Quote:
Originally Posted by JayJamJah
Really good analysis. A Night at the Opera is the one they really hit a homer with I think. '39 is a great song and the album is endlessly entertaining.
|
Thank you. Yeah, they were basically given a high quality studio, tons of time and complete creative control for "A Night At the Opera". This was where they were really trying to prove themselves, spending so much time on layering and such. The end of "Good Company" when May performs that big band type arrangement, with ONLY guitars, blows my mind every time I hear it. May said he probably would not put that much time into something like that today, unless it was completely necessary for the song but back then it was all new and exciting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by variatingmule
Thanks man!
|
you're welcome, I am a bit biased having tons of respect and admiration for Queen but off stage they always came across as down to earth guys who were just doing their jobs on stage... and doing it well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
The great thing about Queen is, they took the sophistication and grandeur of older genres of music and applied it to rock, and while there were already prog bands doing it, Queen took their influenes and turned it into a uber sophisticated kind of pop music that was totally unique then and still is today. I know not everyone is a Queen fan, but they deserve respect dammit.
Sheer Heart Attack and Night at the Opera are amazing albums, pomp rock at it's finest.
|
I don't think they could help it, they were all so advanced musically and mentally... it really was like a super group in a way. They really should be respected but then again their are tons of acts that don't get the respect they deserve.