|
Post by kds on Jan 18, 2019 12:25:02 GMT -5
The production isn't nearly as good, but IMO those songs (Keep Yourself Alive, My Fairy King, Great King Rat, Liar, Son & Daughter, etc) are just so great. Also, nobody ever mentions this, but did Queen invent power metal on Queen II? OK, I have to plead ignorance here. What's power metal? Power metal is a subgenre, mostly from Europe that tends to feature big singalong choruses, at times operatic high octave vocals, and lyrics about dragons, wizards, kings, queens, fantasy stuff. Ronnie James Dio is widely regarded as the father of power metal, but he was also a Queen fan, so it's believable that he could've been very influenced by Queen II.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Jan 18, 2019 12:27:27 GMT -5
Huh: you learn something new everyday. I guess with that definition, I can't think of anyone who really fits the bill that was earlier than Queen. There were some wailers in the English blues-rock scene who moved into fantasy lyrics (Robert Plant and such), but they rarely fit into the singalong choruses category. Or metal.
Then again all of these things tend to be more gradual evolutions than definitive starts-here, stops-here cutoffs.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2019 13:59:00 GMT -5
I appreciate Queen, but not as much as I should've.
I purchased Queen's first album in 1973 based on an ad in Circus magazine. Creem, Circus, and to a lesser extent, Rolling Stone were my "go to" sources for new music back then. My friends and the radio stations where I lived didn't play music like Queen's, so I had to research other places. I liked the first album; it sounded more sophisticated and slicker than the other artists/music I was listening to. I especially liked "Keep Yourself Alive", "Doing Alright", "Modern Times Rock 'n" Roll", and my favorite, "Liar".
I liked the first album enough to purchase Queen II in 1974, with the iconic album cover getting my attention in one of the rock magazines. On this album I particularly liked "Father To Son", "The Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke", "Seven Seas Of Rhye", and maybe my favorite Queen song, "Ogre Battle".
So, two for two very good albums. I can't say that I loved all the songs, but the ones that I liked, I liked very much. I still considered Queen a cult or underground band; I mean, they weren't on the radio and I didn't know anybody else who had those two albums. I really was looking forward to the third Queen album, but a strange thing happened.
In the spring of 1975, "Killer Queen" was all over the radio - and I hated it! I didn't care for the starts and stops, and Brian May's guitar grated on me. In addition to that, around that time, I started to really get into albums, and specifically purchasing them. There were just too many to buy including Blue Oyster Cult, New York Dolls, Slade, Sparks, and KISS. So, I made the decision to NOT buy Sheer Heart Attack, and that effectively ended my active Queen fandom.
I actually never even heard the Sheer Heart Attack album, and the next thing you know, "Bohemian Rhapsody" was everywhere. I ALMOST bought A Night At The Opera, but another group called The Beach Boys was starting to take all of my album money. I never did buy another Queen album. I wasn't impressed with their subsequent singles right into the 1980's. I preferred the "rockier" Queen and what I heard on the radio was too slick and too pop. I still considered myself a fan of Queen, but that was based entirely on the first two albums and maybe an isolated album cut from the others.
Through the years, I've thought of going back and picking up where I left off with Sheer Heart Attack (I know now that it's a classic), and I've looked at several Queen Greatest Hits packages...just never bought any of them. Did that ever happen to anybody, where you buy a couple of a group's albums, and really like them, but then for some reason eventually stop following them - for maybe not a good reason? I still think something will eventually spark my interest in Queen again, and I WILL get back into their catalogue.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Jan 18, 2019 15:16:44 GMT -5
I appreciate Queen, but not as much as I should've.
I purchased Queen's first album in 1973 based on an ad in Circus magazine. Creem, Circus, and to a lesser extent, Rolling Stone were my "go to" sources for new music back then. My friends and the radio stations where I lived didn't play music like Queen's, so I had to research other places. I liked the first album; it sounded more sophisticated and slicker than the other artists/music I was listening to. I especially liked "Keep Yourself Alive", "Doing Alright", "Modern Times Rock 'n" Roll", and my favorite, "Liar".
I liked the first album enough to purchase Queen II in 1974, with the iconic album cover getting my attention in one of the rock magazines. On this album I particularly liked "Father To Son", "The Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke", "Seven Seas Of Rhye", and maybe my favorite Queen song, "Ogre Battle".
So, two for two very good albums. I can't say that I loved all the songs, but the ones that I liked, I liked very much. I still considered Queen a cult or underground band; I mean, they weren't on the radio and I didn't know anybody else who had those two albums. I really was looking forward to the third Queen album, but a strange thing happened.
In the spring of 1975, "Killer Queen" was all over the radio - and I hated it! I didn't care for the starts and stops, and Brian May's guitar grated on me. In addition to that, around that time, I started to really get into albums, and specifically purchasing them. There were just too many to buy including Blue Oyster Cult, New York Dolls, Slade, Sparks, and KISS. So, I made the decision to NOT buy Sheer Heart Attack, and that effectively ended my active Queen fandom.
I actually never even heard the Sheer Heart Attack album, and the next thing you know, "Bohemian Rhapsody" was everywhere. I ALMOST bought A Night At The Opera, but another group called The Beach Boys was starting to take all of my album money. I never did buy another Queen album. I wasn't impressed with their subsequent singles right into the 1980's. I preferred the "rockier" Queen and what I heard on the radio was too slick and too pop. I still considered myself a fan of Queen, but that was based entirely on the first two albums and maybe an isolated album cut from the others.
Through the years, I've thought of going back and picking up where I left off with Sheer Heart Attack (I know now that it's a classic), and I've looked at several Queen Greatest Hits packages...just never bought any of them. Did that ever happen to anybody, where you buy a couple of a group's albums, and really like them, but then for some reason eventually stop following them - for maybe not a good reason? I still think something will eventually spark my interest in Queen again, and I WILL get back into their catalogue.
For my money, Queen are one of those bands were the greatest hits comps don't do them justice. For starters, the first two albums (which I believe are their best) are typically pretty much ignored, as are the many great album tracks from their career like the Tenement Funster / Flick of the Wrist / Lily of the Valley medley from Sheer Heart Attack, Death on Two Legs, '39, Teo Torriate, It's Late, Jealousy, Dragon Attack, Put Out the Fire, Tear it Up, Gimmie the Prize, Was It All Worth It, or The Hitman, just to name a few. Especially if you're into the more rock driven elements of Queen, as their heavier material tends to get left off the compilations. If you're mostly into their more hard rock stuff, I think you're safe with any of their 70s albums. They did start to go a little more pop in the 80s, but I think their last two albums - The Miracle and Innuendo - are a little more guitar rock driven.
|
|
|
Post by Silken on Jan 18, 2019 18:38:49 GMT -5
I appreciate Queen, but not as much as I should've.
I purchased Queen's first album in 1973 based on an ad in Circus magazine. Creem, Circus, and to a lesser extent, Rolling Stone were my "go to" sources for new music back then. My friends and the radio stations where I lived didn't play music like Queen's, so I had to research other places. I liked the first album; it sounded more sophisticated and slicker than the other artists/music I was listening to. I especially liked "Keep Yourself Alive", "Doing Alright", "Modern Times Rock 'n" Roll", and my favorite, "Liar".
I liked the first album enough to purchase Queen II in 1974, with the iconic album cover getting my attention in one of the rock magazines. On this album I particularly liked "Father To Son", "The Fairy Feller's Master-Stroke", "Seven Seas Of Rhye", and maybe my favorite Queen song, "Ogre Battle".
So, two for two very good albums. I can't say that I loved all the songs, but the ones that I liked, I liked very much. I still considered Queen a cult or underground band; I mean, they weren't on the radio and I didn't know anybody else who had those two albums. I really was looking forward to the third Queen album, but a strange thing happened.
In the spring of 1975, "Killer Queen" was all over the radio - and I hated it! I didn't care for the starts and stops, and Brian May's guitar grated on me. In addition to that, around that time, I started to really get into albums, and specifically purchasing them. There were just too many to buy including Blue Oyster Cult, New York Dolls, Slade, Sparks, and KISS. So, I made the decision to NOT buy Sheer Heart Attack, and that effectively ended my active Queen fandom.
I actually never even heard the Sheer Heart Attack album, and the next thing you know, "Bohemian Rhapsody" was everywhere. I ALMOST bought A Night At The Opera, but another group called The Beach Boys was starting to take all of my album money. I never did buy another Queen album. I wasn't impressed with their subsequent singles right into the 1980's. I preferred the "rockier" Queen and what I heard on the radio was too slick and too pop. I still considered myself a fan of Queen, but that was based entirely on the first two albums and maybe an isolated album cut from the others.
Through the years, I've thought of going back and picking up where I left off with Sheer Heart Attack (I know now that it's a classic), and I've looked at several Queen Greatest Hits packages...just never bought any of them. Did that ever happen to anybody, where you buy a couple of a group's albums, and really like them, but then for some reason eventually stop following them - for maybe not a good reason? I still think something will eventually spark my interest in Queen again, and I WILL get back into their catalogue.
Now that you don't need to buy the albums in order to listen to them, do it! You will discover wonderful music.
|
|
|
Post by AGD on Jan 19, 2019 3:22:09 GMT -5
I feel sorry for you and your rigid stance. You're missing out on so much. Like seeing the world on only monochrome.
|
|
|
Post by iancockburn on Jan 19, 2019 5:42:20 GMT -5
Streaming has indeed changed everything. As a kid, I couldn't just check out albums for free unless I found a friend or a library that had a copy. I have always quite liked Queen but never (until very recently) enough to buy their records. Maybe when I was a kid I was too much of a music snob and thought they were a bit TOO easy to like. I liked them enough to watch the Freddie tribute concert.
Recently I've been checking out their albums and loving a lot of them. In the UK, their greatest hits album is SO ubiquitious, and they've never been off the radio in my lifetime, that all their big hits are very over-familiar and over-played (though strangely I never got tired of "Bohemian Rhapsody", and still consider it their masterpiece) so it's SUCH a pleasure to hear unknown or unfamiliar Queen songs that are just as good as, or better than, the hits.
I still don't know their albums as intimately as I'd like but I've settled on "Queen 2", "A Night at the Opera", "A Day at the Races", "Sheer Heart Attack" and "Jazz" as my favourites. Of their later work I find "Innuendo" the strongest (mainly for the singles) but I do find I have to use the skip button a bit on that one.
I haven't seen the movie and I don't intend to, the trailer put me right off. It looked like every other band biopic ever. I suppose I'm not a fan of the genre. Even "Love and Mercy" didn't thrill me much.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2019 5:30:49 GMT -5
As I said on "What Are You Listening To Right now" thread, Seeing the movie Bohemian Rhapsody finally boosted my interest on Queen, and I've checked out four of their albums so far.
Queen - This one, at first, sounded a tad too hard rock-y for me, but with repeated listen, it grew on me rapidly. It's messy in a few places, but it's surely quite an effort considering it's a debut album. I come to like even the most "hard rock" track like "Liar" and "Jesus". My favorite: "Keep Yourself Alive"
Queen II - Least favorite of the four, to be honest. There is quite a few great moments (the intro of "The Fairy Fellers' Master-Stroke for example), and I love the last two songs, but it sounds hysterical in places, although I'm sorry to say that. Hope it'll grow on me with more listens. My favorite: "Seven Seas of Rhye"
Sheer Heart Attack - I appreciate the variety of musical style on this album. It's, to me, more entertaining listen than the first two albums. Likewise with the second album, the last three songs are great, and so is more popular cuts like "Killer Queen" and "Now I'm Here". My favorite: "Bring Back That Leroy Brown"
A Night at the Opera - An immediate favorite. It's thoroughly fascinating. Even "The Prophet's Song", which is 8 minutes long, doesn't drag at all and breathtakingly elaborated. There is more diversity in musical style than the last album, and I especially enjoy traditional pop influence on "Lazing on the Sunday Afternoon." My favorite: "Love of My Life".
Other random favorite cuts: "Somebody To Love", "Don't Stop Me Now" and "Staying Power".
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 16, 2019 18:59:46 GMT -5
Of possible interest to KDS (if he doesn't know it already), this Extreme interview is queued up to a Nuno Bettencourt answer I'd never heard before: that bands at the Freddie Mercury benefit weren't supposed to play Queen music during their own sets, but rather their own music, with the Queen tributes only with Queen later in the show (as Cherone did on "Hammer to Fall").
While it had occurred to me before that they were the only band who really did Queen music, I never realized it was actually supposed to be forbidden. I will say thanks to them, because it was the highlight of that concert for me.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 16, 2019 19:35:59 GMT -5
Of possible interest to KDS (if he doesn't know it already), this Extreme interview is queued up to a Nuno Bettencourt answer I'd never heard before: that bands at the Freddie Mercury benefit weren't supposed to play Queen music during their own sets, but rather their own music, with the Queen tributes only with Queen later in the show (as Cherone did on "Hammer to Fall").
While it had occurred to me before that they were the only band who really did Queen music, I never realized it was actually supposed to be forbidden. I will say thanks to them, because it was the highlight of that concert for me.
I actually didn't know that nobody was to play any Queen before the Queen portion of the show. I know Def Leppard did Now I'm Here, but they were joined by Brian May, so they must've had the ok.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 16, 2019 19:38:15 GMT -5
(Now I'm about forty-five minutes into an Extreme Youtube hole.)
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 16, 2019 19:44:09 GMT -5
(Now I'm about forty-five minutes into an Extreme Youtube hole.) A very underrated band. I remember hoping Cherone might be tapped by Queen once Extreme broke up. But....he was tapped by Van Halen instead.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 16, 2019 20:01:09 GMT -5
Not to make this the Extreme thread, but I always liked Nuno's voice more than Gary's.
Regardless, I think coming off that Freddie show, the names that excited people as what-ifs were Gary Cherone and George Michael. While I'm not a big fan of Michael--though I do really like some of what he did--I actually think he'd have been great.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 16, 2019 20:12:13 GMT -5
Not to make this the Extreme thread, but I always liked Nuno's voice more than Gary's.
Regardless, I think coming off that Freddie show, the names that excited people as what-ifs were Gary Cherone and George Michael. While I'm not a big fan of Michael--though I do really like some of what he did--I actually think he'd have been great. Im not a fan of George Michael's music, but he was a great singer, and the only vocalist of the day who came close to Freddie's range. I remember the version he did of Somebody to Love became a minor hit in 1993 when it was released on the Five Live EP.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 22:54:43 GMT -5
It doesn't get much better than this for me; maybe my favorite Queen song:
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 17, 2019 9:32:48 GMT -5
It's a good one, that's for sure. The "black side" of Queen II used to be my favorite stretch of theirs.
|
|
|
Post by iancockburn on Feb 17, 2019 13:37:03 GMT -5
Im not a fan of George Michael's music, but he was a great singer, and the only vocalist of the day who came close to Freddie's range. I remember the version he did of Somebody to Love became a minor hit in 1993 when it was released on the Five Live EP. Number one in the UK.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 17, 2019 15:53:51 GMT -5
I've just finished watching the acclaimed biopic Bohemian Rhapsody.
Considering all of the positive reaction from fans and critics, I think I was a little underwhelmed. It was good overall, but good performances. The liberties taken with the story for dramatic effect were expected. I guess I just wasn't blown away. Its kind of the same feeling after I saw Love and Mercy.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2019 18:45:45 GMT -5
I've just finished watching the acclaimed biopic Bohemian Rhapsody. Considering all of the positive reaction from fans and critics, I think I was a little underwhelmed. It was good overall, but good performances. The liberties taken with the story for dramatic effect were expected. I guess I just wasn't blown away. Its kind of the same feeling after I saw Love and Mercy. Biopics that were sanctioned by the subjects of the story tend to be pretty mediocre. Why? Because in order to get the "official," "licensed," "authorized" labels, they have to please the egos of their subject matter. This means very little which shows their darker side, their human flaws, the times they were wrong, get left in. Or if it does, it portrays them in the best possible light. It's better than nothing, but personally that approach kind of ruins it for me. There's a great moment in the show Bojack Horseman where Diane's about to publish her book on Bojack and he's upset it portrays him somewhat negatively. She argues that it's the flaws which make people look up to public figures, and after the book is published her way, in the next episode someone comes up to Bojack and calls him their hero. I don't think people want to see perfect demigods who've done no wrong, we want people with strengths we can aspire to and weaknesses we empathize with. Walt Disney could be kind of a dick to his staff. Brian screwed Mike out of royalties and recognition for decades. Syd beat his girlfriend. Princess Diana was really spiteful using the press to make her ex look bad. Grace Slick got drunk on stage and insulted the entire country of Germany. George McGovern ran a flawed campaign and lost in a humiliating margin. But I love them anyway, and in some cases even because of their shortcomings. That's what I wish more biographers and subjects of biographies understood. I'm pretty open about myself and on the off-chance I ever became famous I hope I'd stay that way enough to let my biopic/biography tell the whole story, warts and all.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 17, 2019 22:24:56 GMT -5
I've just finished watching the acclaimed biopic Bohemian Rhapsody. Considering all of the positive reaction from fans and critics, I think I was a little underwhelmed. It was good overall, but good performances. The liberties taken with the story for dramatic effect were expected. I guess I just wasn't blown away. Its kind of the same feeling after I saw Love and Mercy. Biopics that were sanctioned by the subjects of the story tend to be pretty mediocre. Why? Because in order to get the "official," "licensed," "authorized" labels, they have to please the egos of their subject matter. This means very little which shows their darker side, their human flaws, the times they were wrong, get left in. Or if it does, it portrays them in the best possible light. It's better than nothing, but personally that approach kind of ruins it for me. There's a great moment in the show Bojack Horseman where Diane's about to publish her book on Bojack and he's upset it portrays him somewhat negatively. She argues that it's the flaws which make people look up to public figures, and after the book is published her way, in the next episode someone comes up to Bojack and calls him their hero. I don't think people want to see perfect demigods who've done no wrong, we want people with strengths we can aspire to and weaknesses we empathize with. Walt Disney could be kind of a dick to his staff. Brian screwed Mike out of royalties and recognition for decades. Syd beat his girlfriend. Princess Diana was really spiteful using the press to make her ex look bad. Grace Slick got drunk on stage and insulted the entire country of Germany. George McGovern ran a flawed campaign and lost in a humiliating margin. But I love them anyway, and in some cases even because of their shortcomings. That's what I wish more biographers and subjects of biographies understood. I'm pretty open about myself and on the off-chance I ever became famous I hope I'd stay that way enough to let my biopic/biography tell the whole story, warts and all. It wasn't really the general limitations of biopics that underwhelmed me about the Queen movie. I think it was actually Remi Malek's performance as Freddie Mercury. He has a lot of the mannerisms, particularly onstage, but I felt like his performance was a little wooden at times. I actually thought the May, Taylor, and Deacon characters were spot on. Considering how people raved about Malek, I just didn't see it. There was actually a special I saw on the REELZ Channel, which showed dramatizations of Freddie's final years, and I thought that actor absolutely nailed Mercury.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2019 23:06:50 GMT -5
As a huge Mr. Robot fan, Rami is the main reason I was interested in seeing this movie for awhile. Then I saw the middling reviews and decided to wait until it's on TV/On-Demand.
|
|
|
Post by Silken on Feb 18, 2019 8:54:43 GMT -5
Biopics that were sanctioned by the subjects of the story tend to be pretty mediocre. Why? Because in order to get the "official," "licensed," "authorized" labels, they have to please the egos of their subject matter. This means very little which shows their darker side, their human flaws, the times they were wrong, get left in. Or if it does, it portrays them in the best possible light. It's better than nothing, but personally that approach kind of ruins it for me. There's a great moment in the show Bojack Horseman where Diane's about to publish her book on Bojack and he's upset it portrays him somewhat negatively. She argues that it's the flaws which make people look up to public figures, and after the book is published her way, in the next episode someone comes up to Bojack and calls him their hero. I don't think people want to see perfect demigods who've done no wrong, we want people with strengths we can aspire to and weaknesses we empathize with. Walt Disney could be kind of a dick to his staff. Brian screwed Mike out of royalties and recognition for decades. Syd beat his girlfriend. Princess Diana was really spiteful using the press to make her ex look bad. Grace Slick got drunk on stage and insulted the entire country of Germany. George McGovern ran a flawed campaign and lost in a humiliating margin. But I love them anyway, and in some cases even because of their shortcomings. That's what I wish more biographers and subjects of biographies understood. I'm pretty open about myself and on the off-chance I ever became famous I hope I'd stay that way enough to let my biopic/biography tell the whole story, warts and all. It wasn't really the general limitations of biopics that underwhelmed me about the Queen movie. I think it was actually Remi Malek's performance as Freddie Mercury. He has a lot of the mannerisms, particularly onstage, but I felt like his performance was a little wooden at times. I actually thought the May, Taylor, and Deacon characters were spot on. Considering how people raved about Malek, I just didn't see it. There was actually a special I saw on the REELZ Channel, which showed dramatizations of Freddie's final years, and I thought that actor absolutely nailed Mercury. I agree with that actor (I don't know his name). Do you think the movie would be as popular as it is if the leading actor was unknown? I guess all the nominations and awards that Malek is getting are based only on the trailer or the "Live Aid" part of the movie. He nailed it in the more obvious mannerisms, but the rest of the time he was terrible. Besides, I don't know if it's Malek or the script, but they made Freddie look as an unlikable character. When the movie finished (after what it seemed to be an eternity) I felt the urge to watch real interviews and concerts. If I hadn't been a Queen fan, Bohemian Rhapsody wouldn't have turned me into one (just as Love and Mercy did with the BB).
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 18, 2019 9:19:54 GMT -5
It wasn't really the general limitations of biopics that underwhelmed me about the Queen movie. I think it was actually Remi Malek's performance as Freddie Mercury. He has a lot of the mannerisms, particularly onstage, but I felt like his performance was a little wooden at times. I actually thought the May, Taylor, and Deacon characters were spot on. Considering how people raved about Malek, I just didn't see it. There was actually a special I saw on the REELZ Channel, which showed dramatizations of Freddie's final years, and I thought that actor absolutely nailed Mercury. I agree with that actor (I don't know his name). Do you think the movie would be as popular as it is if the leading actor was unknown? I guess all the nominations and awards that Malek is getting are based only on the trailer or the "Live Aid" part of the movie. He nailed it in the more obvious mannerisms, but the rest of the time he was terrible. Besides, I don't know if it's Malek or the script, but they made Freddie look as an unlikable character. When the movie finished (after what it seemed to be an eternity) I felt the urge to watch real interviews and concerts. If I hadn't been a Queen fan, Bohemian Rhapsody wouldn't have turned me into one (just as Love and Mercy did with the BB). To be honest, Im not sure if someone more unknown would've been better. I wasn't familiar with Malek before the movie. I think the movie tried to show Freddie as a lonely man, but I felt that didnt really come across as intended, and I feel like the Freddie character was kind of one dimensional. However, on the positive, I thought the pacing was good, and the 135 runtime went pretty quickly. I also thought the inclusion of Mike Myers' Ray Foster character saying kids would never headbang to Bohemian Rhapsody in their cars was inspired.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 20, 2019 11:24:58 GMT -5
"Queen" (comprising Brian, Roger, Adam Lambert, and whoever else they use ... Spike Edney, probably?) are playing the Oscars. Not enough to get me to watch, but I'm sure I'll take a look later once it's online.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 20, 2019 22:30:03 GMT -5
Im not a fan of George Michael's music, but he was a great singer, and the only vocalist of the day who came close to Freddie's range. When at 15-16 I listened to cassette album "Older" by George Michael, I kept thinking his voice is like Freddie's. They kinda sound very similar. kds, being Queen freak, would you agree that the best solo album's made by nobody in the band? Thanks in advance. I think Brian May's 1993 Back to the Light album is pretty good. His 1998 follow up Another World was OK. I've never listened to his Star Fleet EP. I'm less impressed with Freddie's solo output. And I've never checked out any of Roger Taylor's solo material.
|
|