@U2 Forum

U2 => The Band => Topic started by: taddeorospus on January 06, 2014, 03:14:12 AM

Title: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: taddeorospus on January 06, 2014, 03:14:12 AM
On every U2's forum I've visited, before or then comes the time for a topic called "Bono vs. Freddie."
There are many U2 fans who prefer Freddie's singing, but there are a really few Queen fans which prefer Bono.

I have to say that I love both bands, maybe U2 a little more (but in my teens I used to hate them and really love Queen instead).
To compare two singers like Bono and Freddie is hard, primary because their voice hasn't been the same all over the years.
Bono voice has at least six different periods. I mean from his vocal timber point of view.

1) Boy-October era; 2) War-Unforgettable fire; 3) Band aid - Rattle and Hum 4) Achtung Baby - Million dollar hotel OST; 5) All that can't leave behid - How do dismantle an atomic bomb; 6) No line on the horizon -  nowdays

Freddie Mercury had 5 different vocal shapes:

1) Queen I - A day at the races; 2) 1978 - 1980; 3) 1980 - 1986; 4) The Miracle - Barcelona; 5) Innuendo album and out takes for Made in heaven

About Bono, I prefer Bono's singing in Band-Aid Rattle and Hum era, Achtung baby era, and nowdays era. Nowdays he has even learnt to sing properly (I mean his technical skill is good).
About Freddie, I prefer Freddie's singing in 1980-1986 era, Barcelona album (but not the Miracle), and just a couple of songs on Innuendo (for example The show must go on... but on that album his voice got generally "thin", I guess for the desease). People use to think that Freddie was a real technical singer, but he wasn't. He was just pure instinct like Bono was until he begun taking lessons when his voice seemed to be gone. They say Freddie never took vocal lessons (as Bono in his prime... though I think sometimes singers tend to hyde the truth, I don't know why), so you cannot say his singing was techical. Talking about himself, Freddie spoke about his envy for singers like Rod Stewart who had a better technic and took lessons.

About Bono vs Freddie, here's what I think.
Though Freddie's voice had a better range than Bono's, maybe even more power (but Bono's singing in his prime was really powerful), just by little I prefer Bono's timber and interpretation.
They are my two favourite singers of all time. It's hard to say who I prefer. Maybe Bono wins just by a little (50,1% vs 49,9%). I don't mind about range or technic, I'm talking about vocal-timber and interpretation.

(sorry for my English, guys)
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Tumbling Dice on January 06, 2014, 12:08:25 PM
Bono's a better songwriter than Freddie was.

Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Nico on January 06, 2014, 12:58:57 PM
Freddie had more power than bono and was comparable to robert plant. Plant and bono's voice burnt out after 15 years but bono adapted well and even has maintained a good level to this day. Freddie could belt it out throughout his 20 year career which is amazing. However the beautiful tone and "dusty Springfield esque" voice of plant and especially bono makes bono the best in my opinion.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: MASTER YODA on January 06, 2014, 01:02:44 PM
Bono.
More about preference. Bono has soul.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Tumbling Dice on January 06, 2014, 01:43:06 PM
Freddie's voice suited Queen's operatic style.

Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Doc_Holiday on January 06, 2014, 03:32:03 PM
I always thought Freddie was a technical singer... Interesting to know that he wasn't. His voice was truly something. Listening to some of his pieces still is breathtaking.

I won't compare them, the styles are too different
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: ZooClothes on January 06, 2014, 10:10:45 PM
I still get chills listening to the album "Made in Heaven"......esp. "It's a Beautiful Day"  8)
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: taddeorospus on January 07, 2014, 03:39:12 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bono's a better songwriter than Freddie was.

Well, I don't know. I guess they're equal. U2's songs take their shape in studio, with all the band playing. You can hear that on Achtung Baby Kindergarten. Bono doesn't arrive in studio with songs already written. And he knows more or less 6 chords.
Queen were more like a band in which all his members came from home with written songs. Their demos, in terms of melodies and chords, were almost the same as the album songs. Freddie was able to write the score for an operatic orchestra. You can hear that on Barcelona album, where he wrote the music for all instruments and played them on synthetizers.
U2 take a couple of years to record their recent albums, while Queen registered them in a couple of months. I mean that in two years you have more time to write many songs and then choose the very best.

What is certain is that Bono is a better lyricist than Freddie was.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: xy on January 07, 2014, 11:30:20 AM
On a personal level I prefer Bono.

But there's no denying Freddie was one of the all-time best singers in rock.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: EnduringChill on January 07, 2014, 04:36:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
On a personal level I prefer Bono.

But there's no denying Freddie was one of the all-time best singers in rock.
Yeahh, that's how I feel. It's hard for me to compare. I think it would be harder to compare their performance skills, though.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Shesgonnadreamoutloud on January 07, 2014, 06:30:14 PM
Ooh this is so hard....

I feel like Bono has the edge (no pun intended) of having a more soulful voice and really reaching out to you there while Freddie has pure power and just natural talent behind his voice...he makes it look so effortless
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Rodney T-M on January 07, 2014, 09:10:42 PM
Bono had a much heavier voice from the JT tour thru the Lovetown tour than Mercury ever had. I think Freddie M. is significantly overrated online; he was a great singer, but he was also a very affected and mannered singer and interpreter who could be irritating or shallow in his singing, and very often very campy. He was in no way an opera singer or anywhere near that quality; you listen to him sing "Barcelona" with a real opera singer and he has to yell a lot of it and sing from the throat. The thing about him too is that I've never seen him sing as well live as in studio; he almost always ducks the thrilling high notes. I still enjoy his singing, and he has an especially beautiful husky half-voice that he uses on stuff like "Melancholy Blues" which is very nice, and of course the belty anthems are great too, but he's not the be-all and end all of rock singers-I'd rank a lot of people over him for pure voice and interpretive qualities.
Bono in his best years was my favorite rock singer ever (1982-1994 or so, and his voice is most interesting live during the Lovetown and ZOOTV tours for me, since he uses so much timbral variation). He just had a gorgeous voice which I think was both extremely beautiful and which became very powerful. One could attack him for being over-angsty in his singing from Boy thru R&H, but it's not too big an issue since the songs he sang were appropriate for it. He didn't have as flexible a voice as Freddie because it was bigger and not so light, Bono sang very technically badly for a long time, and he just never had a reason to try to practice figurations and stuff. The thing that always astounds me is the fact that Bono went from an abysmal singer in 79-80 to a fine one by the recording of Boy, and that he just got better and better when he was so awful earlier. They got lucky that he had learned to sing before Boy and not after; it might not have been so big with the damnable caterwauling of young Bono on it.
I think Bono is the greater singer, because he had the most beautiful and riproaring timbre of anyone in rock in his heyday, while Mercury's voice, though great, was less beautiful and more campy than people commonly acknowledge.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: taddeorospus on January 10, 2014, 02:34:19 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think Bono is the greater singer, because he had the most beautiful and riproaring timbre of anyone in rock in his heyday, while Mercury's voice, though great, was less beautiful and more campy than people commonly acknowledge.

Like I said, there are more "periods" in Freddie's and Bono's vocal history. So you can say that Freddie's singing is campy until 1978 or so, but it's not campy in the next years. And it's in these years that is voice shone and became more beautiful (I'm talking, for example, about his voice in Under Pressure (ISOLATED VOCALS TRACK http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT_aLRxjOs4 ).

In Barcelona he didn't want to sound like an opera singer (like Bono don't want to seem an opera singer when he sings Pavarotti in Miss Sarajevo). So what an opera singer thinks about his operatic singing is not important, because he was singing like a rock singer is supposed to do. Here's Barcelona isolated vocals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SpwpjmMyok

Last, I think the paragon between their voices fits good, because their voices are not so different. Both are tenors, both have this beautiful crystal clear timbre a little bit rough. Both had a powerful voice in their best days. Both have a beautiful low register, high register and falsetto.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Nico on January 10, 2014, 02:51:39 AM
Both untouchable at their best
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: surit87 on January 10, 2014, 11:24:00 PM
I always thought of Freddie Mercury as a better entertainer than Bono. Bono on the other hand connects more with the audience emotion-wise. That being said, Freddie passed away when he was still in his prime so he will always be remembered as a brilliant singer and front man. Bono's voice has deteriorated to some extent over the past ten years, so people will somewhat take that into account and only mildly acknowledge his worth as a great vocalist.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: shanep on January 11, 2014, 11:21:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bono's a better songwriter than Freddie was.

A better lyricist, yes Bono was/is. I agree. Musically, I'm not so sure.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Rodney T-M on January 12, 2014, 12:23:38 AM
Freddie just has a thinner voice than I prefer and is generally very shouty on his higher notes later on. His voice just isn't as pretty as it's made out to be, except when it was annoying camp.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: PopMofo97 on January 29, 2015, 07:54:27 AM
I like both bands. I think Freddie and Bono are both geniuses, each in their own style.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Blueyedboy on February 02, 2015, 01:19:19 PM
As singers, Freddie wins hands down, as musicians each member of Queen may be better than their U2 counterparts. As a whole, U2 are all over Queen. They are one of the few bands where the whole is greater than the sum of their parts.

I've always seen Queen as a great singles band whereas U2 made great albums.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: fardreamer on February 02, 2015, 04:11:23 PM
U2 and Queen are 1 and 1a for me.

I think Freddie Mercury was the best rock front man ever. I think Bono might be the second best though.

Freddie definitely had the better voice. I tend to have a very close emotional reaction especially to Queen's later material, when he knew he was dying. A lot of it is very moving.

I totally adore Bono though. Bono always moves me.

Both such great singers and performers.

Freddie gone much too soon.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: sundaybd on February 03, 2015, 08:51:36 AM
I prefer U2's music overall, but Freddie was a better singer, songwriter (he wrote many solo songs, melody and lyrics and musical arranger) and a better showman. However I found queens music patchy at best, probably because having 4 different songwriters meant the music could often go in many different directions, not always good.

Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: jocu2 on February 09, 2015, 08:26:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I still get chills listening to the album "Made in Heaven"......esp. "It's a Beautiful Day"  8)

Hard to imagine that the song was from The Game sessions.

FWIW, I'm gutted to have missed out on seeing Queen with Freddie live. I went to the Tribute Concert in '92 (2nd row on the pitch at Wembley). After watching Live at Wembley on Tv in '86, I was desperate to see the band on their next tour.

Such a shame that one of musics greatest singers / performers was taken from us. Freddie and Elvis were probably the best showmen ever. Can you imagine being in the crowd with one of those on stage???
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: hrsan on February 24, 2015, 08:06:52 AM
Better vocalist:  Mercury
Better frontman:  Mercury
Better band as a whole: U2
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: mdmomof7 on February 24, 2015, 09:22:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Better vocalist:  Mercury
Better frontman:  Mercury
Better band as a whole: U2

Do you think Mercury's early death makes the parameters skewed toward him? Just wondering how it would be if U2 ended after the same duration. What would be the result then?
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: hrsan on February 24, 2015, 10:08:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Better vocalist:  Mercury
Better frontman:  Mercury
Better band as a whole: U2

Do you think Mercury's early death makes the parameters skewed toward him? Just wondering how it would be if U2 ended after the same duration. What would be the result then?

No, I don't think Mercury's death is any indicator, not for my opinion.  Even after U2's defining performance at Live Aid , it was Queen who still stole the show. 
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: bw on February 28, 2015, 07:40:23 PM
I think Bono is brilliant as a live entertainer. He's in an elite group with Plant, Jagger, Daltry, Stipe as rock's greatest leads...

But Mercury was in a class by himself. He was human rocket fuel...he could lift the venue off it's foundation. I've never seen anything like him. And I hope I never do...
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Doc_Holiday on February 28, 2015, 09:13:16 PM
Freddie Mercury without a doubt. He would never let his voice degrade like Bono did
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: THRILLHO on February 28, 2015, 09:42:50 PM
Freddie Freddie Freddie.

Bono is great, charismatic all that. But Freddie, imo, defined what it is to be a GREAT front man, performer, vocalist, etc. Bono's never gotten the crowd to eat out the palm of his hand the way Freddie could do in his sleep. Even in Queens disappointing era, *ahemthe80s* they were still AMAZING in concert, look at the Wembley performance. 

Yea, Freddie would of never let his voice degrade, even though he was a smoker, apparently.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Parsons on February 28, 2015, 10:33:57 PM
Never cared for Freddie or Queen at all .
             Bono by a landslide !
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: THRILLHO on February 28, 2015, 10:37:27 PM
you really can't deny that Freddies vocal are MUCH stronger than Bonos even in the late 80s peak.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: mdmomof7 on February 28, 2015, 10:45:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Never cared for Freddie or Queen at all .
             Bono by a landslide !

Queen was all right, but nothing close to U2 for me.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Volcanogirl on March 11, 2015, 05:03:52 AM
Freddie was a great entertainer. Bono has so many sides (as the Edge says ''he's a nice bunch of guys'').
I loved the MC Physto type !!
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: WookieeWarrior10 on March 23, 2015, 08:29:55 PM
Before I got back in to U2 I love listening to Queen, used to be my favorite band. Hard to call, both have great charisma and amazing voices...
Draw.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: erboe on March 25, 2015, 04:35:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Before I got back in to U2 I love listening to Queen, used to be my favorite band. Hard to call, both have great charisma and amazing voices...
Draw.
Couldn't agree more. I also listened to Queen a lot before I got more into U2, and I still really love Queens music. To me, Queen is Queen, and U2 is U2, and both bands were and are great on what they did. I can't imagine Bono singing Queens' music and vice versa :)
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: THRILLHO on March 25, 2015, 07:17:33 PM
o man Bono's voice doesn't <also, didn't> come close to Mercurys!!!!
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: skaertus on October 22, 2016, 09:27:00 AM
Well, although this is an old topic, I couldn't help noticing it.

It seems natural that most people in a U2 forum would prefer Bono to Freddie Mercury. Both are/were great singers, entertainers and frontmen. And they were in two of the biggest bands in the world. But they had different styles as well.

Now, while Bono is a great singer, his voice is nowhere near Freddie's. You may have your personal preference, but you have to agree that Freddie Mercury's voice is really unique and something else (http://consequenceofsound.net/2016/04/new-scientific-study-confirms-the-audience-freddie-mercury-had-an-unparalleled-singing-voice/). This can be especially noticed in the songs of the late era. Just listen to How Can I Go On, I Was Born to Love You or The Show Must Go On.

As for songwriting, Queen and U2 have different styles as well, but I am not sure whether Freddie Mercury or Bono are to be blamed for all the songs of their bands.

The lyrics in U2 songs are somewhat more consistent, but some are also very cliché: You could have flown away / A singing bird / In an open cage / Who will only fly / Only fly for freedom. Some of them also show a similar verse structure, such as: All that you fashion / All that you make / All that you build / All that you break / All that you measure / All that you feel / All this you can leave behind (which seems taken from Pink Floyd's Eclipse).

Some of Queen songs have really stupid lyrics (Bicycle Race). But some of them are really genius, such as Innuendo (If there's a God or any kind of justice under the sky / If there's a point, if there's a reason to live or die / Ha, if there's an answer to the questions we feel bound to ask / Show yourself, destroy our fears, release your mask) or The Show Must Go On, which has some lyrics very difficult to fit in any kind of tune (Empty spaces, what are we living for / Abandoned places, I guess we know the score / On and on, does anybody know what we are looking for / Another hero, another mindless crime / Behind the curtain, in the pantomime / Hold the line, does anybody want to take it anymore) and some metaphors (My soul is painted like the wings of butterflies / Fairy tales of yesterday will grow but never die / I can fly, my friends).

It is of course a matter of personal preference, but Queen's songs seem more complex, elaborate and sophisticated to me.

Now, on stage, Bono is a beast, one of the best frontmen in rock, along stellar guys such as Jim Morrison, Paul McCartney, Steven Tyler, Axl Rose, Ozzy Osbourne, Jon Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen, Kurt Cobain and even Elvis Presley. But the fact is that in every list of world's biggest frontmen in rock history, three names almost always come at the top, and among them Freddie Mercury is usually #1, followed by Robert Plant (#2) and Mick Jagger (#3), although sometimes they are interchangeable, but they rarely leave the top 3. Of course this is really very hard to measure, as all of them are great. Bono fronted the highest-grossing tour ever, with an average attendance of 66,000 people in 110 concerts. Freddie Mercury was the showman as Queen performed for some of the largest audiences ever, including stealing the show in some large scale rock festivals (Live Aid, Rock in Rio). You cannot measure or compare greatness.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: xy on October 22, 2016, 09:44:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Freddie Mercury without a doubt. He would never let his voice degrade like Bono did

His voice may not have changed as much as Bono's but you can hear subtle differences in 70's, 80's or early 90's Mercury. Also, Bono has about 10 years of age on Mercury now. Does anyone really think Freddie at 55 would sound the same ?
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: shineinthesummernight on October 22, 2016, 03:44:54 PM
Freddie (and Robert Plant, certainly) have more natural talent. Having said, that I think Bono wins due to the soul factor.  He's done a lot with what God's given him.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Smee on October 23, 2016, 05:46:01 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Freddie Mercury without a doubt. He would never let his voice degrade like Bono did

His voice may not have changed as much as Bono's but you can hear subtle differences in 70's, 80's or early 90's Mercury. Also, Bono has about 10 years of age on Mercury now. Does anyone really think Freddie at 55 would sound the same ?
Speculation is pointless. Fact is, at comparitive stages of their lives/Careers, Freddies voice blew Bono's out of the water...and im a way bigger u2 fan than i am a Queen fan.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: skaertus on October 23, 2016, 08:22:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
His voice may not have changed as much as Bono's but you can hear subtle differences in 70's, 80's or early 90's Mercury. Also, Bono has about 10 years of age on Mercury now. Does anyone really think Freddie at 55 would sound the same ?

Well, Freddie Mercury died at 45. Bono is currently 56. When Bono was 45 (shortly after the time of release of How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb), his voice was nowhere near Freddie's voice at the time of his death. And Freddie Mercury's voice blew Bono's away at the peak of both careers.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: riffraff on October 23, 2016, 08:29:51 AM
Freddie and Bono are SO different. Both super passionate, but very different. Freddie was wonderful. Freddie was a GREAT front man, as is Bono. I think Freddie could have been a great solo act...Bono needs U2. Not that that is a bad thing!

Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: skaertus on October 23, 2016, 08:30:45 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Freddie (and Robert Plant, certainly) have more natural talent. Having said, that I think Bono wins due to the soul factor.  He's done a lot with what God's given him.

This may be a little unfair to say.

Bono puts a lot of effort in U2 concerts, and he certainly has a lot of the "soul factor". In fact, sometimes Bono seems to do everything to please his audience.

But both Freddie Mercury and Robert Plant put out great concerts as well. What these artists did on stage was not just "natural talent". Just take a look at videos from Queen and Led Zeppelin concerts. Queen in the 80s and Led Zeppelin in the 70s, I mean. The real thing, not those after-life reunions. Freddie Mercury and Robert Plant dominated the audience and showed generations to come what a rock star should be. Queen and Led Zeppelin on stage were pretty much everything you could expect of a rock concert.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: skaertus on October 23, 2016, 08:35:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Freddie and Bono are SO different. Both super passionate, but very different. Freddie was wonderful. Freddie was a GREAT front man, as is Bono. I think Freddie could have been a great solo act...Bono needs U2. Not that that is a bad thing!
You never know. They both did some solo acts, but their solo careers never really took off.

Freddie Mercury had just two solo albums released before his death, and he had no real time to develop a career here. These albums had their share of success, but not in the level of Queen.

Bono has no solo career on his own, but has collaborated with a few artists. Some great things, including a duet with Frank Sinatra, but that does not make a solo career.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: xy on October 23, 2016, 09:05:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Freddie Mercury without a doubt. He would never let his voice degrade like Bono did

His voice may not have changed as much as Bono's but you can hear subtle differences in 70's, 80's or early 90's Mercury. Also, Bono has about 10 years of age on Mercury now. Does anyone really think Freddie at 55 would sound the same ?
Speculation is pointless. Fact is, at comparitive stages of their lives/Careers, Freddies voice blew Bono's out of the water...and im a way bigger u2 fan than i am a Queen fan.

You and skaertus , see my first post in this thread re : Freddie being better.

I'm just saying Bono has 10 - and counting - years on Freddie now. A lot can happen to a voice in 10 years. Plus Freddie didn't tour for the last few years of Queen - not touring helps.

It's also important to note Bono, like most rock singers, has aged vocally. On the other hand of the spectrum, there's guys like Freddie or Roy Orbison that can still sound great throughout their career.

Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: WookieeWarrior10 on October 23, 2016, 10:14:12 AM
Now that I'm older, and have "grown out" of Queen, (Hate to use that term, but couldn't think of anything else.) I think Bono is my favorite of the two. I prefer his voice, especially how it was utilized in the '90s, having a grittier sound. Lyrically, I think Bono is much better at writing meaningful songs... but I may need a refresher.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: kango on October 23, 2016, 02:00:41 PM
In those polls of greatest frontmen, Freddie Mercury is the only one who, when he comes in front of Bono, I think "I would have voted Bono but yeah, you can have that." And I'm not a Queen fan apart from the odd song.

I prefer Bono as his vocals can be so hypnotic, his songs so healing and powerful, and his lyrics speak to me more than anyone's. He actually writes about the real world whilst Queen - albeit with few equals as musicians - seemed to write overblown concept pieces that weren't really about what is going on in our world.

The problem (or brilliance) with Bono is that he is incredibly gifted in multiple disciplines but some of these fall outside music. So that distracts from his work as a musician and of course even loses him points in the respectability stakes. Freddie I think was pure music and if you sat him down at a piano to write an album / musical, he would come up with the goods whereas Bono would need collaborators or his band around him.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: skaertus on October 23, 2016, 04:14:16 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Now that I'm older, and have "grown out" of Queen, (Hate to use that term, but couldn't think of anything else.) I think Bono is my favorite of the two. I prefer his voice, especially how it was utilized in the '90s, having a grittier sound. Lyrically, I think Bono is much better at writing meaningful songs... but I may need a refresher.

Bono's voice is great, but Freddie's is technically superior. It is really hard to find a rock singer that can surpass Freddie Mercury's voice. Of course you may prefer the way Bono's voice sounds, but that is a matter of personal preference.

As for the lyrics, I honestly think U2 songs are overrated. I mean, some lyrics are good, but they pretend to be better than they really are. The lyrics in the latest albums contain so many clichés... some Queen songs have much more sophisticated lyrics, which are more layers of meaning.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: skaertus on October 23, 2016, 04:22:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In those polls of greatest frontmen, Freddie Mercury is the only one who, when he comes in front of Bono, I think "I would have voted Bono but yeah, you can have that." And I'm not a Queen fan apart from the odd song.

I prefer Bono as his vocals can be so hypnotic, his songs so healing and powerful, and his lyrics speak to me more than anyone's. He actually writes about the real world whilst Queen - albeit with few equals as musicians - seemed to write overblown concept pieces that weren't really about what is going on in our world.

The problem (or brilliance) with Bono is that he is incredibly gifted in multiple disciplines but some of these fall outside music. So that distracts from his work as a musician and of course even loses him points in the respectability stakes. Freddie I think was pure music and if you sat him down at a piano to write an album / musical, he would come up with the goods whereas Bono would need collaborators or his band around him.

Oh, come on. Bono is not "incredibly gifted in multiple disciplines". He is not Leonardo Da Vinci. And he does not distract himself. He is committed to social causes, and raises flags. But he is also a businessman and capitalizes a lot on that. Truth be told. There are superior musicians to Bono, but Bono knows very well how to market himself.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: WookieeWarrior10 on October 23, 2016, 06:16:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Now that I'm older, and have "grown out" of Queen, (Hate to use that term, but couldn't think of anything else.) I think Bono is my favorite of the two. I prefer his voice, especially how it was utilized in the '90s, having a grittier sound. Lyrically, I think Bono is much better at writing meaningful songs... but I may need a refresher.

Bono's voice is great, but Freddie's is technically superior. It is really hard to find a rock singer that can surpass Freddie Mercury's voice. Of course you may prefer the way Bono's voice sounds, but that is a matter of personal preference.

As for the lyrics, I honestly think U2 songs are overrated. I mean, some lyrics are good, but they pretend to be better than they really are. The lyrics in the latest albums contain so many clichés... some Queen songs have much more sophisticated lyrics, which are more layers of meaning.
If we are speaking technically, then Freddy's voice is clearly better, I agree. I just prefer my rock singers to sing with more grit, and Bono brings that to the table. I'm not going to pretend that you'll find much meaning behind any lyrics in U2's latest works. In the '90s, however, Bono wrote some incredible songs.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: skaertus on October 23, 2016, 08:03:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If we are speaking technically, then Freddy's voice is clearly better, I agree. I just prefer my rock singers to sing with more grit, and Bono brings that to the table. I'm not going to pretend that you'll find much meaning behind any lyrics in U2's latest works. In the '90s, however, Bono wrote some incredible songs.

Yes, as I said, it is a matter of personal preference. I like both Freddie and Bono, but I have to say I like Freddie better.

All U2 songs are meaningful. But I would expect the lyrics to be somewhat more sophisticated. At the same time, I found several layers of meaning in some Queen songs from which I would expect very little.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: mrsamrocks2 on October 23, 2016, 08:29:35 PM
I take Bono any time. He writes better songs and melodies, his lyrics are more meaningfull to me and he shows more variety in his singing approach. Live, Bono is and was (up to elevation even more I'd say) an amazing performer. To pull-off shows as varied as ZooTV, Elevation and Popmart takes a lot of talent as a frontman.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: skaertus on October 23, 2016, 08:47:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I take Bono any time. He writes better songs and melodies, his lyrics are more meaningfull to me and he shows more variety in his singing approach. Live, Bono is and was (up to elevation even more I'd say) an amazing performer. To pull-off shows as varied as ZooTV, Elevation and Popmart takes a lot of talent as a frontman.

Well, anyone has the right to express his own opinions. But Queen songs are lyrically and musically more sophisticated than U2 songs. Queen songs show much more variety than U2 songs; Bohemian Rhapsody, Innuendo, We Are The Champions, The Show Must Go On, Crazy Little Thing Called Love - these are all very different songs from one another. U2 does not have this variety.

As for the tours, ZooTV, Elevation and Popmart were very different, but because of their concepts. This has nothing to do with the frontman. Bono was there pulling up a great show in each tour, but I don't see how these different concepts would require much more from the frontman himself.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: craola on October 24, 2016, 02:04:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But Queen songs are lyrically and musically more sophisticated than U2 songs.
and infinitely more obnoxious. and even at his worst, bono never gets as cringey lyrically as crap like "we are the champions"
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: mrsamrocks2 on October 24, 2016, 11:35:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I take Bono any time. He writes better songs and melodies, his lyrics are more meaningfull to me and he shows more variety in his singing approach. Live, Bono is and was (up to elevation even more I'd say) an amazing performer. To pull-off shows as varied as ZooTV, Elevation and Popmart takes a lot of talent as a frontman.

Well, anyone has the right to express his own opinions. But Queen songs are lyrically and musically more sophisticated than U2 songs. Queen songs show much more variety than U2 songs; Bohemian Rhapsody, Innuendo, We Are The Champions, The Show Must Go On, Crazy Little Thing Called Love - these are all very different songs from one another. U2 does not have this variety.

As for the tours, ZooTV, Elevation and Popmart were very different, but because of their concepts. This has nothing to do with the frontman. Bono was there pulling up a great show in each tour, but I don't see how these different concepts would require much more from the frontman himself.
It's not because something is more sophisticated that it is better. In fact, with art, it tends to be the opposite.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: georgemccauley on October 24, 2016, 12:55:16 PM
Bono is incredibly soulful and has a great range to his voice, he can sing low, high with grit, without grit, with attitude, without attitude.... Bono officially has a higher vocal range than Mercury if you look for the facts you will find it.

Not saying Freddie is bad by any stretch, he was a great front man and a great rock singer. But I find his vocal performances all too samey for my liking. There is not enough variety with Mercury to make him superior to Bono,

U2 are a greater band for quite a few reasons, their longevity is a major factor.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Volcanogirl on October 25, 2016, 02:03:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bono is incredibly soulful and has a great range to his voice, he can sing low, high with grit, without grit, with attitude, without attitude.... Bono officially has a higher vocal range than Mercury if you look for the facts you will find it.

Not saying Freddie is bad by any stretch, he was a great front man and a great rock singer. But I find his vocal performances all too samey for my liking. There is not enough variety with Mercury to make him superior to Bono,

U2 are a greater band for quite a few reasons, their longevity is a major factor.
He is soulful, and i would love to hear him do more soulful stuff. And next to that he is an outstanding entertainer.
Title: Re: Bono vs. Freddie Mercury
Post by: Samdoyle1987 on April 20, 2017, 06:10:54 PM
Freddie  (with a range of F2 to F6!)had a superior range to bono (who has a range of  E2 to G#5). Bono did (does?) Have an excellent range, but not quite as expansive as Mercurys was at his peak. But of course range is not everything, and the quality of ones voice is far more important. I tend to think that bono has a slightly better voice that Freddie, just because of bonos emotion, passion and desperation that his voice conveys. Bono has one of the most effective and expressive voices I have ever heard. Think of the bitterness and regret in "one", the desperate and determined " wide awake" of Bad, the yearning and hope in "where the streets have no name". Freddie's voice was amazing also, (think of Barcelona, how can I go on, don't stop me now, and the legendary " prophet's song".  As songwriters, I find bono superior. I know this sounds pretentious, but bonos lyrics seem more "mature" than Freddie's. His songwriting can be very hazy and impressionistic (TUF), it can have a narrative appeal (ISHFWILF), and have a beautifully poetic nature as well (OTH). I find Freddie's writing to be good, but not particularly resonant.
I must say, Freddie had an amazing knack for melodies and catchy vocal hooks. There are so many catchy and unique sounding queen songs. So for creating a memorable melody, I must give the edge to Mercury.
As performers, it is hard to decide. Freddie was larger than life, eccentric and energetic. Bono is those things, but to a lesser degree. I find bonos live performances to create a genuine emotional connection with the audience, and he seems to go to a spiritual place for some songs. As a classic frontman, Freddie wins.  Its impossible to definitively say, but I slightly prefer Bono.