(no subject)
Jul. 18th, 2014 10:46 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tvordljI've been perusing some of the reviews for the Queen concerts, from Toronto, Montreal and last night's gig in New York. You know most of the serious newspapers are not going to have a lot of good to say and true to form the Globe and Mail and the New York Times reviews were churlish and petty. While they also raise some truths, they're probably not fans and for fans, the concerts were pretty fucking awesome. Did the middle acoustic set and solos drag things down? Yes, a bit, the solos put some focus on the band members who take a back seat to the lead singer who garners a lot of the attention most of the time, and having video of Freddie is also a treat for long time fans. It's a Queen concert, after all, not an Adam Lambert solo concert. He's there for Queen, not for his own material, so showcasing Freddie is a nice tribute.
While I do think Adam Lambert does a very good job, and I don't want to compare him to Freddie too much, it's inevitable and I wasn't sure how to explain what I thought of the differences between the two. He's very much the type that a front man for Queen needs to be, that's for sure. But a couple of reviews hit the nail on the head. Freddie's voice has more richness, one said, and another talked about Freddie's presence on stage as having authority. Yes, that's it, exactly. Freddie really did command the stage and his voice had the authority and richness and depth, no matter how high or low the octave. Most people's singing does tend to go a bit wobbly at the high end of their range, or sound screechy. Adam's does a little, too but he does have a pretty good range and the material requires it.
The reviews from the Montreal Gazette and the New York Daily News were a lot more balanced, I thought. Ok, maybe a lot more positive than negative but since I enjoyed the concert so much, I'd agree with them anyway! A few of my friends have seen the concerts and they have all been blown away. One saw them in New York last night and said it was "wicked"!
I concur.
While I do think Adam Lambert does a very good job, and I don't want to compare him to Freddie too much, it's inevitable and I wasn't sure how to explain what I thought of the differences between the two. He's very much the type that a front man for Queen needs to be, that's for sure. But a couple of reviews hit the nail on the head. Freddie's voice has more richness, one said, and another talked about Freddie's presence on stage as having authority. Yes, that's it, exactly. Freddie really did command the stage and his voice had the authority and richness and depth, no matter how high or low the octave. Most people's singing does tend to go a bit wobbly at the high end of their range, or sound screechy. Adam's does a little, too but he does have a pretty good range and the material requires it.
The reviews from the Montreal Gazette and the New York Daily News were a lot more balanced, I thought. Ok, maybe a lot more positive than negative but since I enjoyed the concert so much, I'd agree with them anyway! A few of my friends have seen the concerts and they have all been blown away. One saw them in New York last night and said it was "wicked"!
I concur.
