus. So its no wonder that his voice cracked every now and then. Also, if you want comparisons, how about Pauls version of AOBTD at Wembley this year. Despite being put down 2 keys he doesnt even attempt to try for the "high" notes that Freddie would have hit on any of his versions. That said, I like both Freddie and Paul in equal measure. And I also like the fact that Brian and Roger have chosen someone who is nothing like Freddie to front this version of Queen. |
| Sharron .G 16.09.2005 20:03 |
This shit is dumb to talk about. You are comparing 2 completely different singing styles. Paul is a blues based, macho, vintage rock singer. Freddie is a opera/vaudville/broadway/showtunes inspired, flameboyant, influenced rock singer. Freddie wouldn't have sounded in place on a Bad Company album.... however, his talent would have pulled it off. But the idea of Paul Rodgers on the Barcelona album trying to sing opera.... thats a joke. Paul Rodgers would tell you, himself, to any of our faces that he couldn't/wouldn't attempt a song with Monseratt.... he knows he doesn't have the range. The title of this topic is also dumb... "Paul Could Be Better" Alot of things "could be" My piss hitting toilet water "could be" considered better music then the Beatles entire catalog. George "Dub ya" Bush "could be" intelligent. Alot of thing "could be". If you think Paul's voice is better,,, then to you, it is. To me... its most certainly not... and even if his voice was (which its not) .... he still doesn't have Freddie's stage presence. |
| Mr Mercury 16.09.2005 21:06 |
Sharron .G wrote: George "Dub ya" Bush "could be" intelligent.Him intelligent - Nah. That could never be the case. Anyone who says shit like this has limited intelligence "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 |
| Sharron .G 16.09.2005 22:35 |
Mr Mercury wrote:No shit Jeeves, notice why I put """" around hillbilly Bush's middle initial... he's a inbred hilljack.Sharron .G wrote: George "Dub ya" Bush "could be" intelligent.Him intelligent - Nah. That could never be the case. Anyone who says shit like this has limited intelligence |
| thePresence 16.09.2005 22:49 |
hotspacerules wrote: ive been listening to return of the champions, and here is my theory: I've noticed that Freddie's voice cracks alot on past live albums - a comparison ive made is listen to A kind of magic on Wembley, and then kind of magic of return of the champions - paul's voice is always smooth and silky........well, lets see here...not to be disrespectful, but recording technology is different. thats one of the reasons Paul may sound better compared to Mr. Mercury... |
| Freddie's #1 Fan Forever 16.09.2005 23:59 |
No, Freddie's voice does not easily crack. His highest recorded note is the "C" 2 octaves above middle "C", while his lowest recorded notes are an octave and a half below middle C. I have tested this myself. For instance, in "Under Pressure" there is a note that, I think, is the "A" 2 octaves above middle C and yet the tone of Freddie's voice there is still excellent! You can hardly even tell from listening from it that the note is really that high. Maybe his voice tired on long tours, but his recorded vocal range and tone were superior to what you hear from Paul Rodgers. |
| SomebodyWhoLoves 17.09.2005 01:29 |
hotspace, all you have proven in this thread is that you're a dumbass and/or tone deaf. Freddie had everything a singer could want. 1. He had a beautiful pure tone which is more important than range. Even if he didn't have his 3.5 octave range, his voice had a sweet, angelic tone. Roger Taylor probably has 4.5 octave range, but Roger's voice's tone is very poor. 2. Freddie has an impressive 3.5 octave range. Why is range important? Because high range creates power, and the ability to evoke passion. 3. Because of Freddie's natural vocal gifts, he could sing EVERY style possible. Rock, Pop, Opera, Slow, Fast. Everything. That is what made Queen so great. Each album covered so many styles and Freddie pulled it off. Paul Rodger's voice is technically inferior to Freddie's voice, lacking in both range, and tone. There is simply no comparison. |
| its_a_hard_life 17.09.2005 06:27 |
I like Paul Rogders voice its nice talent, ofcourse no one is better then Freddie Mercury i dont think Paul is better live then Freddie, but he does have a great voice, yes i will buy "the return of the champions" i watched the preview in the cinema and it was wonderful i cant wait to get it out on dvd soon. |
| Mr_Bad_Guy_91 17.09.2005 06:36 |
I say Freddie better because I am profoundly deaf and when Freddie sing i could follow the words same time as he sing his voice is high and clear Paul has a good voice but of coz not the same as freddie I say Well done to Paul because he did it in his own way He didnt try to copy freddie voice he didnt try to dance they way freddie did he didnt dress like freddie he is brillant and he is keeping Queen music alive I will buy the Return of the Champions as it all part of Queen and their history :) |
| brENsKi 17.09.2005 07:48 |
Sebastian wrote: Read what I put in the How Can I Go On thread, I think Fred wasn't "that" great live. I've never heard Paul so I can't judgefreddie's (live) vocal range up until 82 was excellent. Paul could never matcht that as i said - paul is good - but his range is limited, whereas Freddie's vocal range live for 9 years was much better |
| Sebastian 17.09.2005 07:57 |
I've listened to Paul in the studio (Free and Bad Company) many years ago and as I remember, indeed he didn't have a huge range, but he kind of compensed it by the unique way he expressed his singing. > Roger Taylor probably has 4.5 octave range, but Roger's voice's tone is very poor Roger's voice is quite strong. Btw Fred's got larger range than Roger. > Because of Freddie's natural vocal gifts, he could sing EVERY style possible. Without telling the entire story it's just another overrating point. How many boleros has Freddie sung? zarzuelas? flamenco? zamba? Andean music? Vietnamese music? > Paul Rodger's voice is technically inferior to Freddie's voice Yes but that doesn't make Freddie a "better" singer. Virtually every person with 5+ years of vocal lessons already has better technique than Freddie, but it doesn't make them better. |
| Bobby_brown 17.09.2005 08:55 |
I now what you mean, and i think that Freddie with 58 years old couldn't sing as much as Paul with 58 unless Freddie would start taking care of his voice! You may say: compare Paul with the Live KIllers and so forth, but my opinion is that Paul has a better sence of controling his voice because he's 58 and yoga might be helping too. For Freddie to be able to perform live with 58 years he would have to find another lifestile! Take care |
| hotspacerules 17.09.2005 09:06 |
HENCE - PAUL RODGERS IS A GREAT CHOICE IN JOINING THE BAND - AS YOU CAN SEE FROM EVERYONES COMMENTS, YOU CAN COMPARE ANYONE TO FREddies vOICE, BUT THERE VOICES ARE SO UNIQUELY DIFFERENT (and in some instances pauls voice is better) WELCOME TO THE BAND PAUL |
| Mr_Bad_Guy_91 17.09.2005 09:07 |
Yes a warm welcome to Paul :) |
| mr bad guy 5656 17.09.2005 10:21 |
For Freddie to be able to perform live with 58 years he would have to find another lifestile! => well, Freddie's lifestyle did kill him actually. IMO, it says enough cheers anyway link <= this site is really fabulous! check it out. |
| fredrix_p 17.09.2005 12:10 |
I am a big fan and i listened all the lives shows of queen with freddie you have to understand that freddies voice at wembley was very tired , and you cant compared his voice from that concert. now . if you listened the song who wants lo live forever live in budapest 86 you will see a very good performance and the quality just exactly like the studio version. and there are so many concerts in the 70s were freddies voice was excelent more of 700 performance of queen . are so much and you have to understand. now are two differents singer with paul . maybe hard songs like tie you mother down , pauls voice is better but the sensibility and feeling always be mercury . i am a queen fan forever . i think this. |
| Tero 17.09.2005 12:22 |
Mr Mercury wrote: When I went to see him (Paul Rodgers that is) on his own show, he was only on stage for just under 80 minutes. That included the encore - singular, not plural. Freddie, on the other hand usually did about 2 hours plus. So its no wonder that his voice cracked every now and then.I would have been happy to hear 80 minutes of Paul Rodgers a few months ago, if that would have meant they'd cut out the guitar & drum solos, as well as all those songs by Bri & Rog... :P Was Any Queen concert in the 80's over two hours long? As far as I remember, 110 minutes seems to be the maximum, and even that includes the 10 minute break (known as Brighton Rock) and the breaks before the encore(s). |
| Rick 18.09.2005 05:35 |
hotspacerules wrote: ive been listening to return of the champions, and here is my theory: I've noticed that Freddie's voice cracks alot on past live albums - a comparison ive made is listen to A kind of magic on Wembley, and then kind of magic of return of the champions - paul's voice is always smooth and silky........Ever heard Freddie sing in the early seventies? His range was enormous. And BTW, you can't compare Paul with Freddie. And remember: Freddie sang much more then Paul. |
| Mr_Bad_Guy_91 18.09.2005 05:45 |
We do know that freddie sing better but he isnt here now and we have to move on and we much thank paul for keeping Queen music alive :) |