I think - I might be wrong though - that one of the Larry Lurrex things is without John, the other is just Fred and the producer.
I've got a different theory about this discussion: Bohemian Rhapsody is not just Queen, it's Queen + Freddie + John. Same for most of the tracks and concerts.
> if you listen to his solo stuff you wouldn't tell it's the guy from Queen cause it doesn't sound like them at all..
That's utterly unfair: Fred deliberately wanted Mr Bad Guy to be a project way apart from Queen. Brian, on the other hand, deliberately wanted to sound like Queen in both of his solo albums.
> John is just the bassplayer
There's no such thing as "just" the bass-player imo. John was as important as the others, even if he wasn't as recognisable as Fred's vocals or Brian's RS.
> When he is singing in the harmonies it sounds like Queen
Same as I said before, Brian was deliberately recreating the Queen sound, as opposed to Roger and Freddie, who were going apart from there. It's like if, for instance, Fred's solo album would have been full of Queen II-like pieces performed with guitar orchestras and melodic bass-lines and Brian had decided to make Back To The Light a funk record, full of Dancers and Dragon Attacks.
> When you hear Brian play, even in a group with other guitarists you can always pick him out
Same for Freddie's voice, you can completely tell it's him even if he's singing at the same time with Bob Geldof and Bono (and it has happened).
> Roger also has a big part of the Queen sound in his vocals which blends great with Brian
Yes but imo those vocals don't sound quite Queen-like, unless they wanted them that way. I'm In Love With My Car is 100% Roger and sounds Queennie, Beautiful Dreams otoh is 100% Roger as well but doesn't sound Queennie. Roger and Freddie separated well their solo stuff from what they did for the band, unlike Dr May (not that there's anything wrong with any of the sides)
> And also the drumming sounds like Queen.
Not more than John's bass or Fred's piano. Not less either.
> Rogers drumming sound and style are unique and imo very underrated
True. So are John's sounds and style, and Fred's (in piano, not vocals).
All in all, I've come to the conclusion lately (and I'm sure all or most of the forum posters disagree) that Freddie was the weakest of the four when it came to live performances.
Don't get me wrong, I consider Freddie to be a incredibly original, capable and inventive creative musician (in terms of composer and arranger), and a wonderful studio man (in terms of double-tracking, producing and such). His piano playing was excellent (not virtuoso, but very good) and his voice was, in the studio, extremely powerful and extraordinary (especially, imo, in the Barcelona album).
BUT, on stage, I never found Freddie as being something "that" big, particularly in the 80s. His singing wasn't even close to his ability in the studio; for those who're going to ask me "can you do the same?", I can't, but loads of other singers hit the high notes live: Axl Rose, Bruce Dickinson, Ian Gillan, Bono (not that those are very high notes anyway), Roger Taylor and even Brian (listen to Love Of My Life in his solo tours, or Why Don't We Try Again). Considering Fred could, presumably, sing higher than Brian, it's absurd that Brian sang Cs and Ds on stage and Fred had to do thirds or fifths to avoid the C in 'Champions'.
I personally hate his stage antics. I respect everybody who finds his ridiculous dancing brilliant, but imo it's pointless. Some stand up at the stage to do music (Dave Gilmour), and I respect them. Some others put outstanding dance sequences (Jacko, Madonna...), and I respect them for that. IMHO, Fred tried to do both but, again, IMHO, he performed both in halves. Neither he excelled as a musician (for the points I already expressed) nor he did as an actor (if running around a stage
John hated HS. Fred's fave singer was not PR. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' Witness testimonies are often inaccurate. Scotland's not in England. 'Bo Rhap' hasn't got 180 voices.