Used to be a huge Queen fan until I found my Genesis fandom surpassed Queen in my early 20s. Even my ex described my music preferences as "Queen and Genesis, Genesis and Queen, Queen and Genesis".
QUEEN
-
-
Don't be too dismissive of the Greatest Hits people. If they enjoy those compilations they're one type of fan, but they are fans. You're a different type of fan, you just happen to be one who likes the album tracks more than singles and lost interest along the way. If someone who owned and loved all the albums and were dismissive of you as a supposed fan because you're not a completist and lost interest, they'd be wrong.
I'm reminded of my own standing as an Elton John "fan".
I love and enjoy most of his output from 1970 to 75. But if someone asked me if I was actually a fan, I'd probably say no, because I only have 8 of his 31 albums, they were all from a specific period - and I don't really have a desire to explore any albums he released after that.
-
I have never been a fan of this band. I respect for their talent. Certainly Mercury is a gifted vocalist and performer. And assembling the vocals for Bohemian Rhapsody shows incredible craft and musicianship. May is a distinctive guitarist, who sounds like no one else and is instantly recognizable. And Deacon and Taylor form solid support.
As for their songs, I find them melodramatic and excessively over-the-top. I don't mind some of them if they come on the radio, but I don't seek them out. The songs that have more restraint often seem derivative of other artists (e.g., Crazy Little Thing Called Love, Another One Bites the Dust). I have tried investigating a few albums to see if the non-singles are more interesting, but I haven't found anything that really works for me.
-
How is it their answer to punk?
The production is a lot more basic and a couple of songs, Fight From The Inside & Sheer Heart Attack (the latter particularly) are as punk as you can get without being punk. I see you answered me above but I'll leave the comment.
-
I have never been a fan of this band. I respect for their talent. Certainly Mercury is a gifted vocalist and performer. And assembling the vocals for Bohemian Rhapsody shows incredible craft and musicianship. May is a distinctive guitarist, who sounds like no one else and is instantly recognizable. And Deacon and Taylor form solid support.
As for their songs, I find them melodramatic and excessively over-the-top. I don't mind some of them if they come on the radio, but I don't seek them out. The songs that have more restraint often seem derivative of other artists (e.g., Crazy Little Thing Called Love, Another One Bites the Dust). I have tried investigating a few albums to see if the non-singles are more interesting, but I haven't found anything that really works for me.
A couple of my favourite album tracks are I'm In Love With My Car, Tie Your Mother Down, The Prophet's Song, Drowse, White Man, Teo Torriate (Let Us Cling Together), Sleeping On The Sidewalk, Man On The Prowl, Keep Passing The Open WIndows, Don't Try So Hard. There are elements of bombast in some of these but they are worth a listen.
-
I think the reason some of us haven't strayed much further than the greatest hits compilations is that Queen were more of a 'singles' band with their constant stream of power ballads (others in this category for me would include The Beatles, ABBA, Slade, 10cc) rather than an 'album' band like Genesis, Pink Floyd, Led Zep, Yes, Hawkwind etc.
The Beatles weren't an albums band? OK....
I don't wish to derail this, but I couldn't disagree with you more. Just because a band has or had a lot of hit singles doesn't mean their albums weren't equally as worthy.
-
I think the reason some of us haven't strayed much further than the greatest hits compilations is that Queen were more of a 'singles' band with their constant stream of power ballads (others in this category for me would include The Beatles, ABBA, Slade, 10cc) rather than an 'album' band like Genesis, Pink Floyd, Led Zep, Yes, Hawkwind etc.
I think that BECAME true, but the early albums, the first 3 in particular, were very much "albums", indeed, IMO, the single from Q2, (which was a rework of a track on Q1) is one of the worst 2 tracks on it (Funny How Love Is being the other). Slade were singles first and foremost, 10cc were both, such was their talent, and in the case of the Beatles, I think they did the opposite of Queen, starting as a singles band and evolving, the latter singles coming when anything they did would chart.
-
in the case of the Beatles, I think they did the opposite of Queen, starting as a singles band and evolving, the latter singles coming when anything they did would chart.
Although bear in mind that right up until near the end they remained practitioners of the standalone non-album single. They retained the mindset of "we need a new single" which reflected how the industry was. But yeah, they were on that cusp of the 'album band" becoming more of a thing.
