Queen are facing a backlash from fans after announcing Adam Lambert as their new frontman.
Brian May had claimed that fans were in support of Lambert replacing the iconic Freddie Mercury for their forthcoming Sonisphere performance in July - but the online reaction proves they are divided.
One common suggestion for an alternative singer is Marc Martel, who shot to fame after sharing his pitch-perfect Queen performances on YouTube, which led to several TV appearances. Watch him in the clip below.
Comments on the Queen Facebook page and fan site Queenzone show fans saying Mercury is irreplaceable, or that the band should change its name entirely.
UG readers shared similar sentiments in the comment section.
"We don't care if they recruit him, as long as they don't call it Queen," wrote GrungeHippie26. "It's like doing a Nirvana reunion with David Arculetta singing."
Barbquebutt was more blunt: "This is an insult to all real Queen fans. Brian May, why have you forsaken us?"
Not every UG reader was against the new recruitment. "I wasn't keen at first, but Adam Lambert has a killer voice," wrote Tokai09.
You can compare Marc Martel and Adam Lambert singing in the clips below:
Who should be the Queen frontman in your opinion? Let us know in the comments.
I'm not a Queen fan but this is straight disrespectful. No honour , no respect and no integrity. All they can see is dollar signs. Well that does it, I'm selling my Sonisphere ticket.
I'm not a Queen fan but this is straight disrespectful. No honour , no respect and no integrity. All they can see is dollar signs. Well that does it, I'm selling my Sonisphere ticket.
This is something I can not understand. Why the **** should you care why they are doing it? They put on a great show, they have fun, the audience will have fun. They get a lot of cash.
Can you honestly tell me that you would not have done the same thing if you played in Queen?
With respect to mark martel, there is a difference between being able to sing and being a frontman, how can you tell he'll be good, I would not want someone almost completely untested in my legendary band.
I don't think anybody could really deny that Adam Lambert has a pretty good voice. But if they're looking for something as close to Freddie Mercury as possible, Marc Martel would be a better choice.
This is something I can not understand. Why the **** should you care why they are doing it? They put on a great show, they have fun, the audience will have fun. They get a lot of cash.
Can you honestly tell me that you would not have done the same thing if you played in Queen?
What and it would be less fun if they changed the name?
I can't answer that Sir, as I didn't play in Queen. Maybe I'd desecrate a great friends legacy for money as well. I don't mind when a band continues on. I Like Metallica and think Rob is great. The thing is Metallic is still making new records rather than releasing Greatest Hits compilations and playing with Adam Lambert. What I'm saying is that it's kind of a slap in the face to the fans. I'm not a fan though. On the outside looking in it seems like a cash grab.
I don't think anybody could really deny that Adam Lambert has a pretty good voice. But if they're looking for something as close to Freddie Mercury as possible, Marc Martel would be a better choice.
I have to disagree. I don't think they need someone as close to Freddy as possible, but i think they should at least get someone who can actually sing. Seriously, what's with Adam Lamberts ridiculous amount of vibrato?
This is something I can not understand. Why the **** should you care why they are doing it? They put on a great show, they have fun, the audience will have fun. They get a lot of cash.
Can you honestly tell me that you would not have done the same thing if you played in Queen?
What and it would be less fun if they changed the name?
I can't answer that Sir, as I didn't play in Queen. Maybe I'd desecrate a great friends legacy for money as well. I don't mind when a band continues on. I Like Metallica and think Rob is great. The thing is Metallic is still making new records rather than releasing Greatest Hits compilations and playing with Adam Lambert. What I'm saying is that it's kind of a slap in the face to the fans. I'm not a fan though. On the outside looking in it seems like a cash grab.
Ok, i get you. I dont know how metallica got dragged into this, though.
Well, a change of name would have been ok i guess. But if you still want people to come to your show/shows then maybe you need that name. DId you not like it when led zeppelin playd a couple of years back? And i see you like megadeth also. As far as i know, Dave is the only consistant memeber of that band, should he not have kept playing under the name Megadeth then? Same thing with Van halen, deep purple, guns n roses etc etc. What i am saying is that as much as i agree that it seems like just a cash grab, would not you agree you would rather go see guns without slash or no guns at all?
Its still a hell of a time! oh, and ac/dc kept their name too..
Marc Martel sounds like Freddy Mercury, Adam Lambert does not sound anything like Freddie, I have been a Queen Fan since the beginning I saw them at Avery Fisher Hall in N.Y.C. in 1975 during Sheer Heart Attack Tour. Dear Brian, please reconsider.
This is something I can not understand. Why the **** should you care why they are doing it? They put on a great show, they have fun, the audience will have fun. They get a lot of cash.
Can you honestly tell me that you would not have done the same thing if you played in Queen?
What and it would be less fun if they changed the name?
I can't answer that Sir, as I didn't play in Queen. Maybe I'd desecrate a great friends legacy for money as well. I don't mind when a band continues on. I Like Metallica and think Rob is great. The thing is Metallic is still making new records rather than releasing Greatest Hits compilations and playing with Adam Lambert. What I'm saying is that it's kind of a slap in the face to the fans. I'm not a fan though. On the outside looking in it seems like a cash grab.
Ok, i get you. I dont know how metallica got dragged into this, though.
Well, a change of name would have been ok i guess. But if you still want people to come to your show/shows then maybe you need that name. DId you not like it when led zeppelin playd a couple of years back? And i see you like megadeth also. As far as i know, Dave is the only consistant memeber of that band, should he not have kept playing under the name Megadeth then? Same thing with Van halen, deep purple, guns n roses etc etc. What i am saying is that as much as i agree that it seems like just a cash grab, would not you agree you would rather go see guns without slash or no guns at all?
Its still a hell of a time! oh, and ac/dc kept their name too..
Well, every band you mention creates similar reactions every time an article on them comes up at UG.
- "Deep Purple should change their name if they continue without Blackmore!"
- "Deep Purple should change their name if they continue without Lord!"
- "Guns N' Roses should change their name if they continue without Slash!"
- "AC/DC should change their name if they continue without Bon Scott!"
Megadeth is different, because Dave Mustaine IS Megadeth. Van Halen is different because, well, Eddi Van Halen IS Van Halen. Led Zeppelin did a reunion with Jason Bonham. He is not only John Bonhams son, it's also that people often don't really care about drummers. Well, not always: "Dream Theater should change their name if they continue without Mike Portnoy!"
This is something I can not understand. Why the **** should you care why they are doing it? They put on a great show, they have fun, the audience will have fun. They get a lot of cash.
Can you honestly tell me that you would not have done the same thing if you played in Queen?
What and it would be less fun if they changed the name?
I can't answer that Sir, as I didn't play in Queen. Maybe I'd desecrate a great friends legacy for money as well. I don't mind when a band continues on. I Like Metallica and think Rob is great. The thing is Metallic is still making new records rather than releasing Greatest Hits compilations and playing with Adam Lambert. What I'm saying is that it's kind of a slap in the face to the fans. I'm not a fan though. On the outside looking in it seems like a cash grab.
Ok, i get you. I dont know how metallica got dragged into this, though.
Well, a change of name would have been ok i guess. But if you still want people to come to your show/shows then maybe you need that name. DId you not like it when led zeppelin playd a couple of years back? And i see you like megadeth also. As far as i know, Dave is the only consistant memeber of that band, should he not have kept playing under the name Megadeth then? Same thing with Van halen, deep purple, guns n roses etc etc. What i am saying is that as much as i agree that it seems like just a cash grab, would not you agree you would rather go see guns without slash or no guns at all?
Its still a hell of a time! oh, and ac/dc kept their name too..
Well, every band you mention creates similar reactions every time an article on them comes up at UG.
- "Deep Purple should change their name if they continue without Blackmore!"
- "Deep Purple should change their name if they continue without Lord!"
- "Guns N' Roses should change their name if they continue without Slash!"
- "AC/DC should change their name if they continue without Bon Scott!"
Megadeth is different, because Dave Mustaine IS Megadeth. Van Halen is different because, well, Eddi Van Halen IS Van Halen. Led Zeppelin did a reunion with Jason Bonham. He is not only John Bonhams son, it's also that people often don't really care about drummers. Well, not always: "Dream Theater should change their name if they continue without Mike Portnoy!"
This is a long quote, haha!
You are right, although I think bonzo was a crucial part of zeppelin. It's just that im sick of people complaining so much about what people decides to do with their own bands! I dont like that axl still goes under the name guns n roses, but i like a good show so it sort of evens out. Also, Pink ****ing Floyd was created by Syd Barrett. 5 years later he quit the band, then they released dark side, wish you were here, the wall (amongst other great albums). Then in i think late 1980, Roger waters quit, and he was the leading role in the band. But they kept playing and did two more albums (momentary lapse of reasons was created by gilmour alone) and thank science for that! We got a couple of more years, and a couple of more songs from an outstanding band!
I feel like i dont know what started this anymore..
I think what happened is that Adam Lambert has more better (read less corny) stage presence, but I definitely think Marc Martel overall would be a better replacement in terms of just ability/sounding like freddie mercury. Adam Lambert has waaaay too much vibrato and he sounds like an emo singer singing queen.
Marc is far better and closer to the original sound. I guess they wanted a big named star to get the spot for promotional purposes.
Whatever, they can do as they like, but I think they should change their name. I usually don't say that, but I think of it to be the best option here. At least Queen and Adam or something quaint and simple. Plus, it would help with promotion, since that was clearly one of the big reasons Adam was even signed.
AndoFloyd wrote:
Ok, i get you. I dont know how metallica got dragged into this, though.
Well, a change of name would have been ok i guess. But if you still want people to come to your show/shows then maybe you need that name. DId you not like it when led zeppelin playd a couple of years back? And i see you like megadeth also. As far as i know, Dave is the only consistant memeber of that band, should he not have kept playing under the name Megadeth then? Same thing with Van halen, deep purple, guns n roses etc etc. What i am saying is that as much as i agree that it seems like just a cash grab, would not you agree you would rather go see guns without slash or no guns at all?
Its still a hell of a time! oh, and ac/dc kept their name too..
Sir, You missed my point completely and second some of the stuff you said was absurd.
My point was: This seems like a cash grab
I brought Metallica into to point out I don't think a band needs to change when a member leaves/dies. I love Guns and saw them with Axl and it was amazing. Everyone left the band so why should he have to give up the name? Towards the end he was writing most of the songs anyway (breakdown of writing credits in my profile.) I'd have a problem if everyone had died and Axl continued under the name.
Saying Megadeth should change their name is absurd Dave IS Megadeth he writes ALL the songs and 97% of them he is the sole writer. Freddie was a key member and by not releasing any albums with out him they decided not to continue. Only to go back on their decision for a quick buck.
I wouldn't want to see Metallica, Bon Jovi or Guns N' Roses with Adam Lambert singing.
That second guy has a GREAT voice. Inredible resemblance, but Adam DOES have more of Freddie's stage energy and he has a good voice too, so I have no problem with Lambert taking the helm.
Why not call it "Queen with Adam Lambert"? It seems like a fair way to bring him in and not suggest that he is a replacement for Mercury.
Got to admit, it's pretty crazy that a guy who walked into an American Idol auditions just a year or two ago is now the lead singer of Queen. If I were him I'd be in shock.
This is something I can not understand. Why the **** should you care why they are doing it? They put on a great show, they have fun, the audience will have fun. They get a lot of cash.
Can you honestly tell me that you would not have done the same thing if you played in Queen?
What and it would be less fun if they changed the name?
I can't answer that Sir, as I didn't play in Queen. Maybe I'd desecrate a great friends legacy for money as well. I don't mind when a band continues on. I Like Metallica and think Rob is great. The thing is Metallic is still making new records rather than releasing Greatest Hits compilations and playing with Adam Lambert. What I'm saying is that it's kind of a slap in the face to the fans. I'm not a fan though. On the outside looking in it seems like a cash grab.
They are trying to get people to forget freddy , they are trying to get people to remember him. If lambert does a good job with the songs then more will be encouraged to seek out queen. They don't need to bring out a new album because queen have a vast catalogue and their songs are timeless.
Holy crap, that youtuber can sing! Lambert can sing, I won't take that away from him, but I don't think his style fits Queen. As someone already pointed out his constant vibrato is a bit annoying and he doesn't have quite the smoothness of Freddie. But this Marc Martel, wow, that was awesome. Oh, and not to spark more flames, but am I the only one who thought Mika could have filled in nicely for a show?
its not about the voice of the singer (lambert or martel). everyone is still stuck on freddie, cant blame em. but rly, wanting some1 just cuz they look like freddie is pathetic.
lambert has got things that martel doesnt. ive seen both in a live situation and lambert BY FAR is way more entertaining to listen to and to watch. BY FAR THE BEST CHOICE IS WHAT QUEEN MADE
holy shit that marc guy is good, and looks like freddie too! if he doesn't get asked to join the band, he should at least play him in the movie! sorry sacha baron cohen, im a fan but this guy is good!
I was going to say I wonder what the posters who got quoted think about it. one of you guys should make a big deal about not being asked for permission to use your comment and then say you're going to sue UG. I'd lol at their response
Martel is amazing and all, but a good singing voice and a crazy resemblance to Freddie doesn't mean he'd make a good frontman. Singing at home in a studio and singing onstage in front of thousands are two very different ballgames. Lambert at least has some of that experience, and we know he can perform onstage. Having said that, I do prefer Martel's voice.
Oh, who am I kidding, it should be Eric Sean Nally, ffs.
I'm no huge fan of Adam Lambert for obvious reasons, but.....most of you all were not even around when Queen was big. And most of you will not be going to Sonisphere. I even doubt that many of you even like Queen much. So where exactly do you get the right to be pissed off about any of this?
Brian wants to go back on stage, Adam has an incredible voice, he's a fantastic performer, and he clearly can perform Queen's work. Why are all of you getting so pissy over this? Who cares if they call it Queen? Nobody said that Adam is replacing Freddie; that can't be done.
Also, Martel can imitate his voice, sure, but that doesn't make a good show.
Adam Lambert has a good voice, that's undeniable, but I don't think it really fits here. At least not for me And after hearing Marc Martel... well, I think nothing else has to be said. That guy already nails it, and after a bit of training on stage, he'd be perfect.
Martel is amazing and all, but a good singing voice and a crazy resemblance to Freddie doesn't mean he'd make a good frontman. Singing at home in a studio and singing onstage in front of thousands are two very different ballgames. Lambert at least has some of that experience, and we know he can perform onstage. Having said that, I do prefer Martel's voice.
Oh, who am I kidding, it should be Eric Sean Nally, ffs.
I totally thought of Queen when I was introduced to Foxy Shazam
Please, queen, find someone COMPLETELY different. Even though Freddie Mercury will NEVER be fully replaced, ANYBODY but Adam Lambert. I don't think anybody who was on a reality TV show is worthy of the spot, not by a long shot! Hold auditions or something, just please reconsider letting this attention seeker be the frontman!
AndoFloyd wrote:
Ok, i get you. I dont know how metallica got dragged into this, though.
Well, a change of name would have been ok i guess. But if you still want people to come to your show/shows then maybe you need that name. DId you not like it when led zeppelin playd a couple of years back? And i see you like megadeth also. As far as i know, Dave is the only consistant memeber of that band, should he not have kept playing under the name Megadeth then? Same thing with Van halen, deep purple, guns n roses etc etc. What i am saying is that as much as i agree that it seems like just a cash grab, would not you agree you would rather go see guns without slash or no guns at all?
Its still a hell of a time! oh, and ac/dc kept their name too..
Sir, You missed my point completely and second some of the stuff you said was absurd.
My point was: This seems like a cash grab
I brought Metallica into to point out I don't think a band needs to change when a member leaves/dies. I love Guns and saw them with Axl and it was amazing. Everyone left the band so why should he have to give up the name? Towards the end he was writing most of the songs anyway (breakdown of writing credits in my profile.) I'd have a problem if everyone had died and Axl continued under the name.
Saying Megadeth should change their name is absurd Dave IS Megadeth he writes ALL the songs and 97% of them he is the sole writer. Freddie was a key member and by not releasing any albums with out him they decided not to continue. Only to go back on their decision for a quick buck.
I wouldn't want to see Metallica, Bon Jovi or Guns N' Roses with Adam Lambert singing.
You are right about Megadeth, my bad!
But damn! Who would not want to see Adam Lambert in guns? haha
I think we can agree on the fact that people will enjoy it and that we dont get to decide wether or not they keep the name or change it.
As i was trying to say; I get it, to keep true to your name, dont go change the lineup or use someone else other the same name. What my point was was simply that it will be an awesome gig and people will attend and have a great time. But maybe that's absurd, too.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think when a band looks for a new singer they want a singer that sounds almost EXACTLY like the old singer. Phil Collins doesn't sound that much like Peter Gabriel but Genesis managed to keep going for another... 150 years after Gabriel quit. Lambert is a phenomenal singer. Not fussed about his personal music but I'm sure he can put on a good show with Queen.
- "Guns N' Roses should change their name if they continue without Slash!"
Tired of hearing this, Guns N Roses comes from the ORIGINAL lead guitarist Tracii Guns and of course lead vocalist Axl Rose. A couple months after forming the band Guns was out and Slash was in.
And also, there's a big different between studio voice and live voice. Not saying Martel wouldn't be able to cut it by any means, but Lambert has proved his ability for many years now. People need to calm down, it's not like they're only just replacing Freddie now. They've been doing the rounds for years without him.
- "Guns N' Roses should change their name if they continue without Slash!"
Tired of hearing this, Guns N Roses comes from the ORIGINAL lead guitarist Tracii Guns and of course lead vocalist Axl Rose. A couple months after forming the band Guns was out and Slash was in.
Agreed. I was just saying there'll always be people complaining if a band continues without one of their members and not changing their name.
- "Guns N' Roses should change their name if they continue without Slash!"
Tired of hearing this, Guns N Roses comes from the ORIGINAL lead guitarist Tracii Guns and of course lead vocalist Axl Rose. A couple months after forming the band Guns was out and Slash was in.
What did Tracii contribute though?
Guns made it with Appetite which was Axl, Izzy, Duff, Slash and Steven and as far as I'm concerned, they're the original members.
every member of queen has more money than they know what to do with, so i dont understand how you can call this a "cash grab"..does nobody ever consider the fact that these people genuinely just enjoy performing together onstage and want to do it again even if it means replacing their original singer?
I think Martel sounds great, except for the vocal run portion. Adam sounds different than Freddie but he has a powerful voice that fits better than Paul Rodgers did. Martel though did sound like Freddie almost spot on. I guess it all depends on what you want a copy cat or someone who sounds good but is themselves.
Adam Lambert is a good singer, you can't deny that but I think it's in their best interest to go with Marc. Listening to his audition without even watching the video you would think it's Freddie himself. I mean he even looks like him. It's like they are only going with Lambert because he already established a name. Queen, learn from Journey, Youtube is the new medium for discoveries.
Go watch some May riffing live for ****s sake.Stop bitching about menial bullshit.They wanna play,they wanna be Queen once again,do a show,they have a good singer with them,not perfect but,again,**** it.I mean,how many more years until any of you will have the chance to see Brian May play live?They use their band's name,get over it.I'm sure Mercury would like them to continue without him.
Wow that second guy was way better, Adam Lambert's performance was annoying as hell totally over emoting just doing that whole shaky thing with his voice the whole time and as someone mentioned the second guy's voice is just a lot more relaxed and effortless, just like Freddie's was.
So they're giving someone who's already had the fame a chance to step in for Freddie instead of giving someone who actually sounds like him a chance... yea no...
Marc Martel sounds scarily similar to Freddie Mercury. Queen never promised that Adam Lambert would stay in Queen, they only promised one show. Maybe after that one show, they can get Marc to sing for Queen. That would rock.
Everyone above is talented. Adam Lambert is obviously a talented singer. We get that; anyone who doesn't is ignorant. But, this is Queen we're talking about. The band we hear on our local classic-rock radio station. Adam belongs on "Latest Hits."
I don't think he has the matching Queen style, nor will he bring the plate to the table--however, Marc seems to have everything going for him.
Who gives a flying **** about has beens like Megadead or Roses and Guns! This Martel character is a real bad ass! Adam Lambert is an irritating Queen, no pun intended and not because he is gay. I never did care for him much on Idol
Who gives a flying **** about has beens like Megadead or Roses and Guns! This Martel character is a real bad ass! Adam Lambert is an irritating Queen, no pun intended and not because he is gay. I never did care for him much on Idol
I'm not a Queen fan but this is straight disrespectful. No honour , no respect and no integrity. All they can see is dollar signs. Well that does it, I'm selling my Sonisphere ticket.
I don't think you have much respect for them! Have you ever thought that maybe they just miss playing together as Queen? I'm sure they have enough money as it is.
Anyway, they're never going to be the same without Freddie - everyone knows that, even Adam Lambert. Though, I do prefer Marc Martel's voice
Queen lost their frontman which is tragic and he is irreplaceable, Freddy was one of a kind. Queen shoudl just stop doing shows but if there is a gun to their heads to chose a singer i would chose Marc because if anyone is remotly close to Freedy's voice it's him.
Lambert is a ****ing *****. Brian used to be one of my idols, but **** him. He's a sellout that dosnt care about the music.
So he called up a friend that can handle his band's songs to front one show so he and his band can play together again, and that makes him a sellout? What do you want him to do, turn Queen into a garage band because he "just cares about the music"?
I think they don't really want to have a Freddie Mercury copycat, which is why they went with Lambert and Paul Rogers, ya know? They need to be able to sing the songs but be their own person and have their own style, I think that's what the Mercury would want.
I think this is more about who will be the better performer, who will control the crowd more than who will sound and replace Freddy the best. Lambert has strong stage presence and also has his own style, while giving the songs the respect they deserve. Martel, although he sounds like Freddy, is not what Brian May wants obviously, as they dont want to replace Freddy perfectly, they want to put someone who can sing their songs with a flair of originality. At least that how I see it.
With respect to mark martel, there is a difference between being able to sing and being a frontman, how can you tell he'll be good, I would not want someone almost completely untested in my legendary band.
This is a very good point. One which I think the band considered strongly. Yes the youtube guy has an uncanny vocal resemblance to Mercury, but Lambert already has experience with the band under his belt. Although I do find his overuse of vibrato, and long drawn notes incredibly annoying.
Both are very talented singers that sound very close to Mercury. The youtube dude sounds slightlly more like him, but the Adam guy isnt half bad either. And of course they're going to call it "Queen". Wtf would they call it? "Tribute to Queen"? "Queen with Adam"? Not a Queen fan so I guess this doesnt really apply to me, but i'll say what I usually say about when situations like this arise in music: If they sound good live, and your a fan of their music, go check it out! If you cant escape the fact that the frontman "was" the band, then stay at home and miss out a rock show. Its your choice.
To hell with Adam Lambert, Marc Martel nailed it. Of course Martel doesn't come off like a "performer" in this video. The guy's recording an audition in his damn bedroom, for God's sakes.
If we could combine Adam Lambert's comfort on stage (and his not-so-corniness) with Marc Martel's voice, we would have the perfect candidate.
The way it sits right now, Adam Lambert is comfortable on stage, and he could probably work a crowd pretty well, but he oversings things, and he's constantly putting vibrato in his voice. Marc Martel might sound great, but he wouldn't be entertaining on stage; he'd probably just stand there, pretty much, but he would sound closer to Freddie, although I think that's not necessarily what the band is after.
Oh, well. I guess they're damned if they don't, damned if they do.
P.S.
I think Roger Taylor had a small stroke during We Will Rock You. What was up with that? He sounded awful on that piece.
Blown away by Martel. Still have goosebumps. That said, I get why they wouldn't want him... they'd be turning themselves into a Freddie Mercury Tribute act, whereas Lambert (while a less than ideal choice) would be bringing something new. They did the same thing with Paul Rodgers to astounding success, but there will always be naysayers.
This is similar to what happened with Iron Maiden in the 90's, when they got rid of Bruce and got Blaze, he was certainly not like Bruce, range wise, but he was a good singer nonetheless. I am sure this will, if it has not already, divide the Queen camp ina similar way, but we will let history decide.
if i'm honest, i just think its cool they're playing again, i don't care who's singing, its 3/4 of the original line up, which is a 75% share in queen, so its all good from me,
Adam's not really best suited for Queen IMO, but I think a lot of people are just so passionately dissing him because he's a pop artist.
I'm passionately dissing him because of who he is. He's a makeup wearing sissy. He got arrested after beating his boyfriend in Finland. turns out that the beating was really just 1 slap. This is not because he's gay, because Freddy Mercury was gay and he was the man. Adam Lambert is just a pussy.
Woah. I know, everyone has got a different taste, but i can't believe anyone actually prefers Lambert over Mercury. That's just physically not possible.
You know Paul Rodgers didn't sound anything like Freddie Mercury either. Maybe they know trying to replace him is pointless since you're just going to end up like Journey if you do. Marc Martel is a decent imitator, but his voice lacks what really made Mercury great: Soul and originality.
Seriously though, what's everyone's bitch with Adam Lambert? Is being a random schmuck on Youtube any better than being an American Idol contestant?
I'd prefer Lambert because Martel sounds too much like Mercury. It would be easy to get confused between the two. I prefer a frontman with a different voice, so we know that its a Queen reunion, not a ressurection of Mercury.
Lambert forgot to turn the Vibrato Pedal on the mic off... Showawawawawaw Muhuhuhuhuhuhuhuhuhuhuhuhust Gohohohohohohohohoho Ohohohohonononnonononnnonon.
With respect to mark martel, there is a difference between being able to sing and being a frontman, how can you tell he'll be good, I would not want someone almost completely untested in my legendary band.
what you may or may not know, Marc Martel is actually already in a band called Downhere, and hes the frontman so there really isnt any problem. He has a near close to Freddie voice and hes just awesome. so yeah
if i'm honest, i just think its cool they're playing again, i don't care who's singing, its 3/4 of the original line up, which is a 75% share in queen, so its all good from me,
The real question is if the second guy can sing in front of that many people. Doing something like that on that scale isn't easy, I'd probably freeze up just playing guitar on a stage like that
Freddy was a unique and brave artist in terms of sound and pushing the envelope, he wouldn't want someone who sounds exactly like him to front the band. He would want someone that could expand Queen's audience and take it in a new direction. That was his style. He was spontanious and constantly reinventing the band. Why would he want someone who is obviously not going to follow through with that? Marc sounds just like him but would the inovative Freddie that we have come to respect want that? I'm not an Adam Lambert fan at all but I definately see why he would be the choice for Queen.
If Paul Rodgers couldn't replace Freddy Mercury, no one can. They should just go away gracefully instead of putting out some wannabe, regardless of who they are.
if i'm honest, i just think its cool they're playing again, i don't care who's singing, its 3/4 of the original line up, which is a 75% share in queen, so its all good from me,
A true Queen fan should know that John Deacon wouldn't involve himself in this. I'm just a casual Queen fan, yet even I know that Deacon has scarcely been involved in anything Queen-related since Freddie Mercury's death - and practically nothing in the last 15 years.
That leaves you with 50% of Queen. ...and it wasn't the best songwriting 50%. So if they write an album, you probably shouldn't get your hopes up.
Uh, he does suck fat ones dude, better come up with somethin better than that. As a matter of fact, Freddie sucked fat ones too! But who cares, it's one show, he's not their new singer.
Really? Lady Gaga is a far better musician than Adam Lambert, and at least she doesn't need a ridiculously enormous vibrato to make it sound like she's hitting the notes.
Although I think Marc had the better voice, Adam does and we've seen he has stage presence. From experience I know how important stage presence is, as in my former folk/blues band we recruited this really good singer but once she got on stage she lost all expression, hid behind the mic stand for the entire show and just looked like she didnt want to be up there. Not saying it will be the same for Marc, but we dont know if he can entertain when hes up on stage.
I bet a lot of people here saying Adam Lambert hasn't watched the video, he's actually quite good. I do still think Martel is better, but Lambert is not a bad choice really. Give the guy a chance.
I bet a lot of people here saying Adam Lambert hasn't watched the video, he's actually quite good. I do still think Martel is better, but Lambert is not a bad choice really. Give the guy a chance.
I bet a lot of people here saying Adam Lambert hasn't watched the video, he's actually quite good. I do still think Martel is better, but Lambert is not a bad choice really. Give the guy a chance.
And to clarify, I hate Lambert.
Adam Lambert isn't good haven't watched the video*
Jeez, this is what happens when I type while watching videos for class.
Brian May attempting to have stage presence by running around? Get outta town Brian, your entire live career was built on standing completely still and shredding like a pro
I don't think anybody could really deny that Adam Lambert has a pretty good voice. But if they're looking for something as close to Freddie Mercury as possible, Marc Martel would be a better choice.
I have to disagree. I don't think they need someone as close to Freddy as possible, but i think they should at least get someone who can actually sing. Seriously, what's with Adam Lamberts ridiculous amount of vibrato?
god the vibrato is killing me. its really bad. even one syllable words have vibrato in them.
With respect to mark martel, there is a difference between being able to sing and being a frontman, how can you tell he'll be good, I would not want someone almost completely untested in my legendary band.
Marc Martel is the frontman of his own band. I believe their name is Down Here. He knows how to be a front man.
No one can replace Freddie Mercury, but give Adam Lambart a chance, you elitist posers.
I completely agree. People are never happy, it doesn't matter what the news is, people always complain.
UG posters, Queen made the decision. Stop trying to undermine it and pretend you know more than they do. It's their band, not yours, so please grow up. I'm sick of it.
Also, stop trying to claim he's too mainstream for Queen. If you watched him on idol, you would know that what he is producing now is completely different to what is he real passion...
I'm not a Queen fan but this is straight disrespectful. No honour , no respect and no integrity. All they can see is dollar signs. Well that does it, I'm selling my Sonisphere ticket.
This is something I can not understand. Why the **** should you care why they are doing it? They put on a great show, they have fun, the audience will have fun. They get a lot of cash.
Can you honestly tell me that you would not have done the same thing if you played in Queen?
Marc looks ****ing bored. And to be honest (whilst not bashing his talent, because there's no way in hell that I could do that), perhaps they didn't choose him because they didn't want an exact replica of Freddie (vocal quality, looks etc.).
I agree with what someone said near the top though, they play good music, people turn up to shows because they enjoy it - so why b****h about a decision that you have no control over?
Isnt this a one off thing?? Clearly if no one likes it, they wont keep doing it. At the end of the day it does seem like they took him for the promotional aspect. If you look at it like Queen + Adam Lambert vs Queen + Some guy who sang one song on you tube (damn well), you can see why they picked adam. I was never a huge queen fan anyway but I can see why they made that choice. Plus, isnt it kind of fitting?
I know I'll get shit for it, but I don't care. They're just replacing one homosexual with another. Freddie was the cool kind of gay(bi) guy, Adam is just uncomfortably gay.
I don't see this lasting long.
I am disappointed. Queen appears to be trying to ignite new interest by putting a voice familiar to this generation at the front of the band. Adam Lambert doesn't have (IMO) what it takes to fill the shoes of Freddy Mercury. They should have done what Journey did, find someone with a voice close to his and let people relive the concerts of the Mercury era. Marc fits the band wonderfully and there is no telling if he would be a good "front man" or put on "a good show" so why not give him a chance? Also, to nitnatsnok: I am in a band, and sound COMES FIRST. A "good show" is an addition to good sound. If you sound like crap no one will care how cool you look running around stage.
I think the Freddie Mercury tribute concert was as far as I could go w/o Freddie. What they really need is Deacon John from "Queen I" back on bass. But seriously, I wouldn't want Lambert headlining an event as big as Sonisphere w/Queen. At least get Paul Rodgers back up there, I prefer a seasoned performer over the media's product anyway. Not saying Lambert can't sing, he just isn't Queen enough to be with Queen. Paul, a veteran with great pop/rock voice, is though.
It would have to be Martel. Lambert is just whatever, and a lot of people can scream into a microphone, and that's all well and good. But that kind of talent and vocal range like that....that comes about what, 2 in every few billion? His range is much stronger and much more "Queen". If they took him I think people would be more willing to accept it as Queen, simply because he's not some developed name that we'll all have to try to get used to. Just a guy who can relatively match Freddie and add a grit to the band that someone like Lambert just doesn't have. It'll feel more like a band and less like a stunt. Oh, and **** american idol.
Marc!! Come on "fake queen"!! Maybe Marc is more... mmm... homosexual, but the other guy has a voice like Mercury!! and he looks more like Mercury as well.
The question is... do you wand a gay singer like Mercury (thanks to this, a big showman like Freddy), or a great singer like Mercury?? We know that to find both in one person it abso****inglutely difficult, but if you have to choose one, I'd choose the great singer. (Is more important the music than the show or the show than the music?)
Marc killed that other dude. not even close. Honestly though, after watching the Queen video as they are today, I'd rather pay to watch that dude sing into his SM7 in his bedroom than go to a "real" queen show.
the ONLY problem with Marc is he has no soul, it just doesnt seem like he really feels this music. and the only freakin song i could find on youtube was Somebody to Love
Queen should've signed Martel even before they finished watching his video. Hell, that was like passing on a second shot at the brass ring. What on earth were they thinking?
Adam hasn't joined Queen. It's Queen + Adam Lambert. Brian and Roger are Queen, John Deacon has retired... no one has been replaced. I prefer it this way, because to recruit Martel would've been an obvious try to replace Freddie with someone similar... with Paul Rodgers and Adam Lambert, they are working with people who've got their own sound and voice. Much more respectful than to hire a second-rate Freddie impersonator or go the Journey-route.
That second guy has a GREAT voice. Inredible resemblance, but Adam DOES have more of Freddie's stage energy and he has a good voice too, so I have no problem with Lambert taking the helm.
Why not call it "Queen with Adam Lambert"? It seems like a fair way to bring him in and not suggest that he is a replacement for Mercury.
That's what they are. It'll be called Queen + Adam Lambert. AL isn't joining Queen.
Queen stopped being Queen when Freddie died. What difference does it make that the remaining members do some shows with a different person? Why is Queen untouchable? That's like bitching every time somebody covers a Queen song. Its ****ing bullshit. I'd rather hear Adam Lambert cover Queen than someone who doesn't actually have talent.
Queen being my number #1 on all time favorite bands my vote goes for Marc...also I am trying to figure out why Adam Lambert was even in the running. Constant vibrato has got to gooOOOooOooOOoooOOO
Oh no no no! I'm sorry, but I don't think this should go on, with Adam Lambert of Marc Martel. Queen was 'Freddie Mercury, Brian May, John Deacon and Roger Taylor...and none of them can be replace! I'd love to see Brian and Roger do more music related things but not under the name Queen. I'm sorry, but i'm literally crying about this...
Queen's sound was very friendly and smooth. They had songs that everyone could sing together and have fun. Adam Lambert is trying way to hard. Vibrato, sharp inclines at the end of the verses. Just not nice. Queen was a band were you thought of there songs and remembered good memories. Mark Martel brings that sound back. Go with the classic, not the try-hard.
Adam Lambert is talented but not the talent Queen needs, he isn't right for the band.
Marc Martel is a better fit vocally and just over all. Adam is too flash for the band. It almost like they got one of the only free gay singers and offered him the spot. Its wrong. The Nirvana comparison was perfect. He isn't right for it.
Its like putting a Ferrari in a stock car race. Its flashy and powerful but wrong for the job.
Yes, lets take Marc Martel, who has very little stage experience, over Adam Lambert, who is a star in is own right and has experience in the big show.
UG logic for you.
Dude, Martel has been the frontman on his own band for many years now. He may not have played shows as large as Lambert, but he sure has more experience. And is also a MUCH better singer.
Like I said in my previous comment, Adam isn't a bad singer (though, like many here, I find his excessive vibrato a bit annoying), but his voice doesn't fit in Queen in my opinion.
if i'm honest, i just think its cool they're playing again, i don't care who's singing, its 3/4 of the original line up, which is a 75% share in queen, so its all good from me,
A true Queen fan should know that John Deacon wouldn't involve himself in this. I'm just a casual Queen fan, yet even I know that Deacon has scarcely been involved in anything Queen-related since Freddie Mercury's death - and practically nothing in the last 15 years.
That leaves you with 50% of Queen. ...and it wasn't the best songwriting 50%. So if they write an album, you probably shouldn't get your hopes up.
They already wrote an album. It was called "Cosmos Rocks". Remember it? No? Good, 'cause you shouldn't.
I'm not a Queen fan but this is straight disrespectful. No honour , no respect and no integrity. All they can see is dollar signs. Well that does it, I'm selling my Sonisphere ticket.
Why is it offensive now? It wasn't this offensive when Paul Rodgers was with them. I don't remember such backlash. It's just a freaking name. Besides, it'll be something like "Queen + Adam Lambert" or "Queen featuring Adam Lambert".
I don't see the problem. Paul Rodgers did a great job and the band was still called QUEEN so what's the issue with Adam Lambert? He's a great singer.
Stop being such prissy fanboys and actually enjoy the fact that Queen are still out there wanting to play for their fans.
Actually the band was called "Queen + Paul Rodgers" and people were still complaining about them continuing without Freddy.
Damn straight! That started as a promising idea, with them doing Bad Company and Free songs as well as Queen, bringing the classic music to a live audience that would otherwise never get it. That I appreciate, but when they dragged it out and made an album that as a Queen fan I listened to about a third of and never touched since, it got stupid, and they really started to sell out. Now May's playing with Dappy, and plucking an artist from a show that is everything bad in the music industry... for me it's just a case of remembering Queen up to 1991 plus the No One But You song they did as a 3, but anything after that is not Queen.
I stand by my quoted comment. This is an insult. Seeing that god awful clown on stage with one of the best bands ever makes me sick to my stomach.
I hadn't heard of this Martel guy before, but man does he have some pipes. He sounds almost identical to Freddie, and you know what? That's what Queen songs SHOULD have. Not some eyeliner wearing dickhead putting his spin on songs that mean more to the world than his life.
The other guy is way better, I don't believe in these talent show things, if you were destined to be a rock star, it will find you, Osborne,plant,Page, Lennon, McCartney, the gallagher brothers, Dylan , the doors, Presley,cash, lemme, cobain, grohl, to name a few great musicians.. We're never on a talent show. I love queen, I thought the Paul rodgers collaboration was ok, but this could tarnish them, what's wrong with old rockstars trying to make a quick dollar these days??
I know real Queen fans will never find anyone acceptable to replace Freddie Mercury. Truth is no one could replace him. Most would rather they call it a day and leave us with their awsome legacy, but it's not for us to say if they choose to still perform. Being objective, I watched the EMA's and after seeing Adam Lambert's performance he cannot sing Queen songs. They honestly sounded terrible. So why would they do it again?!
I'm not a Queen fan but this is straight disrespectful. No honour , no respect and no integrity. All they can see is dollar signs. Well that does it, I'm selling my Sonisphere ticket.
Why is it offensive now? It wasn't this offensive when Paul Rodgers was with them. I don't remember such backlash. It's just a freaking name. Besides, it'll be something like "Queen + Adam Lambert" or "Queen featuring Adam Lambert".
Get over it.
Their wasn't a backlash because Paul Rogers is a massively respected rock/soul/blues singer, with a proven career. Also Freddie Mercury was supposed to have been qutie fond of his voice/him so i guess he was a lot more acceptable.
Personally i think they should jack it in, find a decent singer who's headlines aren't dominated by how "glam and unique" he is, and just play some ****ing music.
We've detected that you are using Ad Blocking software.
If you hate ads, but love Ultimate Guitar, how about subscribing to Ultimate Guitar's Ad Free Service? If you subscribe to this service, you won't see annoying banner ads, pop-up ads, text-link ads or video ads and will be helping to support your favorite site at the same time.
As you know, we provide you with a lot of great, free content like news, reviews, interviews, tabs and chords, but you see, ads are the way we generate revenue to run UG and pay royalties to the songwriters and music publishers of the songs that are posted here.
).
