Forums > Queen - General Discussion > My biggest Queen complaint

forum rss feed
Author

AmeriQueen user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1072 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jul 08, 20:11 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I am so bored with Queen's set list save maybe 20% of it, and it's been this way for 30 years for the most part.

How many more times are they going to end a concert with We Will Rock You/We Are The Champions? How important is it really to them, us, or anyone that Tie Your Mother Down doesn't get skipped, or that Paul Rodgers list hangs on to All Right Now and Can't Get Enough of Your Love???

I realized once again that after earlier listening to the Japan show they shot live with PR 3 years back that the coolest elements by far are the Teo Torriate and Fire + Water additions, and most special of all decisions they made on the tour was the May/Taylor version of I Was Born To Love You. I have 3 points about this:

1. Queen has to be bored near death by now at playing these songs up into the thousands night after night.

2. True Queen die-hards can't possibly be that pumped up about hearing yet another playing of We Are The Champions and it's traditional partners of constant replay, and if they are like me they usually will skip forward these worn out tunes on dvd viewings.

3. True Queen fans like myself would cry out tears of joy everytime something interesting and uncommon made the list, just like the 3rd leg's one additional Queen classic joined the set and gave us Dragon Attack.

4. Even if they felt obligated to give audiences a wealthy load of classic hits, couldn't they drop We Will Rock You, Tie Your Mother Down, We Are The Champions and Radio Ga Ga and instead treat us with replacements such as Headlong, Liar, Save Me and/or Heaven For Everyone?


One Vision was the only interesting addition with the Nelson Mandela set-list. I'd love to see them drop the traditional format and surprise us sometime with White Man or Prophet's Song or Doing Alright, or go really nuts with something like Don't Lose Your Head or Who Needs You.


Surprise us Queen.


P.S. I do contradict this post slightly in that I think the Brighton Rock 3 harmony Brian May solo should always continue it's path of evolution, and every show ought to close out with God Save The Queen of course.




Cwazy little thing user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 483 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jul 08, 20:29 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Whilst Im absolutely for some surprises and a more interesting setlist, I dont think dropping Champions or WWRY would be popular or plausible.

You play every show as if its to an audience who have never seen you before, even if they have, and none of those other songs you mentioned are even a tenth as well known as those two. Bands will always play their biggest, bestest known songs as this is their bread and butter, and these are their most successful tracks for a reason - MOST people like them.

The vast majority of people at any gig are not the sort of fans who post on sites like this, and would most likely want to hear these big hits.

HOWEVER, this argument does not run for IWTBF, Magic, FBG (although this one's still ok in my book) etc, and it is these tracks they could, and in some cases should sacrifice to make for a more interesting experience, and to cover their back catalogue a bit better.

I mean a Queen show without WWRY/Champions is like a Sabbath show without Paranoid, an ACDC show without Back in Black or Highway to Hell or a Deep Purple show without Smoke on the Water.
I saw Clapton a few years back for the very first time - some fans had probably seen him many times down the years, but if he hadnt played Layla, I would have been somewhat pissed off, and shortchanged: it wasnt all I went for, but I sure as hell wanted to see it!

:)

Those are my thoughts anyway! Best Wishes.


Adventure Seeker on an empty street...

www.myspace.com/ampfirerock
AmeriQueen user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1072 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 00:39 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I can understand your point about treating the audience as receipiants of a first ever live treat, but while it may be a wideknown and classic in finishing a Queen gig, I can't help but remember the pre News of the World Days when they ended shows with the likes of Liar, Jailhouse Rock and above all their once perfect closure behind In The Lap of the Gods Revisited.

I can't see a majority Queen crowd as feeling let down with a return to this early encore in exhange with a 30 year repetition.

P.S. My first ticket to May's Birmingham show with PR surprisingly cut Feel Like Making Love from the setlist and my dissapointment was insignificant with the dozens of other classics they draw from their collective well.



mr mercury user not visiting Queenzone.com
Adam who?????
mr mercury
Deity: 4630 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 05:15 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

AmeriQueen wrote:



I do contradict this post slightly in that I think the Brighton Rock 3 harmony Brian May solo should always continue it's path of evolution,



Sorry, but I dont agree. In my opinion, Brian's solo has becoming boring and a bit stale. I would much rather see him going full tilt in a solo within a song or two.


"Normally i can't dance to save my life.

But as soon as I step in dog shit, I can moonwalk better than Michael Jackson."
FriedChicken user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 10641 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 07:45 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Don't forget that it's only the hardcore fans who heard 30% of the concerts they did on bootlegs and dvds and so on. The normal people who have a couple of albums would be really disappointed if We are the Champions and We Will Rock You weren't played.





"On the first day Pim & Niek created a heavenly occupation. Pim & Niek blessed it and named it 'Loosch'."



(Genesis 1:1)
Benn user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1332 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 07:58 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

AmeriQueen,

Of course, you're absolutely right. Wouldn't it be great to have set lists changed on a nightly basis and arrive at a show not knowing what you're going to get. After all, Springsteen & The E-Street Band can do it, can't then and they play for 3+ hours every time.

However, many bands simply like the feeling of being incredibly good at playing a certain set of songs night after night - it makes them feel more comfortable and allows them to then stretch themselves within the confines of what they know if you get my drift. The technical side of it also comes into play here too. Where a band like Queen relies HEAVILY on a structured light show, there is very little scope for movement outside of the rehearsed set list. Computers are programmed for the players to be playing songs in order. Unfortunately, Queen seem to think that it's great to have a highly structured stage performance and light show. For me, and I think plenty of others too, I'd prefer NO lights and simply the band playing as if they were in a small theatre and just doing what comes naturally, not relying on rehearsed moves and formal structure.

Although The Who has relied on a structured set list for some time now, you never quite know what you're going to get. With Springsteen, every show is a joy in that requests come from the audience and the band members themselves.

I'm sad to say that Queen now bores me. There's NOTHING exciting about what they play or how they play it. Brian trots out LOLM at each show as if we're all still paying homage to Freddie whilst he takes a paid break on the stage. They need to move themselves on and get away from what is easy to play. Challenge themselves and bring out some material that's fun and interesting. I'd rather see a completely ballsed up version of White Queen or Ogre Battle than a note perfect, well lit Radio GaGa or AOBTD........



Benn
Queenman!! user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queenman!!
Bohemian: 931 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 10:06 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Benn wrote:

AmeriQueen,

Of course, you're absolutely right. Wouldn't it be great to have set lists changed on a nightly basis and arrive at a show not knowing what you're going to get. After all, Springsteen & The E-Street Band can do it, can't then and they play for 3+ hours every time.

However, many bands simply like the feeling of being incredibly good at playing a certain set of songs night after night - it makes them feel more comfortable and allows them to then stretch themselves within the confines of what they know if you get my drift. The technical side of it also comes into play here too. Where a band like Queen relies HEAVILY on a structured light show, there is very little scope for movement outside of the rehearsed set list. Computers are programmed for the players to be playing songs in order. Unfortunately, Queen seem to think that it's great to have a highly structured stage performance and light show. For me, and I think plenty of others too, I'd prefer NO lights and simply the band playing as if they were in a small theatre and just doing what comes naturally, not relying on rehearsed moves and formal structure.

Although The Who has relied on a structured set list for some time now, you never quite know what you're going to get. With Springsteen, every show is a joy in that requests come from the audience and the band members themselves.

I'm sad to say that Queen now bores me. There's NOTHING exciting about what they play or how they play it. Brian trots out LOLM at each show as if we're all still paying homage to Freddie whilst he takes a paid break on the stage. They need to move themselves on and get away from what is easy to play. Challenge themselves and bring out some material that's fun and interesting. I'd rather see a completely ballsed up version of White Queen or Ogre Battle than a note perfect, well lit Radio GaGa or AOBTD........


I 100% agree with you. Unfortunately it still comes to money, selling out shows and using old succes. I hope with the new album coming up, something will change.

That's also the problem I have with the guitar solo from Brian in the middle of the show. Since 1984 he uses always the same licks on and on..(clean part always starts in E-minor etc, harmonizer noise)
I love to see the things he did on the Hammersmith 1975 performance etc.



You made us laugh, you made us cry, you made us feel like we could fly!
Micrówave user not visiting Queenzone.com
Delilah, on Medium Power
Micrówave
Deity: 7037 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 11:02 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

They could all wear wireless headset/microphones. That way, new dance moves could be mixed in.

kingogre user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 425 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 11:23 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

QPR is on that level of popularity that he have to consider that they are playing for an audience that is more of a casual fan or concert goer who goes after seeing the names Queen or Paul Rodgers. Hence the hits.

Also if I had written songs that would get the response that WWRY, WATC or Allright Now gets from an audience I would sure play them.
These songs really are an extraordinary thing that most bands not have. You could call them some of the absolutely most effective stadium anthems ever.

That said I hope to see a bit more of a forwardlooking band on this tour. 2005 was very obviously a collaboration and at least when it came to Queen a lot about repeating classic moments like the WWRY, WATC, GSTQ ending, Brians acoustic LOML, Bohemian Rhapsody and IMLWMC.
They feel more like a band now so therefore it should be easier for them from that point of view and making a setlist that flows more easily.
Hopefully theyll leave some of "classics" like Bo Rhap, IMLWMC and LOML and instead add some forgotten gems or other songs. Sail away sweet sister (with Roger doing the Freddie bit), Headlong, WWTLF solo acoustic, The Stealer or some other songs from the not toured albums or gems from Free/BC/The Firm/PR. Good lovin gone bad could be great.

Champipple user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 245 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 12:07 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

A couple of points.

A) Queen has never been a jam band. Their set lists have *always* been static with the odd addition/subtraction. Why do you think it's such a big deal that Freddie sang a bit of a Hungarian folk song? It's what... 2 minutes tops? Big deal for a lot of bands, but for Queen it's a big deal because every show on a tour is pretty much the same as the previous show.

B) This was never a problem until the Internet allowed for almost instantaneous sharing of the audio/video of practically every show. Now everyone who digs Queen enough to post here downloads the setlists / audio / video of every show, so by the time it gets to their town, they've seen it! I can't listen to Bohemian Rhapsody anymore because I've heard it too many times... concerts are now getting that way too.



Champipple user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 245 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 12:11 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sorry. last point.

The last Q+PR tour actually did see more variation than most Queen with Freddie tours. They added Under Pressure, Seagull, Teo Torriatte, Imagine, Snippits of 39...........

But they are going to be limited because PR is a hired gun singer. He doesn't know these songs, so it's not like they can do Liar because someone holds up a sign asking for it at a concert.

Springsteen has worked with the same vet band for decades and will nightly change things up, pulling out old B-Sides, covers that they played in the 70s... I think he does it because the audience now expects it, and it's a challenge to him.

He very very rarely plays Born in the USA, and when he does it's often heavily re-arranged, but he's a rare exception and he's always been that way.



The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18624 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 14:21 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Flat out, it varies from band to band. But generally speaking, if you're a band who has had success in the singles charts, you need to play what the majority of people know. Hardcore Queen fans would like nothing better than to hear the first four albums played cover to cover, but 99% of the people on hand will know less than 5 of those songs. However, simply put, it is that 99% of the audience who made it possible for the band to be in that arena in the first place.

You basically have to assume that most people attending the show listen to the radio and know about 10 of their songs, and have heard one or two Greatest Hits compilations. So, here's my take on the estimated percentage of the audience who'd know the songs (it varies by country, of course, but this is an approximation of the general North American perspective):

BoRhap, WWRY, WATC - 99-100%
Crazy Little Thing Called Love, Dust - 90%
Radio Ga Ga, Under Pressure - 80%
Tie Your Mother Down, Fat Bottomed Girls - 70%
....
'39, Dragon Attack - 20%
White Man, Tear It Up - 10%
Ogre Battle, White Queen - 0-1%

And you can simply judge these things by listening to the audience response at the beginning and end of the song (or the references to songs, like the White Man intro to Fat Bottomed Girls... the few hardcores acknowledge it, but most people don't know the A Day At The Races album).

It makes perfect sense why Under Pressure was played here in '06 (one of their last huge hits), why Break Free was dropped (not a huge hit here), and why Dragon Attack was added (because The Game hit #1).

Of course the band played a few more obscure things in Japan... that is the first place where Queen found success, and the people there are simply more familiar with the back catalogue.

Brian and Roger are obviously very conscious of these things. This is why they always put on a great show for the overwhelming majority of their audience wherever they go. It's possible that they may be tired of a few songs, but I'm sure the joy of watching people in the audience enjoy the songs overrides that.

Since day one, Queen have been a band who want to perfect their show. Once they've found their niche, they stick with it because it works with that 99% of the audience. But if you removed the songs under 100%, 90%, and 80%, how many of the 15,000 people in the arena do you think would leave in disappointment? Would the biggest songs and the Queen spirit be ringing through their heads on their ride home, while looking forward to the new album and perhaps seeing the band again?



"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
drwinston user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 153 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 14:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Benn wrote:

AmeriQueen,

Of course, you're absolutely right. Wouldn't it be great to have set lists changed on a nightly basis and arrive at a show not knowing what you're going to get. After all, Springsteen & The E-Street Band can do it, can't then and they play for 3+ hours every time.

However, many bands simply like the feeling of being incredibly good at playing a certain set of songs night after night - it makes them feel more comfortable and allows them to then stretch themselves within the confines of what they know if you get my drift. The technical side of it also comes into play here too. Where a band like Queen relies HEAVILY on a structured light show, there is very little scope for movement outside of the rehearsed set list. Computers are programmed for the players to be playing songs in order. Unfortunately, Queen seem to think that it's great to have a highly structured stage performance and light show. For me, and I think plenty of others too, I'd prefer NO lights and simply the band playing as if they were in a small theatre and just doing what comes naturally, not relying on rehearsed moves and formal structure.

Although The Who has relied on a structured set list for some time now, you never quite know what you're going to get. With Springsteen, every show is a joy in that requests come from the audience and the band members themselves.

I'm sad to say that Queen now bores me. There's NOTHING exciting about what they play or how they play it. Brian trots out LOLM at each show as if we're all still paying homage to Freddie whilst he takes a paid break on the stage. They need to move themselves on and get away from what is easy to play. Challenge themselves and bring out some material that's fun and interesting. I'd rather see a completely ballsed up version of White Queen or Ogre Battle than a note perfect, well lit Radio GaGa or AOBTD........


Excellent post. I agree for the most part, although I did enjoy the Bad Company and Free stuff that they did in the last tour. Probably because it was new to a Queen show.

Since Paul is blues/rock singer, maybe they could do some blues jamming which varies night to night. That would be a nice change of pace.

steven 35638 user not visiting Queenzone.com
Band ten hut!
steven 35638
Deity: 2132 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 15:26 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I can relate to the complaint presented by AmeriQueen; however, I find it quite foolish to drop a great portion of their biggest hits. Even if they were to just drop Bohemian Rhapsody, it would ruin the show for many individuals. And to drop We Will Rock You and We Are The Champions would be a devastating blow to the show. It's tradition, and I believe it should be kept as such.

I think it is also naive to think that it is possible for Paul Rodgers to perform songs such as The Prophet's Song and Ogre Battle. It is even more naive to think that either Roger or Brian could sing those songs. I will admit, however, that there are exceptions. What those exceptions are is clearly up for debate.


"Fuck today, it's tomorrow." - Freddie Mercury
joe6464 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Be Gentle, I'm a newbie: 11 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 16:48 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

the reason they keep the familiar songs in the setlist is to keep the fans who are not huge fans and just like the popular songs e.g. WWRY & WATC happy perhaps if QPR did some smaller venue e.g. the indigO2 for die hard fans then they could do the songs the fans REALLY want to hear

most these songs that you people want most of the crowd will be pissed off cos they have never heard of them anyway its for a new album so the setlist will almost certainly be tracks off the album and the rest of the song will be the bit hits so no time for the lesser known songs, but i still hope they dont do TSMGO cos thats just been overplayed by them

vadenuez user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 263 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 17:14 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

They won't change a tune. The main reason they've been releasing loads of greatest hits albums and 80s DVDs is because they like to keep playing safe. That's the same reason they want to keep being "Queen" instead of "Newsuperband": if they agree to turn into something new, they won't be allowed to play the old hits, because they're supposed to be a different band, not "Queen". They'll have to leave comfort zone and face new audiences with new music. And simply they don't want to leave comfort zone anymore.

Queenman!! user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queenman!!
Bohemian: 931 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 17:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote:

Flat out, it varies from band to band. But generally speaking, if you're a band who has had success in the singles charts, you need to play what the majority of people know. Hardcore Queen fans would like nothing better than to hear the first four albums played cover to cover, but 99% of the people on hand will know less than 5 of those songs. However, simply put, it is that 99% of the audience who made it possible for the band to be in that arena in the first place.

You basically have to assume that most people attending the show listen to the radio and know about 10 of their songs, and have heard one or two Greatest Hits compilations. So, here's my take on the estimated percentage of the audience who'd know the songs (it varies by country, of course, but this is an approximation of the general North American perspective):

BoRhap, WWRY, WATC - 99-100%
Crazy Little Thing Called Love, Dust - 90%
Radio Ga Ga, Under Pressure - 80%
Tie Your Mother Down, Fat Bottomed Girls - 70%
....
'39, Dragon Attack - 20%
White Man, Tear It Up - 10%
Ogre Battle, White Queen - 0-1%

And you can simply judge these things by listening to the audience response at the beginning and end of the song (or the references to songs, like the White Man intro to Fat Bottomed Girls... the few hardcores acknowledge it, but most people don't know the A Day At The Races album).

It makes perfect sense why Under Pressure was played here in '06 (one of their last huge hits), why Break Free was dropped (not a huge hit here), and why Dragon Attack was added (because The Game hit #1).

Of course the band played a few more obscure things in Japan... that is the first place where Queen found success, and the people there are simply more familiar with the back catalogue.

Brian and Roger are obviously very conscious of these things. This is why they always put on a great show for the overwhelming majority of their audience wherever they go. It's possible that they may be tired of a few songs, but I'm sure the joy of watching people in the audience enjoy the songs overrides that.

Since day one, Queen have been a band who want to perfect their show. Once they've found their niche, they stick with it because it works with that 99% of the audience. But if you removed the songs under 100%, 90%, and 80%, how many of the 15,000 people in the arena do you think would leave in disappointment? Would the biggest songs and the Queen spirit be ringing through their heads on their ride home, while looking forward to the new album and perhaps seeing the band again?


I get your point, but in the last years Queen will perform it's also good to try something new from the old days.

It will be a challenge to perform a song which you have never done and keeps things fresh. It's also a way to communicate with the audience. Will they like a song or not, what shape will it take live on stage etc.


You made us laugh, you made us cry, you made us feel like we could fly!
Charlie Brown user not visiting Queenzone.com
Charlie Brown
Bohemian: 462 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Jul 08, 18:42 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more variety in Queens set list but for them not to perform WWRY, WATC etc. would be a terrible idea. We are talking about some of the most popular songs ever. These are the songs that drew a mass audience to Queen and the songs that the mass of concert goers want to hear. The people on this site represent the hardcore fanbase who own most if not every Queen album. We don't represent the mass audience. Would we expect Paul McCartney not to perform "Hey Jude" or any other of The Beatles huge hit songs?