The Cosmos Rocks - Queen+PR

OK-Cancel-Apply

I'm a life-long Queen fan, and I was just a tad disappointed with it. There are only a few half decent songs, and even they had to grow on me a bit. It sounds like they are trying too hard to sound different IMO, and the lyrics seem a bit unpolished. I just expected something more from such talented musicians.

Anyone else heard it? What do you think?

Doctor J

Heard that Celebrity tune a while back and mentally filed that album under "Avoid"

I love Queen, love Free and Bad Company too but the tune was just... bad.

OK-Cancel-Apply

I must say, the opening riff of that song sounds great, especially with Brian's punchy treble-boosted red-special tone, but the words 'rip' and 'off' come to mind, as do the words 'Judas' and 'Priest'. :pac:

Karl Hungus

I'm in the same boat as Doc, heard the song Celebrity, and that's it... Queen was the band I grew up with, I love them, their music means a lot to me, but I guess I just don't want to ruin the memory, I'd like to forget all about this new music because it's just not good.

steveone

some things shouldn't be mixed..

queen should have wound up after freddie died.

nyarlothothep

Its not Queen, its three dudes releasing a new record which probably isn't very good because they conveyed all their musical ideas in the 70s and 80s. They have nothing left to say. C-lebrity was lyrically lame but its not actually that bad imo, its well above what some bands produce.

cassette50

Spent most of the week listening to this album and as a long time Queen fan I must say that it's a very good album. Well, I enjoyed listening to it anyway.


The first mistake would be to expect this album to sound like Queen, IT'S NOT QUEEN, IT'S QUEEN+PAUL RODGERS. It's a new sound and direction and it works for the most part. Some people complain that there is more of a Paul Rodgers influence, the truth is probably that the songs were written by the various members to suit the singing style of Paul Rodgers and not Freddie Mercury.

It's a bit much to criticise the lyrics as "unpolished" etc, as even Queen are not exactly regarded as being lyrical genuises. It was often just Freddie Mercury's excellent vocal and Brian May's guitar that turned an average song into a somewhat memorable tune.

The album contains a number of good tracks such as Small, Some Things that Glitter, Cosmos Rocks (fun tongue in cheek rocker), Warboys, We Believe and Through the Night.

I would recommend that you should download the Itunes bonus track from the album Runaway. It's a great fun version of this song. It's a great track, but it would not haved fitted on the album.

The only song on the album that I don't like after one week is Vodoo, it just has not grown on me at all.

I'm off to see the band in Rome on Friday so I looking forward to that. I would recommend anybody should go see them if you get the chance as regardless of what you may think of the new album, they still put on a great live show.

OK-Cancel-Apply

cassette50 wrote: »

Spent most of the week listening to this album and as a long time Queen fan I must say that it's a very good album. Well, I enjoyed listening to it anyway.


The first mistake would be to expect this album to sound like Queen, IT'S NOT QUEEN, IT'S QUEEN+PAUL RODGERS. It's a new sound and direction and it works for the most part. Some people complain that there is more of a Paul Rodgers influence, the truth is probably that the songs were written by the various members to suit the singing style of Paul Rodgers and not Freddie Mercury.

It's a bit much to criticise the lyrics as "unpolished" etc, as even Queen are not exactly regarded as being lyrical genuises. It was often just Freddie Mercury's excellent vocal and Brian May's guitar that turned an average song into a somewhat memorable tune.

The album contains a number of good tracks such as Small, Some Things that Glitter, Cosmos Rocks (fun tongue in cheek rocker), Warboys, We Believe and Through the Night.

I would recommend that you should download the Itunes bonus track from the album Runaway. It's a great fun version of this song. It's a great track, but it would not haved fitted on the album.

The only song on the album that I don't like after one week is Vodoo, it just has not grown on me at all.

I'm off to see the band in Rome on Friday so I looking forward to that. I would recommend anybody should go see them if you get the chance as regardless of what you may think of the new album, they still put on a great live show.

For a mainstream rock album, it's far better than any of the assembly line garbage that's been in our faces this past decade, but those aren't the standards I was expecting to be judging this album by.

I accept your point about the lyrics, but gone are the days when they could get away with that sort of thing. Back in the day, it was more tongue-in-cheek anyway. I just thought that in 2008, they'd have something more poetic to say about the world they've lived in. Like you say, it's a different band now. They really needed to blow us out of the water with something really cool, but I think it ended up just missing the mark somewhat.

I hate to write this kind of thing, but as I said before, I was expecting something special from musicians of this calibre. I have to say though, that I do enjoy on some level listening to new Brian May material.

JeanH

I still haven't bought the album actually. Must do this weekend.

I just heard Celebrity on Al Murray's Happy Hour back in April. I agree taht the opening riff to that song is brilliant but it went a bit downhill after that. I expect it's a grower though.

I'll report back when I finally purchase the album!

To the above poster going to the gig in Rome, I hope you have a great time. I saw Queen and Rodgers in 2005 in Dublin. Brilliant concert.

nyarlothothep

OK-Cancel-Apply wrote: »

For a mainstream rock album, it's far better than any of the assembly line garbage that's been in our faces this past decade, but those aren't the standards I was expecting to be judging this album by.

I accept your point about the lyrics, but gone are the days when they could get away with that sort of thing. Back in the day, it was more tongue-in-cheek anyway. I just thought that in 2008, they'd have something more poetic to say about the world they've lived in. Like you say, it's a different band now. They really needed to blow us out of the water with something really cool, but I think it ended up just missing the mark somewhat.

I hate to write this kind of thing, but as I said before, I was expecting something special from musicians of this calibre. I have to say though, that I do enjoy on some level listening to new Brian May material.

I dont know about Rodgers, but May great and all as he is---master physicist/astronomer and guitar prodigy, is and was pretty much a terrible lyricist, hammer to fall was basically really bad social commentary---here we stand tall and proud in the shadow of the mushroom cloud, while anything Taylor has written has tended to be pretty much the writings of a 12 year old, refer to songs such as I'm in Love with My Car.

OK-Cancel-Apply

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I dont know about Rodgers, but May great and all as he is---master physicist/astronomer and guitar prodigy, is and was pretty much a terrible lyricist, hammer to fall was basically really bad social commentary---here we stand tall and proud in the shadow of the mushroom cloud, while anything Taylor has written has tended to be pretty much the writings of a 12 year old, refer to songs such as I'm in Love with My Car.

Yeah Taylor and Deacon wrote some annoyingly childish and silly ones.

I read Brian's blogs all the time, and I'm a big fan of his. And not only does he have one of the greatest guitar sounds ever, but he's able to verbally articulate precisely why it sounds so good - like it's a science! He's a legend, but the new album is silly and nerdy. Maybe that reflects his current state of mind, having recently completed his astrophysics PhD.

nyarlothothep

OK-Cancel-Apply wrote: »

Yeah Taylor and Deacon wrote some annoyingly childish and silly ones.

I read Brian's blogs all the time, and I'm a big fan of his. And not only does he have one of the greatest guitar sounds ever, but he's able to verbally articulate precisely why it sounds so good - like it's a science! He's a legend, but the new album is silly and nerdy. Maybe that reflects his current state of mind, having recently completed his astrophysics PhD.

True, Brian is a very articulate, intelligent individual, moreso by a hundred lightyears than your usual rockstar, or most people in any discipline for that matter. Yes I guess so, though cheesy/silly lyrics is one of the things which also appealed to me about Queen, because its ever so slightly unintentional...The Best of 2 and 3 are great for really daft songs like Princes of the Universe and Headlong. I think Freddy showed lyrical depth like on Take My Breath Away, Bo Rhap, even Death on Two Legs, imo he wrote the best lyrics.

Still it is kind of cool for a band have an album title like that, its different to the usual I went down the chipper stuff.

Karl Hungus

cassette50 wrote: »

The first mistake would be to expect this album to sound like Queen, IT'S NOT QUEEN, IT'S QUEEN+PAUL RODGERS. It's a new sound and direction and it works for the most part. Some people complain that there is more of a Paul Rodgers influence, the truth is probably that the songs were written by the various members to suit the singing style of Paul Rodgers and not Freddie Mercury.

I don't think that's my problem with it at all. Frankly I think Paul Rodgers is amazing, he's done the impossible trying to fill the gap left by Freddie, and he's just got a terrific voice. I've already been listening to stuff that was written with Freddie's voice in mind, where Paul has succeeded terrifically. I think it's just that the material I've heard so far is weak, and there's no way you can say that it was intentionally written weak. Obviously I didn't expect another Bohemian Rhapsody, but there's no reason that lads as talented as they are can't write something better.

I'm actually a little on the ropes though, I was very close to buying the album today, because I'm hoping that there are some better songs on offer. Maybe I'm a sucker?

nyarlothothep

Bought the album, its ok, middling/mediocre I guess and the cheese factor is exponentially high, not really in the good way but more in the cringe Alan Partridge way.

OK-Cancel-Apply

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Bought the album, its ok, middling/mediocre I guess and the cheese factor is exponentially high, not really in the good way but more in the cringe Alan Partridge way.

LOL - 'Say it's not true' is quite ok, but I did laugh a little bit and put my face in palm. 'Surf's Up...School's Out' is just plain terrible. 'Cosmos Rockin' makes me say "Ouch...", 'C-Lebrity' is actually one of the better tracks, though it's only the riff that makes it so (and that's just a blatant rip off).

dr.bollocko

Free were a great band.
Bad Company were a good band.
There is nothing you can really say about Queen. They are just immense.
But when you think of a band like them reforming to tour after the death of Freddy, it seems better for them to tour the old stuff. Of course new material is always welcome, but it's hard to welcome it, despite the merging of Queen and Paul.

nyarlothothep

yar, its not even Queen as it doesn't include the technically amazing signature bass playing of John Deacon. They should have just called it something else. Like Brian and Taylor's duo project with friend.

Karl Hungus

nyarlothothep wrote: »

They should have just called it something else.

I don't think the name is the issue, it's the music. It's just not great, no matter what you call it.

dr.bollocko

Although while you mention the name change, when Ray Manzarek and Robbie Krieger from the Doors reformed and became the doors of the 21st century, I believe that John Densmore sued successfully to have the name of the doors taken out of the reformation.
Not because he is a dick, necessarily, but because he wanted to honour the memory of Jim Morrison.They are The Riders on the Storm now.
I saw them play the Point as D21C and they were immense. Ian Astbury embodied Jim fantastically. They have a new lead singer now I haven't seen, but that act was a tender re-incarnation, an OTT homage to the past.
This seems more like a cash cow in some ways. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I just think that it's always going to be difficult to respect the new material made from a band that is eternally remembered for world domination a long time ago. If you think about it from the musician's point of view, if you had to play the same tunes every night for 20 or 30 years you would probably shoot yourself.

OK-Cancel-Apply

nyarlothothep wrote: »

yar, its not even Queen as it doesn't include the technically amazing signature bass playing of John Deacon. They should have just called it something else. Like Brian and Taylor's duo project with friend.

I have to say Brian's bass playing on this album was quite impressive. Though I'm not surprised, as he's proven himself to be quite a multi-instrumentalist.

nyarlothothep

It was quite good, one of the lead bass runs was impressive...in terms of production the album is very good...but I still think Queen is the wrong name for it, its not Queen, even enough to justify the Q+PR title. They really stopped being a unit when they finished up after commerating Freddy's death. For me that was the end of the saga, Deacons departure signified that imo.

OK-Cancel-Apply

nyarlothothep wrote: »

It was quite good, one of the lead bass runs was impressive...in terms of production the album is very good...but I still think Queen is the wrong name for it, its not Queen, even enough to justify the Q+PR title. They really stopped being a unit when they finished up after commerating Freddy's death. For me that was the end of the saga, Deacons departure signified that imo.

Yeah, to me 'Queen' means those original four guys... But at the same time, even though Freddie died, and John left, we can't expect Brian and Roger to end their own music careers. They couldn't exactly call themselves by some other name only to continue touring with 'Queen' songs. Brian was really the driving force behind the band (he put it together if I'm not mistaken) and wrote most of the songs. Calling themselves 'Queen + Paul Rodgers' was probably the only move they could have made in the game that is the music biz.

nyarlothothep

OK-Cancel-Apply wrote: »

Yeah, to me 'Queen' means those original four guys... But at the same time, even though Freddie died, and John left, we can't expect Brian and Roger to end their own music careers. They couldn't exactly call themselves by some other name only to continue touring with 'Queen' songs. Brian was really the driving force behind the band (he put it together if I'm not mistaken) and wrote most of the songs. Calling themselves 'Queen + Paul Rodgers' was probably the only move they could have made in the game that is the music biz.

There are bands that play the songs of their former bands, it shouldn't be much of a problem imo, like Hot Leg playing Darkness songs for example. As far as I can recall the writing credits were fairly even across the albums, Brian would write 1/3, then Freddie 1/3, with 1/3 between Deacon and Taylor respectively. But given the music biz I doubt they would attract as large an audience going under a different name so commercially retaining the name is a good idea.

Karl Hungus

Well AC/DC kept the name after Bon Scott passed away, so I don't really see the problem with Queen doing the same.

nyarlothothep

True that, but that applies to AC/DC, imo Queen definitely lost their Queeness with the passing of Freddie, they were never going to regain it with another singer

Shryke

Freddie Mercury was a massive part of Queen, he made the band. May has talent but I don't believe that he would rate so highly in the history books if not for Freddie.
AC/DC could have dissapeared after Scotts death but they came out with all guns blazing and one of their best albums. Now if the band had lost Angus I think that would have put them down. That's just speculative rubbish though.

DylanS09

Queen just arnt the same without Freddie!!!!

ShawnRaven

cassette50 wrote: »

The first mistake would be to expect this album to sound like Queen, IT'S NOT QUEEN, IT'S QUEEN+PAUL RODGERS.

The second mistake is for them to actually call themselves Queen + Paul Rodgers. It's HALF OF QUEEN + PAUL RODGERS.

Just telling it like it is, folks.

Motley Crue

In the Queen International Fanclub Magazine many fans share their disappointment with a "just average" album. I think personally that while its not the best diamond in the crown, it still sparkles, even though its obvious Brian May was dedicated to finishing his PHD and that Rodgers was touring.

It could have been that Roger Taylor was the only one dedicated to wanting this to happen (as we all know Roger Taylor has no real solo material thats worth mentioning) and its a very drum driven album.

May's work seems to have been taken from a list of solo's and simply placed where it suits. No song looks to have a real direction, it all just looks to be a collection of Pro Tool clippings, and while there are powerful songs on here its hard to imagine somone writing "Once I Loved A Butterfly...." over the traditional writing process.

What really shocked me is that they really latched onto it going No1 in Estonia. No disrespect to the people of Estonia but I dont think that any other band has ever used marketing in Ireland or the UK to tell people that "the album is really good...its charting high throughout Eastern Europe!"