IT'S A GAS, GAS, GAS!!
Return to Gasx3 Board Homepage
Subject: RE: Queen vs Stones vs Beatles
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2017
Time: 2:15:30 PM
Remote Address: 188.8.131.52
Message ID: 307006
Parent ID: 307000
Thread ID: 306970
Queen was a great band indeed, but no, they were no where as great as either the Stones or the Beatles.
Of the 3 bands, they might have had the best drummer out of the 3, since Charlie as great as he is, isn't the greatest Rock drummer, he's got more of a jazzy beat to his drumming, and even if you argue that he's a better overall drummer, and he might be, he isn't the better rock drummer.
Freddie was also a better piano player than anyone in the Beatles or Stones - even better than Stu (unless you just talk honky tonk piano playing, which Stu was tops and better at). But Lennon, Macca, and Jagger were better singers, or should I say, better rock singers. Freddie had a great singing voice, in some ways better than the others, but not overall. Paul was one of the best bass players period, yet Bill wasn't that far behind him, while with guitar playing, all 3 bands had good enough players, even if the Stones clearly were tops in that field out of the 3. The best song writers were clearly not in Queen, yet Freddie did write the greatest rock opera ever - light years better than what Pete Townsend wrote for the totally overrate Tommy, which had great music, yes, but a flat out stupid story that made no sense, even if the lyrics to many of the individual songs were great, when you combined them into one story, they sucked and told a dumb and stupid story indeed.
Note: Do not hit the "Post Message" button more than once, even if it is taking a long time to post your message. Doing so may cause a double post to appear and could slow down your posting time even more.
Download your free, customizable Burton Networks Message Board now!
© 1998 - 2017 by Keno Internet Services, except where otherwise noted. All rights reserved.
Return to Gasx3 Board