American Idol voters prove their ineptitude yet again

The surviving members of Queen have found a new “Somebody to Love.”

One-time “American Idol” runnerup Adam Lambert will be the classic rock band’s new lead singer, the singer told UK’s Daily Star.

The 30-year-old singer will be filling pretty big platform boots. Lambert has said that one of his idols was Queen’s original front man, Freddie Mercury, widely considered one of the greatest vocalists in rock history.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music-arts/adam-lambert-queen-lead-singer-filling-shoes-idol-late-freddie-mercury-article-1.1016781#ixzz1lMZpoHD3

This seems like a good choice. It's tough to think of many singers Idols or not who have the vocal range of Lambert, and to step into Freddie Mercury's shoes is a daunting task.

Meanwhile, whatever happened to the guy who won, the guy before that and I can't even remember who won before that?

I don't think anyone can replace Freddie Mercury and I don't see the point of trying. And ultimately this is a career downgrade, so I'm not sure why someone would do it.

I guess we'll see how it turns out. It's the rest of the group's decision, after all. Maybe they didn't want any competition for the groupies! LOL He'll probably be ok, I think they probably didn't want someone who sounded JUST like Freddie, because it would then be a cheap imitation. So they got someone who was different enough to not be mistaken for Freddie, yet not SO different as to be a shock. It will be interesting to see how it pans out... a big group changin lead singers doesn't happen very often, but sometimes, like when Jean Terrell replaced Diana Ross in the Supremes, I liked them BETTER. So who knows

I haven't listened to any of Adam Lambert's material after Idol but on Idol I mostly just remember wailing. I would think that would suit one of the big hair bands more than Queen.

This is definitely a career downgrade. Being the leader singer of Queen in 1978 is one thing. Being the lead singer of Queen in 2012 is totally different. The solo career that he wanted flopped, and so this is where he ended up.

I think the idea is that maybe Lambert can revitalize their popularity. It's a big gamble.. because in today's world, an older musical act has a REALLY hard time in the fickle United States record industry. Cher did it, Labelle's reunion made a bit of impact, but nothing huge. It's hard to know.

His first cd didn't flop at all, neither did the singles. I don't understand why he's doing this before giving his second album a chance.This doesn't make any sense at all. If he wants to cover a couple Queen songs fine, but this is basically a tribute band. He's a vocalist and doesn't really need a band. It also cuts the profits from him by doing it this way.

Isnt it a short term, concert series thing?

As far as I'm concerned, the only person to attempt to fill Freddie Mercury's platform boots, and not fail miserably while doing so, was Paul Rodgers (who was himself a big name at the same time when Queen was hitting their stride, what with being in Free and being a founding member of Bad Company)

Perhaps it's because this guy was hyped up as the second coming of Freddie Mercury from the jump, but I've never been able to embrace him like everyone else has. Unfair? I suppose, but I hate having people shoved down my throat as the next, best thing EVER (especially when they're being marketed as the 'second coming' of the irreplaceable).

Edited May 18, 201213 yr by VirginiaHamilton