Geoff Tate

Vexer6 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

The complaint shouldn't be about what Tate listens to or is into outside of Queensryche; it should be about the fact that he has abandoned his own music, his own "metal," if you will.

Some musicians prefer to expand their sound and go a different direction, if he dosen't feel like doing metal anymore, then he shouldn't force himself to do it just because the fans want him to. If doing modern rock is what makes him happy, then i'm fine with it.

I agree with that, but Queensryche is not a solo project.

Eyesore wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

The complaint shouldn't be about what Tate listens to or is into outside of Queensryche; it should be about the fact that he has abandoned his own music, his own "metal," if you will.

Some musicians prefer to expand their sound and go a different direction, if he dosen't feel like doing metal anymore, then he shouldn't force himself to do it just because the fans want him to. If doing modern rock is what makes him happy, then i'm fine with it.

I agree with that, but Queensryche is not a solo project.

or is it if the majority of the band is in the real Queensryche???

exact33 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

The complaint shouldn't be about what Tate listens to or is into outside of Queensryche; it should be about the fact that he has abandoned his own music, his own "metal," if you will.

Some musicians prefer to expand their sound and go a different direction, if he dosen't feel like doing metal anymore, then he shouldn't force himself to do it just because the fans want him to. If doing modern rock is what makes him happy, then i'm fine with it.

I agree with that, but Queensryche is not a solo project.

or is it if the majority of the band is in the real Queensryche???

Exactly, I can understand people being upset at Geoff for forcing the original band members into a sound they didn't want to do, but since he's off doing his own thing now, I don't have a problem with him going in a new direction.

Vexer6 wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

The complaint shouldn't be about what Tate listens to or is into outside of Queensryche; it should be about the fact that he has abandoned his own music, his own "metal," if you will.

Some musicians prefer to expand their sound and go a different direction, if he dosen't feel like doing metal anymore, then he shouldn't force himself to do it just because the fans want him to. If doing modern rock is what makes him happy, then i'm fine with it.

I agree with that, but Queensryche is not a solo project.

or is it if the majority of the band is in the real Queensryche???

Exactly, I can understand people being upset at Geoff for forcing the original band members into a sound they didn't want to do, but since he's off doing his own thing now, I don't have a problem with him going in a new direction.

he should go with his own name then.

I don't get it, Achtung Baby sounds nothing like The Joshua Tree, The Bends sounds nothing like In Rainbows and neither of them sound anything like Kid A, even Devin gets away with radical stylistic changes and no-one bats an eyelid. But Queensryche, Iron Maiden, Metallica etc have to keep to 'the classic (meaning 80's) sound or else the fans have somehow been betrayed. Funny thing is, it's always been this way, Ride the Lightning was a sellout record according to some and Bruce Dickinson had to endure the crowd screaming Paul DiAnno's name through his early Maiden gigs.

Why do metal fans always want their bands to repeat what has already been done and stick to the formula?

exact33 wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

The complaint shouldn't be about what Tate listens to or is into outside of Queensryche; it should be about the fact that he has abandoned his own music, his own "metal," if you will.

Some musicians prefer to expand their sound and go a different direction, if he dosen't feel like doing metal anymore, then he shouldn't force himself to do it just because the fans want him to. If doing modern rock is what makes him happy, then i'm fine with it.

I agree with that, but Queensryche is not a solo project.

or is it if the majority of the band is in the real Queensryche???

Exactly, I can understand people being upset at Geoff for forcing the original band members into a sound they didn't want to do, but since he's off doing his own thing now, I don't have a problem with him going in a new direction.

he should go with his own name then.

He probably will once the case gets settled.

Boris2008 wrote:

I don't get it, Achtung Baby sounds nothing like The Joshua Tree, The Bends sounds nothing like In Rainbows and neither of them sound anything like Kid A, even Devin gets away with radical stylistic changes and no-one bats an eyelid. But Queensryche, Iron Maiden, Metallica etc have to keep to 'the classic (meaning 80's) sound or else the fans have somehow been betrayed. Funny thing is, it's always been this way, Ride the Lightning was a sellout record according to some and Bruce Dickinson had to endure the crowd screaming Paul DiAnno's name through his early Maiden gigs.

Why do metal fans always want their bands to repeat what has already been done and stick to the formula?

No idea, the move into new territory scares some people I guess. I for one have no problem with bands trying new things as long as they don't go too far overboard like Metallica did with St. Anger, I doubt I will ever hear another album that's anywhere near as terrible as that one. I'll gladly take American Soldier, Dedicated To Chaos and Hear In The Now Frontier over it any time, hell i'd rather listen to Thrash Queen then that worthless hunk of plastic!

exact33 wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

The complaint shouldn't be about what Tate listens to or is into outside of Queensryche; it should be about the fact that he has abandoned his own music, his own "metal," if you will.

Some musicians prefer to expand their sound and go a different direction, if he dosen't feel like doing metal anymore, then he shouldn't force himself to do it just because the fans want him to. If doing modern rock is what makes him happy, then i'm fine with it.

I agree with that, but Queensryche is not a solo project.

or is it if the majority of the band is in the real Queensryche???

Exactly, I can understand people being upset at Geoff for forcing the original band members into a sound they didn't want to do, but since he's off doing his own thing now, I don't have a problem with him going in a new direction.

he should go with his own name then.

Agree

Boris2008 wrote:

I don't get it, Achtung Baby sounds nothing like The Joshua Tree, The Bends sounds nothing like In Rainbows and neither of them sound anything like Kid A, even Devin gets away with radical stylistic changes and no-one bats an eyelid. But Queensryche, Iron Maiden, Metallica etc have to keep to 'the classic (meaning 80's) sound or else the fans have somehow been betrayed. Funny thing is, it's always been this way, Ride the Lightning was a sellout record according to some and Bruce Dickinson had to endure the crowd screaming Paul DiAnno's name through his early Maiden gigs.

Why do metal fans always want their bands to repeat what has already been done and stick to the formula?

Its not that they want the bands to repeat what the band has already done, they just want them to do what they do and expand on it and continue to write good songs.

In Queensryches case they went from being a metal band, to a prog metal band to a generic alternate rock band. They were doing a style of music that would have been popular in the mid 90's not now.

I'm all for change as long as the songs are there. If a band changes their sound and releases an album with all crap songs then yea I'd be a little upset because I stuck by them. They could release it under a different name or something.

Paradise Lost tried to change their sound for a while and look what it did to them? No one even cared about that album, "Host". Helloween, most fans hate Chameleon or even Pink Bubbles Go Ape, for that matter. They are huge departures from what the band started as and I understand why fans get mad.

I've stuck with Queensryche since the day that I started listening to them up until Dedicated To Chaos. I was fed up with the nonsense and I should have been years ago but since I have respect for them as musicians I stuck with them even though I didn't agree on the direction they were going in.

Phoenix Reign Drummer wrote:

Boris2008 wrote:

I don't get it, Achtung Baby sounds nothing like The Joshua Tree, The Bends sounds nothing like In Rainbows and neither of them sound anything like Kid A, even Devin gets away with radical stylistic changes and no-one bats an eyelid. But Queensryche, Iron Maiden, Metallica etc have to keep to 'the classic (meaning 80's) sound or else the fans have somehow been betrayed. Funny thing is, it's always been this way, Ride the Lightning was a sellout record according to some and Bruce Dickinson had to endure the crowd screaming Paul DiAnno's name through his early Maiden gigs.

Why do metal fans always want their bands to repeat what has already been done and stick to the formula?

Its not that they want the bands to repeat what the band has already done, they just want them to do what they do and expand on it and continue to write good songs.

In Queensryches case they went from being a metal band, to a prog metal band to a generic alternate rock band. They were doing a style of music that would have been popular in the mid 90's not now.

I'm all for change as long as the songs are there. If a band changes their sound and releases an album with all crap songs then yea I'd be a little upset because I stuck by them. They could release it under a different name or something.

Paradise Lost tried to change their sound for a while and look what it did to them? No one even cared about that album, "Host". Helloween, most fans hate Chameleon or even Pink Bubbles Go Ape, for that matter. They are huge departures from what the band started as and I understand why fans get mad.

I've stuck with Queensryche since the day that I started listening to them up until Dedicated To Chaos. I was fed up with the nonsense and I should have been years ago but since I have respect for them as musicians I stuck with them even though I didn't agree on the direction they were going in.

I liked Host, Chameleon and Pink Bubbles, though I fully understand why others dislike them so much.

Other guilty pleasures are Scorpions- Eye II Eye and Megadeth - Risk.

I love Chameleon and Pink Bubbles as well. Host on the other hand I don't even remember listening to it cause I probably only listened to it once and just put it on the shelf. I have guilty pleasures myself so change doesn't bother me as long as its good.

Phoenix Reign Drummer wrote:

I love Chameleon and Pink Bubbles as well. Host on the other hand I don't even remember listening to it cause I probably only listened to it once and just put it on the shelf. I have guilty pleasures myself so change doesn't bother me as long as its good.

Here's the title track from Host, it's one of my favorites:

Helloween lost me a long time before Pink Bubbles, I didn't feel betrayed though, the direction that they went in wasn't for me.

I actually can't think of many metal examples but if Primal Scream (the Scotish one) had stuck with being a second rate Jesus & Mary Chain, the world would have been deprived of the mighty 'Screamadelica', without doubt one of the best albums of the nineties.

I have liked what I have heard from Queensryche even after 'The Promised Land".

I did not buy most of them, but did like what I heard, til we got to 'Dedicated to Chaos" an ok album that tired to broaden their sound, but songs just weren't there.

'Cold' is not bad, but like I said it could be anybody, Geoff Tate is a very talented vocalist and songwriter, aside from his douche bag behavior, I like the fact that he follows his own muse, well at least he did, til we get to this new album.

For a man who claims he likes to always look forward, hard to believe he re-recorded classic Queensryche material.

Boris2008 wrote:

I don't get it, Achtung Baby sounds nothing like The Joshua Tree, The Bends sounds nothing like In Rainbows and neither of them sound anything like Kid A, even Devin gets away with radical stylistic changes and no-one bats an eyelid. But Queensryche, Iron Maiden, Metallica etc have to keep to 'the classic (meaning 80's) sound or else the fans have somehow been betrayed. Funny thing is, it's always been this way, Ride the Lightning was a sellout record according to some and Bruce Dickinson had to endure the crowd screaming Paul DiAnno's name through his early Maiden gigs.

Why do metal fans always want their bands to repeat what has already been done and stick to the formula?

I want good music. I don't care about anything else. I have no issues with Geoff liking heavy metal or not liking heavy metal, nor do I care if Queensryche weren't doing old-school metal anymore.

My issue is with Geoff refusing to play those early songs despite the fans and the other guys in the band wanting it. If Geoff doesn't want to do it in a band he has full control over, then that is fine.

Vexer6 wrote:

Other guilty pleasures are Scorpions- Eye II Eye and Megadeth - Risk.

I'll give you Risk, but Eye II Eye is a travesty. It's WORSE than St. Anger IMO.

ultmetal wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Other guilty pleasures are Scorpions- Eye II Eye and Megadeth - Risk.

I'll give you Risk, but Eye II Eye is a travesty. It's WORSE than St. Anger IMO.

No way is it worse than St. Anger! Very few albums are worse than that one. At least Eye II Eye had one good song, "Mind Like a Tree." Hell, that's a great song. St. Anger is shit through and through.

'Chameleon' is 10x the record stuff like 'Dedicated to Chaos' is.

Eyesore wrote:

ultmetal wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Other guilty pleasures are Scorpions- Eye II Eye and Megadeth - Risk.

I'll give you Risk, but Eye II Eye is a travesty. It's WORSE than St. Anger IMO.

No way is it worse than St. Anger! Very few albums are worse than that one. At least Eye II Eye had one good song, "Mind Like a Tree." Hell, that's a great song. St. Anger is shit through and through.

Haha! Ok, well then they are both shit.

I'll have to listen to that song again, but I don't remember any 'great' song on Eye II Eye. As I recall that song was the closest to actually sounding like a Scorpions songs.

I don't mind bands changing, evolving, whatever you want to call it. So long as they can write good songs then its a non issue for me. Some of my favourite bands have gone through some massive changes over the years, some reverted back to a style more akin to their original stuff whilst some have simply become a completey different band.

Anathema, paradise lost, my dying bride and fates warning are examples of big changes. Iron maiden it could be argued are more prog rock than straight up heavy metal these days.

I could name loads of others but my point is if you can still write good music then change is good. If you write boring crap like st.anger, risk, skunkworks then the change of style means nothing. Crap is crap no matter the style.

Eyesore wrote:

My issue is with Geoff refusing to play those early songs despite the fans and the other guys in the band wanting it. If Geoff doesn't want to do it in a band he has full control over, then that is fine.

Honestly, maybe he just can't sing them. He could probably do fine (and has) with "Take Hold The Flame", or "Lady Wore Black" or "I Don't Believe In Love" (3 songs they've pretty consistently played over the years). But he knows he's past being able to do "Queen..." and "Prophecy" and "Blinded" (or any other song w/ loads of high-range vocals/screams) consistently and wants to stick to what he feels he can do and not A- embarrass himself and B- not damage his already aging throat.

Here's the position the fans put bands like Queensryche in:

A- WE WANT THE OLD SONGS OR IT'S NOT (QUEENSRYCHE).

B- WE WANT THE ORIGINAL MEMBERS OR IT'S NOT (QUEENSRYCHE).

When bands get older, one of these isn't going to happen. When a band like Queensryche basically paints itself into a corner with songs in those kinds of keys w/ vocals that high AND gain a large fanbase, they're stuck. They're either going to change singers and piss off subsection B, or drop old songs/styles and piss off subsection A.

They can't win.

I just know that if the record doesn't come out on Japanese blu-ray vinyl, it's going to be unlistenable. The digital age is the true culprit behind the demise of Queensrÿche.

Quote :

When bands get older, one of these isn't going to happen. When a band like Queensryche basically paints itself into a corner with songs in those kinds of keys w/ vocals that high AND gain a large fanbase, they're stuck. They're either going to change singers and piss off subsection B, or drop old songs/styles and piss off subsection A.

And theGeoff managed to piss off both.

Dark Horseman wrote:

Quote :

When bands get older, one of these isn't going to happen. When a band like Queensryche basically paints itself into a corner with songs in those kinds of keys w/ vocals that high AND gain a large fanbase, they're stuck. They're either going to change singers and piss off subsection B, or drop old songs/styles and piss off subsection A.

And theGeoff managed to piss off both.

Yes, he did. It's amazing.

I will take this moment to reiterate that, IMO, "Cold" is better than "Redemption".

I am still a Geoff Tate fan, just not a fan of him using the name Queensryche, 'Cold' is not a bad tune the more I hear it the more I like it, but nothing in the song tells me its Queensryche other then the vocals.

"Redemption" is also a good song, at the moment I prefer that tune, but I have not bought a Queensryche album as a new release since 'Tribe" and I do not see that changing with these two albums.