>mfw Queen has tons of great albums and deep cuts but /mu/ ignores them because they still think Queen is just a normie reddit singles band
sure, faggot
they have like 2 great albums. don't kid yourself.
a night at the opera is kinda solid
what else should I listen to?
>>64056151
First 3 albums senpai
>>64056151
Sheer Heart Attack
he said posting his favorite facebook frog
There are far better hard rock bands, far better pop rock artists/bands, and far better prog bands.
I'm not going to listen to mediocre watered down shit that even fucking Rolling Stone knows isn't worth listening to.
>>64056163
>>64056176
thanks lads will get on that shit
>>64056104
even at their best they're normie tier wew
someone posted a positive thread about Hot Space yesterday, so /mu/ will apparently like anything
Queen was one of the first bands I was a fan of as a teenager, but in all seriousness the only actually good albums they made are Queen II and A Night At The Opera
Sheer Heart Attack, The Game, Jazz and Innuendo are also decent, but they really were a singles band
Queen II is a totally awesome album, though, and one of the greatest rock albums of the 70's
>>64056237
i don't understand what this chart is even trying to convey
>>64057680
it will never stop being funny how much Rolling Stone despised Queen, but I don't really see the relevance of the whole chart - probably it's trying to point out that Rolling Stone is not afraid to give some "overrated" albums mediocre scores
>>64056104
Enjoy listening to a band that stopped being relevant 40 years ago
You know, I am not saying Night at the Opera or Queen II aren't good. It's just that I could as well go and listen to the whole Elton John discography.
>>64056151
Sheer Heart Attack
>>64057850
why the fuck would you choose to not listen to music you like because they are not "relevant?"
not saying that you like queen but your point here makes literally no sense.
They have at least 4 really good albums and then a handful of great singles after that. I'd say Queen is doing alright.
