Not at all comparing to Freddie Mercury. But technically, or/and lyrically talking, what do you think about Paul's voice?
I think he can hit actually at least 2 1/2 octaves, that's pretty good I think.
I also think that he didn't have any vocal professional formation, but he can quiet naturally hit high notes...I think he sings with his throat very much, but his voice has very much power; and he sings very much with the heart. I think too that one thing which proves that he sings much with the throat is that he doesn't very often open his voice as he would have to by singing as a professional vocalist.
What do you think? What do think the vocalists who talked about Freddie's voice, but now talking ONLY about Paul's voice, I don't want to begin a fight of Queenzoners :-)
Rodgers has an amazing voice. I think that vocally he is better now than at any time in his career.
Sure, what 57 year old can hit the notes he could when he was 20? But, in terms of feeling, modulation, etc., the guy is amazing.
After seeing him front Queen, I found a new respect for Paul Rodgers.
Apart of being a amazing singer... with a beatiful voice in both sides (ballads, blues, rock...) he is an amazing INTERPRETER... you can have the best voice technically but if you are a crappy interpreter... you are nothing...
And the music of Queen.. in MY opinion... needs more a great interpreter that a great singer technically...
Paul Rocks!
mircal wrote: His voice is ok, but i think he has an attitued.
What do you mean by attitude? I think that he comes across as a very lighthearted and humble person or so I have heard. Sadly, I missed meeting him by minutes because we were looking for a place to park the car around the hotel in Prague at the time he was arriving at the front door, after his gig with Queen last year. Still, I have only heard good comments about him being nice.
On stage I sometimes felt like people didn't appreciate him enough. He was at the catwalk and most people were looking at Brian and Roger. This happened in their 2005 tour, San Diego 2006 was a whole different story. He seemed very comfortable fronting the band, he had everybody's attention on him and he shone very brightly. What an ass kicking show!
I know this topic was originally about his voice, sorry. I think he has a very good voice. I have bought a couple of Bad Company and Free albums. Try listening to Free's Chronicles compilation. I think it's great. Still, he might be singing better today than in some of those recordings.
Wiley
masterstroke_84 wrote: Apart of being a amazing singer... with a beatiful voice in both sides (ballads, blues, rock...) he is an amazing INTERPRETER... you can have the best voice technically but if you are a crappy interpreter... you are nothing...
And the music of Queen.. in MY opinion... needs more a great interpreter that a great singer technically...
Paul Rocks!
Paul doesn't have any bad attitude at all, in fact he is a nice person. He even signed my I want it all 7" single hahaha....I wouldn't do that if I was Paul...
He is a real nice person and a great great singer.
Wiley wrote:
I know this topic was originally about his voice, sorry. I think he has a very good voice. I have bought a couple of Bad Company and Free albums. Try listening to Free's Chronicles compilation. I think it's great. Still, he might be singing better today than in some of those recordings.
Wiley
Yeah, I'm listening to that myself right now.
The really early stuff blows me away, cos you can hear an unrefined, youthfulness to his voice but even at the age of 18, it's clear that this was a special singer.
Those long sustained notes in Moonshine?
Whoa nice!
Then just one year later on the second LP stuff, he makes a huge leap with refinement and power.
Archetypal is almost how I would describe his voice.
One of those guys that defines the pinnacle of a genre or style.
He's great.
He's got a fantastic voice and, in my experience, is gracious, warm, and humorous in person.
I heard a live version of Rock and Roll Fantasy with Bad Company on the radio today. He goes into The Beatles "Ticket To Ride" for a bit. I was again struck by how good his voice is. He's the real deal and I'm sorry I missed his solo gigs in the US and UK.
I like his singing now more than I did 30 years ago.
He may have the voice of a man in his late 50s but he knows what to do with that voice.
And for masterstroke_84's comment on Paul Rodgers interpreting Queen songs you made an excellent point.
To me his interpretation was better than having someone trying to be Freddie and falling short.
Paul hasn't got an additude at all. Freddie had an additude!
When I talked to Paul after the Paris show, and I gave him a compliment on the great performance he did his reaction was more of a 'Huh? They actually like what I did?" than a 'I know darling, I'm a bloody rockgod"
FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: Paul hasn't got an additude at all. Freddie had an additude!
When I talked to Paul after the Paris show, and I gave him a compliment on the great performance he did his reaction was more of a 'Huh? They actually like what I did?" than a 'I know darling, I'm a bloody rockgod"
Have you ever met freddie mercury asshole?...If you never met the man how can you say he had an additude?
s.m. wrote: great voice, no doubt about it
but that dosent mean that he can sing queen songs
that is another different level
I couldn't agree with you more. Some people on these boards think I hate paul, but that simply isn't true. Rodgers is a fantastic singer with a great voice, he's probably in the top 15 of the best rock singers in history. That doesn't mean that he sings Queen songs good, All the highlights on ROTC is paul singing his own songs. The Queen songs didn't work, except for FBG and TYMD. Some examples of songs that didn't work are "I want it all" and "magic." Paul even said that he couldn't pull off "I'm going slightly mad."