Forums > Queen - General Discussion > An interesting comparison...

forum rss feed
Author

Tero user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1012 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 06:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

FT wrote on the "Does the spirit of Queen live on with Bri, Rog & Paul?" topic at QOL:

This is a very interesting topic, nonetheless it does generate intense feelings amongst fans who either love or hate the use of the name. For a brief period (because of my association with Jeff Soto) I became interested in Journey - a band that I thought had been together forever, so I decided to look back at who they were and where they came from. It threw up some interesting facts, not sure if this will copy here, but a synopsis/timeline of the band's history shows that they have been a very fluid outfit but have two constants - Neal Schonn and Ross Valory (Guitar & Bass respectively)

date Vocalist Guitar Bass Keys Drums
1975 Robert Flieschmann Neal Schonn Ross Valory Gregg Rolie Aynsley Dunbar
1978 Steve Perry Neal Schonn Ross Valory Gregg Rolie Steve Smith
1980 Steve Perry Neal Schonn Ross Valory Jonathan Cain Steve Smith
1986 Steve Perry Neal Schonn Jonathan Cain
1995 Steve Perry Neal Schonn Ross Valory Jonathan Cain Steve Smith
1997 Steve Augeri Neal Schonn Ross Valory Jonathan Cain Deen Castronovo
2006 Jeff Scott Soto Neal Schonn Ross Valory Jonathan Cain Deen Castronovo
2008 Arnel Pinero Neal Schonn Ross Valory Jonathan Cain Deen Castronovo

So Journey, quite apart from the much revered Steve Perry (who is going 'head to head' with Freddie on www.voteno1.com) have had three other front men - yet the band, despite having only 20% of the original membership still calls itself 'Journey'. And that is without the many others who have been a part of, or whom have participated in 'Journey'; Randy Jackson, Larrie Londin, Prairie Prince, George Tickner.

So the parallels are there
Uncle H


Some people apparently see these kinds of lists as a validation for Brian and Roger performing as Queen. I don't see it that way at all.

On the surface this appears to be a nice comparison, but it fails to take into account on any level the fact that Journey had major line-up replacements over thirty years ago, at the very start of their career. The same chart with Queen would read:

1973 Freddie Brian John Roger
1978 Freddie Brian John Roger
1980 Freddie Brian John Roger
1986 Freddie Brian John Roger
1995 Freddie Brian John Roger
1997 Brian John Roger
2006 Brian Roger
2008 Brian Roger

Does anybody else see the difference compared to the previous list? Does anybody else agree with me that the stability of Queen's line-up makes it somewhat unique compared to the examples that are usually thrown in these discussions?

(And pleases remember this isn't a deadly serious topic, and that's why it's in the general discussion area...)

bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12700 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 06:57 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It's basically impossible to use different bands for examples when it comes to line-up changes, and whether or not the new line-up is worthy of the old band name.
This is only how I feel, but I don't think it works for Queen. On the other hand, I think it works (on some level) for The Who. Some bands can pull it off, others can't. It's not a question of how many members it takes to leave a band before it's not the 'real' thing anymore, it's really 'who' you take out.


"Your not funny, your not a good musician, theres a difference between being funny and being an idiot, you obviously being the latter" - Dave R Fuller
Treasure Moment user not visiting Queenzone.com
Treasure Moment
Deity: 3413 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 08:13 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It can NEVER be Queen without freddie, simple as that.


Freddie Mercury is God

TREASURE MOMENT: Continuing QUEENs footsteps

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=42215463

theCro user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1056 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 08:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Treasure Moment wrote:

It can NEVER be Queen without freddie, simple as that.
but it's already Queen (+ Paul Rodgers) ?
Queen today is Brian and Roger... that's what they say and have rights to use Queen 'banner' under their names. so it's legal.. is it moral? thats the other subject...

Tero user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1012 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 12:58 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Zebonka12 wrote:

It's basically impossible to use different bands for examples when it comes to line-up changes, and whether or not the new line-up is worthy of the old band name.
This is only how I feel, but I don't think it works for Queen. On the other hand, I think it works (on some level) for The Who. Some bands can pull it off, others can't. It's not a question of how many members it takes to leave a band before it's not the 'real' thing anymore, it's really 'who' you take out.


It's really the last sentence that says it all.
What it comes down to is who does the general population perceive to be the most important member(s) of the band? The Who can pull it off because they have the leading members left... Queen could do it if they had disbanded in the 80's and Brian and Freddie had gone back to touring in 2004.

Some bands can succesfully replace their frontmen, but in my opinion that can only work if there is a past history of changes. Nobody expects the Rolling Stones to continue without Mick Jagger, or the Beatles to reform without John Lennon. That would be just as absurd as Queen without Freddie.

Treasure Moment user not visiting Queenzone.com
Treasure Moment
Deity: 3413 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 14:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

theCro wrote:

Treasure Moment wrote:

It can NEVER be Queen without freddie, simple as that.
but it's already Queen (+ Paul Rodgers) ?
Queen today is Brian and Roger... that's what they say and have rights to use Queen 'banner' under their names. so it's legal.. is it moral? thats the other subject...


they use the name but the real queen fans wont buy into it. Its basically like a cover band now, they should REALLY put this down.


Freddie Mercury is God

TREASURE MOMENT: Continuing QUEENs footsteps

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=42215463

primavera user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 26 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 18:01 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I've been following all the discussions about Q+PR and came to one conclusion which maybe somebody would find blasphemous...

OK, don't get me wrong... I think Freddie is the best vocalist and performer ever, versatile, flamboyant, talented... a genius of music... and we all miss him immensely! It hurts to think what else he could have created, had he not left us..

But all this criticism about Brian and Roger betraying the memory of Freddie. I mean, who are we to criticise them? THEY are the founding members of Queen, THEY (of course, together with John and Freddie) started the whole thing... and it is not for us to tell them what is right and what is wrong. We have not got the status and the talent.

Queen is not exclusively the property of fans... And I, as a fan of Queen for nearly 16 years would accept any step Brian and Roger would make in order to keep their music living.

P.S. everything said above is my humble opinion and is not intended to abuse of offend anyone

Dusta user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 525 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 18:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I do think this is very important, and, keeping this in mind has helped me to be a little less emotional about Queen moving forward without Freddie. Why does it matter so very much to me?Brian and Roger are both incredibly musical people, as was Freddie. In order to feel whole, it seems as if they need to make music. It would be difficult for them, at their age, after all of this time, to start a, "new," band.

I do agree, however, that the comparison to Journey and other bands isn't really accurate, at all, as the circumstances are completely different. Queen's longevity as a band makes the idea of them moving forward, less two important members, a bit more dismaying for folks like me, who have been fans since the seventies.

primavera wrote:

Queen is not exclusively the property of fans... And I, as a fan of Queen for nearly 16 years would accept any step Brian and Roger would make in order to keep their music living.

P.S. everything said above is my humble opinion and is not intended to abuse of offend anyone



It is all random
Boy Thomas Raker user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 969 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Mar 08, 19:24 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

"THEY are the founding members of Queen, THEY (of course, together with John and Freddie) started the whole thing... and it is not for us to tell them what is right and what is wrong. We have not got the status and the talent."

Absolutely 100% correct. Whether you believe it's Queen is decided if you believe in a brand name or people. As I believe in people, I could never accept anything but Roger, John, Brian and Freddie as Queen.



You know, good times are now.
Roger Meadows Tailor user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 330 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 17 Mar 08, 00:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

primavera wrote:

I've been following all the discussions about Q+PR and came to one conclusion which maybe somebody would find blasphemous...

OK, don't get me wrong... I think Freddie is the best vocalist and performer ever, versatile, flamboyant, talented... a genius of music... and we all miss him immensely! It hurts to think what else he could have created, had he not left us..

But all this criticism about Brian and Roger betraying the memory of Freddie. I mean, who are we to criticise them? THEY are the founding members of Queen, THEY (of course, together with John and Freddie) started the whole thing... and it is not for us to tell them what is right and what is wrong. We have not got the status and the talent.

Queen is not exclusively the property of fans... And I, as a fan of Queen for nearly 16 years would accept any step Brian and Roger would make in order to keep their music living.

P.S. everything said above is my humble opinion and is not intended to abuse of offend anyone


You can count me in on that one too.Queen they are and Queen they will forever be.Whether anybody likes it or not,In Paul,i think they've got the best singer/front man that is going.And i'm a TRUE Queen fan and have been for the past 34 years.Not like some i can mention


Memories my memories

How long can you stay

to haunt my days.