|
Replies: 31
| visibility 1
|
Expert [1251]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 685
Joined: 6/21/11
|
Queen
Aug 25, 2012, 11:02 PM
|
|
Was debating with a friend on who we thought was the best Rock band OAT. He says Beatles, I say Queen. Greatest rock and ever. Freddie Mercury > John Lennon
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [5307]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/23/06
|
Beatles, Zepplin, Who, Stones, are all better.
Aug 25, 2012, 11:19 PM
|
|
Queen MIGHT crack the top ten.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1251]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 685
Joined: 6/21/11
|
Re: Beatles, Zepplin, Who, Stones, are all better.
Aug 25, 2012, 11:22 PM
|
|
Freddie Mercury pawns all those band s lead singers though,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1251]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 685
Joined: 6/21/11
|
PWNS***
Aug 25, 2012, 11:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7114]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7323
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Beatles, Zepplin, Who, Stones, are all better.
Aug 25, 2012, 11:34 PM
[ in reply to Re: Beatles, Zepplin, Who, Stones, are all better. ] |
|
Never have quite figured out what pawns, or pwns, or whatever the f@ck that means... but for songwriting, vocals and sheer musicianship, I'd say that Queen had it over all those bands. Especially over the Stones. They were never better than average at best talent-wise and song-writing. Music for the stoned masses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [966]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
Re: Beatles, Zepplin, Who, Stones, are all better.
Aug 26, 2012, 2:06 AM
|
|
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pwn
Hurray typos!
What Queen lacked in longevity they made up for with Mercury's sheer over-the-top-ness (if that's a word).
Unfortunately I'm too young to have been to many of the "great" concerts, but by all accounts Queen could put on a #### fine show. Among these is their show at Wembley in 1986:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh9oUHO2dxE
Is Queen the best ever? It depends on what you look at. They certainly have not been around as long as many, many other bands. They were not as prolific as many bands. They were not as popular as many bands. I'd say Mercury is one of the best lead singers, both in the quality of his voice as well as his ability to put on a show.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [702]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 2260
Joined: 6/28/03
|
Freddie with the most powerful voice,but LedZep
Aug 25, 2012, 11:23 PM
|
|
is best OAT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5330]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10336
Joined: 10/13/02
|
Queen is pretty awesome***
Aug 25, 2012, 11:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1065]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 914
Joined: 12/1/09
|
Pink Floyd on the overall performance...
Aug 26, 2012, 12:01 AM
|
|
I wasn't old enough to make it to one of their concerts, but I've only heard great things...
Gotta love psychedelic rock
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [748]
TigerPulse: 72%
Posts: 1466
Joined: 9/20/10
|
Re: Pink Floyd on the overall performance...
Aug 26, 2012, 1:53 AM
|
|
didnt really follow pink floyd. I was more like Van Halen, Ratt, white Lion etc kinda guy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2481]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 9264
Joined: 8/16/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [128]
TigerPulse: 65%
Posts: 271
Joined: 6/21/06
|
AC/DC > all others
Aug 26, 2012, 1:54 AM
|
|
Queen not even in top 10.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1327]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1570
Joined: 10/29/00
|
Agree to disagree.....
Aug 26, 2012, 2:43 AM
|
|
Probably have to go with Led Zepplin but Queen with Freddie was da*mn good. Will never forget We Will Rock You during FSU game! Gave us all goose bumps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5555]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6196
Joined: 6/18/03
|
One Direction
Aug 26, 2012, 4:16 AM
|
|
YOLO
Both of those things I just said were completely sarcastic and the dumbest things ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4787]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9986
Joined: 6/12/10
|
skynyrd,boston,reo speedwagon,foreigner,nantucket,april wine
Aug 26, 2012, 7:39 AM
|
|
and framton, in no particular order.
Message was edited by: sgt tiger®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rooter [249]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 143
Joined: 1/9/08
|
If my choices are The Beatles or Queen
Aug 26, 2012, 9:15 AM
|
|
I choose the Beatles though these bands are from 2 different eras really.. John Lennon was the superior songwriter and the Beatles were long gone by the time Arena rock came around- the Beatles never played live together after 1966 with one exception.. Yes they played in a couple of stadiums but more as a novelty to sell as many tickets as possible- loudspeaker technology became much more sophisticated later. I like Queen and I think Freddie Mercury was a great frontman but I like The Who , The Stones, Led Zeppelin, and Pink Floyd better from that era... I will have to say that "Queen Live Killers" is a great live album and Brian May totally rocked the Olympic Closing Ceremonies the other night...
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7831]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20489
Joined: 10/9/04
|
There are tons of great bands
Aug 26, 2012, 9:37 AM
|
|
Thelist is very long
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amateur [40]
TigerPulse: 16%
Posts: 133
Joined: 10/15/10
|
Re: Queen
Aug 26, 2012, 9:45 AM
|
|
queen for the win!!!!!!!!!! night at the opera! one of the best albums ever recorded
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15795]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7687
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Zeppelin, Floyd, Kiss,U2, Rush, Maiden, Van Halen (no Hagar)***
Aug 26, 2012, 10:15 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2481]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 9264
Joined: 8/16/99
|
Uhhh, would not put U2 in that group***
Aug 28, 2012, 6:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3405]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5216
Joined: 1/26/09
|
Re: Zeppelin, Floyd, Kiss,U2, Rush, Maiden, Van Halen (no Hagar)***
Aug 28, 2012, 7:04 PM
[ in reply to Zeppelin, Floyd, Kiss,U2, Rush, Maiden, Van Halen (no Hagar)*** ] |
|
Maiden! \m/ \m/
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [577]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 400
Joined: 12/4/11
|
One of the greatest leads ever
Aug 26, 2012, 10:35 AM
|
|
Was Jeff Lynne from E. L. O.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [757]
TigerPulse: 72%
Posts: 1487
Joined: 5/23/12
|
I'ts not even worthy of comparing....***
Aug 26, 2012, 10:40 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49613]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30357
Joined: 12/10/98
|
That's kind of like comparing....
Aug 26, 2012, 10:45 AM
|
|
Steven Jobs to Thomas Edison.
Without Edison, there's no Jobs. Without the Beatles, there's no Queen. Everything was built on what came before. There's no "Bohemian Rhapsody" without the groundbreaking work on "Sgt. Peppers" and no "Night at the Opera" without "Revolver."
Kind of like without Gamecock grads, there's no Domino's Pizza.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3462]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5156
Joined: 9/12/10
|
Queen vs Queensryche
Aug 28, 2012, 5:53 PM
|
|
I always liked Queen and they are by for a more classic band than Queensryche, but I believe Queensryche was an overall better band. Better musicians and great lead vocal. Goeff Tate back in the 80s could hit notes Freddie Mercury never could dream of hitting. But both bands rock to me. Queen will always be more popular but Queensryche was a better band.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3405]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5216
Joined: 1/26/09
|
Re: Queen vs Queensryche
Aug 28, 2012, 7:14 PM
|
|
This is just blasphemous. I will say that I do like both bands and have seen Queensryche play two or three times (granted not in their prime), but to say they are better than Queen is just crazy. Geoff Tate had a good voice in his day particularly on Warning and Mindcrime, but it does come off a bit nasally or like he has something in the back of his throat when he goes for the high notes. Freddy Mercury is a MUCH better singer. There is more to singing than just hitting high notes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3405]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5216
Joined: 1/26/09
|
Re: Queen vs Queensryche
Aug 28, 2012, 7:56 PM
[ in reply to Queen vs Queensryche ] |
|
I can also say that I don't ever get chills listening to any Geoff Tate songs. I can't say the same thing for Queen and Freddy Mercury. They have so many powerful songs, We Are The Champions, Who Wants to Live Forever, I Want it All, The Miracle, and The Show Must Go On! The Show Must Go On is better than anything Geoff Tate could ever produce, Mercury put on one of the greatest rock vocal performance as he was dying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2481]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 9264
Joined: 8/16/99
|
Talent wise, or popularity
Aug 28, 2012, 5:59 PM
|
|
Not many were bigger than the Beatles,and the Rolling
Stones...maybe Led Zepplin.
#21
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Beatles and Zeppelin. Queen, however, is great and Freddy
Aug 28, 2012, 7:02 PM
|
|
Mercury and Robert Plant are hands down the two greatest rock vocalists, but I give the edge to Plant. Practically every heavy metal and rock band of the late 70s and 80s had lead singers trying to be Plant in look, style, and sound.
Mercury, from a musical and technical standpoint, has the superior voice and could have sung opera. But rock is not about those things. It's about raw power, sexuality, presence. When you think rock, esp hard rock, you think Zeppelin, and Plant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mln0RciE2o0
Now in terms of greatest band, that can be parsed many ways. Music is like women, beer, food, esp BBQ, everyone has a unique personal preference.
The Beatles are the greatest BAND ever. Most creative. They were the first to dream up and do so many things musically, esp in the studio. Most imaginative in the studio. Most influential in EVERY way. No one has influenced more bands and music like the Beatles. And McCartney and Lennon are far and away the greatest lyricists ever. In Rolling Stone's Top 500 Albums list, all 10 Beatles studio albums are on the list, 4 are in the top 10, 3 are in the top 5, including number one. No one else even comes close to that.
Zeppelin, however, is probably the greatest collection of musicians ever and they are the greatest hard rock/heavy metal band. They are the fathers of heavy metal.
John Paul Jones is one of the greatest bass players ever. Bonham is widely considered the greatest drummer, top 3 at worst. And of course Jimmy Page is one of the greatest guitarists ever. Cap that off with Plant as lead singer and no other band comes close in terms of raw talent from a musician standpoint. Unlike the Beatles, they were never especially creative and innovative in the studio from a creative standpoint. They were first and foremost a blues band and they took that and took it to a rock extreme never before heard. So in that way they were innovative, and each was innovative in their playing style, but the Beatles were just light years ahead of everyone else in the studio.
So greatest and most influential band - the Beatles.
Zeppelin, IMO, is second and in some ways ahead of the Beatles.
Hands down they are the top 2. Queen was a great band and Mercury an incredible singer, but honestly, they aren't even in this conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3462]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5156
Joined: 9/12/10
|
Don't get me wrong
Aug 30, 2012, 11:43 PM
|
|
Freddie was great but Tate was better in his day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11435]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14500
Joined: 1/2/11
|
Old GNR***
Aug 30, 2012, 11:44 PM
|
|
I saw them with Metallica and was there to see Metallica and GNR just blew me away. They blew Metallica away live. Best live band I've ever seen and i've seen alot
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [864]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 3124
Joined: 12/8/11
|
Let's put this to rest
Aug 30, 2012, 11:48 PM
|
|
Queen best stadium band by far......we will rock u and we are the champions!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 31
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
