Elton John vs Queen in the 70s

I don't know if that's necessarily true. Queen always suffered from comparisons to more 'manly' rock bands. Even as a small child, I heard the rumor that Freddie Mercury was gay.

Elton's bisexual rumors in the late 70's hurt him as well. He was a massive star in early and mid-70's, then in 1976 he admitted he was bi, and it had an impact on his career.

But look at what lasts and is remembered. Is Steely Dan or Boston remembered or revered? Not really.

I wouldn’t say Queen were necessarily considered pure novelty like Kiss - mainly because of Bohemian Rhapsody which I think everyone appreciated as artistically creative. But definitely appealed to a similar straight boy fan base. Elton John was definitely considered higher art.

Thanks R1 and R2

Like a lot of people my age, I first became aware of that era of music due to my parents listening to "classic rock" stations in the car plus that was the music we had in the house.

EJ seems like his work was more in the traditional vein, with a decent number of soft, thoughtful songs versus Queen, whose greatest hits seem like something you'd play at a party or to work out to.

Queen was big for sports. EJ was definitely not sports.

I think Queen’s popularity developed in retrospect when they started playing “We Will Rock You” and “We are the Champions’ at sports stadiums and arenas.

Elton John was the biggest star in pop rock and Queen a major act. Clearly their music stood the test of time (and your parents are lame, OP). Coming out did not harm John’s career as he himself has attested.

Elton’s career took a sharp dive after the Rolling Stone article. It might have happened anyway, but there’s no way to really know. On the other hand, despite his marriage, he was never a paragon of heterosexual energy.

I was 10 in 1970, and remember Elton John being huge. Bennie and the Jets, Saturday Night, etc. I didn't care for the quieter songs, but they seem to have been huge and very family and older people friendly, so Elton crossed age barriers much more than Queen did.

The first time I really remember being aware of Queen was when a radio station played one of their songs that went, roughly, "You suck my mind, I blow your head."

Not the same audiences.

I was in high school when they both started to get popularity. Elton was definitely the more palatable of the two, and, pretty much everyone liked him at the time. Boys. Girls. Parents. He was prolific, and his songs were smooth enough to not offend anyone, yet still had a little bit of an edge, probably because of Taupin's lyrics. Queen, on the other hand? I hated them then, and time has not changed my opinion of them at all. I know this is a nit, but, on the musician credits for their fist few albums, they made a point of saying "NO ONE PLAYED SYNTHESIZER!" I then read an interview with Mercury in which he explained that if the band could not play an instrument in the studio, then they should not include it. Everything should should be done live, and for real. And I thought: then what about the overdubbing and multitracking vocals? THAT can't be done live, it is a studio creation, and I can't explain why it pissed me off. But it did, and I've hated them ever since. I don't care for their music, either. I have no way to prove this, but I suspect that Elton appealed to everyone, whereas Queen seemed to appeal more to the less intelligent and lower classes, the white trash and the rednecks Witness their resurrection from Wayne's World. That is the kind of person I see being a big fan. People who don't know any better and are just awed by the spectacle.

I think it's probably true that EJ (at his peak) was both more critically respected and had a large female fanbase. Both my mom and stepmom were big fans and had several of his albums.

Queen were more like Boston - huge arena anthems that were enormously popular but not a lot of respect from critics. I think that all started to change a bit after Freddie Mercury died.

Steely Dan are in another category altogether. They got a lot of play on classic rock stations, but they always had a cryptic, intellectual aura that set them apart (and they were always critical favorites, as you can see from checking the Village Voice Pazz & Jop critics polls from the 70s).

Elton John was a pop star. Queen was a rock band with heavy metal cred. You heard EJ on AM pop music stations. Queen was played on FM rock stations.

Queen turned out to be more influential on GenX musicians, which is another reason for their elevated status post-Freddie.

Queen’s production was considered over the top and fussy, especially once the DIY punk rock era came in. They were campy despite rocking quite hard, but still managed to have a fan base among young men at the time. They were so theatrical and melodramatic that it almost felt like a joke at times, but that is part of what made them so genius.

Elton John was mainstream pop/soft rock, also campy, but was more popular with mainstream audiences, like parents. Completely different audiences for sure, although people my age (almost 55) grew up with both.

Thanks all-- good perspective all around

Do you all remember "The Bitch Is Back" being controversial? I can't imagine radio stations in the South were all that happy to play in back in the 70s.

Or did they just bleep out "bitch" the way they do with "fuck" now.

I am your parents' age, YMF. I bought all of EJ's albums until GBYBR. I was in college when it came out, and every single guy in every single dorm room was playing it, so I didn't feel the need to buy a copy (I was more into the Beach Boys and the Kinks, with whom I'd lost touch in the '60s). It was during Watergate.

I was only barely aware of the existence of Queen until the late '90s, when I bought a new turntable and stacks of new old records. I had confused them with Kiss. There was an episode of Homicide: Life on the Street in which a kid shoots someone dressed as a member of Kiss for Halloween when they knock on his door and terrify him. Even then, I didn't know the difference. (I never really liked any of the groups who didn't bother to stick a "the" in front of their name.

I did like Steely Dan somewhat, though their later albums are the ones I like most (Aja, Gaucho, The Nightfly).

Elton was way more popular in my small universe than Queen. And Kiss didn't really exist.

r13, I remember hearing and enjoying The Bitch is Back, and among my teenish friends and I we probably thought it was naughty, but I don't recall any serious talk or controversy about it or bleeping of 'bitch.'

Here's a great YouTube video of that song!

When new Wave, Punk, etc. started up in 1976-1977 BOTH groups were considered old fashioned by the cool kids. It was Elvis Costello, Talking Heads, The Damned etc. with Bowie being the only performer who stayed cool after music changed.

That may have been the case back then and it wouldn't surprise me. But how the tables have turned (sort of)--Queen's music and image is more popular and loved than Elton's. Just look at their streaming and youtube sales. Bohemian Rhapsody has something like 1 billion views on youtube, which is insane.

For some reason a rivalry between Elton John and Queen has been trumped up on Datalounge. Why the fuck is that? Because Freddie Mercury and Elton John were both gay and flamboyant and both had biopics? Elton John and Queen, while in their heyday, were not associated with each other at ALL. They were two entirely different kinds of musical styles. So where does this Queen vs. Elton John shit come from?

By the way, Freddie Mercury and Elton John were good friends. There was no animosity between them at all. Here's something from Elton John's biography, about his good friend Freddie Mercury:

"Freddie had passed on November 24, 1991, and weeks after the funeral, I was still grieving. On Christmas day, I learnt that Freddie had left me one final testament to his selflessness.

I was moping about when a friend showed up at my door and handed me something wrapped in a pillowcase. I opened it up, and inside was a painting by one of my favourite artists, the British painter Henry Scott Tuke. And there was a note on the front from Freddie.

Years before, Freddie and I had developed pet names for each other, our drag-queen alter egos. I was Sharon and he was Melina. Freddie's note read, "Dear Sharon, I thought you'd like this. Love, Melina. Happy Christmas."

I was overcome, 44 years old at the time, crying like a child. Here was this beautiful man, dying from AIDS, and in his final days, he had somehow managed to find me a lovely Christmas present.

As sad as that moment was, it's often the one I think about when I remember Freddie, because it captures the character of the man. In death, he reminded me of what made him so special in life."

In the UK in the 70s Elton John, because he was bland and inoffensive, appealed to the crowd who didn’t really like hard or heavy rock. Queen had more of a hard rock following, many of whom were oblivious that Mercury was gay because it wasn’t really something discussed back then. Bowie was the one who was considered really out there and garnered the attention for the way he looked and saying he was bisexual. Elton John pretended to be straight and Freddie Mercury just stayed quiet.

With punk in ‘76 there was a reaction against all the bombastic ‘big’ bands and as R16 states only Bowie ( and Bolan to an extent ) was considered cool.

Elton John was bigger in the US being so mainstream radio friendly. Queen really lifted off into the stratosphere after Live Aid because they blew everyone off the stage. Wasn’t that keen on them but it was undeniable.

Queen had 4 or 5 epic rock songs, unforgettable. Elton probably had 8-10 unforgettable pop hits. They're both great.

"Elton John and Queen, while in their heyday, were not associated with each other at ALL"

They had the same manager back in the seventies, they knew each other, and they had films coming out at roughly the same time. So yeah, they're associated.

"They had the same manager back in the seventies, they knew each other, and they had films coming out at roughly the same time. So yeah, they're associated."

Not musically. Musically, they had nothing in common at all. Their fan bases were entirely different. There was no rivalry between them, ever. So it's weird that some people (rabid Queen fans, it would seem) are trying to make it look like they were in a competition with each other. But there was never any competition between them. They were two different musical acts, doing their own thing.

I was a white suburban nerdy teenager during their US heydays in the 70s, and I wasn't wild about either. I liked Elton because he had some good solid enjoyable hits, but I didn't like Queen because I thought their sound was so artificial that they sounded like singing synthesizers. I thought they were hardly better than the generic disco that dominated the airwaves for so long, and BTW I hated disco like all the other nerds. Awful overprocessed music for slutty cokeheads, we thought, snotty little virgins that we were.

I only learned to appreciate Queen later in life. When I started listening as a grownup, after Mercury left us, I realized their music was incredibly original and complex, Freddie was perhaps the best frontman ever, and that it spoke to me as an adult gay. Plus, they had an astrophysicist and an electrical engineer in the band, how can you not love a band with nerds playing.

Oh yeah, my feelings towards Elton haven't really changed over the years.

Good, solid songwriter and musician, but he's never captured my heart and never will. I think he can live with that.

Thanks, R28. I knew that Elton John collected paintings by Tuke but had never heard the story if the gift from Freddie Mercury.

I was aware of Queen and knew that they were showy and bombastic, easily mixed in my mind with a lot of other groups of the period and I never paid attention. It seemed mainstream stuff, music for a teen jock having a moment of feigned angst. The only song that surprised me pleasantly was the less showy Under Pressure.

Elton John certainly did some shitty songs and shitty concert schtick, and some of them were among his biggest hits. I never liked belted out rock songs about parties, for instance, but his voice on the better conceived songs stood out - a rare quality of hearing a song as if for the first time that you have heard hundreds of times. His better songs have a cinematic quality and they hold up well relative the vast majority of other things I heard then.

Thanks again all-- this is great, you're all for the most part confirming each other, which is interesting.

To clarify, R18, I'm not trying to stir up an EJ vs Q rivalry on DL, was just curious because I'd watched both biopics and because Queen seems to still be enjoying so much success and is currently well-regarded, so I was surprised to hear four adults whose recollections I generally trust say that Queen was considered sort of cheesy back in the 70s and Elton John wasn't-- I would have guessed it was the other way around if you'd asked to place a bet.

Different appeal and music. If they shared management then that actually might have led a real effort to place them in different niches.

Sir Elton started out almost folkish and ended up semi-glam He had an earlier, longer peak career with a broader appeal. Queen was not quite metal, not quite prog rock, so they were easily out of it when new wave, eg al came in despite “Under Pressure” with Bowie, which is my favorite of their songs. The earlier stuff was pretty vapid and the staying power of something as bad as “We Will Rock You” is not complement to them musically.

Sir Elton was already past his peak when he came out as bi. It’s a good example of someone hurting their appeal by pointing out the obvious. Liberace would have lost his old lady fans if he had done something similar.

Competing them to, e,g., A mid cult band like Steely Dan (who still have devoted fans) or a short lived, powerpop garage band like Boston is ridiculous. Different styles and appeals.

I can speak to the 80s... Elton John was on heavy MTV rotation when I was a kid. I never really liked his songs but he was big whereas Queen had less of a presence. They were big too of course but not on MTV like Elton John. I know Queen mainly since they became cool in the last few years.

In the US Queen peaked with The Game in 1980, before the MTV era. In the UK they continued to be popular through the 80s. Elton had some mild success in the MTV era but it wasn't really anything like his 70s superstardom.

are we talking in US or UK?

i come from a family where each person had their particular faves shading towards what they thought "good music" was about. most people listened to Queen, but Elton was a piano-rock guy and so owning him was less about his image or perceived sexuality, and more about how one felt about pianos. most people also listened to hard rock, but definitely considered Queen as "rock". perhaps less so for Elton, but people still played him and my family owned both. They also owned Kiss, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, Fleetwood Mac, Heart, Journey, Led Zeppelin, Santana, Janis Joplin and a bunch of other stuff. My granny even went to a Van Halen concert in the Roth era, and watched him do the splits and rip his pants strategically down the center crotch. she thought it was a blast.

as i child, i was into Elvis (seriously) and the Beatles. getting older, it was The Doors and then grunge. all music from "before my time".

people are not as boxed in as current musical genres would have one think. also, people didn't care as much about what the person's image was (unless it was just for copying their style of dress. nearly every chick around that era wore those Stevie Nicks boots and batwing dresses) or what those people were up to in their day-to-day. they just listened to music, and like it or didn't like it. the video era changed all of this, i believe. and not for the better.

It's kind of incredible how Elton John has stayed relevant the past 50 years. If you mention other big music stars like Jackson Browne they have no idea who you're tlaking about.

But everyone knows who Elton John is.

R31 it’s because of stuff like Lion King and all that kind of crap that has made him a gazillionaire — but at the same time has sent his cool cred down to about zero (although he never had much to begin with, except for maybe very early in his career).

Queen’s music was much more edgy and fun unlike that queen Elton’s music. They were not as high maintenance either and were actually sexy.

Elton seemed "cool" (to me) until GBYBR. I never really liked that album, though I'd bought all of the ones that came before.

[quote] I have no way to prove this, but I suspect that Elton appealed to everyone, whereas Queen seemed to appeal more to the less intelligent and lower classes, the white trash and the rednecks Witness their resurrection from Wayne's World. That is the kind of person I see being a big fan. People who don't know any better and are just awed by the spectacle.

People weren't just awed by Queen's spectacle, R9. I think even John Elton would agree that Farrokh Bulsara had a far better voice :). As a Millennial myself, I heard Bulsara's vocals before I saw any vids of him perform. The voice blows you away. Elton has a good voice and it was well-suited for the type of songs he performed. But Bulsara was on a completely different level in terms of vocals.

Are you trying to be clever, r35, using Freddie Mercury's birth name? Because you're coming across as an idiot. Elton John's real name is Reginald Dwight, not John Elton, stupid.

Elton did not appeal to everyone. he was never "rock". he played a piano in honkytonk style, but wasn't that either. he was his own thing. his stuff borders on easy listening, at times and more the older he gets.

Queen was rock, but done it a music hall Gilbert & Sullivan style. it wasn't niche either, it was just a different slant to rock music. i don't think anyone thought of them as a "gimmick" band, but real, actual musicians. somewhat like Jethro Tull or Yes--different takes on what "rock" sounds like.

some rock music borders on classical for complexity and tone, even theme. saying it is for the "unintelligent" is like saying that Beethoven listeners are dumbasses.

"Bohemian Rhapsody" was a huge deal, but it's true Queen was not highly respected in the US as much as it was in Europe until the sports stadium thing.

Elton was as huge in the US as he was in Europe.

It's always amazing to me how hot Freddie Mercury became when he cut his hair, started working out, and grew the mustache to hide his cleft palate scar (which also wound up de-emphasizing his huge teeth). He was very unattractive when he started out, and then became a kind of gay fantasy type.

R39: that look your talking about, around the time of Another Bites the Dust with the short hair, mustache, wife beater and tight jeans was straight out of Cristopher st. He was giving us hints back then.

From "The Game" inner sleeve. I believe in the Rolling Stone review of the album, the look was described as "Christopher Street proctologist."

"Queen’s music was much more edgy and fun unlike that queen Elton’s music. "

What was "edgy" about Queen's music? And why was it more 'fun" than Elton John's? It's so stupid to compare them because they were nothing alike musically.

Well, Queen did have a record that advocated smoking marijuana when you played it backwards.

YMF, what R1 and R2 wrote is correct. I'm a decade younger than your parents. My friends in high school (some of whom were from Queens) and I listened to Queen. They were more than a novelty act like Kiss. I can remember discussions about Elton John's bisexuality, but I don't recall anyone I knew making disparaging remarks about him or about Freddie Mercury. And "poofta" was bandied about a lot. We got that term from Monty Python.

[quote] Are you trying to be clever, [R35], using Freddie Mercury's birth name? Because you're coming across as an idiot

Oh dear, someone dared to use someone’s “birth name”. Find something more important to pearl-clutch about, hysterical “idiot” @ R36.

r39. Freddie never even used his own private gyms in his houses. His friends did, but not him. This is a fact, according to interviews with his friends. Cleft palate scar? Where have you that heard from? Freddie had four additional front teeth.

What's frustrating about this discussion is that the modern music industry doesnt seem to be looking for the next Elton John or the next Queen.

They want flashes in the pan, boy bands and pop tarts, sexy untalented performers who will put out and who wont read their contracts too carefully, and who will record whatever they're given. They are NOT looking for singer-songwriters like Elton or Mercury, or self-directed pre-existing bands like Queen, but those are the acts that will have long careers and keep making money for decades.

I dont know how Adele got past their short-sighted quick-buck standards.

Agreed R47. I keep hoping that some sort of underground music scene will spring up on TikTok or something. Just singer-songwriter types, although there's an argument that the old school music industry types pushed all of these up and coming acts in the 60s and 70s so that they actually churned out hits or something better than what they were creating when they first got "discovered"

It's funny with Elton John--was talking with a friend today who correctly pointed out that for many people my age, our initial encounter with Elton John was on Sesame Street./The Muppet Show (The Street has had some amazing artists on it though.)

Elton John had hits with some very beautiful melodies.

Melody isn't popular in today's pop music but times change.

I love Queen and Freddy Mercury's voice, but none of their stuff actually moves me the way a "Your Song" or "Daniel" does.

Elton John's first big hit was a pretty melody with an intimate message and I think that's the kind of material were he shines.

Queen vs Kiss is a better comparison. I think Queen's better imo.

Kiss...what a hilariously musically inferior band. But they could put on a show. That was what they were best at: showmanship. As musicians and singers, they were nothing.

Donald Trump has a bizzare obsession with Elton John. He has boasted several times that he has broken Elton John's attendance record at whatever venue he was speaking at. Elton is the very definition of success according to him.

There was also a story that he blasts Elton John on air force 1 so loud no one can talk.

I was in high school when Queen burst onto the U.S. scene (with "Killer Queen" I think). Others have correctly stated that Elton was a pop act whereas Queen was rock, so different fans and radio play (AM Top 40 vs. FM). Everyone in school was crazy about Bohemian Rhapsody (we used to sing it to each other in the hallways between classes....we had never heard anything like it before) and all of their following hits including, "Somebody to Love," "We Will Rock You/We are the Champions," etc.

I like Elton John too, but many of his songs were boring. I still think they are. I barely stayed awake through his movie and was grateful Richard Madden popped up as he did. I was wide awake after that!

I am astonished that anyone thought that Queen was equivalent to Kiss, which even then I considered a novelty rock act. Queen was head and shoulders above them in their style and complexity of music.

Elton John had already released his best studio albums* before "Bohemian Rhapsody" appeared in 1975. The stuff that was contemporaneous with BR, and what came after, was boring, as r53 opines. I never found any of it as good as his earlier records.

* Elton John (1970)

* Tumbleweed Connection (1970)

* Friends (soundtrack) (1971)

* Madman across the Water (1971)

* Honky Chateau (1972)

* Don't Shoot Me, I'm Only the Piano Player (1973)

* Goodbye, Yellow Brick Road (1973)

I wonder how many people [italic]started[/italic] listening with GBYBR.

GBYBR was probably where he peaked in popularity, so there were people who would not have been aware of him before, but his music decline really started there and his original fans became increasingly disappointed with him.

R54 That's a pretty spectacular run though.

Yeah, he was the top of the top for a while, but what's impressive about Elton is that he's kept plugging away for fifty years now. In a field where most people burn out quickly, both creatively and personally, he's still putting out new work.

I've never been a fan of his and I'm not a fan now, but damn. His career is really impressive.

I thought "Tiny Dancer" was better than anything Queen ever did. That song is so beautiful and timeless.

Elton was an ace singles artist until about 1975. Then it all suddenly went to shit.

Elton John's peak was 1975 with Captain Fantastic and Rock of the Westies both debuting at number 1 on the album charts (before soundscan).

R59,Elton's greatest singles were released in the 80s. I'm Still Standing, Sacrifice, Guess That's Why They Call It The Blues. He had a good run in the 90s also.

Neither Kiss nor Queen were novelty acts for several years when they first became popular.

I think Elton John was more interesting. He was a one-man band. Freddie Mercury was the driving force with Queen but it was both of Mercury and Queen. EJ was his own driving force.

R59 is rather full of shit. Only until 1975? Mary, please.

"Elton's greatest singles were released in the 80s."

I thought he best work was during the 70s. I still listen to his music. A lot of it never gets old.

Fuck you, r63.

R61 I think he meant artistically.

R61 those songs are all dreadful. Your point?

R68 is correct. All of those songs suck.

"I Guess That's Why They Call It The Blues" did not "suck." It was one of Elton John.s better later efforts.

[quote]"I'm Still Standing, Sacrifice, Guess That's Why They Call It The Blues.

"I'm Still Standing," is pretty awful.

But I think "Sacrifice," is a solid pop song. And "Guess That's Why They Call It The Blues." is fine.

"Blue Eyes" is 1982. I think it's a good one.

But there was a lot of crap in those years: "Candle in the Wind" etc. and frau pleasing junk like "Can You Feel the Love Tonight".

But I'd still rather listen to all of that, then most of what passes for music today.

R70, it sucked.

Freddie is still the King. His voice was outstanding and he wrote unbelievable good music. Bohemian Rhapsody will be remembered as a remarkable piece of work, there are academic disputes about his composer work at classical teaching music academies and universities.

Elton is great and a lot of his songs are already classics and I love them.

But Freddie is another league, like John Lennon and Paul McCartney.

Freddie was the first one to cross the boarder from Rock to Classic with Barcelona.

He prepared the way for Pavarotti, Domingo and Carreras when they first performed at the soccer WM 1990 at the Carcalla Therme near Rome. He gave the blueprint for this crossover spectacle.

A pity, that he was already gone, when the 1992 Olympic games at Barcelona were held, where his song was the hymn. He would have loved it.

"But Freddie is another league, like John Lennon and Paul McCartney."

I know you worship and adore him, but Freddie Mercury was NOT "in another league, like Lennon and McCartney." They could wipe up the floor with him musically.

[quote]He prepared the way for Pavarotti, Domingo and Carreras when they first performed at the soccer WM 1990 at the Carcalla Therme near Rome. He gave the blueprint for this crossover spectacle.

How exactly? I don't understand what you're saying here..

r75. Honey, Google will be your friend in this case.

Anyway, have a look here darling: NDR. de/kultur/freddie-mercury

A wonderful Hommage to him including a Professor of classic music with an amazing interpretation of Bohemian Rhapsody on the piano.

Elton John peaked artistically in the early 1970s. His self-titled LP may be one of the finest debut albums ever. And he had a string of amazing LPs that culminated with GBYBR. As his 'bisexuality' was revealed and his flamboyance increased, his once-formidable talent seemed to wane. I thought Caribou was just okay, Captain Fantastic tolerable, and Blue Moves so awful that I never bought another Elton John record again. Maybe he did good stuff later on that I'm unaware of, but many artists burn brightly, burn out, and then go on living on their laurels. I always thought he was the quintessential example.

I don't have any real opinion about Freddie Mercury or Queen, on the other hand, and the compare-and-contrast thing between them and Elton John seems really arbitrary. The only common denominator, I think, is singers who were coy about their sexuality. They're unrelated musically and commercially, and I'm inclined to doubt their fan bases overlapped much (based, at least, on what my friends and I were listening to and buying).

R74 Too many Queen fans try to draw parallels but Queen will never touch The Beatles

[quote]Honey, Google will be your friend in this case.

Sorry, but I'm seriously asking. I see nothing about the 3 Tenors ever singing anything by Queen. If you could direct me, I'd appreciated it.

R78, Queen is better imo. The Beatles put me to sleep.

[queen]Queen is better imo. The Beatles put me to sleep.

That's you.

Everyone has their own personal tastes, but The Beatles' place in pop music history is far, far above Queen's.

*[quote]Queen is better imo. The Beatles put me to sleep.