| deleted user 12.05.2007 12:26 |
I think that A Night At The Opera is over-rated. Queen were at their best during the early years. Queen II was an absolute masterpiece, and Sheer Heart Attack was even better. Queen (the album) was substantially better than "The Game" which some argue to be one of their best. Queen redeemed themselves with News Of The World, but it wasn't the same. News Of The World would work better as an album if the first two tracks (We Will Rock You and We Are The Champions) had been the last two tracks. but with songs that seem to end an album at the beginning, I am constantly reaching for the next button on my stereo. Somehow, they redeemed themselves again on Innuendo, but this sounded like a third rate Guns And Roses tribute band had attempted to make a carbon copy of Queen II without getting sued. I know you are going to flame me for insulting "the greatest band in the land" but I don't fucking care. nothing about being a Queen fan requires me to love every single album. |
| YourValentine 12.05.2007 13:53 |
You are entitled to your opinion. I wonder where it comes from when I look into your profile, though: Favorite Band Member: Brian May Favorite Album: A Night at the Opera Became a Queen fan: March 2005 |
| deleted user 12.05.2007 14:07 |
I haven't updated that in ages |
| Penetration_Guru 12.05.2007 18:21 |
<i>Donny Mars wrote: I change my mind a lot |
| steven 35638 12.05.2007 22:27 |
<i>Donny Mars wrote: I think that A Night At The Opera is over-rated. Queen were at their best during the early years. Queen II was an absolute masterpiece, and Sheer Heart Attack was even better. Queen (the album) was substantially better than "The Game" which some argue to be one of their best. Queen redeemed themselves with News Of The World, but it wasn't the same. News Of The World would work better as an album if the first two tracks (We Will Rock You and We Are The Champions) had been the last two tracks. but with songs that seem to end an album at the beginning, I am constantly reaching for the next button on my stereo. Somehow, they redeemed themselves again on Innuendo, but this sounded like a third rate Guns And Roses tribute band had attempted to make a carbon copy of Queen II without getting sued. I know you are going to flame me for insulting "the greatest band in the land" but I don't fucking care. nothing about being a Queen fan requires me to love every single album.This is hardly a "fresh" idea. This argument has existed for a long while, and you realize this now? And if I may add, your ignorance is apparent. There was no need to stoop so low as to resort to profanity. |
| SomebodyWhoLoves 12.05.2007 22:48 |
Queen were always good in the 70s. But you're right. I think after the Sheer Heart Attack album, Queen became less of a metal / experimental band, and more of a conventional pop/rock commercial band where they tried to write hit singles in order to sell records. The quality was still there, but they lost some artistic earnesty of their early albums, and they never recovered it. During the 80s, they became even more of an egregiously pop/commercial band. But they were masters at creating hit songs. And the fans wanted exactly what Queen were creating. One thing that Queen should have tried to do later on in their career was to write a rock opera. They had the talent to do it. Sadly, that will never happen. |
| masterstroke_84 13.05.2007 05:10 |
how do you write hits???? you start an album and say: ok these 9 songs gonna be "normal" and these tree gonna be "hits"??... Now I´m gonna sit down and write 5 hits and become millonaire in one week... jezzz... P. |
| steven 35638 13.05.2007 11:51 |
<i>Donny Mars wrote: Queen redeemed themselves with News Of The World, but it wasn't the same. News Of The World would work better as an album if the first two tracks (We Will Rock You and We Are The Champions) had been the last two tracks. but with songs that seem to end an album at the beginning, I am constantly reaching for the next button on my stereo.I was going to say something about this before, but felt it wasn't important to say. However, I do believe it deserves somewhat of a discussion now, or whatever. Listen, it would have been idiotic when producing the album to put those two tracks at the end. For heaven's sake, it's "We Will Rock You," not "We Just Rocked You." Perhaps they could have put "We Are The Champions" at the end of the album by itself, but that might have changed the course of history for Queen. I do realize that at most their concerts they put We Will Rock You/We Are The Champions at the end, however when producing the album they hadn't exactly performed those two songs as a tradition just yet. |
| deleted user 13.05.2007 12:16 |
I loved "Innuendo" and I would pick it as their "best". Maybe wrongly, maybe because how I feel about music as art. I don't think it was trying to be a "carbon copy" of anything. I think perhaps they were maturing and took things they learned together. I also love "The Miracle" - and I can see a sort of "lead up" to "Innuendo" there. I agree wholeheartedly with Freddie - I don't remember when he said it, or what it was part of - but he said that the band had already grown and done better than "Bohemian Rhapsody". I think this was "Day at the Races" time, but I'm not sure. Stephen King also said something to the effect of, "It kind of bothers me when people say my best work was thirty years ago and that I can only go downhill". I think creative people can certainly "decline" - but I think what Queen did was a choice. Do you think that if Queen had stuck to "Prog-Fantasy-Fairy-Rock" people would still give a shit today ? I guess it's possible, but I think they would have stagnated and people would have gotten tired of them. People like Madonna and Bowie because they "change". If Ziggy Stardust had tried to keep going, he could well have gotten boring and outlived his welcome. But, whatever. |
| queen4eva224 13.05.2007 20:16 |
masterstroke_84 wrote: how do you write hits???? you start an album and say: ok these 9 songs gonna be "normal" and these tree gonna be "hits"??... Now I´m gonna sit down and write 5 hits and become millonaire in one week... jezzz... P.omg, i am always thinking about that! it's like for the news of the world album..."Ok, WWRY and WATC are gonna be hits, so let's put them at the beginning of the album." ? this is strange to me. speaking of hits, what i don't understand is why bohemian rhapsody is so great but people fail to realize how very similar it is to march of the black queen. can someone explain this to me? |
| SomebodyWhoLoves 13.05.2007 20:24 |
queen4eva224 wrote:How is BohRhap similiar to March of the Black Queen?masterstroke_84 wrote: how do you write hits???? you start an album and say: ok these 9 songs gonna be "normal" and these tree gonna be "hits"??... Now I´m gonna sit down and write 5 hits and become millonaire in one week... jezzz... P.omg, i am always thinking about that! it's like for the news of the world album..."Ok, WWRY and WATC are gonna be hits, so let's put them at the beginning of the album." ? this is strange to me. speaking of hits, what i don't understand is why bohemian rhapsody is so great but people fail to realize how very similar it is to march of the black queen. can someone explain this to me? |
| queen4eva224 13.05.2007 21:03 |
SomebodyWhoLoves wrote:idk, to me they seem simliar. i don't know how to describe it. um...they're both different in an awesome way. there's not really a chorus for either of them. i mean, they both change a lot throughout the song, they don't stay the same for too long. you know what i mean? god, i knew this would be hard to explain. yargh.queen4eva224 wrote:How is BohRhap similiar to March of the Black Queen?masterstroke_84 wrote: how do you write hits???? you start an album and say: ok these 9 songs gonna be "normal" and these tree gonna be "hits"??... Now I´m gonna sit down and write 5 hits and become millonaire in one week... jezzz... P.omg, i am always thinking about that! it's like for the news of the world album..."Ok, WWRY and WATC are gonna be hits, so let's put them at the beginning of the album." ? this is strange to me. speaking of hits, what i don't understand is why bohemian rhapsody is so great but people fail to realize how very similar it is to march of the black queen. can someone explain this to me? |
| Vincent. 13.05.2007 21:19 |
^They are both some form of progressive rock, I suppose... They both use some of the same recording techniques... They both are real long... I guess. That's what I think, anyways. (: |
| deleted user 13.05.2007 21:53 |
... "The March of the Black Queen", to me is definitely a step on the way to "Bohemian Rhapsody". They both have the changes in style that take you on a sort of "journey". The difference I feel is that "Bohemian Rhapsody" is more "one song" with "The March of the Black Queen" is a bit more choppy (which isn't necessarily "worse"). I also feel that "My Fairy King" and "The Millionaire Waltz" and probably something I'm forgetting are "related" to "Bohemian Rhapsody". They just have the same sort of multi-part music journey thing going on. |
| SomebodyWhoLoves 14.05.2007 12:00 |
I think Freddie said that he took three songs and put them together to make Bohrap. It does sound like one of those early Queen medleys. Actually, in Queen II, a lot of those songs, especially on the black side sound like medleys where you have songs that lead into another song as if it is one long song. BohRhap is the same way. It starts off with a beautiful soft song that leads into a crazy bizarre "operatic" section that explodes into a hard rock riff before finally fading back softly. It's a very strange yet beautiful song in which only Freddie could pull off. It's almost orgasmic. The entire song builds and builds and finally there is a climax. If you put Nevermore and March of the Black Queen together, it sort of is a BohRhap. Nevermore is a beautiful soft song that fades into a harder, edgier, climactic March of the Black Queen song. I can't decide which I like better: Never More + March, or BohRhap. |
| Micrówave 14.05.2007 13:00 |
<i>Donny Mars wrote: sounded like a third rate Guns And Roses tribute bandAre they any better? Cause the original sucked. |
| Wiley 14.05.2007 17:15 |
SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: How is BohRhap similiar to March of the Black Queen?They are both mostly acyclic pieces of music with several different sections, themes and melodies. Surely not your average pop song. I once made a paper on Bohemian Rhapsody for my musical appreciation class and mentioned Black Queen as a predecessor to it. Before that, maybe My Fairy Queen could be considered the start of a series of ideas, techniques and styles that eventually led to Freddie writing BoRhap. As (I believe) Sebastian pointed out in a thread, during the first half of the seventies, Queen got a bit more accessible to the masses while having more complex arrangements. Bohemian Rhapsody is the ultimate product of this. Still, I don't like the ANATO album as much as I like ADATR (talking about similar albums). Wiley |
| queen4eva224 15.05.2007 22:56 |
SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: It's a very strange yet beautiful song in which only Freddie could pull off. It's almost orgasmic.um, almost? lol. yeah, i think u guys described the similarities between the two songs quite well. better than me, anyway. bo rhap is like a journey...nicely said The Audacity of Charles. |
| August R. 16.05.2007 07:46 |
*azzadude* wrote: Most bands take ages to make albums. Queen just pumped out the albums. So unlike bands these days that take 2-3 years between albums, Queen in the 70's was with a range of 1-2 year space. And in that time between studio work there were touring the globe.This is a bit off the mark, 'cos you made a good point, but just wanted to remind that in the 70's a world tour meant North America, western (=non-socialist) parts of Europe, Japan and Australia in some cases. Nowadays the world tours really are world tours, so it takes much more time to promote the latest album everywhere. That's why many BIG bands release an album only every 2-4 years. |
| sparrow 21754 16.05.2007 13:29 |
night at the opera is one my favorite. i dont know why, but it also changes day to day. tomorrow their debut album will be a favorite. then news of the world the next day. i honestly cant pick a favorite, and that to me, ladies and gentleman, proves a great band. i dont think it is over rated. it is properly rated ot its quality of work. however, i believe if anything there are some underrated albums. |
| sparrow 21754 16.05.2007 13:29 |
YourValentine wrote: You are entitled to your opinion. I wonder where it comes from when I look into your profile, though: Favorite Band Member: Brian May Favorite Album: A Night at the Opera Became a Queen fan: March 2005XD brava barb! |
| Micrówave 16.05.2007 14:49 |
August R. wrote: That's why many BIG bands release an album only every 2-4 years.Also, releasing them too soon can kill a band. Men At Work - Released "Cargo" while still in the US promoting Business As Usual. Five top ten singles in 1982-83. Then one more album with half the "Men" missing, and done. Creed - Released three crappy albums so close together, it didn't take the world long to figure out how bad they sucked. And that's why Brian May releases a solo album every 17 years. |
| Carol! the Musical 16.05.2007 16:10 |
<font color=FF0033 face=symbol>Freddie wrote:You read my mind.<i>Donny Mars wrote: I think that A Night At The Opera is over-rated. Queen were at their best during the early years. Queen II was an absolute masterpiece, and Sheer Heart Attack was even better. Queen (the album) was substantially better than "The Game" which some argue to be one of their best. Queen redeemed themselves with News Of The World, but it wasn't the same. News Of The World would work better as an album if the first two tracks (We Will Rock You and We Are The Champions) had been the last two tracks. but with songs that seem to end an album at the beginning, I am constantly reaching for the next button on my stereo. Somehow, they redeemed themselves again on Innuendo, but this sounded like a third rate Guns And Roses tribute band had attempted to make a carbon copy of Queen II without getting sued. I know you are going to flame me for insulting "the greatest band in the land" but I don't fucking care. nothing about being a Queen fan requires me to love every single album.This is hardly a "fresh" idea. This argument has existed for a long while, and you realize this now? And if I may add, your ignorance is apparent. There was no need to stoop so low as to resort to profanity. And notice how he changed his fave album. xP |
| Ale Solan 16.05.2007 21:25 |
A Fresh View would be to see the world without you, Angus. :-D |