Queen |
Post Reply | Page 123 4> |
Author | |||||
Moribund
Forum Senior Member Joined: March 21 2005 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 210 |
Topic: Queen Posted: April 11 2005 at 05:25 |
||||
I am baffled at the absence of Queen from this site. The fact that their music became markedly commercial and unprog from the mid 70's onwards is undeniable, but this is no less a reason to dismiss them as to dimiss Genesis for doing the same some 5 years later. The first four albums are undeniably prog (certainly Art Rock if not Symphonic Prog) and isn't Bohemian Rhapsody arguably the most definably prog sounding track to have ever made number one in the UK singles chart (a distincion later to be challenged by Paranoid Android)? I am not making a particular play for including them, but comenting on what seems a conspicuous absence from a band whose first four albums seem to belong very comfortably within the genre. Now tell me I'm wrong...
|
|||||
James Lee
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: June 05 2004 Status: Offline Points: 3525 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 05:53 | ||||
You're not wrong. You're not the first to say it, maybe not even the first this week. They're one of the perennial top contenders for inclusion on the site...and many people feel that they belong here more than dozens of bands already listed. I personally wouldn't mind seeing them listed one bit...Queen II is one of my favorite examples of early hard rock-flavored prog, right up there with Rush. The argument against them (as far as I understand) is that the overall output of the band is not prog, and that they belong with other bands who dabbled in prog but didn't make it their focus. Is that accurate, naysayers? |
|||||
bumheed7
Forum Senior Member Joined: March 31 2005 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 134 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 05:53 | ||||
totally agree. i feel they are more prog than radiohead, anyway |
|||||
Good Morning Carpark Fans
|
|||||
Joren
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 07 2004 Location: Netherlands Status: Offline Points: 6667 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 06:02 | ||||
Yes, but Radiohead's inclusion, IMHO is a MISTAKE. I don't think Queen is prog. It's just radio-friendly classic rock with a prog edge, just like Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple.
|
|||||
The Hemulen
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: July 31 2004 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 5964 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 06:23 | ||||
I think the sheer theatricality of Queen's output is reason alone for their inclusion. Also, the diversity of styles they draw from make another good argument for their case. I challenge anyone to listen to A Night at the Opera and not agree that it's one of the finest art rock albums of all time.
Edited by Trouserpress |
|||||
Joren
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 07 2004 Location: Netherlands Status: Offline Points: 6667 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 06:32 | ||||
Fat bottomed girls make the world go round very prog... |
|||||
Guests
Forum Guest Group |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 07:11 | ||||
Queen arn't prog I can accept their Debut,'Queen 11' & 'Sheer heart attack' albums as great albums with acceptable progggy type material,'A night at the opera'album, has some great tracks but the album is then totally destroyed by the tragic 'Bohemian Rhapsody' track...O god do i hate that track.After this album Queen are pants Edited by Karnevil9 |
|||||
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 09:57 | ||||
Bohemian Rhapsody is a fantastic track - just overplayed! I like all of Queen's output, and consider the 1st 5 albums to be pretty much pure prog, albeit coming from a glam rock type of angle. Innuendo is back in character, but all their albums have something progressive going on. I can understand why they wouldn't be contenders for the archives - but to say that they're more prog than Radiohead is ignorance. Queen never came out with anything near the progressiveness of "Kid A" or "Amnesiac", both of which have more in common with Can than almost anything else. On the other hand, if the only objection is output ratio, then don't forget that Genesis have spent less of their time producing prog than pop/rock music. Edited by Certif1ed |
|||||
John Gargo
Forum Senior Member Joined: January 26 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 450 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 09:59 | ||||
Queen are one of the greatest bands ever.... even when they went commercial in the 80s, there were still creating high quality music that completely trumps everything else that was mainstream. INNUENDO, their last album, has some fantastic proggish flourishes, which means they've done something that Genesis hasn't... they've gone back to their roots. Fantastic band... I think it's a travesty that they're not on here. |
|||||
James Lee
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: June 05 2004 Status: Offline Points: 3525 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 10:11 | ||||
it's hard to find a band that put more Symphonic into their Rock than they did. then again, ELO did too...but that's another touchy topic. |
|||||
Dan Bobrowski
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 02 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5243 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 10:57 | ||||
The Prophet Song gets included in every Prog Compilation I've made. Queen II was seriously drenched in progressive tendencies and a great defining statement. I still say, "What's the problem adding ONLY those albums by a band that ARE prog?" Do we have to add their entire output? I think, "NO" would be the correct answer to that. How many bands have been influenced by Freddie and the band? I've heard plenty of prog that has strong ties to Queen... Relayer, IZZ, Salem Hill, Kaipa, Ritual... The Queen stamp is all over them. |
|||||
Guests
Forum Guest Group |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 11:02 | ||||
O God lets all commercial shall we.Commercialism was one of the things that helped destroy prog in the first place. Yeh to the first 3 queen albums but i'm afraid to the rest. Edited by Karnevil9 |
|||||
salmacis
Forum Senior Member Content Addition Joined: April 10 2005 Status: Offline Points: 3928 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 11:15 | ||||
I couldn't agree more with the points raised here; Queen are a FANTASTIC band that have progressive tendencies all over their work- 'Queen II' is their proggiest album, as mentioned, and in my opinion, one of the greatest albums ever made. Just listen to 'Ogre Battle' or 'March Of The Black Queen' to see how heavy and proggy they got. Even the hit single 'Seven Seas Of Rhye' is a magnificently overblown 3 minutes... 'A Night At The Opera' is wildly ambitious; almost a compendium of popular music in the 20th century with dancehall music, jazz pop, heavy rock, 60s pop tunes and mega pomp-prog (check out 'The Prophet's Song'). 'Innuendo' is a magnificent track, and for prog fiends, has Steve Howe on 'wandering minstrel guitar' playing an excellent flamenco section- it also has an instrumental mid section to die for and Freddie Mercury delivers an astonishing vocal. Sure- nothing the band did in the '80s was prog in the slightest, but you could say the same about Genesis or Yes inb the main. I'd love to see the band represented here and would gladly write the biography for their entry.
|
|||||
Vince
Forum Groupie Joined: March 24 2005 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 95 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 11:52 | ||||
I agree that Queen should be featured here, like many of you. I always felt that Queen was a style on its own, a little bit like Pink Floyd. And I also think that Queen was one of the most influencial rock bands. |
|||||
"The mind is like a parachute: it doesn't work until it's opened"... Frank Zappa.
|
|||||
Guests
Forum Guest Group |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 11:57 | ||||
Innuendo!!!! You going slightly mad. |
|||||
Guillermo
Prog Reviewer Joined: November 28 2004 Location: Mexico Status: Offline Points: 814 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 13:01 | ||||
Yes. Queen should be included in this website. But I lost in the ELO poll I posted two months ago... |
|||||
Avatar: Photo of Solar Eclipse, Mexico City, July 1991. A great experience to see. Maybe once in a lifetime.
|
|||||
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 13:09 | ||||
That one isn't - but neither is "Owner of a Lonely Heart". "The Prophet's Song", as has been observed, is pure symphonic prog with touches of Queen "magic" (and no synths!). BTW, like "Money", Paranoid Android is partly in 7/4 time - and the "Rain Down" coda is not unlike the symphonic prog of Barclay James Harvest, replete with 4-part harmonies and counter-calls. It's a prog track for the 1990s and beyond alright! Edited by Certif1ed |
|||||
maani
Special Collaborator Founding Moderator Joined: January 30 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 2632 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 14:03 | ||||
Speaking personally (not "officially"), I competely disagree. First, I do not consider either Queen I or Queen II "prog" in any way, shape or form. They are rock albums with some interesting quasi-prog elements, but they are not prog - certainly not as whole albums. As for Sheer Heart Attack, some songs have some "prog sensibilities," but the album as a whole is definitely not prog: it is rock. Re Night at the Opera, I would agree that perhaps Prophet's Song and Bohemian Rhapsody border true "prog." But, again, the album as a whole is not prog. Same goes for Day at the Races, which has a couple of "proggy" tracks, but is not, by any means, a "prog album." Nothing after that was even closely "prog." Peace.
|
|||||
lucas
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 06 2004 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 8138 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 14:22 | ||||
At least 4 prog sites mention QUEEN in their archives !!!! |
|||||
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)
|
|||||
The Hemulen
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: July 31 2004 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 5964 |
Posted: April 11 2005 at 15:09 | ||||
Amen to that, Lucas. |
|||||
Post Reply | Page 123 4> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |