una999 20.09.2006 10:00 |
Just listening there to that medley of 5 songs. Some fantastic stuff there that should have made it on the album Makes u think of all the magic songs freddie would have done if he were alive - instead we're left with plonkers like McFly etc... Queen really knew how to play even comparing them to other bands of today - certainly a band way ahead of their time. Fuck the beatles queen were better!!!(but whats the point even arguing that!) |
7 seas of Rhye 20.09.2006 21:05 |
Yay! Finally someone else agrees that Queen is better than The Beatles!!!!!! Where have you been all my life? |
SK 20.09.2006 21:14 |
una999 wrote: Just listening there to that medley of 5 songs. Some fantastic stuff there that should have made it on the album Makes u think of all the magic songs freddie would have done if he were alive - instead we're left with plonkers like McFly etc... Queen really knew how to play even comparing them to other bands of today - certainly a band way ahead of their time. Fuck the beatles queen were better!!!(but whats the point even arguing that!)I know you are passionate about Queen, but they dont even come close to The Beatles, they don't even come close to WINGS or any of the solo Beatles. There is no point in saying any more, those who know that Beatles are superior to Queen in every sense already know, those who don't will never quite "get" The Beatles. Cheers. |
rocks. 20.09.2006 21:47 |
SK wrote:Differance in opinion love, dont worry about it.una999 wrote: Just listening there to that medley of 5 songs. Some fantastic stuff there that should have made it on the album Makes u think of all the magic songs freddie would have done if he were alive - instead we're left with plonkers like McFly etc... Queen really knew how to play even comparing them to other bands of today - certainly a band way ahead of their time. Fuck the beatles queen were better!!!(but whats the point even arguing that!)I know you are passionate about Queen, but they dont even come close to The Beatles, they don't even come close to WINGS or any of the solo Beatles. There is no point in saying any more, those who know that Beatles are superior to Queen in every sense already know, those who don't will never quite "get" The Beatles. Cheers. My mom likes them better than beatles too. I prefer them, but I wont say either is "better" than the other. I think what you like is what the beatles represent....but remember, thats just MY opinion, dont take it personally. |
SK 20.09.2006 21:51 |
WhatMustHeThink wrote:Hey glad to see you around! Funny how we usually dont end up posting in the same topics :D. Yes, I suppose I grew up with the Beatles(and Queen too mind you) and their message of love and to be yourself,free,classless,artistic, that stuck with me all these years. It wasn't that I was doubting his own opinion, he was stating it like a fact sadly, which is what made me say what I had to say. Beatles are amazing, Queen is cool too. Thats all that matters :) by the way I saw the Game at Dejavu, do you have that one already?SK wrote:Differance in opinion love, dont worry about it. My mom likes them better than beatles too. I prefer them, but I wont say either is "better" than the other. I think what you like is what the beatles represent....but remember, thats just MY opinion, dont take it personally.una999 wrote: Just listening there to that medley of 5 songs. Some fantastic stuff there that should have made it on the album Makes u think of all the magic songs freddie would have done if he were alive - instead we're left with plonkers like McFly etc... Queen really knew how to play even comparing them to other bands of today - certainly a band way ahead of their time. Fuck the beatles queen were better!!!(but whats the point even arguing that!)I know you are passionate about Queen, but they dont even come close to The Beatles, they don't even come close to WINGS or any of the solo Beatles. There is no point in saying any more, those who know that Beatles are superior to Queen in every sense already know, those who don't will never quite "get" The Beatles. Cheers. |
rocks. 20.09.2006 22:09 |
*drools* Nope!!! Glad to see you too hun! Mm, i had to get them to extend their hold on GVH2 and hotspace, havent been able to get down there! *gah* Well, glad you see my point love, and I like posting with you! :D |
SK 20.09.2006 22:23 |
WhatMustHeThink wrote: *drools* Nope!!! Glad to see you too hun! Mm, i had to get them to extend their hold on GVH2 and hotspace, havent been able to get down there! *gah* Well, glad you see my point love, and I like posting with you! :D:) Bless your heart |
Marcelo_argentina 20.09.2006 23:05 |
Queen can´t be compared to Beatles at all. I find this discussion stupid. As stupid as saying in a "Queen page" that any ohter band is better than Queen...you prefer Beatles? Great..but don´t expect silence if you say what you "had" to say... Thanks SK! Queen. |
Saint Jiub 20.09.2006 23:20 |
Ringo is better than Queen and he is a better drummer. LOL |
deleted user 20.09.2006 23:25 |
I know some people who would have NO PROBLEM fucking The Beatles... |
M a t i a s M a y 21.09.2006 03:49 |
SK wrote:WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU KNOW ABOUT MUSIC, LITTLE MAN?!?!?!una999 wrote: Just listening there to that medley of 5 songs. Some fantastic stuff there that should have made it on the album Makes u think of all the magic songs freddie would have done if he were alive - instead we're left with plonkers like McFly etc... Queen really knew how to play even comparing them to other bands of today - certainly a band way ahead of their time. Fuck the beatles queen were better!!!(but whats the point even arguing that!)I know you are passionate about Queen, but they dont even come close to The Beatles, they don't even come close to WINGS or any of the solo Beatles. There is no point in saying any more, those who know that Beatles are superior to Queen in every sense already know, those who don't will never quite "get" The Beatles. Cheers. SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!! And then... capo Queen capo The Beatles do ya get me? ;) |
FriedChicken 21.09.2006 04:39 |
My guess is that he knows more about music than you do. The Beatles ARE more superior. I like Queen more, but The Beatles where so much ahead of their time. |
Togg 21.09.2006 04:56 |
As Brian said, The Beatles were our guide, we had better technology, but we used the benefit of their experience. |
SK 21.09.2006 06:45 |
FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: My guess is that he knows more about music than you do. The Beatles ARE more superior. I like Queen more, but The Beatles where so much ahead of their time.Thank you. |
una999 21.09.2006 09:50 |
Personally i dont mind who's better - it doesnt matter! When i listen to music i listen to the music - not the words (initially). That's why i think queen are better - sounds bigger and better - and freddies voice was so unique that its so refreshing to hear it, compared to someone like paul mccartney who isnt as technically able (dont have to be technically great to be a great singer!!).just nice to hear such a powerful voice in freddie I listen to the words second, and as long as the lyrics aren't childish or stupid i dont mind. If i was locked in a room for a week i'd pick queen due to the diversity. Beatles are prob better or maybe it's just becasue people keep saying they are - they're always there like the ten commandments!! |
The Fairy King 21.09.2006 10:19 |
una999 wrote: Personally i dont mind who's better - it doesnt matter! When i listen to music i listen to the music - not the words (initially). That's why i think queen are better - sounds bigger and better - and freddies voice was so unique that its so refreshing to hear it, compared to someone like paul mccartney who isnt as technically able (dont have to be technically great to be a great singer!!).just nice to hear such a powerful voice in freddie I listen to the words second, and as long as the lyrics aren't childish or stupid i dont mind. If i was locked in a room for a week i'd pick queen due to the diversity. Beatles are prob better or maybe it's just becasue people keep saying they are - they're always there like the ten commandments!!That still doesn't mean they are better though. ;) They have some great tunes, but they are a bit overrated in the sense that everybody keep saying they're the greatest etc. |
Adam Baboolal 21.09.2006 10:49 |
<b><font color="#FF1493">The Fairy King wrote:They belong to a different time and to those that experienced them and what came after, they could just be...una999 wrote: Personally i dont mind who's better - it doesnt matter! When i listen to music i listen to the music - not the words (initially). That's why i think queen are better - sounds bigger and better - and freddies voice was so unique that its so refreshing to hear it, compared to someone like paul mccartney who isnt as technically able (dont have to be technically great to be a great singer!!).just nice to hear such a powerful voice in freddie I listen to the words second, and as long as the lyrics aren't childish or stupid i dont mind. If i was locked in a room for a week i'd pick queen due to the diversity. Beatles are prob better or maybe it's just becasue people keep saying they are - they're always there like the ten commandments!!That still doesn't mean they are better though. ;) They have some great tunes, but they are a bit overrated in the sense that everybody keep saying they're the greatest etc. Adam. |
M a t i a s M a y 21.09.2006 12:39 |
FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: My guess is that he knows more about music than you do. The Beatles ARE more superior. I like Queen more, but The Beatles where so much ahead of their time.How can he know more about music than me? I am a musician myself, I study music and I've been studying music for YEARS, I play more than 5 instruments, and I write songs that could only be performed by an orchestra (some of them have more than 20 instruments). He claims to know because he has some records and listens to them, and then he thinks he knows about music... I repeat How can he know more about music than me? |
Gone. 21.09.2006 13:03 |
OMG! Just stop with the argument dammit! Both of you know a LOT about music! There we go...Peace is restored. Hopefully. ~>:-O. What would your mothers say, dammit? Shame on you. :-/ lol |
M a t i a s M a y 21.09.2006 13:06 |
<font color="#FF7F5">GetDown!<h6>Make <3 wrote: OMG! Just stop with the argument dammit! Both of you know a LOT about music! There we go...Peace is restored. Hopefully. ~>:-O. What would your mothers say, dammit? Shame on you. :-/ lolHE KNOWS SHIT ABOUT MUSIC!!! HE DOESN'T EVEN FUCKING KNOW WHAT MUSIC IS!! |
Gone. 21.09.2006 13:07 |
How on Earth is it possible to compare the two most greatest bands in Rock history? It's impossible. Seriously, Beatles were better in their "special genre" and Queen was better at theirs. They are two different bands. No way a person can compare them. NO WAY! I like Queen and the Beatles equally. :) P-p-p-e-a-c-e :) |
Gone. 21.09.2006 13:09 |
M a t i a s M a y<h6><i>QZ's Rainmaker wrote::-o...*goes away to hide in a little corner*...I'm not messing with this. :-/ lol. *gasp*<font color="#FF7F5">GetDown!<h6>Make <3 wrote: OMG! Just stop with the argument dammit! Both of you know a LOT about music! There we go...Peace is restored. Hopefully. ~>:-O. What would your mothers say, dammit? Shame on you. :-/ lolHE KNOWS SHIT ABOUT MUSIC!!! HE DOESN'T EVEN FUCKING KNOW WHAT MUSIC IS!! |
una999 21.09.2006 13:21 |
different genres alright - maybe its just that beatles fans are the generation at the mo. i'm sure that say a band like radiohead are the beatles of another generation!! by the way i play piano and guitar but it doesnt make a differnece to your opinions on music - dont need to be a fashion expert to see that someone dresses well! |
carboengine 21.09.2006 13:24 |
Sorry to have such a poor memory, but on one DVD/VHS Queen got a longevity #1 award and an interviewer said you've beaten the Beatles. Was it Roger who then said no one beats the Beatles. |
kagezan1313 21.09.2006 13:44 |
We're out of cheese, Gromit! Beatles were hotshots - they put out a lot of great music, but died because they got arrogant and put their own drama before the music. Pathetic. Queen had the creative fire to carry on until Freddie died, and during their career, made some great music too. And judging by the charts, people have demanded Queen's songs a lot more than the Beatles. |
M a t i a s M a y 21.09.2006 16:01 |
una999 wrote: different genres alright - maybe its just that beatles fans are the generation at the mo. i'm sure that say a band like radiohead are the beatles of another generation!! by the way i play piano and guitar but it doesnt make a differnece to your opinions on music - dont need to be a fashion expert to see that someone dresses well!but you need to actually know about fashion to state who dresses better ;) |
M a t i a s M a y 21.09.2006 16:01 |
kagezan1313 wrote: We're out of cheese, Gromit! Beatles were hotshots - they put out a lot of great music, but died because they got arrogant and put their own drama before the music. Pathetic. Queen had the creative fire to carry on until Freddie died, and during their career, made some great music too. And judging by the charts, people have demanded Queen's songs a lot more than the Beatles.you're insane |
maxpower 21.09.2006 16:09 |
dont quite know whats this has to do with the miracle but hey ho. |
deleted user 21.09.2006 16:12 |
maxpower wrote: dont quite know whats this has to do with the miracle but hey ho.Yeah... that's kinda what I was thinking too... |
una999 21.09.2006 16:29 |
fashion - to a point. i can tell if a news presenter dresses well, if i see one of my friends!! i take ur point though! |
deleted user 21.09.2006 16:35 |
Fashion - It's loud and it's tasteless and I've heard it before - Fa-fa-fa-fa-fashion - Lala la la la la la! la! |
maxpower 22.09.2006 12:33 |
In reply to kagezan1313 the drama overtook the group thats why they stopped touring no fucker wanted to listen to the music (even if the did the couldnt hear anything)just stare at 4 lads on stage & scream, which is a shame as ive some great quality bootlegs from early shows in Sweden in 63 & other places before then & the audience actually listened. The reason the beatles impolded is down to one thing Brian Epstiens death after that 4 headless chickens trying to be "beatles" as well as businessmen & as John Lennon said following Esptiens death "We've fucking had it now" within 2 years it was all over. |
maxpower 22.09.2006 12:40 |
& to add further what charts are we refering to? album charts from 1963 Weeks at number one so May 63 thru to xmas the only thing that knocked Please Please Me off the top spot was With The Beatles 1963 re 12 Jan Original Soundtrack West Side Story 1 re 19 Jan Shadows Out Of The Shadows 2 33 02 Feb Cliff Richard & The Shadows Summer Holiday (OST) 14 34 11 May Beatles Please Please Me 30 35 07 Dec Beatles With The Beatles 21 1964 (2nd beatle album at number 1 till may) 36 02 May Rolling Stones Rolling Stones 12 37 25 Jul Beatles A Hard Day's Night 21 38 19 Dec Beatles Beatles For Sale 7 no band in history has done this |
breathe 23.09.2006 14:04 |
I prefer Queen to the Beatles. I like how Queen can do a range of styles and still have that Queen aura and harmony, whereas the Beatles don't have that same, familliar, warm aura. Just an opinion. From '39 to Death On Two Legs, or Sheer Heart Attack to You Take My Breath Away, its so distinctly Queen. Then again, I absolutely BUM Queen, so I will be biased. Just a thought. |
skiqueen 23.09.2006 14:12 |
queen is more entertaining...its so fun to watch freddie run around the stage!! |
7 seas of Rhye 23.09.2006 14:16 |
Okay. Apparently there is still some confusion on this subject. Let me clear this up for all the slow people. Queen are better than the Beetles. It doesn't really matter if you agree with me. It's fact. Sorry Beetles fans but Queen is just simply better in everyway possible. |
Gone. 23.09.2006 14:22 |
7 seas of Rhye wrote: Okay. Apparently there is still some confusion on this subject. Let me clear this up for all the slow people. Queen are better than the Beetles. It doesn't really matter if you agree with me. It's fact. Sorry Beetles fans but Queen is just simply better in everyway possible.I have to agree with you, my little muffin. xD The music isn't better...just the energy, I have to say. In my opinion..Let's put it this way...If I was given a Beatles Concert ticket, and a Queen concert ticket...I would choose Queen. Simple as that. :D |
deleted user 24.09.2006 04:47 |
<font color="#FF7F5">GetDown!<h6>Make <3 wrote:True, I agree as well, but I just simply like Queen's music better, I would choose Queen over the Beatles because I'm a bigger Queen fan. I think Freddie had the edge as a singer and Brian as a guitarist, but just because I think like that doesn't mean Queen are better than the Beatles. They are two great rock groups from different times. You really can't compare them on anything other than your personal opinion.7 seas of Rhye wrote: Okay. Apparently there is still some confusion on this subject. Let me clear this up for all the slow people. Queen are better than the Beetles. It doesn't really matter if you agree with me. It's fact. Sorry Beetles fans but Queen is just simply better in everyway possible.I have to agree with you, my little muffin. xD The music isn't better...just the energy, I have to say. In my opinion..Let's put it this way...If I was given a Beatles Concert ticket, and a Queen concert ticket...I would choose Queen. Simple as that. :D |
eenaweena 24.09.2006 04:53 |
comparing queen to the beatles would be very hard. they were playing i 2 different eras. vocally, i think that queen was better. they were also more innovative than the beatles. but with regards to the sales and hits, i think that the beatles were much better. come to think of it, in a span of 8 years being together, they had bazillions of hits! queen also had the same amount of chart-toppers, but thing is, they did it in a span of... 20+ years, if i am not mistaken. having said this, i say i love them both, but queen has a bigger place in my heart. :) |
Gone. 24.09.2006 10:04 |
<font color="indigo"><b>friedchicken \m/ wrote: having said this, i say i love them both, but queen has a bigger place in my heart. :)EXACTLY! :D. Queen is just more...more FUN TO WATCH! LOL. I adore the Beatles. But I would choose Queen. :D. Smile. |
deleted user 24.09.2006 12:10 |
una999 wrote: Just listening there to that medley of 5 songs. Some fantastic stuff there that should have made it on the album Makes u think of all the magic songs freddie would have done if he were alive - instead we're left with plonkers like McFly etc... Queen really knew how to play even comparing them to other bands of today - certainly a band way ahead of their time. Fuck the beatles queen were better!!!(but whats the point even arguing that!)I like Queen and i like the beatles and i like McFly and i dont see the problem! Whats the point in arguing about what band is better cos its not gonna make any difference! Even if you say that Queen are better than the beatles theres always somebody who will say vice versa! I like both The Beatles and Queen and i wouldnt say that one is better as i think that they are both legends and have the same amount of my respect! |
Oberon 24.09.2006 16:06 |
kagezan1313 wrote: Beatles were hotshots - they put out a lot of great music, but died because they got arrogant and put their own drama before the music. Pathetic. Queen had the creative fire to carry on until Freddie died, and during their career, made some great music too. And judging by the charts, people have demanded Queen's songs a lot more than the Beatles.But the achievement of the Beatles in the space of less than 10 years is quite phenonemal really. But the thing that I think means that Queen are better musicians is that The Beatles started with simple pop songs and grew to make more complicated esoteric music, wheras Queen did the reverse. They created complex interesting music at the start of their career and then graduated to "simple" pop songs in the 80s (the fact is that even the poppier songs were still underpinned by great melodies however). And of course, they came back with Innuendo to come full circle (almost). So to my mind, The Beatles were the most prolific and influencial band (and Lennon and McCartney must be hailed as two of the greatest ever songwriters - not necessarily performers) whereas I think overall, Queen are better musicians and performers and equal (if not greater) songwriters. A lot of that is my opinion and obviously biased, but I still think Queen's music as a whole is more interesting, even though I like the Beatles too. |
mc7t 24.09.2006 16:21 |
For what it's worth, here's my way of working out the beatles/queen situation.I love 'em both, so The Beatles are the best 60s band,then Queen took over the throne after...Easy!:-) |
The Real Wizard 24.09.2006 16:58 |
M a t i a s M a y<h6><i>QZ's Rainmaker wrote: I am a musician myself, I study music and I've been studying music for YEARS, I play more than 5 instruments, and I write songs that could only be performed by an orchestra (some of them have more than 20 instruments). He claims to know because he has some records and listens to them, and then he thinks he knows about music... How can he know more about music than me?Okay, that's it. For months, I've watched you look down on others for their musical tastes or knowledge, but now you just crossed the line. You are the personification of a "snobby musician". Just because you can arrange music for an orchestra doesn't make you a master of music in all its aspects. There is more to music than the technical ability to arrange, or play a few instruments. One doesn't have to be a musician/composer/arranger to be highly knowledgeable about music history or music in culture. You have displayed plenty of musical ignorance on this forum over the past few months. If you are a true musician, or at least highly knowledgeable of music, then the first fact to be understood is that one musician shouldn't place himself over another for ANY reason. Everyone is at a particular point on their musical journey, no matter how serious (or not so serious) they are about it. If playing four-chord punk music makes someone happy, then so be it. If playing jazz music to 20 people in a club makes someone happy, then so be it. If one is happy arranging orchestra scores or concertos, then so be it. Understanding music involves tolerating the musical differences between you and others. You have NOT displayed this, ever! Your particular knowledge of music may gain you the respect of a few of your peers who are at a similar level as you, but most people will scowl at your attitude and arrogance towards others who are different from you. If in real life you act like you do on this forum, I'm sure there are many, many people who do not respect you as a musician or as a person. As for the Beatles/Queen debate... there really shouldn't be much of a debate. Although Queen are my favourite band, it is not even worth discussing the overall cultural impact of The Beatles vs. Queen, or any other band. No group of rock musicians impacted culture and popular music more than The Beatles did. If you include solo records, they have sold over 1.5 billion records worldwide. Nobody will ever be bigger than The Beatles. End of discussion. |
Togg 25.09.2006 07:09 |
Here bloody here! well said |