|
|
Post by QuocaQuola1 on Jan 26, 2017 7:48:05 GMT
Having read through the Sabbath thread and the Quo vs AC/DC stuff on another thread, it gave me the idea of having a thread of comparing other bands to Quo and how they fair against each other.
So, Queen. Both Quo and Queen had their first and only number 1 for a long while back in 75. Quo were firing out number 1 albums and singles while Queen began to break into America towards the end of the decade. Both released unexpected albums in '82, to put it lightly. Both brought it back in the middle of the decade, with Quo still somehow firing out hits every so often. 1991 saw both bands with a real return to form: Innuendo and Rock 'Til You Drop.
And so Quo fell to shite and Brian May and Roger Taylor went on to tarnish the Queen name by trying out new singers.
So, if anyone has anything to add (which there is quite a bit to do so), feel free.
|
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Jan 26, 2017 8:43:42 GMT
For me, there is almost nothing to compare Queen with Quo. Yes, there was friendship between the bands.....but there was only one significant thing: FR ended up wishing he was in a band like Queen, with the diversity to do what he wanted.
Sabbath - during the 71-76 period, they were very like Quo in that they were loud, heavy and very unique in style. Like FR, Iommi has worked extremely hard over the decades to keep the name going.
The Sabs/Quo/DC thing is that together they were heavy bands, with large crossover of audience, as evidenced by the patches on the backs of many thousands of jackets. You did see Queen patches, but not nearly as many as these three bands.
AC/DC of course were stylistically similar to Quo during the 70's. Quo, quite simply, were better. Great as ACDC were, Quo were more diverse...with three singers, better songwriting and greater range of song styles. Live, Quo could blow anyone off the stage. Back in Black was better than anything Quo recorded afterwards, and following EOTR, they were far better live than Quo. Since Back in Black, AC/DC have been poor in the studio, but they haven't tarnished the image - they have remained true to the fans and have made sure they didn't embarrass them
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaz on Jan 26, 2017 9:04:52 GMT
For me, there is almost nothing to compare Queen with Quo. Yes, there was friendship between the bands.....but there was only one significant thing: FR ended up wishing he was in a band like Queen, with the diversity to do what he wanted. Sabbath - during the 71-76 period, they were very like Quo in that they were loud, heavy and very unique in style. Like FR, Iommi has worked extremely hard over the decades to keep the name going. The Sabs/Quo/DC thing is that together they were heavy bands, with large crossover of audience, as evidenced by the patches on the backs of many thousands of jackets. You did see Queen patches, but not nearly as many as these three bands. AC/DC of course were stylistically similar to Quo during the 70's. Quo, quite simply, were better. Great as ACDC were, Quo were more diverse...with three singers, better songwriting and greater range of song styles. Live, Quo could blow anyone off the stage. Back in Black was better than anything Quo recorded afterwards, and following EOTR, they were far better live than Quo. Since Back in Black, AC/DC have been poor in the studio, but they haven't tarnished the image - they have remained true to the fans and have made sure they didn't embarrass them Cant argue against any of that. |
|
|
|
Post by freewilly on Jan 26, 2017 10:59:41 GMT
It fascinates me that Queen didn't draw as much of a crowd to MK in 82, compared to Quo in 84...Yet, two years after the EOTR, that all completely changed. Obviously Freddie's performance at Live Aid and the whole "who the hell are this lot?" reaction to "Quo's" promo pics in 86 had a big bearing on that  |
|
|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Jan 26, 2017 13:08:11 GMT
Live Aid definitely did a lot to boost Queen's profile, and swell the numbers for the Magic tour in '86.
I don't buy any PR bullshit about Live Aid doing anything for Quo. The only people who talk about Live Aid being amazing for Quo are Quo themselves. But nobody ever bangs on about how amazing Quo were at Live Aid in the same way that they do for Queen. The only thing to mention is the song Rockin' All Over The World. I still don't see how opening the show could be seen as a great PR exercise. Talk about spin.
It's not like RAOTW suddenly became the band's anthem in 1986. It was still played in the middle of the set, like it had been for years. They still did Roadhouse Blues for the set closer for another 10 years after that.
U2 did VERY well out of the Live Aid exposure. Did wonders for their Joshua Tree ticket sales.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Lord Flasheart on Jan 26, 2017 13:16:35 GMT
It fascinates me that Queen didn't draw as much of a crowd to MK in 82, compared to Quo in 84...Yet, two years after the EOTR, that all completely changed. Obviously Freddie's performance at Live Aid and the whole "who the hell are this lot?" reaction to "Quo's" promo pics in 86 had a big bearing on that Queen were on the back foot in 82, Hot Space was lackluster and some fans did not like Freddie's new image from 1980 onwards. The Game was a big album in 1980 but it showed a change in their music and not every fan went with it. You cannot fault their performances though between 1980-82 they delivered. Though worse was to come for Queen when they made a mistake of playing South Africa in 84. |
|
|
|
Post by freewilly on Jan 26, 2017 13:30:57 GMT
Live Aid definitely did a lot to boost Queen's profile, and swell the numbers for the Magic tour in '86. I don't buy any PR bullshit about Live Aid doing anything for Quo. The only people who talk about Live Aid being amazing for Quo are Quo themselves. But nobody ever bangs on about how amazing Quo were at Live Aid in the same way that they do for Queen. The only thing to mention is the song Rockin' All Over The World. I still don't see how opening the show could be seen as a great PR exercise. Talk about spin. It's not like RAOTW suddenly became the band's anthem in 1986. It was still played in the middle of the set, like it had been for years. They still did Roadhouse Blues for the set closer for another 10 years after that. U2 did VERY well out of the Live Aid exposure. Did wonders for their Joshua Tree ticket sales. Agreed! Only thing I will say in regards Quo at Live Aid, is the fact it was only them, U2, Bowie and Queen that got the crowd going IMO.
The Joshua Tree was a class album. They were on the rise before then too. Sold out Stadiums before Live Aid. It was inevitable I suppose. Achtung Baby is still the best they've ever done
|
|
|
|
Post by freewilly on Jan 26, 2017 13:32:51 GMT
It fascinates me that Queen didn't draw as much of a crowd to MK in 82, compared to Quo in 84...Yet, two years after the EOTR, that all completely changed. Obviously Freddie's performance at Live Aid and the whole "who the hell are this lot?" reaction to "Quo's" promo pics in 86 had a big bearing on that Queen were on the back foot in 82, Hot Space was lackluster and some fans did not like Freddie's new image from 1980 onwards. The Game was a big album in 1980 but it showed a change in their music and not every fan went with it. You cannot fault their performances though between 1980-82 they delivered. Though worse was to come for Queen when they made a mistake of playing South Africa in 84. Queen always delivered....Except the shows in 84 when Freddie's voice went.
But, that's my point about MK...Before then, both bands were pretty much neck and neck in terms of popularity and success in Europe. It's just weird how Queen got less of a crowd at MK than Quo....But, as we know, that sorted itself out after 1985
|
|
|
|
Post by wolfman on Jan 26, 2017 14:36:35 GMT
quo v showaddywaddy....
|
|
|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Jan 26, 2017 14:40:03 GMT
Hot Space didn't go down very well with Queen's rock fan base, so maybe that affected the tickets sales at MK.
Quo were playing their 'final' gig so that would boost ticket sales.
I love Hot Space - love a bit of funky Queen. I also love the bonkers prog of Queen II. But everything else is a bit patchy.
Queen are a good example of everyone wanting their own compositions to be on the album, so you get a very varied mix of songs on each album. They didn't start listing the songwriters as a collective 'Queen' until much later with The Miracle - I guess that explains why the cover is like it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Detroit on Jan 26, 2017 16:33:29 GMT
Having read through the Sabbath thread and the Quo vs AC/DC stuff on another thread, it gave me the idea of having a thread of comparing other bands to Quo and how they fair against each other. So, Queen. Both Quo and Queen had their first and only number 1 for a long while back in 75. Quo were firing out number 1 albums and singles while Queen began to break into America towards the end of the decade. Both released unexpected albums in '82, to put it lightly. Both brought it back in the middle of the decade, with Quo still somehow firing out hits every so often. 1991 saw both bands with a real return to form: Innuendo and Rock 'Til You Drop. And so Quo fell to shite and Brian May and Roger Taylor went on to tarnish the Queen name by trying out new singers. So, if anyone has anything to add (which there is quite a bit to do so), feel free. RTYD a return to form?  ?? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2017 16:36:24 GMT
It fascinates me that Queen didn't draw as much of a crowd to MK in 82, compared to Quo in 84...Yet, two years after the EOTR, that all completely changed. Obviously Freddie's performance at Live Aid and the whole "who the hell are this lot?" reaction to "Quo's" promo pics in 86 had a big bearing on that Queen were on the back foot in 82, Hot Space was lackluster and some fans did not like Freddie's new image from 1980 onwards. The Game was a big album in 1980 but it showed a change in their music and not every fan went with it. Hi All, @the Lord Flasheart I wonder where I have seen that happen before ?.......... 
Personally I think Quo can be compared to bands like ZZ Top/Thin Lizzy/Nazareth/Geordie/UFO/Uriah Heep to be honest though they carved out a niche for themselves if truthful n other band sounded like them at the time............ 
Geoff.
|
|
|
|
Post by QuocaQuola1 on Jan 26, 2017 18:08:53 GMT
Having read through the Sabbath thread and the Quo vs AC/DC stuff on another thread, it gave me the idea of having a thread of comparing other bands to Quo and how they fair against each other. So, Queen. Both Quo and Queen had their first and only number 1 for a long while back in 75. Quo were firing out number 1 albums and singles while Queen began to break into America towards the end of the decade. Both released unexpected albums in '82, to put it lightly. Both brought it back in the middle of the decade, with Quo still somehow firing out hits every so often. 1991 saw both bands with a real return to form: Innuendo and Rock 'Til You Drop. And so Quo fell to shite and Brian May and Roger Taylor went on to tarnish the Queen name by trying out new singers. So, if anyone has anything to add (which there is quite a bit to do so), feel free. RTYD a return to form? ?? Which would you have out of these: 1982, BTB, ITAN, AC or RTYD? |
|
|
|
Post by Detroit on Jan 26, 2017 18:16:42 GMT
RTYD a return to form? ?? Which would you have out of these: 1982, BTB, ITAN, AC or RTYD? Still doesn't make it a 'return to form'. To answer your question, none of them, as I don't listen to any of them. |
|
|
|
Post by freewilly on Jan 26, 2017 18:20:41 GMT
RTYD a return to form? ?? Which would you have out of these: 1982, BTB, ITAN, AC or RTYD? 1982 - Dear John BTB - Ol' Rag Blues, MOB, TCTTG Army - Love it except for Speechless. Lonely should have replaced it on the album AC - Hate Bridges, Know Your Leaving, Shipwreck, Cross That Bridge....Like the rest though. Think RTYD had more to do with the sound of the record |
|
??
