I don't like Freddie Mercury at all.Mick and Tyler are much better than this guy.

Personal tastes aside, Freddie's reign as king rock frontman is a fact. Watch Live Aid - no one else came close.

A stunt with a rope?....how about checking out Mick at the Paris show of 76'...that's a stunt with a rope...

that got copied by Paul Stanley on a late 1990's tour.

Mick is the man...hey I seen that picture on the second post...I always thought Mick was short...my God...unless he was standing on a step...looks like he has a couple of inches of height over Tyler.

PECMAN

This thread is so bad I refuse to post on it!

D'oh!

Elvis, Otis, and Mick were the king front men. Tyler and guys like Mercury aren't even in the same class. No way, no how. Rod Stewart in the late 60's early 70,'s was also very good.

Tyler started watching the Stones live thinking I can do that, too. Well, o.k. If you look at any Aerosmith pics he must have had at least for the last 25 years permanently near-death-encounters. This means, next Thursday the Stones will announce the tour schedule for 2032.

They are both great front men. I love them both.

JaggerFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Personal tastes aside, Freddie's reign as king
> rock frontman is a fact.

No, it's not. He did appeal to some people for a few years...

I used to be a big Queen Fan, and I used to rate Freddie Mercury as the best frontman; then I discovered the Stones and I've watched my first Stones live VHS (already owned all Queen's VHS), and I've never felt like watching Queen live ever since. Mick just tops big time Freddie Mercury, Steven Tyler and everyone else out there. Jagger really is the man, the best. Now, this is a fact.

Don't understand the Freddy Mercury hype. Queen was never as big as the Stones so why would Freddie be more revered than Jagger? He may have had more pure singing ability than Jagger but Jagger has a great rock voice, can sing in many different falsettos, has great stage presence, can often make a live song better than the original and is a better song writer in my opinion.

I like Tyler and Aerosmith too but I always thought Tyler was a "poor man's Mick Jagger".
Kind of like comparing Tom Selleck to that other guy that looked and acted like him- had that show Matt Houston in the eightees. Certainly not a knock on Tyler, he just isn't Jagger.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-20 05:17 by FrankM.

MsTuesday Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the best frontmen in the world
> the experts put
>
> 1.) Freddie Mercury (cant argue with that one)
> 2.) Mick Jagger
> 3.) Steven Tyler
>


Who exactly are these "experts"?

----
Don't understand the Freddy Mercury hype. Queen was never as big as the Stones so why would Freddie be more revered than Jagger? He may have more pure singing ability than Jagger but Jagger has a great rock voice, can sing in many different falsettos, has great stage presence, can often make a live song better than the original and is a better song writer in my opinion.
------

But so did Freddie Mercury, he had an awesome stage prescence, and can sing in many different falsettos as well.
Mick Jagger is my favorite, but Mercury was very good.

[[FEAR; BUILDS WALLS.]]

Pecman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Mick is the man...hey I seen that picture on the
> second post...I always thought Mick was short...my
> God...unless he was standing on a step...looks
> like he has a couple of inches of height over
> Tyler.


Tyler and Joe Perry are both actually rather short. I remember reading somewhere that they were both like 5'7" or there abouts. Give or take an inch. Which is quite short in my opinion.

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [www.timeisonourside.com]

that face just screams "plastic surgery!"
tyler's look was distinguished the way he was, a little jaggerish, but his own.
Now he looks like a heavily augmented hollywood starlet, I just can't figure out who.

i met steve and joe a few times...and was a little surprised as how relatively 'short' they both were..(i'm 5' 11", not a giant myself) but standing right with them you get a perspective)

i will say i was even more surprised, and impressed by, at how mellow, gracious and loving they were to fans who would come up excitedly...very quick with a hug and personal face time for fans...very good spirited and nice people.

Mick's comment to that woman Bebe ..ell(?) when talking her into a little ride. 'Why go for the copy when you can have the real thing?'

was mick referring to Don Covay? cause HE knows that's the real thing.
no keith without berry; no jagger without covay. one way of looking at things, as far as original influences and stylists go.

He was speaking of Bebe Buell (sp.?) being with Tyler not himself. Mick eventually got her. She is Liv Tyler's mother.

Mick Jagger is the ultimate icon of Rock and Roll. The elemental Rock Star. Many have tried to pattern themselves after him – none more outwardly than Steve Tyler – but these people are facsimiles…the original still stands.

Jagger is the front-man of the greatest Rock and Roll Band ever.

Tyler is the front-man of a good rock band that had some great songs [and some fine albums – none in the league of the Rolling Stones' best works] in the 1970’s and achieved their commercial apex in the early 90’s with commercialized power ballads.

Jagger will be remembered for eternity as the greatest front-man ever.

In the Pantheon of Rock Gods Jagger stands at the forefront. Tyler does not even stand in the front row. Daltrey, Plant, Morrison, Bono, Bowie [with the Spiders], Iggy Pop, Johnny Rotten, Sprinsgsteen [with the E Street Band], Marc Bolan and Freddie Mercury [both in Europe, not in the States]…not to mention James Brown and Otis Redding and Wilson Pickett and Little Richard…all supersede Tyler.

In the History of Rock and Roll Jagger is a Scripture. Tyler is a footnote.

To mention Jagger and Tyler in the same breath is absurd. Steven Tyler would be the first to agree.

Diamond rings, Vaseline, you gave me disease, well, I lost a lot of love over you.

JaggerFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Personal tastes aside, Freddie's reign as king
> rock frontman is a fact. Watch Live Aid - no one
> else came close.


Fact my arse!, Mick is the greatest frontman ever in a rock band, he is up there with Elvis and James Brown as an entertainer.

Freddie Mercury's vocal skills were far above anything Mick has ever demonstrated. His skill, passion for performing and credible believablity puts Post Steel Wheels Jagger to shame.

I'm a Mick Fan - but I'm an honest one.

The Stones have the greatest frontman in rock - as Mick has always been the strongest link in the group. But his complacency and indifference lose him points with me. I'd never seen such ambivalence in either Tyler or Mercury.

The only reason why Mick gets away with it - he's Mick Jagger for Christ's sake.

Sorry, but as a matter of fact Mick Jagger still today as a frontman put anybody else to shame by a very long shot. Indifference? He really works his ass of on stage, even on the very same day his father died!

Mick number one and will always be.

JaggerFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Freddie Mercury's vocal skills were far above
> anything Mick has ever demonstrated. His skill,
> passion for performing and credible believablity
> puts Post Steel Wheels Jagger to shame.
>
> I'm a Mick Fan - but I'm an honest one.
>
> The Stones have the greatest frontman in rock - as
> Mick has always been the strongest link in the
> group. But his complacency and indifference lose
> him points with me. I'd never seen such
> ambivalence in either Tyler or Mercury.
>
> The only reason why Mick gets away with it - he's
> Mick Jagger for Christ's sake.

Freddie Mercury connected with British crowds possibly more then Mick but only in the Uk, he never matched Mick worldwide, Mick set the bar and nobody has surpassed him even today as a frontman of a rock band , he is as good today as far as capturing an audience attention as he ever was, FACT!

> he is as good today as far as
> capturing an audience attention as he ever was,
> FACT!

... because he's Mick Jagger. He could stoll onstage, fart and leave and he'd have the same attention as if he'd rocked out like the days when he actually EARNED his reign as King Rock Frontman.

JaggerFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > he is as good today as far as
> > capturing an audience attention as he ever was,
> > FACT!
>
> ... because he's Mick Jagger. He could stoll
> onstage, fart and leave and he'd have the same
> attention as if he'd rocked out like the days when
> he actually EARNED his reign as King Rock
> Frontman.
Bullshit! he does @#$%& EARN it, the man gives it his all during his performance, he may not sing as well but the effort and result is there I can't believe you can't see that

True, Jaggers performance is really exceptional and always has been.

JaggerFan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Personal tastes aside, Freddie's reign as king
> > rock frontman is a fact.


No offense but "reign as king rock frontman" is a personal taste, not a fact at all......how do you possibly determine this "reign as king" objectively? .....from music critics?....that sounds like personal tastes........and you do understand the irony of calling Feddie Mercury a king right? his band is Queen

Ahaha.
I bet we could all aruge about this
for hours at a time.
No one really knows whos the
greatest of them all.
We may favour some,
and claim that they are the BESt, or GREATEST person alive
but thats really just our opinion
But what we can all agree on
is
"Its only Rock n Roll" and We all like it.

[[FEAR; BUILDS WALLS.]]

uhh..the answer's in my name..haha



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-21 01:33 by MICK_JAGGER.

Don't shoot me , i'm only da singer in aerosmith