|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
04-02-2003, 05:03 AM
|
#1 of 31 
|
|
Ricardo C
Member
Location: Venezuela
Join Date: Feb 2002
Local Time: 05:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 5,142
|
The reason I'm asking this is because I just watched the mini-concert by Brian, Roger, and assorted guests gave iN Amsterdam last year, to celebrate the Queen's Day holiday. It was great to see Queen perform again, even if it was just half of the band. Brian's playing was terrific, ("Hammer to Fall" and "No-One But You" rocked). Roger actually did quite a nice job with "Radio Ga Ga". But that's all I enjoyed about the show. Here's what got on my nerves:
- Backup singers. F**k that, you know? Queen never needed backup singers. It's a trend that started at the Tribute concert, and should not continue. One of the things I enjoyed most about Queen was seeing how they adapted their multi-layered albums for live performance.
- No Deaky. I know, he claims he retired from music the day Freddie died, but come on, man. He could have shown up for NOBY, at least.
- No Spike Edney.
- Patti Russo. Ma'am, I love your voice, but you should never sing another Queen song. Same goes for Trijntje Oosterhuis, who closed the show.
Anyway... Seeing the lads are still in top form made me feel great. There's been no real decline in their vocal abilities (limited though they may be) nor in their playing. But I really wish they'd stop making these "half of Queen" appearances. When your lead singer dies, you either pack it in, or find a new lead and keep going. In the past, I've been opposed to the idea of ANYONE taking over Freddie's job, but I think it might work, if they auditioned total unknowns and focused on finding someone who can hit the notes, but who is NOT a Fred lookalike. Someone who could come out of nowhere and truly become one of the band.
Maybe it's just that I'm pumped after watching a live Queen show, but I really would like tos ee the band back in full, and not as a nostalgia act, but as the creative juggernaut they always were. Who's with me?
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
04-02-2003, 05:21 AM
|
#2 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Local Time: 02:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 145
|
it would be so very very pale in comparison, no matter who they got to try and replace FM. i'd be appalled.
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 08:17 AM
|
#3 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 1999
Local Time: 05:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 2,275
|
We're not talking about replacing David Lee Roth or Sammy Hagar here, you know? Though Gary Cherone sounded amazing singing that Queen medley at the Concert for Life...
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 08:49 AM
|
#4 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Local Time: 05:53 AM
Local Date: 11-19-2008
Posts: 117
|
No!!! Cover versions come to my mind when I think of the Tribute to Freddie Mercury concert.
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 09:20 AM
|
#5 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Local Time: 02:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 685
|
OK - start the flames.
George Michael.
He did a killer job doing "Somebody To Love" at that memorial concert a few years back.
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 09:27 AM
|
#6 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Local Time: 05:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 458
|
George Michael sounded O.K. on "Five Live" where he sang Queen songs with the rest of the boys...
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 10:04 AM
|
#8 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Local Time: 04:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 282
|
I agree with the Gary Cherone supporters. He's got the pipes and the stage presence to pull it off.
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 02:27 PM
|
#9 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Local Time: 09:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 315
|
no. Queen died the day that freddie died. It'll be like bringing back the Doors or the Beatles with substites. It's just wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 03:58 PM
|
#10 of 31
|
|
Member
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Join Date: Aug 2000
Local Time: 02:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 5,835
|
No. Freddie is Freddie and that's it. He wasn't just a singer, but he was a performer and entertainer too.
Would be like, ... the Doors trying to replace Jim Morrison. Stupid, IMO.
If it's not worth waiting until the last minute to do, then it's not worth doing.
KevinVision 7.1 ...
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 04:18 PM
|
#11 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: May 2001
Local Time: 09:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 537
|
What Zack said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2003, 06:02 PM
|
#12 of 31
|
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Local Time: 04:53 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 4,399
|
I'm not a Queen fan, but I'm with those who oppose a reunited band with a new singer. These attempts - Creedence Clearwater "Revisited" or the new Doors - are just pathetic. I won't argue that bands should only continue if they include only the original members, and it can get sticky to decide who's "expendable". The Who without Moon and/or Entwistle? The Stones without Jones and/or Wyman? Led Zep without Bonham? I've seen the first two, and I'd probably see the other one as well.
For most acts, though, lead singers AREN'T replaceable. That's probably not fair, especially in cases like the Who, where one could argue that Moon and Entwistle were as essential to the band as Daltrey. Be that as it may, I accept the Who with just Daltrey and Townshend, but I wouldn't accept a version that included only Moon and Entwistle and replaced Pete and Roger. I'll happily see the current Stones lineup, but if Jagger quit and Keith tried to replace him - a notion that actually seemed possible in the late Eighties - I'd never see the Stones. (I'd not see them without Keith or Charlie either.)
Queen without Freddie ain't Queen. Cherone indeed did a nice job with the song he played at the 1992 show, but I wouldn't support a version of the band with him as the singer. (Granted, I don't support them NOW, but that's not my point!)
| |
