Brian May Promises New Queen Album

[rustoffa]

Brian May has announced plans to begin work on the first Queen album since late frontman Freddie Mercury died in 1991.

The guitarist recruited Paul Rodgers to take over vocal duties for a series of live dates earlier this year, and now he wants to record new tracks with drummer Roger Taylor and the former Free singer.

He says, "I talked to Paul, and confirmed we will be heading into the studio in October. Now it really looks as if we are on.

"(It) will bring us all to a new place. We will take it gently at first, the priority being to feel good, and put ourselves in the mood to create."

Copyright World Entertainment News Network 2006

[Coyote]

I'm at a loss for words...

[Jérôme Frenchise]

Pfffffffff... Why do they persist in calling themselves "Queen"?

John Deacon, who will probably stay at home, should sue them.

Why didn't they call themselves "May/Rodgers/Taylor"? That would at least be classier, in respect for Mercury's memory and Deacon's bandmateship.

I like Queen's stuff - the genuine - a lot, and I like Paul Rodger's records either in Free or Bad Co or even "The Firm" as well as solo, but it's really inappropriate and base on their part to keep the name. :mad:

[Jack68]

Im a who fan who cant let go.This is what they do and keeps them alive i guess.It should not be called Queen.If it means i can see Brian may live ill go.long live king mercury.

[rustoffa]

What's next? This is the musical equivalent of recording a new Jimmy Hendrix Experience CD.

Don't hold yer breath, Lenny Kravitz has a drum machine.
:mad:

[Tiki-Tom]

Has Brian lost his mind?
If he puts the name Queen on the new disc then he will lose the respect of a lot of fans,this one included. I could barely handle him touring under the name Queen with Paul Rodgers. I have to wonder what Freddy would think of this? I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be happy.

John Deacon is a class act and I hope he stays that way.

[MAPRamone]

If this is true it's a fucking disaster!

[FORD]

After seeing the DVD it appears that Rodgers does work well with these guys, and I will be interested to hear what they can write together.

But it's time for them to get their own name. It's not Queen. Brian and Roger are not Queen, despite the size of Roger's ego or Brian's hair.

[Panamark]

King ??

[Jérôme Frenchise]

Originally posted by Panamark
King ??

:D ... "Jack"?

[Shaun Ponsonby]

I'm glad. I love Queen (as most people know!), and I love Paul Rodgers. The gig was probably the best I saw last year...I'm happy. I hope it works out. It'll be interesting to hear how the 2 styles sound fused together. The new song they were playing "Take Love" was a good song (although, the boot I heard wasn't a particularly good quality).

As for the name, I think the record company will put "QUEEN" written somewhere on the frontcover anyway for commercial reasons. Maybethey should get Mick Ralphs on second guitar and call it "Queen and Company". I dunno. So long as the music is good, I don't really care aboot the name. If the music is good, then they aren't really doing any harm to the Queen name. Unlike some of the other things that have gone on. And, I don't count the musical in that. I reckon Freddie would have been up for the musical idea anyways because he was very into theatre and stuff like that, so he would have jumped at the chance. He probably would have had a major input as well.

[Jérôme Frenchise]

Originally posted by Shaun Ponsonby
As for the name, I think the record company will put "QUEEN" written somewhere on the frontcover anyway for commercial reasons. Maybe they should get Mick Ralphs on second guitar and call it "Queen and Company". I dunno.

That would be a lesser evil IMO. :cool:

I have to confess that I dug the two vids that were posted here about 18 months ago, which were "We are the champions/We will rock you" (though they were heard way too much, like the Stones' "Satisfaction" or AC/DC's "Highway to hell")...
It's only concerning the name that I'd disagree with them calling that "Queen", so "Queen & Company" sounds like a good compromise. :cool:

[Shaun Ponsonby]

Well, to be fair, they don't call it Queen. They call it Queen + Paul Rodgers, but most people don't bother saying the whole this ("Queen plus Paul Rodgers" is a bit of a mouthfull for a band name). Its not a very practical band name, but "Queen and Company" is.

But, performance wise they were close to faultless. It seems as though they've been playing together for years. rather than a band still finding ther feet together. Look for a video of them doing "Wishing Well" or "Feel Like Makin' Love". Even on Paul's songs, they play brilliantly. And, in the same way that Paul brings Queen songs out in a new light, Brian and Roger's style of playing bring Paul's songs out in a new light.

[Jérôme Frenchise]

Yep. Bad Co songs must be easy for Brian May to play.
No offense for Mick Ralphs and Co, I dig Bas Company's records a lot, but it sure must have been no hard job for him. :cool:

[Soul Reaper]

it's good that they're making new material together....they can call themselves Queen if they want to, even if I may not agree with it....

is John Deacon taking no part in this then?

[binnie]

Is the record going to be called "Pissing on our legacy"?

That's what May has been doing for the past ten years.......

I'm sure the fans will dig it tho.....

[Shaun Ponsonby]

I don't think Brian's been pissing on the legacy too much.

OK, performing with 5ive was a mistake (a fooking BIG one). But, from another perspective, I wonder how many kids heard that and thought "I wonder what other Queen songs are like", looked through their dad's CD collection, found a Queen album, liked and then listened to other classic bands. Don't be suprised if that happened. Its not too far off how I was introduced to these bands.

But, Robbie Williams would have done We Are The Champions anyway, and Freddie would have been up for the musical more than the rest of them. They were always a theatrical band anyways, so its not doing any harm IMO.

And, I can't think of much else. A few compilations? A few public appearences to keep people aware of the band? "Made In Heaven" (IMO, Freddie asked them to make sure that was released, its seems to be a very personal album to Freddie and the band in general)? The Tribute show? Some fundraising things for AIDs.

To be fair, most of the things he and Roger have done have been in aid of the Freddie Mercury Phoenix Trust.

But, anyways, THIS is legit. This is 2 very respectable and talented rock legends coming together. Paul Rodgers is a GRATE performer (although, I've never seen him so mobile as he was on the Queen tour).

And, as for calling it Queen. I've said it many times...THEY ARE NOT CALLING IT QUEEN.

They added Paul's name onto the title. They had to put the name "Queen" somewhere for the tour, otherwise you wouldn't know who it was.

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

Originally posted by rustoffa
This is the musical equivalent of recording a new Jimmy Hendrix Experience CD.



"Jimi".

[binnie]

I don't think that the stuff with Paul is pissing on their legacy, I think it's a good idea (although i didn't at first)

I was thinking of 5ive, and the musical more than anything......

[Shaun Ponsonby]

Originally posted by rustoffa
What's next? This is the musical equivalent of recording a new Jimmy Hendrix Experience CD.

No, because Jimi Hendrix WAS the Jimi Hendrix Experience.

Freddie Mercury WASN'T Queen. He said it himself. They were all gifted writers and each individually wrote a handful of their most memorable hits.

Freddie hated people thinking that he was the mastermind behind everything they did. He was 25% of Queen...no more, no less. I'm not down playing his role, I'm telling you what he thought.

I don't think Freddie would have a problem with it.

[Shaun Ponsonby]

Originally posted by binnie
I don't think that the stuff with Paul is pissing on their legacy, I think it's a good idea (although i didn't at first)

I was thinking of 5ive, and the musical more than anything......

But, when you think about what Freddie was like, he'd have been up for the musical as well. He probably had the idea himself.

They were always a theatrical band, so doing something for theatre isn't exactly pissing on their legacy.

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

Not taking anything away from the rest of Queen, but Freddie Mercury WAS and will FOREVER BE Queen.

And I don't think had Brain May been the dead one that Freddie would have ever toured as Queen again. Whatever I think of Plant and Page for not including Jones in their reunion ten years ago, at least they had the class to NOT call it "Led Zeppelin" without Bonham.

[binnie]

Ahh but there's doing a musical, and there's doing a musical with Ben Elton!

like making a record with Simon Cowell.....

Although I can imagine Freddie would have liked the idea of a muscial

[FORD]

Originally posted by Shaun Ponsonby

Freddie Mercury WASN'T Queen. He said it himself. They were all gifted writers and each individually wrote a handful of their most memorable hits.

Freddie hated people thinking that he was the mastermind behind everything they did. He was 25% of Queen...no more, no less. I'm not down playing his role, I'm telling you what he thought.

I don't think Freddie would have a problem with it.

In the studio they might have been more or less equal partners, but on the stage, Freddie most definitely WAS Queen. And since the live performance is where the band really makes their living, that counts for more in the end. Otherwise this "new" group would have hit the studio before the road, right?

[m_dixon1984]

As long as Brian May gets new music out to us I don't care what he wants to call it. Anyone who won't buy a new Queen album because Freddie's gone will likely be missing out. Of course it could be shit and thanks to the Internet no one will have to buy it if it is. I think we spend too much time being concerned over who's in a band. If the music's good, and a lot of people seem to think Rodgers can do the job, then we win.

I also think that Brian has too much respect for Freddie and the Queen name to do anything disrespectful to either.

We lost with Van Halen. Hopefully Brian won't release a big old turd pie like Van Hagar did.

M

[Shaun Ponsonby]

That gets a 5 star rating...my sentiments exactly.

I have loved Brian's solo work as well, particulary "Back To The Light", and, although I can like to hear a few of Roger's stuff scattered around, I'm not crazy aboot listening to a full solo album from him. He's done some good songs, though. "Stand Up For Love" on The Cross album "Shove It" is as good as anything he's done in his entire career. I'm actually excited by this.

People don't bitch aboot Deep Purple using the name Deep Purple these days too much, despite having only 1 original member (Ian Paice), and only 3 classic line up members (Paice/Gillan/Glover).

People don't bitch too much aboot Whitesnake using the Whitesnake name, despite only 1 original member (Coverdale, of course). Although Coverdale really IS Whitesnake, he couldn't have done it without the people who were there from the beginning, and he seems to have forgotten them.

If its good music, its good music...no matter what the name is.

[Shaun Ponsonby]

Originally posted by FORD
In the studio they might have been more or less equal partners, but on the stage, Freddie most definitely WAS Queen. And since the live performance is where the band really makes their living, that counts for more in the end. Otherwise this "new" group would have hit the studio before the road, right?

No. Because originally I think this was aboot Brian and Roger getting something out of their system without harming the respect the band have, particulary in the UK and Europe.

Although, I agree that Freddie MADE the live performances...that is why the Q+PR show was nothing like a Queen show from 25 years ago. If it was the original band, they wouldn't have Eminem on the intro, there would have been some sort of medley near the beginning of the show, there would be a section of covers, there wouldn't be so many "extra" musicians etc...the show was a completely different animal. It wasn't a Queen copy, it wasn't a Queen tribute show, it was a different kind of Queen. It was Queen + Paul Rodgers, doing songs by Queen, Free and Bad Company.

It bugs me that people say that this is pissing on the band's legacy...cos Brian was the one stopping it from happening for years. Roger wanted to do it again, probably to play big places and stisfy his ego.

[flappo]

brian and roger DID start queen before freddie came along , don't forget

ok , it was called smile at the time , but the idea was there

[Shaun Ponsonby]

Exactly, exactly.

It didn't matter that they had a different name, how many name changes do unsigned bands go through before they finally settle on one?

Actually, I'd like to hear what they would come up with with Tim Staffel (the 3rd member of Smile, for those who don't know) today. I know he did a solo album a couple of years ago, but other than that...

[Vinnie Velvet]

Originally posted by FORD
But it's time for them to get their own name. It's not Queen. Brian and Roger are not Queen, despite the size of Roger's ego or Brian's hair.


True.

However, from their point of view, using a new name won't sell CDs.

Using the Queen name, either on its own or with 'Paul Rodgers', WILL sell CDs.

Just ask Van Hagar, who falsely continued under the name 'Van Halen', when we all knew they were nothing but, without Dave.

;)

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

Originally posted by flappo
brian and roger DID start queen before freddie came along , don't forget

ok , it was called smile at the time , but the idea was there

So what? Bands like U2 and REM were formed before Bono and Michael Stipe were members, but it was THEIR visions and directions that transformed these bands from very good, talented players, into an important, unique band.

Same applies to VH. Van Halen, after all, is the brothers name; so if anyone has the right to use their old band name, its Eddie and Alex. But you can't tell me that that band is ANYTHING that resembles VAN FUCKIN' HALEN without David Lee.

Freddie's voice was a once-in-a-generation phenomenon. Couple that with his musicianship and on-stage persona, and I truly do believe that he would have ;led a band that for all intents and purposes, would have sounded verry much like Queen.

P.S. Brian May fuckin' ROCKS.

[rustoffa]

There's more than a few lines of logic to be followed, or discarded in this thread. In honor of that simple premise?

Bump.
:)