Is Queen Still More Relevant Than Taylor Swift?

[lovinthehd]

Why?

Time is change. It's normal and natural.

Off subject and all but I never liked Queen. I tried so hard. I tried yet again about 5 years ago, I just can't listen to them. I prefer Swift.

Just in the overall scheme of things, she's just not as important in the history of music IMO. Let alone as fun to listen to.

 

[eljr]

What is official/definitive about categories someone named like "Rock" or "Classic Rock" let alone "Pop/Rock"? Alternative is another vague one. Its alive as long as someone still listens in any case....not just what you care about.

You are trying to say that music categorization is subjective. That is correct. That has nothing directly to do with my post.

Classic Rock is fine if you like it, few people have listened to more of it than I. That said, it is objectively not timeless by any non biased measure. No music is.

It's the bias in people that make them believe as such. As an objectivist as you are, you should realize this.

 

[eljr]

Just in the overall scheme of things, she's just not as important in the history of music IMO. Let alone as fun to listen to.

How was Queen important in music history? Honest. I do not see it at all. If you give Queen such a caption, the list is very very long.

I kinda think of important to music history as the Beatles. Once you go pass them you open the flood gates for scores of bands, no? I would not even put Queen on the second tier. I'd go with the Stones and Zeppelin. And what is important to music history, innovation or popularity? Yes Queen was popular and the lead singer had a great voice, if you could tolerate it but nothing they did was important to music history that I am aware of.

Listen, I firmly believe and you have heard me say this before, "there is good music and there is great music, there is no bad music." Implied in this is that all music genres are are good, no judgment. That one would elevate Classic Rock over other genres is judgment hence my rebuttals.

I professed Rock to be on a level all it's own for decades. As I aged I realized that was my ego speaking not my intellect.

Just saying, I did not come here to troll.

Peace

 

[Trebdp83]

It’s all subjective and every generation has a soft spot for the music that shaped them. Queen is not everybody’s cup of tea but the fact that they are still talked about more than forty years on is telling. Nobody is arguing over the better of Blood Sweat & Tears and Gary Puckett and the Union Gap. I happen to love ‘em both. “You’ve made me so… very happy…and I guess there’s just no getting, over you!” See what I did there?

 

[panteragstk]

What can I do but laugh. BTW, ever notice Classic Rock is a subset of Pop/Rock?

Nothing timeless about it. Thank God it morphed into Alternative in the 90's is all I can say. After that, it died as is normal and natural.

Alternative in the 90's is now classic rock too.

I think we can all agree that there has been a ton of garbage music in every decade. There has also been excellent music in every decade. Now isn't any different, but some of the stuff being produced pretty much from the 80's to now is forgettable nonsense that, in it's day, was HUGE. It's funny to look back on some of the VERY popular songs of a given year and hear how horrible they were.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

hmm, I was about to write a whole paragraph on how @panteragstk is all wrong, and then I realized that my opinion doesn't matter as I'm neither objective as I grew up in 80 s-90s and 90s Alt-rock meaning something else for me and people my age group (mid-40s) than to current 20 years olds.
After all, Led Zep was probably the closest thing to metal at the time and now surely is classic rock.

Time waits for nobody

 

[lovinthehd]

How was Queen important in music history? Honest. I do not see it at all. If you give Queen such a caption, the list is very very long.

I kinda think of important to music history as the Beatles. Once you go pass them you open the flood gates for scores of bands, no? I would not even put Queen on the second tier. I'd go with the Stones and Zeppelin. And what is important to music history, innovation or popularity? Yes Queen was popular and the lead singer had a great voice, if you could tolerate it but nothing they did was important to music history that I am aware of.

Listen, I firmly believe and you have heard me say this before, "there is good music and there is great music, there is no bad music." Implied in this is that all music genres are are good, no judgment. That one would elevate Classic Rock over other genres is judgment hence my rebuttals.

I professed Rock to be on a level all it's own for decades. As I aged I realized that was my ego speaking not my intellect.

Just saying, I did not come here to troll.

Peace

I'd still put Zep and Stones in somewhat the same importance area as Queen, but think they made different contributions somewhat. I just wouldn't put Taylor Swift anywhere close to any of these guys I think most classical is fairly close over hundreds of years in general, too....just not much going on there in general but you'd probably not agree with that

 

[highfigh]

Why?

Time is change. It's normal and natural.

Off subject and all but I never liked Queen. I tried so hard. I tried yet again about 5 years ago, I just can't listen to them. I prefer Swift.

Did you listen to the stuff that was constantly played on the radio, or their older songs? Some of the old stuff was much better than their long, drawn out 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and arena rock.

 

[highfigh]

It’s all subjective and every generation has a soft spot for the music that shaped them. Queen is not everybody’s cup of tea but the fact that they are still talked about more than forty years on is telling. Nobody is arguing over the better of Blood Sweat & Tears and Gary Puckett and the Union Gap. I happen to love ‘em both. “You’ve made me so… very happy…and I guess there’s just no getting, over you!” See what I did there?

As long as I don't need to listen to 'Spinning Wheel', I like BS&T but if you listen to 'Young Girl', it's pretty creepy.

 

[Trebdp83]

That's why I quoted "Over You."

 

[highfigh]

I'd still put Zep and Stones in somewhat the same importance area as Queen, but think they made different contributions somewhat. I just wouldn't put Taylor Swift anywhere close to any of these guys I think most classical is fairly close over hundreds of years in general, too....just not much going on there in general but you'd probably not agree with that

Music like the type mentioned by Beato may be 'relevant' WRT record sales, use in commercials and in being "very popular with the young kids", but a lot of music is popular without contributing anything of substance to music, in general. If we were to list bands that caused changes to musical & instrumental styles, created/spawned new genres and attracted millions of people to various musical instruments, THEN, the word 'relevant' has a different meaning. Classic Rock didn't become that until it had reached the age of an adult and people still wanted to hear it, so the radio industry gave it a name- before that, it was called 'Rock music', of some type, whether blues-rock, Rock N Roll, prog rock, Jazz rock, etc. Classic rock encompasses about fifteen years of recordings and for people who like it, great. For those of us who have heard it for fifty years, I would ask the radio stations to PLAY SOMETHING ELSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. If some stations didn't have a playlist, they wouldn't have a clue what to play and in one local station's case, it reached the point where a DJ gave up and went on a rant at the beginning of his show, explaining that the listeners were being raped by the stations that only played what they paid for, but the catalog of great music that existed was almost endless. He continued and ended by saying "But this is likely to be the last you hear from me and I've got work to do and then, he played 'I've Got Work To Do', by The Average White Band- a song that was NEVER played on the air by ANY of the commercial stations. During the song, the station manager entered the studio and the DJ turned up the mic's level and asked "What are you doing here, Brent? What are you going to do, shut off the transmitter?" and at that point, the station went silent for a few minutes followed by the station manager turning up the mic to apologize for the DJ's rant and explained that said DJ had been fired.

 

[highfigh]

That's why I quoted "Over You."

That was the first major band I ever saw, live. I think they may have played with The American Breed that night but I can't remember the others.

 

[eljr]

Alternative in the 90's is now classic rock too.

LOL

I think we can all agree that there has been a ton of garbage music in every decade.

No, I cannot agree on this. I can agree that for some people, some music produced was not something they preferred and they labeled it garbage.

There has also been excellent music in every decade. Now isn't any different

agree

some of the stuff being produced pretty much from the 80's to now is forgettable nonsense

Are you suggesting this was different previous? (by the way, I disagree)

 

[eljr]

I'd still put Zep and Stones in somewhat the same importance area as Queen, but think they made different contributions somewhat. I just wouldn't put Taylor Swift anywhere close to any of these guys I think most classical is fairly close over hundreds of years in general, too....just not much going on there in general but you'd probably not agree with that

I disagree about Swift but respect your perspective.

peace

 

[eljr]

Did you listen to the stuff that was constantly played on the radio, or their older songs? Some of the old stuff was much better than their long, drawn out 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and arena rock.

There old stuff is why I never "got them."
By Rhapsody I was hiding from them actively.

I'll never forget my confusion, I recall it as it were yesterday.
When Queen released it's first album there was a review in Rolling Stone Magazine. The review hailed it as the second coming. It said Queen invoked the power and air of Zeppelin. I cut class, I had to have it. I got back to the dorm and put it on. When it was finished I was completely perplexed. So I played it again. Same. Confusion. I continued to do this. Nothing. After a month or so I gave up.
Second album was relapsed, I ran out and bought it immediately. Surly I would finally "get it."
Nope.

Like I said, I tried again in good fait about five years ago. I did not get Blood Sweat and Tears or Chicago either, back in the day. I later "got them" and loved them now. So I figured I'd try Queen again. Nothing. I am not happy about it, I just don't "get" it.

Peace

 

[highfigh]

There old stuff is why I never "got them."
By Rhapsody I was hiding from them actively.

I'll never forget my confusion, I recall it as it were yesterday.
When Queen released it's first album there was a review in Rolling Stone Magazine. The review hailed it as the second coming. It said Queen invoked the power and air of Zeppelin. I cut class, I had to have it. I got back to the dorm and put it on. When it was finished I was completely perplexed. So I played it again. Same. Confusion. I continued to do this. Nothing. After a month or so I gave up.
Second album was relapsed, I ran out and bought it immediately. Surly I would finally "get it."
Nope.

Like I said, I tried again in good fait about five years ago. I did not get Blood Sweat and Tears or Chicago either, back in the day. I later "got them" and loved them now. So I figured I'd try Queen again. Nothing. I am not happy about it, I just don't "get" it.

Peace

I have found that listening to what radio announcers recommend is an exercise in futility, although the stations that played whole LPs in the late-60s-late-'70s did play a lot of great music. Once they changed to AOR and playing hits, it was basically over, although the station at Milwaukee School of Engineering (WMSE) did brighten our lives by increasing their transmitter power and being licensed for broader range- that was in early-1981 and it's the only station in MKE that plays anything different from the same ol', same ol'. Sure, we have a type of Country station, but Country mixed with Hip Hop and hard rock is crap. I'm not a huge Country listener, but the stuff WMSE plays a wide range and some of it falls under the genre of 'Psychobilly', which was the kind of stuff Johnny Cash and others were doing when they rebelled against the establishment in Nashville. It's a bit different from 'Outlaw Country', which is what Waylon, Willie Nelson and others like them were doing, but one difference is that they left Nashville, the Psychobillies stayed and revolted locally. WMSE plays well-known music, totally obscure music and everything in-between, but it's interesting to hear what they bring to the surface. It's an all volunteer staff with the exception of the station manager and a couple of others- the manager fills in and puts together some incredible playlists, the engineer is a retired USPS employee who happens to like doing radio as well as recording live bands in the studio.

They archive their shows and can be heard at www.wmse.org- it's not professional radio, by any means but it's worth checking out, IMO.

 

[MR.MAGOO]

A song by Queen was used in the movies! (Wayne's World, 1992). I don't think a Swift song has ever been, but I could be mistaken, I don't go to the movies anymore. Today's so-called musicians seem to be more into activism than making actual MUSIC.

 

[Trell]

A song by Queen was used in the movies! (Wayne's World, 1992). I don't think a Swift song has ever been, but I could be mistaken, I don't go to the movies anymore. Today's so-called musicians seem to be more into activism than making actual MUSIC.

Also in the movie Flash Gordon (1980)

Flash Gordon (soundtrack) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[panteragstk]

LOL



No, I cannot agree on this. I can agree that for some people, some music produced was not something they preferred and they labeled it garbage.



agree



Are you suggesting this was different previous? (by the way, I disagree)

No, but the difference between the 70's and earlier is there just wasn't as MUCH music as there would be in later decades.

Now, there is so much that it's difficult to keep up with what's new. I find artists I like release albums and it somehow totally escapes my notice. It's frustrating.

 

[eljr]

I find artists I like release albums and it somehow totally escapes my notice. It's frustrating.

I never run into this. Just follow you fav artists on Facebook, make them favorites on Spotify and subscribe to a publication or two that cater to your main genre of music.

I review daily the new releases in my main genre and every week or two in others.

Honest, it was much harder to be aware in the 70's.

I forgot, I also post on several music forums. I don't think I miss anything.