Queen! What say ya?
Printed From: MetalMusicArchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Suggest new bands/artists to MMA
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Metal Music Archives
URL: http://www.MetalMusicArchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=793
Printed Date: 22 Dec 2024 at 1:22am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 10.16 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Queen! What say ya?
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Subject: Queen! What say ya?
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 10:15am
|
Do you think Queen is suitable as Proto-Metal? They were heavy for sure at times. And they were an influence for metal bands. Like Metallica e.g. who recorded Queen's song Stone Cold Crazy for their Garage Inc. album. What say ya?  ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 10:24am
Bartek, they've already been suggested, though it was at the beginning of the site's activity - when we put a moratorium on all possibly controversial addition. Now there's talk of having a Hard Rock section (some of us at least are VERY much in favour of it), which would be a much better definition than Proto-Metal. Unless, that is, we go for Metal-Related and open the proverbial can of worms ....Anyway, before we tackle anything potentially controversial, we have to get all the genre teams up and running again (we're short on Collabs at the moment, since many people just dropped off the radar). Personally, as was the case for PA, I'm all for inclusiveness, but we have to be all on board - especially M@x and Philippe. |
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 10:29am
Hi, Raff. It's a half-tongue-in-cheek suggestion, and:
I was about to suggest that too. -------------
|
Raff wrote:Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 11:17am
Oh, and about collab shortage, I don't think I'm an expert in metal in any way but I could gladly help in some technical role as I did in PA. 
-------------
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 11:17am
When Moris suggested them, it was not tongue-in-cheek, and other Collabs have brought Queen up in the CZ. It's not like someone had suggested adding Michael Jackson because Eddie Van Halen plays guitar on "Beat It" .
|
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 11:46am
You don't answer... Ok, I assume you don't need me then...  -------------
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 1:12pm
| Bartek, I didn't answer because I was not online anymore... Of course we need you! What would you like to do? |
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 1:59pm
|
Well, in PA I was an Errors & Omissions Editor...
-------------
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 2:30pm
|
That's something we really can use... There are already two people working there, Scott (Rushfan) and Diego (Progshine). I'll just post a note in the Admin Zone (where I seem to be the only one to post these days), and promote you by tomorrow if I don't get any feedback. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2010 at 6:40pm
in short...  and welcome to the ranks of the collabs here Tuz. Nice to see you onboard!  |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 7:55am
|
Queen were indeed heavy - and more than once entered into the realms of metal. Stone Cold Crazy (1974, unbelievably) is the one that's not only irrefutably a full-blown metal song 4 years before the NWoBHM, and 3 years before Priest played anything like metal - and is deservedly known best, thanks to Metallica, but Sheer Heart Attack on "News of The World" is heads-down full-on too.
They are exceptions, in a catalogue largely full of non-metal (e.g., at least 3 albums crammed full of Prog Rock that's actually better and heavier than most "Proper" Prog bands, and a large number of ballads, stadium anthems, and all the general good stuff that Queen did.
I can't see how it can be denied that Queen were, along with The Sweet, a fairly significant influence on the Metal scene - although I'm aware that many metal fans live in denial that Metal could possibly have been influenced by Glam (which it undoubtedly was). The links from Slade and Sweet through the LA bands like Quiet Riot (spits) tho Motley Crue et al are blatant.
I think, however, that there are more important acts to add - Queen are worthy of discussion, but pleeeeease stay away from comparing "Flash Gordon", "Another One Bites The Dust" or "I Want to Break Free" to anything metal. It's just not worth it...
I wouldn't necessarily vote for them, but I wouldn't vote against them.
The Kinks next...
|
Posted By: LittleBig
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 9:35am
| I guess Queen could be here as long as people review only the albums from the debut to Jazz let's say (Let Me Entertain you and Dead on Time sound pretty heavy). |
Posted By: Colt
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 9:45am
 ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/colt2112" rel="nofollow - http://www.last.fm/user/colt2112 
|
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 9:50am
|
First you add controversial bands to our proposed 'metal-related' or 'non-metal' category. Then there will be people complaining that they are metal enough to be in an actual category. There are always going to be disagreements over where band x belongs. Queen is an almost universally loved band, and I think they're brilliant as well. However, they only had a few metal songs along a broad catalogue of albums. Ogre Battle, Champions of the Universe, Stone Cold Crazy, I would call these metal songs. But you'd only find at most a few metal songs on any given album, and it wouldn't be unusual to come across an album of theirs containing no metal whatsoever. I would give it a large resounding no. ------------- Lost respect for these archives when I saw Creed added, among other bands. Not going to be foruming here anymore. You can keep my reviews if you want. |
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 11:29am
|
If we want to continue to have 5 visitors a day and 300 forum members then yes, by all accounts, let's add Queen and all non-metal rock acts that will further make us look like a "metal-ish" site. If we want to actually become a household name in the METAL world, let's continue adding true metal bands (those nobody would ever fail to recognize as such), correct the info we have already here (that musicbrainz system only creates problems in my view since sometimes it adds more than one band per name) and improve the general database. One day when this website has enough credibility amog metal fans we can include backstreet boys if you want. But as of now, if we start adding bands like Queen, we're neither a hard metal site nor a hard rock one. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 1:44pm
Well, we haven't added Queen or anyone else of that sort, and the situation has not improved either... I have started thinking too exclusive a policy may do the same amount (or even worse) damage than a too inclusive one. But then, what do I know ? In any case, we should not forget that we have to get M@x's agreement on expanding any existing categories - and I also agree about Musicbrainz creating more problems than it is worth. Thankfully now we have three people on the Errors and Omissions team, plus others who are lending their expertise to the improvement of our database. @ LittleBig: when an album is tagged as Non-Metal, it cannot be reviewed. This is what happened to the Rush albums after Moving Pictures, for instance. |
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 2:56pm
Thanks, Micky. -------------
|
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 2:59pm
Ok, close and hide this thread, please. I feel ashamed. 
-------------
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 3:06pm
|
Not on your life! There is no need to be ashamed, because Queen are considered as metal-related by lots of other sources. Even Porcupine Tree have been suggested for addition, which I think is somewhat more far-fetched.
|
Posted By: LittleBig
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 3:23pm
|
never create a metal related category, the previous PA category "prog-related" created enough trouble/controversy, we should learn from mistakes, don't we?
early Queen can fit a little bit under proto-metal.
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 3:27pm
| Personally, I'd be in favour of a Hard Rock category, and so would other people, but it's probably too early to decide. And I agree with you about the metal-related category... I left PA mainly because of the endless friction over those 'controversial' additions, and of people behaving like 3-year-olds. |
Posted By: LittleBig
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 3:30pm
hard rock is actually even better for Queen 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 3:32pm
don't make me reach through the internet and snack ya silly! No such thing as a bad suggestion.. you know that Tuz. 
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 3:36pm
I think that this is the best opposing point of all, and I'd be interested to see if anyone pops up with a point in Queen's favour that is as good.
Queen's inclusion on a Prog site was natural, because they have released at least 3 full-blown prog albums. Even if you argued that it was only one, that is enough, because when Queen did Prog, they were awesome at it.
They were also awesome at metal - "Sheer Heart Attack" is still one of the most intense songs I've ever heard - but not one single album is metal.
|
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 3:39pm
I just read my initial post. Sounds like written by an excited kid. Ok, gotta go now. Goodnight! -------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2010 at 3:40pm
have a good night Tuz!  hahah
|