Discussion in 'Odds & Ends' started by kiki, Feb 1, 2014.
Interesting 1975 article in Rolling Stone called The Durable Led Zeppelin.
Article Part 2
Article Part 3
Article Part 4
Article Part 5
Article - Final Part
I'm not going hunting around for other threads. In this thread, the intelligent among us recognize Zeppelin as a great band, just as we might acknowledge Andy Roddick as a great tennis player. No shame in Roddick's career, and he did win a slam, but he's no Federer or Nadal or Djokovic, just as Zeppelin is no Beatles, Stones, or Beach Boys.
Jagger didn't sing like a girl. Neither did the Beatles. I agree that the Beach Boys often sang like girls, but at least they didn't look them. But Roberta Plant both looked like a girl and sounded like a girl, and I've yet to see any documented evidence that he was not, in fact, a girl. Have you?
Jagger the machito lipcase was bedding Bowie around the same time Plant the girl was devastating any c.unt younger than 30 in dollarland and euroland,including oceánic $
The delusion and irk of Led Zepp haters not just makes me wonder but also makes me ask you
Do you remember laughter??
Not meaning BB or Beatles members were gay,just that they made girlish music,which can be as good as any other
Good point Borg,
But to me,even more than their individual talent they may have had,it is synergy the key word
While absolutely all bands,good or médium fight against themselves,the loyalty and chemistry of those four one piece men is what the legions of detractors cannot stand and brings out all the envy and irk that we are seeing so often
Semper Fidelis...until the end
What a standart of decency they brought into that sick world of supetstardom!!!
Chemistry and loyalty are well and good -- but it hasn't nothing to with good music. I could do with some more disloyalty and some better music out of these "guys".
It explains a lot of the amazing standarts of rock music set by Zeppelin
Well, first we need to know what those "standarts" are before go any further here.
the most complete and innovative band covering from folk, blues,gaelic,arabic and of course, hard rock
in terms of mere innovation, only Pink Floyd,Jimmy Hendrix and two or three more bands could ever get close.None of them were your beloved Beatles,Beach Boys and Stones, even if for a while the Stones could have really become a great band
I must have skipped school that day, as the saying goes.
I'm beginnning to think this a parody thread, wherein you intentionally get it all backwards.
It's the Beatles, Beach Boys, and Stones who were innovative. Zeppelin and Hendrix's main accomplishments were turning out a few fine songs amid all the noise. Both have a not particularly varied "one note" sound, no real range at all. Contrast that with the breadth and depth of the top three and one wonders how Zeppelin even got into this discussion at all.
Geez¡¡¡ if Zeppelin had something the others did not WAS THEIR SOUND and BEAT, which no other band could duplicate¡¡¡.Like it or not, it was unique and untansfereable.
did you ever listen to them? I doubt it.
If you were talking about those 4 bands(Beatles,Stones,B Boys,Led Zep) I'd say Led Zeppelin's sound is probably the easiest to recreate
Absolutely. I have all 4 of their great songs on iTunes, and listen to them regularly. Misty Mountain Hop perhaps the best one.
Well, it's certainly the most mindless one of all. Play hard and fast, and repeat.
Led Zeppelin listened to each other and found rock-and-roll’s most magical formula
rock-and-roll’s most magical formula
heycal and Midasol,Just read some of the excerpts that Borg number one is bringing us so to have a little clue of what we're talking here
"at the end it is 4 guys listening to each other"
Is there a better way to explain why they were a perfect,yet sensitive and so spiritual rock machine?
This is a good quote here.
I couldn´t agree more with Morello.Hated by the stablishment and loved by their many unconditionals.
Hated by the establishment? Rolling Stone put them at number 4 of best bands of all time, which is probably 3 or 4 notches above where they should be. They probably show up on other critic's 'best bands' lists of all time too.
RS spent decades vomiting their irk...now, when they are long time gone, they cannot be so stupid and ridiculous...yet, only ranking them at 4 shows an accumulated biass...
but that always happen with the great artists.Beethoven and Van Gogh, fi
If it's true they hated them at the time, maybe they're trying to make it up to them by ranking them higher now than they should be?
Two wrongs do not make a right.
I look at it from a different perspective.
Imagine you have had an historically bad relationship with someone.The funeral comes and your speech will probably try to accentuate some good features of this person but you will also most likely be unable to speak out all the good things that this person may have been deserved and that you really knew of him, you will just behave correctly not to sound stupid or unproper but you´ll try to keep things as cold as possible and will restrain from laudatory speeches.
This is human nature, maybe the example is not good but the sense of it is clear.
But how does this explain putting them at number 4 when they perhaps should be at number 8 or 9?
or why have them at 4 when they are number 1?
RS seems like tennis Channel, those funny fellas that have Pancho Gonzales at 22 all time...
Just saw a TV special on the 1960's that featured stuff on the the Stones, Beach Boys, and Beatles. Seeing it reminding me how truly superior these bands were compared to the likes of Led Zeppelin. I thought of this thread and laughed at festishists like Kiki actually comparing Zeppelin to the true greats...
The show really made how clear, again, how the Beatles in particular were revolutionary, the most original and innovative band ever. From perhaps Rubber Soul on, they completely changed rock.
But then, this is hardly news, is it?
The 60's yes, not the 70's.
Beatles did a good job in the 60´s, particularly with girls, and Zepp in the 70´s.Heycal, take it easy man.You are the absolute fetishist here.
Whatever you think about them,at least we can agree that they reinvented rock in a time when reinventing was the keyword
My Generation,California Dreaming,Hey Jude&Joe,Simpathy for Devil and Cocaine began sounding so MUCH different than before after Zeppelin,Floyd,Yes,Sabbath,Purple and Crimson took music by storm!!!
Oh Yeah,oh Yeah
There was a time when I could read rubbish like the post above and remember to laugh at the end. Now with your signature change, I have forgotten...
Can you claim I am wrong with an argument that can convince any mediocre IQ?
I thought your hatred was límited to Lz
Now I realize I was too narrow minded
I'm sure I could - but first I'd have to understand what you're trying to say.
I've been listening to Zeppelin for 30+ years. When I was a kid I would bungee tie a boom-box to the handle bars of my bike and blast Zeppelin all summer long. So don't call me a hater. I don't hate LZ, you or anyone else. All I'm saying, is that there are bands I like more than Zeppelin for various reasons - and that you often struggle to express yourself in a cogent manner.
Perfectly put. I too have listened to (and played) LZ songs for oodles and oodles of years. Great stuff.
There's simply no accounting for personal taste, that's all, and it seems the kikster can't either understand or accept it. Sigh...symptoms of fanboyitis which is fascist-like in a way, i.e. my way or the highway..
Speaking of Hell, how did some calculating vamp like Madonna get into the "Rock & Roll" (lol) HOF?
Dylan!...Davies!!....move over, you hacks!...... v v v
"Borderline" - Madonna
Something in the way you love me won't let me be
I don't want to be your prisoner so baby won't you set me free
Stop playing with my heart
Finish what you start
When you make my love come down
If you want me let me know
Baby let it show
Honey don't you fool around
In the words of Greg Kihn.....man, they don't write 'em like that anymore.
Dedans,am I a fascist because I like Zeppelin?
I mean,it has nothing to see with polítics,and in any case the one who had simpathy for that ideology was considered to be Lou Reed
I don't pretend that you must like them,it is your own taste,mood and experience.
But you should recognize their influence and the leading role they had in changing music
Weren' t you moved by their spirituality?
No, not because you like Zeppelin but because of your "you must see it my way ....or go take the highway" approach. That's all I meant. :neutral:
I love Zeppelin, I adore "Since I've Been Loving You" and have played it off the grooves to where it's most likely one of the song's that have contributed to my tintinitis (along with playing music and at times the joys of amplifier feedback that went with it-lol), BUT, they aren't the be all of music. Imagine if there were only bands that represented a certain style....a gray world...
You should never confound polemizig with being autoritharian.
For all your newfound love to Lz,you never miss a chance to bash them
You do realize that Led Zeppelin is the antichrist, right?
Thank you Satan
Wasn´t the Evil the Lord´s favourite angel before failling?
He took everything off him...but not inteligence and creativity.Lucifer start with Luz (Light)
anyway, Jimmy Page was much more handsome...
I thought we settled all this already, when we all agreed that Zeppelin ranked somwhere between #4 and #10 in the best bands of all time?
If Kiki wants to argue that they belong as high as number #4, ahead of greats like the Doors and Jefferson Airplane and such, I guess we have to hear him out, but so far he hasn't made a great case for that. He calls them "influential", but frankly, what impact they may have had on bands like Van Halen or Aerosmith isn't anything to brag about...
Maybe we should just compromise here, place them at number 7 of greastest bands of all time, and call it a day?
By any measure, Van Halen? Aerosmith? Jefferson Airplane? Not even close.
The Doors, now we are getting closer to Led Zeppelin's rarefied air.
It's their longevity that sets them apart. How many bands from the 70's are still so influential? None in rock music.
Longevity? In what sense? And compared to bands like the Beatles and Stones??
And influential in what way? They influenced stupid metal bands like Van Halen? Who cares?
Who agreed with that?
Tell me who would be the 3 better bands?
Maybe, the best way to describe Zepp´s influence since 1970 is :
Nobody ever spoke any more Word of wisdom
Everybody forgot about their California dreamings
Nobody ever felt any more Sympathy for the Devil
unless you were a girly popìst or a teen girl, then you certainly would know
"You should be glad, if you were at LA and getting certainly some Satisfaction"
Separate names with a comma.