Premier Rock Forum

numberthirty wrote: Mon Jun 19, 2023 9:38 pm That's the main issue...

Without all of the folks not named "David Bowie..." who played a massive role in all of the music that he gets the credit for?

You are essentially left with the start of "Quicksand".

While I really do love that? It ain't no Queen. Not by a long shot.

Very tough to disagree.

Visconti, Ronson, Eno, Fripp, Belew, etc. all had huge roles in shaping Bowie's best albums. I love those albums more than I love Queen's best albums, but...

Brian May? Fucking awesome.

Roger Taylor? Fucking awesome.

John Deacon? Massively underrated.

Freddie Mercury? Might be the greatest singer ever.

I cannot choose.

I really think Queen I and II are incredible records, but Queen becomes spotty for me after that. I think Freddie and Rob Halford are the most accomplished rock vocalists. You couldn't fuck with either at their respective peaks.

jfv wrote: Mon Jun 19, 2023 10:26 pmVery tough to disagree.

Visconti, Ronson, Eno, Fripp, Belew, etc. all had huge roles in shaping Bowie's best albums. I love those albums more than I love Queen's best albums, but...

Brian May? Fucking awesome.

Roger Taylor? Fucking awesome.

John Deacon? Massively underrated.

Freddie Mercury? Might be the greatest singer ever.

I cannot choose.

Even there...

You get down the line to Tin Machine. If you pull either of the Sales brothers or Gabrels out of that equation, would anyone even give listening to it a second thought?

jfv wrote: Mon Jun 19, 2023 10:26 pmVery tough to disagree.

Visconti, Ronson, Eno, Fripp, Belew, etc. all had huge roles in shaping Bowie's best albums. I love those albums more than I love Queen's best albums, but...

Brian May? Fucking awesome.

Roger Taylor? Fucking awesome.

John Deacon? Massively underrated.

Freddie Mercury? Might be the greatest singer ever.

I cannot choose.

So one individual is getting pulled on the quality of their collaborators, and the others aren't because they stuck with the same collaborators and gave themselves a collective name. I don't get this at all.

A_Man_Who_Tries wrote: Tue Jun 20, 2023 6:16 pm

jfv wrote: Mon Jun 19, 2023 10:26 pmVery tough to disagree.

Visconti, Ronson, Eno, Fripp, Belew, etc. all had huge roles in shaping Bowie's best albums. I love those albums more than I love Queen's best albums, but...

Brian May? Fucking awesome.

Roger Taylor? Fucking awesome.

John Deacon? Massively underrated.

Freddie Mercury? Might be the greatest singer ever.

I cannot choose.

So one individual is getting pulled on the quality of their collaborators, and the others aren't because they stuck with the same collaborators and gave themselves a collective name. I don't get this at all.

I think I may see your point.

Perhaps I'm confusing "Artist: David Bowie" with "Musician: David Bowie".

A_Man_Who_Tries wrote: Tue Jun 20, 2023 6:16 pmSo one individual is getting pulled on the quality of their collaborators, and the others aren't because they stuck with the same collaborators and gave themselves a collective name. I don't get this at all.

I can tell you how I see this...

The "MKI..." PJ Harvey trio?

That doesn't get judged the same way that I judge her bands that were made up of players.

She also gets judged differently on albums where it almost entirely her.

Cave In are also better than something like the "Band..." Chelsea Wolfe records.

Come to think of it....

I also draw a pretty clear line between Cheri Knight being a member of the band Blood Oranges and her solo records.

Bowie: picked good collaborators
Queen: never had "baby groupies"

Queen. Also way musically better.

Bowie might be the most overrated musician of all time

biscuitdough wrote: Sun Sep 17, 2023 1:02 am Queen: never had "baby groupies"

Didn't her friends say Mattix made this up?

Also:

Bowie: criticised MTV for not playing black artists.
Queen: played Sun City.

Queen. Also way musically better.

I like Queen, but come on. They never made anything half as good as Low.