Geoff Tate

thejokeriv wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

And I refuse to write off either side. Geoff should suck it up and move on, focus on his solo albums and winery stuff. No shame in that, even if Queensryche was the money machine. And let's see what the other guys can do with what's-his-nuts.

I agree - at this point Tate knows he will not win in court and is just trying to cause confusion and destroy the brand.

Agree!!!!! Tate just needs to let it go and try to build a solo career

and to be quite frank - if Tate really is the reason for all the success of the band over the years why should he have to use the name? If he really is the talent behind the band I would think people would go to see him rather than the band.

exact33 wrote:

thejokeriv wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

And I refuse to write off either side. Geoff should suck it up and move on, focus on his solo albums and winery stuff. No shame in that, even if Queensryche was the money machine. And let's see what the other guys can do with what's-his-nuts.

I agree - at this point Tate knows he will not win in court and is just trying to cause confusion and destroy the brand.

Agree!!!!! Tate just needs to let it go and try to build a solo career

and to be quite frank - if Tate really is the reason for all the success of the band over the years why should he have to use the name? If he really is the talent behind the band I would think people would go to see him rather than the band.

The same reason David Gilmour wanted to go under the Pink Floyd name or Tony Iommi just did not launch a solo career after Gillan, Butler and Ward bailed out of Black Sabbath, they worked over 20 years to establish the name Pink Floyd and Black Sabbath, and those names are worth their weight in gold. David Gilmour is not going to sell out stadiums or get the up front guarantees from promoters as the name Pink Floyd will

Quote :

or Tony Iommi just did not launch a solo career after Gillan, Butler and Ward bailed out of Black Sabbath

He did...the label nixed it.

I wonder how Tate would do on Karoake of early QR?

It's unfortunate how much ability Tate has lost with time.

Tate is a fragment of his former self.... IMHO

Tate really seems to be showing his true, vindictive colors, huh?

I mean, really. If you're so talented, and the brains of the operation...prove it. Let them be Queensryche while you, in your infinite genius, make your solo output bigger and better. That would make sense, right?

No. We're going to go round with "official" and "real" and "original" and beat the name to death in the process.

Lame.

I am huge Queensryche fan but this is stupid, he should promote it as Geoff Tate, the voice of Queensryche, or former vocalist of ..., but two bands with the same name is going to devalue their marquee value, and turn off long term fans.

I am completely turned off by both parties, thankfully the only thing I care about is their music and both of these entities better put out some killer music to justify this huge amount of bullsh*t they can keep spewing out.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Quote :

or Tony Iommi just did not launch a solo career after Gillan, Butler and Ward bailed out of Black Sabbath

He did...the label nixed it.

True but when he moved to IRS Metal label, he still continued with the name Black Sabbath, which I was and still am personally ok with

manny wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Quote :

or Tony Iommi just did not launch a solo career after Gillan, Butler and Ward bailed out of Black Sabbath

He did...the label nixed it.

True but when he moved to IRS Metal label, he still continued with the name Black Sabbath, which I was and still am personally ok with

True...and I've got no problem with it either. But Ozzy wasn't running around at the same time w/ some other guys and trying to call it "Black Sabbath starring Ozzy Osbourne: The Original Voice"...he went solo and stayed that way.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

manny wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Quote :

or Tony Iommi just did not launch a solo career after Gillan, Butler and Ward bailed out of Black Sabbath

He did...the label nixed it.

True but when he moved to IRS Metal label, he still continued with the name Black Sabbath, which I was and still am personally ok with

True...and I've got no problem with it either. But Ozzy wasn't running around at the same time w/ some other guys and trying to call it "Black Sabbath starring Ozzy Osbourne: The Original Voice"...he went solo and stayed that way.

You are right, I have to admit I am more disappointed in Geoff Tate then anything else, I always viewed Queensryche and Tate himself as a class act, a group of talented mature grown ups. I am bit disllusioned by his behaviour but as the cliche goes trust the art not the artist.

Ill lay the blame at Tate's feet since he knows darn well he isnt entitled to the name and is just trying to make a quick buck and ruin the brand.

exact33 wrote:

Ill lay the blame at Tate's feet since he knows darn well he isnt entitled to the name and is just trying to make a quick buck and ruin the brand.

Yep. Tate is really coming across as a vidictive malicious person only doing this out of spite.

007 wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Ill lay the blame at Tate's feet since he knows darn well he isnt entitled to the name and is just trying to make a quick buck and ruin the brand.

Yep. Tate is really coming across as a vidictive malicious person only doing this out of spite.

?

He's doing this to make money.

James B. wrote:

Tate is a fragment of his former self.... IMHO

I found that out about 3-4 years ago when I heard a modern live version of a Mindcrime song and I couldn't listen to more than a minute of it.

Temple of Blood wrote:

007 wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Ill lay the blame at Tate's feet since he knows darn well he isnt entitled to the name and is just trying to make a quick buck and ruin the brand.

Yep. Tate is really coming across as a vidictive malicious person only doing this out of spite.

?

He's doing this to make money.

he is also doing to create confusion over who is in the band.

Yeah, there is no doubt this is about money, but there is a much darker side to it all.

The name Geoff Tate should carry enough weight on its own. Brand that! Hell, if he was Queensryche, as he claims, then his name should actually carry more weight.

Eyesore wrote:

Yeah, there is no doubt this is about money, but there is a much darker side to it all.

The name Geoff Tate should carry enough weight on its own. Brand that! Hell, if he was Queensryche, as he claims, then his name should actually carry more weight.

True dat!

It's definitely about money, but it also carries a darker tone coming from Tate...a tone of desperation and low-self esteem ("ME ME ME"). He's being vindictive, smarmy, and a little nasty of top of it...IMO anyway.

Like I said, if he thinks he was the brains, heart and soul of the band, then prove it by outdoing them musically instead of the way he seems to be going about it.

IMO, both parties should abandon all talk of the lawsuit & only talk about the new music & touring plans they have...that's it. May the best band win...

I would not be interested in buying anything tate comes up with.

brokentulsa wrote:

I would not be interested in buying anything tate comes up with.

I won't go that far, and I am one of the few people on the planet that not only bought his solo album but actually enjoyed it.

manny wrote:

brokentulsa wrote:

I would not be interested in buying anything tate comes up with.

I won't go that far, and I am one of the few people on the planet that not only bought his solo album but actually enjoyed it.

Yeah, his solo debut is not bad...

Another one here who liked his solo album (the one he released as Geoff Tate, not the ones he's been releasing as Queensryche ). I knew in advance that it wasn't metal, which was probably key - if you go in expecting anything remotely resembling Queensryche then you're going to be disappointed.

Citanul wrote:

Another one here who liked his solo album (the one he released as Geoff Tate, not the ones he's been releasing as Queensryche ). I knew in advance that it wasn't metal, which was probably key - if you go in expecting anything remotely resembling Queensryche then you're going to be disappointed.

I hope common sense prevails and he releases the album under his own name

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

manny wrote:

brokentulsa wrote:

I would not be interested in buying anything tate comes up with.

I won't go that far, and I am one of the few people on the planet that not only bought his solo album but actually enjoyed it.

Yeah, his solo debut is not bad...

Not bad, not great. Maybe not even really good. Just okay, I guess.