Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

[Mark Ahle]

I'm 16. My dad brought me up listening to all the classic guys...The Who, Floyd, Allmans, Free, Bad Company...You get it. And I've always been into Zep. but the other day my dad gave me a whole stack of Zep CD's. L.Z. 1, 2, 3, and Houses of the Holy. Wow. I had really only listened to their hits before this, but when I ran through the whole CD on my dads Altec Lancing Model 19's, I realized something. EVERY SONG on their albums are absolutly amazing. These days, it's all about the HIt. Bands put out CD's with 1 Hit, and then 11 filler songs that suck. But Zep is something else. So innovative-so original. True Art. So far, I have ran through Led Zeppelin 1, 2, and Houses of the Holy, the latter being my favorite. These guys really blow my mind everytime I listen to them. I just thought I'd tell someone about my new found appreciation for the most influential band of all time.



-MA

[Ian Williams]

I think the appropriate word for Led Zeppelin is: Great.
Not ridiculous.

[GRUNTERSDAD]

We had some bands in our time like that. My age is the same as your, just reverse the numbers. There were a bunch of one-hit wonders. It was about Money. Other bands like Led, and the Beatles, and The Who and others had some integrity and put out many great albums. You found a great group, bow get back to listening to those CD's.

[nhzoso]

Wait till you listen to physical graffitti, their best album IMO. This is cool because I remember the 1st time I figured it out too I was about 16 as well.

[Ian Williams]

Some people tend to overlook - Presence - due to Physical Graffitti hit, but it's an excellent album as well.

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

Awesome band. For me, it doesn't get any better than Zepp.......hands down favourite. My username is my witness!

Page, my all time fav guitarist. His playing still sends shivers down my spine.
Jones, tell me what drummer wouldn't want this guy grooving along in the pocket with you??
Plant, hmmmm....I'm still dirty on him for not wanting to follow on with a world tour (now THAT is ridiculous!!).......For christ sake Percy, your fans are calling!!
AND Bonham, well, 'nuff said!

Many years of listening pleasure in store for you....enjoy!!

[DSCRAPRE]

Rediculously awesome is more like it.

[zambizzi]

Timeless masterpieces! This is a band that future generations will continue to love. I'm 31 and discovered Zep when I was maybe 10? I heard Kashmir on the radio. It was all over for me after that.

[Thaard]

They have some pretty good tunes, but for me, they can never stand up to Deep Purple. Just my personal opinion. Maybe they wouldve made more great tunes if Bonham had'nt died.

[Skulmoski]

Wait till you listen to physical graffitti, their best album IMO.

A very underrated album. I loved it when it was released and didn't understand how the critics could pan this masterpiece.

GJS

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

They have some pretty good tunes, but for me, they can never stand up to Deep Purple. Just my personal opinion. Maybe they wouldve made more great tunes if Bonham had'nt died.

Great band indeed - especially 'Mark II' - this was the perfect 'Purple' in my book.....but which 'mark' Purple did you prefer?

I (Evans, I think) or II (Gillan. Glover) or III (Coverdale, Hughes) or IV (Can't remember, Bolin??) Anyway, you catch my drift here. They've had that many line up changes, it can seem like totally different bands at times.

[rogue_drummer]

I don't mind Zep, it's just the jerkwad radio stations play the SAME 3 SONGS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN!

You're tuned to one station, and it plays Black Dog. Ok, you've heard it 5 times this week. You turn to another station and guess what? They are playing Black Dog. Ahhhhh!!!!

I'd about give my left testicle to hear "Moby Dick" once in a while.

[Mark Ahle]

"Thank You" is far out. And it really shows how groovy Plant was when writing. It was actually the first song Page gave the writing job to Plant, and it showed the rest of the band that he can freakin' write.

This is the difference between Bands, and Artists. I'm so glad I can appreciate this stuff.

"If the sun refused to shine, I would still be loving you.
When mountains crumble to the sea, there will still be you and me.

Kind woman, I give you my all, Kind woman, nothing more.

Little drops of rain whisper of the pain, tears of loves lost in the days gone by.
My love is strong, with you there is no wrong,
Together we shall go until we die. My, my, my.
An inspiration is what you are to me, inspiration, look... see.

And so today, my world it smiles, your hand in mine, we walk the miles,
Thanks to you it will be done, for you to me are the only one.
Happiness, no more be sad, happiness....I'm glad.
If the sun refused to shine, I would still be loving you.
When mountains crumble to the sea, there will still be you and me."


-MA

[Bonz0]

An absolutely amazing band, I think is one of the most musically acomplished bands ever, true musicians with an incredible skill and feel of the music they created.

[DSCRAPRE]

I don't mind Zep, it's just the jerkwad radio stations play the SAME 3 SONGS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN!

You're tuned to one station, and it plays Black Dog. Ok, you've heard it 5 times this week. You turn to another station and guess what? They are playing Black Dog. Ahhhhh!!!!

I'd about give my left testicle to hear "Moby Dick" once in a while.

Ditto

When The Levee Breaks > Black Dog

[zephead19]

I'm 16. My dad brought me up listening to all the classic guys...The Who, Floyd, Allmans, Free, Bad Company...You get it. And I've always been into Zep. but the other day my dad gave me a whole stack of Zep CD's. L.Z. 1, 2, 3, and Houses of the Holy. Wow. I had really only listened to their hits before this, but when I ran through the whole CD on my dads Altec Lancing Model 19's, I realized something. EVERY SONG on their albums are absolutly amazing. These days, it's all about the HIt. Bands put out CD's with 1 Hit, and then 11 filler songs that suck. But Zep is something else. So innovative-so original. True Art. So far, I have ran through Led Zeppelin 1, 2, and Houses of the Holy, the latter being my favorite. These guys really blow my mind everytime I listen to them. I just thought I'd tell someone about my new found appreciation for the most influential band of all time.



-MA

See I never had your problem when it came to the Zep. When I was introduced to Zeppelin I never knew what the "hits" I just listened to my dads collection of every album they produced. That is why songs like "How Many More Times" and "Misty Mountain Hop" are some of my favorite Zep songs. But overall there will never be another group of four musicians that were that good alone, and together. All four of them being top three in their respective intruments no band will every live up to the might of Page, Plant, Bonzo and JPJ

[wy yung]

Led Zep never touched me. I can say that I am not influenced by them at all. I saw a concert DVD and liked John's relaxed grip. Other than that I could not care less. Good band though. A bit over hyped though. The best thing about them was their amazing manager.

[donv]

Loved their albums, but I saw them live twice and was disappointed. From what has come out since, I imagine Page was too wasted to play.

[rogue_drummer]

I saw them when I was 15 at the Tarrant County Convention Center in the mid 70's. They were decent, but nothing amazing. In fact, they screwed up a song so bad, they had to start it over. I can't remember the song, though. Of course I was sitting in the nose bleed section, but still...

[Thaard]

Great band indeed - especially 'Mark II' - this was the perfect 'Purple' in my book.....but which 'mark' Purple did you prefer?

I (Evans, I think) or II (Gillan. Glover) or III (Coverdale, Hughes) or IV (Can't remember, Bolin??) Anyway, you catch my drift here. They've had that many line up changes, it can seem like totally different bands at times.

Mark 2 ofc. Atleast Paice is the only member whos stayed through all of them(i think)

[nhzoso]

"Thank You" is far out. And it really shows how groovy Plant was when writing. It was actually the first song Page gave the writing job to Plant, and it showed the rest of the band that he can freakin' write.

This is the difference between Bands, and Artists. I'm so glad I can appreciate this stuff.

"If the sun refused to shine, I would still be loving you.
When mountains crumble to the sea, there will still be you and me.

Kind woman, I give you my all, Kind woman, nothing more.

Little drops of rain whisper of the pain, tears of loves lost in the days gone by.
My love is strong, with you there is no wrong,
Together we shall go until we die. My, my, my.
An inspiration is what you are to me, inspiration, look... see.

And so today, my world it smiles, your hand in mine, we walk the miles,
Thanks to you it will be done, for you to me are the only one.
Happiness, no more be sad, happiness....I'm glad.
If the sun refused to shine, I would still be loving you.
When mountains crumble to the sea, there will still be you and me."


-MA


This is me and my wife's song, beautiful song indeed. I like Zep so much that I kinda feel bad for people who don't get it. I don't feel that way about any other band.

[Darbuka]

This is me and my wife's song, beautiful song indeed. I like Zep so much that I kinda feel bad for people who don't get it. I don't feel that way about any other band.

great lyrics!
http://www.fingersoffury.com.au
http://www.darbukaplayer.com

[Darbuka]

I really dug te Eastern sounds of Page and PLant with the Egyptian Darbuka player Hossam Ramzy. Very groovey indeed.
http://www.fingersoffury.com.au
http://www.darbukaplayer.com

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

I really dug te Eastern sounds of Page and PLant with the Egyptian Darbuka player Hossam Ramzy. Very groovey indeed.
http://www.fingersoffury.com.au
http://www.darbukaplayer.com

Agreed, the reworking of some of their songs on the Unledded special with those guys was amazing. I loved hearing their music presented "in a new frame", to quote Page..

[Deathmetalconga]

I don't mind Zep, it's just the jerkwad radio stations play the SAME 3 SONGS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN!

You're tuned to one station, and it plays Black Dog. Ok, you've heard it 5 times this week. You turn to another station and guess what? They are playing Black Dog. Ahhhhh!!!!

I'd about give my left testicle to hear "Moby Dick" once in a while.

It is possible to overplay any music, even a great band.

I cringe in embarrassment every time I'm in a coffee shop and they play Led Zeppelin or The Beatles. These bands are played over and over and over and over and over again - it's like Christmas music, except played all year long. For these and a few other reasons, I dislike the Beatles intensely and Led Zeppelin is on its way. Very good bands, very good music, and very very overrated.

[Pollyanna]

It is possible to overplay any music, even a great band.

I cringe in embarrassment every time I'm in a coffee shop and they play Led Zeppelin or The Beatles. These bands are played over and over and over and over and over again - it's like Christmas music, except played all year long. Very good bands, very good music, and very very overrated.

I agree. I love both bands but I can't imagine how good they would need to be to live up to the hype and attention. It's amazing the gap between the attention given to them and all those other great performers of that period - The Stones, The Who, Jimi, Janis, Cream, Traffic, Pink Floyd, Purple, Fleetwood Mac, Joe Cocker, The Doors, Bowie, Uncle Frank, BB King, King Crimson, The Supremes, Santana, Focus, Aretha, Gong, James Brown, Chicago (pre blow wave), Roxy, Supertramp etc etc.

Surely at least some of the great numbers by all the other outstanding artists would be worth playing instead of the 20000th spin of Stairway or Black Dog or Yesterday ...

[Strangelove]

For these and a few other reasons, I dislike the Beatles intensely and Led Zeppelin is on its way. Very good bands, very good music, and very very overrated.

Interestingly, back in the 70's they weren't overplayed at all, at least not like the bubble gum pop bands (if I hear Angie one more time in my life I will puke). I do remember Stairway being played a few times on some "album rock" radio stations, but most generally shied from it because it is SO VERY LONG and totally opposite what the teenie pop idol's span of attention could handle. It seems that LZ got more single song radio play in the 1980's after Bonham died, than any other time I can remember. Now I can hardly listen to Black Dog, Rock and Roll, and Kashmir anymore.

Overrated? These guys were not like the Stones, Bowie, Fleetwood Mac, Eagles, and other pop bands that did little more than write the proverbial catchy 3 minute, 3 chord, run of the mill cookie cutter songs that were designed for feeding the masses. Zep had an Avant-Gardedness about them that very few groups of the era displayed at all. The violin bow, the reverse echos, the calming acoustic intros leading to electrical explosions that led back to acoustical outros were just something nobody else was really doing back then. The melting of deep Delta Blues, old English and American Folk, Country Western steel guitar and banjo (Tangerine has always been one of my favorites), with Middle Eastern sounds - no, I don't think they should ever be classified as overrated, not in the least. I think they were an artistic masterpiece and may even be underrated or maybe under-appreciated for their artistic contribution - kind of like Zappa, Emerson, Lake, and Palmer or King Crimson. Still, I cannot listen to a few of their songs today because they have played the grooves out of them on classic rock radio stations.

[donv]

Interestingly, back in the 70's they weren't overplayed at all, at least not like the bubble gum pop bands (if I hear Angie one more time in my life I will puke). I do remember Stairway being played a few times on some "album rock" radio stations, but most generally shied from it because it is SO VERY LONG and totally opposite what the teenie pop idol's span of attention could handle. It seems that LZ got more single song radio play in the 1980's after Bonham died, than any other time I can remember. Now I can hardly listen to Black Dog, Rock and Roll, and Kashmir anymore.

Overrated? These guys were not like the Stones, Bowie, Fleetwood Mac, Eagles, and other pop bands that did little more than write the proverbial catchy 3 minute, 3 chord, run of the mill cookie cutter songs that were designed for feeding the masses. Zep had an Avant-Gardedness about them that very few groups of the era displayed at all. The violin bow, the reverse echos, the calming acoustic intros leading to electrical explosions that led back to acoustical outros were just something nobody else was really doing back then. The melting of deep Delta Blues, old English and American Folk, Country Western steel guitar and banjo (Tangerine has always been one of my favorites), with Middle Eastern sounds - no, I don't think they should ever be classified as overrated, not in the least. I think they were an artistic masterpiece and may even be underrated or maybe under-appreciated for their artistic contribution - kind of like Zappa, Emerson, Lake, and Palmer or King Crimson. Still, I cannot listen to a few of their songs today because they have played the grooves out of them on classic rock radio stations.

Your comments are right on. The Deep Purple, Zeppelin debate seems to show up here every couple of months, but as you've pointed out, the deciding factor for me was the variety of styles Zeppelin played that DP never attempted.

Also with album sales of near 85 million, they're #3 in album sales--only beaten by the Beatles and Garth Brooks per a google search. In 07 they sold the digital publishing rights to their catalog to Warner for 60 million and they're now enjoying a resurgence that few bands will ever enjoy. They might even be more popular now then they ever were?

Of course as drummers we all know that nobody would have ever heard of them if it wasn't Bonham! 8^)

BTW, no song was overplayed more then Smoke on the Water!

[Strangelove]

The Deep Purple, Zeppelin debate seems to show up here every couple of months, but as you've pointed out, the deciding factor for me was the variety of styles Zeppelin played that DP never attempted.



Well, Deep Purple was a pleasure to the ears when they were firing on all 8 cylinders. That being of course when Gillan, Blackmore, and Paice were all getting along, which unfortunately was not that often. I think Ian might have had a better, more powerful vocal range than Plant, and Blackmore's lead solos probably had more musical complexity to them than Page's. Paice vs Bonham? Well, we might as well argue singles versus triplets to cover that one. But when it all came together, Deep Purple was no Led Zeppelin. They were excellent in their own right and I even like listening to some of their live reunions from the 1990s, but as a band in their heyday, they did not shine as bright and as long, and did not leave the overall artistic element and complete musical diversity that Zep did.

[donv]

Well, Deep Purple was a pleasure to the ears when they were firing on all 8 cylinders. That being of course when Gillan, Blackmore, and Paice were all getting along, which unfortunately was not that often. I think Ian might have had a better, more powerful vocal range than Plant, and Blackmore's lead solos probably had more musical complexity to them than Page's. Paice vs Bonham? Well, we might as well argue singles versus triplets to cover that one. But when it all came together, Deep Purple was no Led Zeppelin. They were excellent in their own right and I even like listening to some of their live reunions from the 1990s, but as a band in their heyday, they did not shine as bright and as long, and did not leave the overall artistic element and complete musical diversity that Zep did.

Don't ge me wrong, I'm a big DP fan. I just appreciate that Zeppelin was always pushing the boundries of music and styles and it always worked for me. DP on the other hand stuck pretty much to the hard rock formula so you can only guess at what they could have, or might have done if they had experimented more.

[Pollyanna]

Strangelove, you're a hard man - lol

Sure, Fleetwood Mac and The Stones didn't have a class of Led Zep (I see David Bowie in a similar league, though), but the difference wasn't night and day.

I'm nore sure Zep had the class of Uncle Frank or King Crimson either, although I wouldn't say the latter (in their various incarnations) are better bands, just more sophisticated.

At some point with most listeners, gut feeling overrides extra musical sophistication. At what point that kicks in is an individual thing. If you're talking about influence, then sure, Zep are way up there.

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

I'm actually getting really quite sick of the backward-looking 'Rock' lobby at the moment.

Now that I've alienated everybody in this thread, I will explain.

I like Led Zeppelin. I used to like them a lot more, but I'm actually with DMC on this one on so many levels. This focus on bands that have been gone thirty or forty years to the forsaking of all others (to use matrimonial terminology) really irritates me. That and bands (like Wolfmother) who just re-hash this kind of music. It happened, it's over, please move on with your lives.

The truth is, it stagnates everything. Whenever I listen to Classical Music (and I listen to a lot more than the majority of the people on here as part of my degree) I can usually place it within a certain compositional timeframe and see a progression directly from Bach, through to Mozart, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Schoenberg et al. I don't know if it's just me, but the speed of musical change in the previous century should have made it easier to pinpoint to even more specific dates. I can do it with jazz - I can listen to a lot of the music and pinpoint a rough era as to when the music was written - pre-'Brew' Davis is definitely pre -'Brew' Davis and Brian Blade is definitely much more modern, because I can see a linear progression. However, when I listen to a lot of guitar-based music, I just don't hear that. I can certainly hear it for the first decade or two of rock, for argument's sake '55-'75 but really beyond that, I struggle to hear what has musically changed in a lot of mainstream material.

This focus on a very specific time frame (roughly '68-'78) means that younger generations are growing up with an attitude of just wanting to play that music. I'm sick of pentatonic scales, I'm sick of two-minute guitar solos, I'm sick of drummers hitting their crash every 'one' and I'm sick of vocalists who think that they can use the word 'wooohhhmmaaannn' in a song without a hint of irony.

There are plenty of bands out there that don't do this. I could name dozens, but it seems to so many young people today that this period is all that counts. I know, I've been there and out the other side and I was even critical of drum machines for a long time - until I started looking elsewhere. I've discovered so much musical diversity in the last two decades it is ridiculous, but so little of it uses the 'standard band' format. Bowie is a prime example - there's a guy who realised what he was doing was going to be passe in the next two years and changed it all just because he could. What did we get? Two (arguably three) fantastic albums - that mercifully haven't been copied - and mind-blowing collaborations with a small group of musicians that have seriously radicalised and influenced a wide range of musicians in the years since. Why then, do I keep hearing the same three chords on the radio? Why do I listen to a mainstream pop track and think it's from the 90s but it turns out to be the 'newest' chart release?

Because people don't listen to enough music. Vygotsky (a psychologist) postulated a theory known as 'Zones of Proximal Development' whereby in order to develop, one has to stretch slightly beyond their 'comfort zone' and seek new empirical experiences. I don't think enough people do that. Without that I would have never have started the degree I am doing, I would never have discovered some really fantastic music (let's just start with Schoenberg and Penderecki) and I would have never have discovered quite what a computer could do, and that actually deeply disturbs me, yet every time I log in, I keep seeing the same names mentioned, the same concepts mentioned and there is very little new in any of it.

Why not take the primitive rhythms of Stravinsky's 'Rite of Spring' and try something new, rather than lauding over Bonham, Paice et al (who I do think are great drummers) and really pushing some boundaries?

[Pollyanna]

Outstanding post, MFB. As a backward looking old fart I am not 100% with you, but it was still a great post :)

It should be said that my band does noting even remotely like Zep. Nearly all of our material is sourced from the 40 to the 60s :)

Rock has certainly evolved - from post-punk grunge in the 90s to bands like RATM or The Chill Peppers or the four thousand brands of nu-metal ...

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

Outstanding post, MFB. As a backward looking old fart I am not 100% with you, but it was still a great post :)

It should be said that my band does noting even remotely like Zep. Nearly all of our material is sourced from the 40 to the 60s :)

Rock has certainly evolved - from post-punk grunge in the 90s to bands like RATM or The Chill Peppers or the four thousand brands of nu-metal ...

Yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there's been an aesthetic shift. Really, when I say I 'don't hear the difference' what I tend not to hear (more than just the notes themselves) is the aesthetic. And to me a lot of it is still loud guitar music with the same attitude as before. I'm not saying that's inherently a bad thing in itself, but I just want to see somebody doing something different.

[PQleyR]

I for one would take all that over the post-punk revival rubbish that is essentially that same aesthetic with all the life and interest sucked out of it. While I agree in principle, I'm prepared to listen to anything if it has sincere and open emotional expression at its heart.

[donv]

I'm actually getting really quite sick of the backward-looking 'Rock' lobby at the moment.

Now that I've alienated everybody in this thread, I will explain.

I like Led Zeppelin. I used to like them a lot more, but I'm actually with DMC on this one on so many levels. This focus on bands that have been gone thirty or forty years to the forsaking of all others (to use matrimonial terminology) really irritates me. That and bands (like Wolfmother) who just re-hash this kind of music. It happened, it's over, please move on with your lives.

The truth is, it stagnates everything. Whenever I listen to Classical Music (and I listen to a lot more than the majority of the people on here as part of my degree) I can usually place it within a certain compositional timeframe and see a progression directly from Bach, through to Mozart, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Schoenberg et al. I don't know if it's just me, but the speed of musical change in the previous century should have made it easier to pinpoint to even more specific dates. I can do it with jazz - I can listen to a lot of the music and pinpoint a rough era as to when the music was written - pre-'Brew' Davis is definitely pre -'Brew' Davis and Brian Blade is definitely much more modern, because I can see a linear progression. However, when I listen to a lot of guitar-based music, I just don't hear that. I can certainly hear it for the first decade or two of rock, for argument's sake '55-'75 but really beyond that, I struggle to hear what has musically changed in a lot of mainstream material.

This focus on a very specific time frame (roughly '68-'78) means that younger generations are growing up with an attitude of just wanting to play that music. I'm sick of pentatonic scales, I'm sick of two-minute guitar solos, I'm sick of drummers hitting their crash every 'one' and I'm sick of vocalists who think that they can use the word 'wooohhhmmaaannn' in a song without a hint of irony.

There are plenty of bands out there that don't do this. I could name dozens, but it seems to so many young people today that this period is all that counts. I know, I've been there and out the other side and I was even critical of drum machines for a long time - until I started looking elsewhere. I've discovered so much musical diversity in the last two decades it is ridiculous, but so little of it uses the 'standard band' format. Bowie is a prime example - there's a guy who realised what he was doing was going to be passe in the next two years and changed it all just because he could. What did we get? Two (arguably three) fantastic albums - that mercifully haven't been copied - and mind-blowing collaborations with a small group of musicians that have seriously radicalised and influenced a wide range of musicians in the years since. Why then, do I keep hearing the same three chords on the radio? Why do I listen to a mainstream pop track and think it's from the 90s but it turns out to be the 'newest' chart release?

Because people don't listen to enough music. Vygotsky (a psychologist) postulated a theory known as 'Zones of Proximal Development' whereby in order to develop, one has to stretch slightly beyond their 'comfort zone' and seek new empirical experiences. I don't think enough people do that. Without that I would have never have started the degree I am doing, I would never have discovered some really fantastic music (let's just start with Schoenberg and Penderecki) and I would have never have discovered quite what a computer could do, and that actually deeply disturbs me, yet every time I log in, I keep seeing the same names mentioned, the same concepts mentioned and there is very little new in any of it.

Why not take the primitive rhythms of Stravinsky's 'Rite of Spring' and try something new, rather than lauding over Bonham, Paice et al (who I do think are great drummers) and really pushing some boundaries?

You've [put up a thoughtful post, but I disagree with you on a number of things.

First and foremost is that age of rock. Of course it's easier to follow the progression of a music that is hundreds of years old--classical, or 100+ years old--jazz.

But even, their are some great reintreptations of classics like "The Hall of the Mountain King," by Apocolypto and Savantage.

But what about the early guitart laden rock, to the electronic music of the 80's, to rebirth of hard rock in the 90's with much less guitar dependence and soloing, to multiple genre's of metal, to the likes of rap and hip hop. Music has changed drastically over the last 40 years--for better or worse is for the individual to decide.

But the idea that "it happened, it's over?" I see that along the lines of cutting out elemenatry school and sending kids straight to high school. It's where you end up anyway. Seems from your post some musical taste foundations irritate you while others don't. I don't see the discussion as being a scholastic as you've implied. Music is music, and some music grabs some, while not others. Seems odd to be irritated by what does grab some. It's also odd to not see the roots of a current top 40 band along the lines of Buckcheery and not see the 70's roots to the music.

Furthermore, a lot of classical music isn't all that scholastic, and a lot of it stands alone in the fact that it didn't come from previous music, and like popular music, a lot of it is just catching a ride on what was popular and rewriting "popular" in another way. A lot like top 40 music is today much the same song over and over. If people were as familiar with classical musuc as they are with current music, this would be obvious.

[Strangelove]

You guys are getting too analytical for me. Music appeals to my right side, not the left. ;-}

My whole point was despite their arena-rockedness, Led Zep is absolutely not in the same league as Black Sabbath, KISS, Guns-N-Roses, or Spinal Tap.

[Ian Williams]

Do you think We are lauding over John Bonham, Ian Paice?

The question is: Who will be the next John Bonham, Ian Paice, Bill Ward? At the present time? If there is/are any!

[nhzoso]

You guys are getting too analytical for me. Music appeals to my right side, not the left. ;-}
.



LOL, could not have said it better myself, who takes music and puts that much BS into it? Come on man really, pffftt talk about your over bearing self righteous rubbish.

Give him a break, The kid is 16 and is just discovering the greatest Rock band of all time, he has enough time to learn about all the other crap that makes us all such over opinionated people who think that because they like something the whole world should like it or be called a moron for not getting it.

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

LOL, could not have said it better myself, who takes music and puts that much BS into it? Come on man really, pffftt talk about your over bearing self righteous rubbish.

Just about everybody at this University, so it happens. If you want to talk about what music can do to people (lest you listen to other forms of music beyond your own scope) then it is very much worth talking about and is in now way 'over bearing' nor 'self righteous'. Ever listened to 'Threnody For the Victims of Hiroshima'? Thought not.

ut what about the early guitart laden rock, to the electronic music of the 80's, to rebirth of hard rock in the 90's with much less guitar dependence and soloing, to multiple genre's of metal, to the likes of rap and hip hop. Music has changed drastically over the last 40 years--for better or worse is for the individual to decide.

See, I don't think it has changed. This to me is the 'demographic' nature of the music business - Mozart was guilty of it as we are today (he wrote to commission after all) but that wasn't the sole nature of his output. It has changed in the last few years, but I am one who finds fault with the music industry for actually stagnating so many things. Rap - a great force for political change in the early 1980s (and this analogy holds with many 'new' forms) - was sanitised for the sake of mass-marketing. The same is true of so much of what I hear around me. Why's that? Well, the music industry playing it safe and consumers going along with it.

[Pollyanna]

Yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there's been an aesthetic shift. Really, when I say I 'don't hear the difference' what I tend not to hear (more than just the notes themselves) is the aesthetic. And to me a lot of it is still loud guitar music with the same attitude as before. I'm not saying that's inherently a bad thing in itself, but I just want to see somebody doing something different.

It depends, MFB (just putting aside objections by enforcers of righteous right braininess against the infiltration of sinister left-brain activity for a moment :)

I think we could try an analogy with jazz. Jazz started out as rude and wild and was putting two fingers up to the establishment at the time. Remember, at one time even Strauss's waltzes were considered impolite by the guardians of righteousness.

Much has happened since then and most (not all) jazz is now "respectable". Where does that leave guitar rock? We had the blow-waved rockers (often studio types) singing with the kind of shallow sentimentality we had in a lot of 50s music. We had rock playing become clean and neat and tidy, all these extra chords, technique etc. Junior goes to college.

Punk arrives with its safety pins and anti-technique thing. Next minute we have tutorials and CDs on how to do punk drumming. I expect there are now people out there giving lessons in performing death growls in the correct way.

Who has revolutionised electric guitar playing? After Jimi, Adrian Belew, Ian Williams and Robert Fripp come to mind. Slash and Van Halen were highly influential.

It seems to be that rock has become less sexy and more violent, which fits the current ethos where two people making love on screen is considered obscene but someone getting shot or beaten up is family entertainment. Sexiness has shifted to pop and funk.

In terms of techiques and ideas I see the mainstream music scene tending to chase itself in ever decreasing circles - feeding off what's come before and not innovating, except on the fringes. We can thank powerful record companies and the increasing commercialisation of music for that. In the 60s bands could form and be sloppily creative and still get signed.

The scene is now so competitive that if musos hope to not work 9 to 5 they have to play to the market. Listeners don't have time in this busy world to just sit there with their heads wedged between the speakers, getting off on musical experiments or expressionist soling a la Zep etc.

Music for music's sake has decreased. Music now needs a utility value to be do well - to also have use in parties, dancing/moshing, chilling, background/musak, advertising, movie sound tracks ...

Web 2.0 is the main thing keeping rock from stultifying completely.

Edit: MFB, we posted at the same time and said more or less the same thing :)

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

I think you're underrating the influence of people like East Bay Ray on styles of playing. Most of what I hear as 'new' movements are essentially rebellions against the 'order of things' but I haven't sensed that for at least a decade. Why? Well, you've covered that pretty well. What we do have is a small number of artists who work for themselves, but invariably they've been left well alone by the record labels.

[Pollyanna]

I think you're underrating the influence of people like East Bay Ray on styles of playing. Most of what I hear as 'new' movements are essentially rebellions against the 'order of things' but I haven't sensed that for at least a decade. Why? Well, you've covered that pretty well. What we do have is a small number of artists who work for themselves, but invariably they've been left well alone by the record labels.

Heh, I've not heard of East Bay Ray. I looked at YouTube and figure that I missed it because my old fartiness doesn't relate to it, even a bit. So it wouldn't surprise me if I understated it. Thanks for filling the hole :)

To look for where rebellion comes from I think you have to weigh up:

- What's big now
- The youthful creative urge.

If popular music is getting out reach for young people, then they say "stuff you" and do their own thing. Once the technical and logistical challenges of music become too great then you get a reductionist movement in the poor areas, which seems to be where most musical revolutions grow. That's why big kits and complex triggering solutions will be the targets for the next rebellious movements; they put music-making out of reach of the poor.

It could even be a quiet revolution as more people create music on their desktops instead of forming bands (cost of studios, noise laws, more condensed living etc). Then there's the rise of video and gaming and Rock Band etc.

Bands are being increasingly squeezed out of clubs and pubs by machines - be it DJs or gaming machines. I think the whole concept of band play is under threat. It's enough to make anyone nostalgic.

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

What you have to ask yourself though is that is that all necessarily a bad thing?

East Bay Ray was the guitarist for the Dead Kennedys. You have no excuse!

[Pollyanna]

What you have to ask yourself though is that is that all necessarily a bad thing?

East Bay Ray was the guitarist for the Dead Kennedys. You have no excuse!

I don't need an excuse. I'm an old biddy and proud of it! (or at least resigned to it). When I start getting cats I know it will be all over. For now I just borrow the moggy next door for my feline cuddle needs :)

No more band play a bad thing? Hell yeah. I love playing in bands. When I am in a practice studio with a bunch of musos I'm at home. I admit to a teensy bit of subjectivity here. The experience of band play is precious to me and if I holed up at home with Reason and churned out stuff I'd end up as a hermit. I also enjoy the physical aspect and challenges of playing music, even though I'm far better with the conceptual side.

I think many others will share that joy of physical music-making so I won't be alone there. I have a feeling that Robert Fripp's prediction of music moving towards "small intelligent units" is prophetic.

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

I'm just throwing it out there. Bands disappearing is a form of development, of a sort. That's all I'm suggesting. I'm not saying it's for better or worse.

[wy yung]

I'm actually getting really quite sick of the backward-looking 'Rock' lobby at the moment.



It drives me insane. Well not quite. But I think it is holding music back. Led Zepp this, Led Zepp that. Holy cow! John died decades ago. There has been loads of great music since then. Why listen to the same old music over and over again? How many times can a novel be read?

Don't get me started on Wolfmother. It is the year of our Lord 2009!

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

It drives me insane. Well not quite. But I think it is holding music back. Led Zepp this, Led Zepp that. Holy cow! John died decades ago. There has been loads of great music since then. Why listen to the same old music over and over again? How many times can a novel be read?

Don't get me started on Wolfmother. It is the year of our Lord 2009!

Take away 'Lord' and I agree entirely. That's not say I don't listen to older music, but there has been something since then!

[wy yung]

Take away 'Lord' and I agree entirely.


I was being formal. I've been reading too much Erasmus. I was thinking 16th century. I thought it funny because we are discussing 2009 and looking backwards to the 70's. I have a weird sense of humor. :-)

[Pollyanna]

MFB, as you'd know, The Lord was a cat that belonged to the guy who accidentally ruled the universe.

I'm in a band that plays music from the 40s onwards so I'm not in any position to judge people who are stuck in the 70s.

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

I thought the Universe was run by hyper-intelligent mice? Oh wait, that was just the Earth.

[Pollyanna]

MFB, we are of course being rather retro here :)

I like old music (and other stuff) the way Dad likes Benny Goodman; that's the music of our youth.

Dufference is that I enjoy some new stuff too as long as the volume control isn't set to 11 and/or techno that even out-ostinatos me!

[donv]

I thought the Universe was run by hyper-intelligent mice? Oh wait, that was just the Earth.

Just as long as they don't mess with the earth. That''s where I keep all my stuff.

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

Just as long as they don't mess with the earth. That''s where I keep all my stuff.

Not quite sure how to break this to you...

[Deathmetalconga]

I'm actually getting really quite sick of the backward-looking 'Rock' lobby at the moment.

Now that I've alienated everybody in this thread, I will explain.

I like Led Zeppelin. I used to like them a lot more, but I'm actually with DMC on this one on so many levels. This focus on bands that have been gone thirty or forty years to the forsaking of all others (to use matrimonial terminology) really irritates me. That and bands (like Wolfmother) who just re-hash this kind of music. It happened, it's over, please move on with your lives.

The truth is, it stagnates everything. Whenever I listen to Classical Music (and I listen to a lot more than the majority of the people on here as part of my degree) I can usually place it within a certain compositional timeframe and see a progression directly from Bach, through to Mozart, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Schoenberg et al. I don't know if it's just me, but the speed of musical change in the previous century should have made it easier to pinpoint to even more specific dates. I can do it with jazz - I can listen to a lot of the music and pinpoint a rough era as to when the music was written - pre-'Brew' Davis is definitely pre -'Brew' Davis and Brian Blade is definitely much more modern, because I can see a linear progression. However, when I listen to a lot of guitar-based music, I just don't hear that. I can certainly hear it for the first decade or two of rock, for argument's sake '55-'75 but really beyond that, I struggle to hear what has musically changed in a lot of mainstream material.

This focus on a very specific time frame (roughly '68-'78) means that younger generations are growing up with an attitude of just wanting to play that music. I'm sick of pentatonic scales, I'm sick of two-minute guitar solos, I'm sick of drummers hitting their crash every 'one' and I'm sick of vocalists who think that they can use the word 'wooohhhmmaaannn' in a song without a hint of irony.

There are plenty of bands out there that don't do this. I could name dozens, but it seems to so many young people today that this period is all that counts. I know, I've been there and out the other side and I was even critical of drum machines for a long time - until I started looking elsewhere. I've discovered so much musical diversity in the last two decades it is ridiculous, but so little of it uses the 'standard band' format. Bowie is a prime example - there's a guy who realised what he was doing was going to be passe in the next two years and changed it all just because he could. What did we get? Two (arguably three) fantastic albums - that mercifully haven't been copied - and mind-blowing collaborations with a small group of musicians that have seriously radicalised and influenced a wide range of musicians in the years since. Why then, do I keep hearing the same three chords on the radio? Why do I listen to a mainstream pop track and think it's from the 90s but it turns out to be the 'newest' chart release?

Because people don't listen to enough music. Vygotsky (a psychologist) postulated a theory known as 'Zones of Proximal Development' whereby in order to develop, one has to stretch slightly beyond their 'comfort zone' and seek new empirical experiences. I don't think enough people do that. Without that I would have never have started the degree I am doing, I would never have discovered some really fantastic music (let's just start with Schoenberg and Penderecki) and I would have never have discovered quite what a computer could do, and that actually deeply disturbs me, yet every time I log in, I keep seeing the same names mentioned, the same concepts mentioned and there is very little new in any of it.

Why not take the primitive rhythms of Stravinsky's 'Rite of Spring' and try something new, rather than lauding over Bonham, Paice et al (who I do think are great drummers) and really pushing some boundaries?

Well put. There are billions of great songs that no one has ever heard, because no one has yet written them and no musicians have yet rendered them. If I can bring help bring a few of those songs into existence during my life, that will be one measure of a life well-lived.

[PQleyR]

It's my hope that the next musical revolution will involve people being very silly.

[Spinozalove]

I'm 16. My dad brought me up listening to all the classic guys...The Who, Floyd, Allmans, Free, Bad Company...You get it. And I've always been into Zep. but the other day my dad gave me a whole stack of Zep CD's. L.Z. 1, 2, 3, and Houses of the Holy. Wow. I had really only listened to their hits before this, but when I ran through the whole CD on my dads Altec Lancing Model 19's, I realized something. EVERY SONG on their albums are absolutly amazing. These days, it's all about the HIt. Bands put out CD's with 1 Hit, and then 11 filler songs that suck. But Zep is something else. So innovative-so original. True Art. So far, I have ran through Led Zeppelin 1, 2, and Houses of the Holy, the latter being my favorite. These guys really blow my mind everytime I listen to them. I just thought I'd tell someone about my new found appreciation for the most influential band of all time.



-MA


Try the BBC sessions. Really amazing. The best thing I have heard by them I think.

[rogue_drummer]

Even on XM it's STILL the same 3 or 4 songs! Ahhhhhh!! I turned on the XM on my way into work today and guess what! THE SAME SONG I HEARD LAST NIGHT WHEN I PULLED IN MY DRIVEWAY.

I'm not knocking Led Zepplin, just the programming guys.

[Strangelove]

Even on XM it's STILL the same 3 or 4 songs! Ahhhhhh!! I turned on the XM on my way into work today and guess what! THE SAME SONG I HEARD LAST NIGHT WHEN I PULLED IN MY DRIVEWAY.

I'm not knocking Led Zepplin, just the programming guys.

The only XM station that doesn't play the same songs over and over seems to be the Vault. That station playlists closer to the early or mid seventies "album rock" stations.

[rmandelbaum]

There was a poin tin my life, many years ago when I listened to nothing else. I since then have expanded my tastes but I still love Zep.

If you really want a treat http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14GYov0EdyQ

[Mark Ahle]

You see-I wrote one paragraph on how much I love Zep, and all this^^^^^^is a result of it. Fantastic!

-MA

[whiterhino]

My favorite Led Zeppelin song would have to be 'How many more times' by far. My favortie section of the song would be...........

Oh, Rosie, oh, girl
Oh, Rosie, oh, girl
Steal away, now, steal away
Steal away, baby, steal away
Little Robert Anthony wants to come and play
A-why don'tcha come with me, baby, steal away
All right, all right

Well, they call me the Hunter, that's my name
Call me the Hunter, that's how I got my fame
Ain't no need to hide, Ain't no need to run
'cause I've got you in the sights of my gun

[ShaneFitz]

It is possible to overplay any music, even a great band.

I cringe in embarrassment every time I'm in a coffee shop and they play Led Zeppelin or The Beatles. These bands are played over and over and over and over and over again - it's like Christmas music, except played all year long. For these and a few other reasons, I dislike the Beatles intensely and Led Zeppelin is on its way. Very good bands, very good music, and very very overrated.

Blasphemer!!!!!!
Stay away from the teeny bop era of the Beatles and you are golden....
You dont like Abbey Road? White Album?
Don't let the radio ruin music for you i stopped listening to that devil box years ago.
please dont give up on zep and give the beatles a chance!

[ShaneFitz]

Since Ive been loving you. MSG 1973.
GIVES ME CHILLS EVERY TIME
most emotional piece of music i have ever heard

[FourOnSix]

PHYSICAL GRAFFITI. GET IT NOW

[bonzolead]

Try the BBC sessions. Really amazing. The best thing I have heard by them I think.

Yes BBC is great but I like "How The West Was Won" also,When LZ was hitting on all cylinders live there was very few if any bands out there at that time that could touch them.

All of the studio albums are great but I prefer "Presence" just on the fact that it's probably the most under-radio played album they made, "Achilles Last Stand" how amazing is that tune and how many times have you heard it on the radio? Catch my drift? or just listen too "Tea for One" for one of the best slow-blues tracks in the Zeppelin library.

Yes they are & always will be my Fav but yes I agree the same tunes are constantly played on the radio it got too the point where every time I started to hear "Stairway" back in the 80's I would change the station immediately LOL but then I didn't. hear it for a long time and today I almost have a new appreciation for the tune how weird is that LOL

I just as with a lot of Zep fans wish Robert Plant would get his head out of his a-- and tour with Jimmy,John-Paul & Jason one last time they don't. have too be like the Stones and tour every 2 years just one final hoo-hah. I know RP don't. want too go back too yesterday(Led-Zeppelin) but he wouldn't. have today(Allison Krauss,solo career) if it wasn't. for yesterday.

I was too young to see them in their hayday but i've seen everything else....The Firm,John Paul Jones solo,Jimmy Page solo,Robert Plant solo,Page & Plant,Coverdale & Page, & Jimmy Page w/the Black Crows. Give us one last tour so the average,hardworking LZ fan can see them live. Thanks for letting me vent LOL

Bonzolead

[MisterZero]

Too funny!. I was around that age when I realized how great Zeppelin is. I am 42 now. Yeah, their hit songs were great, but most people who don't know their deep cuts, the ones that arent on the radio,think of Zeppelin as nothing more than those mainstream tunes. I remember the day I heard Physical Graffitti. I was absolutely blown away. I could not beleive the incredible magic I was hearing. Most songs take a couples listens for me. After the tune "Ten Year's Gone" was over- check that- BEFORE it ended, it was my alltime favorite song, and still is.....

Led Zeppelin is a cut above everybody else by a mile. It is the greatest badn in the world and has crossed multiple generations attracting new fans every minute of evey day. Welcome to the club, my friend.

[Ian Williams]

We're Gonna Grove, pumps me up every time I listen to it.....So powerful, so aggressive, so Zeppelin........http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=479SdH4UwuE&feature=related

[Gethsemane]

They are such an amazing band. I just bought drum sheet music for their 4th album. It is so cool.

[Skulmoski]

PHYSICAL GRAFFITI. GET IT NOW

My favorite album! I could not see how the critics generally panned it when it came out. I had the same feeling with Led Zep III.

I have been a fan since I first heard their first album when I was 9 back in '69. I have bought their music on LP, 8 track, cassette and CD. I search out and read all that I can about this band. I just finished reading Welch and Nichols' book about Bonham. Nice read, but not overly insightful or critical.

GJS

[Ian Williams]

Led Zeppelin remains in nowadays, strong as ever.

[Jeff Almeyda]

Too bad they ripped off many of their early hits from lesser known blues artists:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/video/26428/led_zeppelin_rip_off_artists_.html?cat=33

[swiNg]

Too bad they ripped off many of their early hits from lesser known blues artists:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/video/26428/led_zeppelin_rip_off_artists_.html?cat=33
then you should do yourk homework again, thanks to the british bands like rolling stones, them, zeppelin, yarbirds et all, the blues became something more than just afroamerican music in a time when that was marginalising. you could even say they stood in front of the civilrights movement just by playing blues oldies.Even if that was not their purpose. And they put the spot on the artists they borrowed from or covered.

[Strangelove]

Too bad they ripped off many of their early hits from lesser known blues artists:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/video/26428/led_zeppelin_rip_off_artists_.html?cat=33

The Joan Baez and Spirit comparisons are just not even close, and the Dazed and Confused comparison is laughable at best. Led Zeppelin evolved from The Yardbirds, which the maker of that video fails to disclose. Dazed and Confused as well as Train Kept a Rollin were both carryovers from the Yardbirds to Led Zeppelin. The other plagiarism allegations involving Dixon and other early blues artists are addressed pretty well in the last paragraph here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Led_Zeppelin

They were lyrical and not musical copies, which is questionable, but the claim that they "ripped off" their early hits is not true.

[Jeff Almeyda]

then you should do yourk homework again, thanks to the british bands like rolling stones, them, zeppelin, yarbirds et all, the blues became something more than just afroamerican music in a time when that was marginalising. you could even say they stood in front of the civilrights movement just by playing blues oldies.Even if that was not their purpose. And they put the spot on the artists they borrowed from or covered.

Yeah they put the spotlight on blues musicians but they kept the money, fame and adulation.

I grew up on Zep, idloizing them to the point of thinking they were something more than mere mortals. It really bothered me when I found out that they had to pay out of court settlements to Wille Dixon. If that isnt an admission of plaigarism then what is?

[Strangelove]

Yeah they put the spotlight on blues musicians but they kept the money, fame and adulation.

I grew up on Zep, idloizing them to the point of thinking they were something more than mere mortals. It really bothered me when I found out that they had to pay out of court settlements to Wille Dixon. If that isnt an admission of plaigarism then what is?

They only paid one settlement to Dixon, I thought. Because Plant copped the lyrics from his single "You Need Love" into "Whole Lotta Love" without acknowledging Dixon or paying him royalties. But the music of those two songs was very much different, so you cannot call it direct plagiarism. Here is a pretty objective take on the whole allegation of Zep's supposed plagiarism, with an excellent compilation of their true Blues influences at the bottom:

http://www.turnmeondeadman.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=28

I agree with this guy's opinion on the matter. Page himself was an artist who dwelled in the outer stratosphere when compared to most rock writers/composers/producers. He was an artistic genius and he nor that band deserves to be slammed for being cheap thieves who deliberately ripped off some lowly Delta and Chicago Blues artists for profit. Copping blues standards was SOP in Britain during the 1960s - look at the Rolling Stones, John Mayall, Eric Clapton, etc. Plus, Zeps style of lulling you to sleep with light acoustical intros which up and kick you between the legs when they launch into guitar and matched bass riffs was more reminiscent of classical music than it was of any Willie Dixon or Sonny Boy Williamson 12 Bar Blues standard. It was also copied by most every famous rock act since, especially Aerosmith, Boston, and Heart. Everything in music gets copied, if you really look at it.

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

Page himself was an artist who dwelled in the outer stratosphere when compared to most rock writers/composers/producers. He was an artistic genius and he nor that band deserves to be slammed for being cheap thieves who deliberately ripped off some lowly Delta and Chicago Blues artists for profit. Copping blues standards was SOP in Britain during the 1960s - look at the Rolling Stones, John Mayall, Eric Clapton, etc. Plus, Zeps style of lulling you to sleep with light acoustical intros which up and kick you between the legs when they launch into guitar and matched bass riffs was more reminiscent of classical music than it was of any Willie Dixon or Sonny Boy Williamson 12 Bar Blues standard. It was also copied by most every famous rock act since, especially Aerosmith, Boston, and Heart. Everything in music gets copied, if you really look at it.

Works for me doctor.....well said.

[Strangelove]

Checkout Ritchie Blackmore discussing all the songs he copped to make legendary Deep Purple hits:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLgF7BDch4M&feature=related