DRUMMERWORLD OFFICIAL DISCUSSION FORUM   

Go Back   DRUMMERWORLD OFFICIAL DISCUSSION FORUM > Off Topic Lounge

Off Topic Lounge All Discussions Not Related To Drumming

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 11-09-2009, 02:07 AM
Mark Ahle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-09-2009, 03:09 AM
Ian Williams's Avatar
Ian Williams Ian Williams is offline
Rebel
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Venezuela.
Posts: 3,247
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

I think the appropriate word for Led Zeppelin is: Great.
Not ridiculous.
__________________
"Forget the message, forget the lyrics, and just play." - Ginger Baker
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-09-2009, 03:11 AM
GRUNTERSDAD's Avatar
GRUNTERSDAD GRUNTERSDAD is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Florida's West Coast
Posts: 15,645
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
__________________
Thank you for sharing my day.
Gretsch Renown
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-09-2009, 01:18 PM
nhzoso
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-09-2009, 01:50 PM
Ian Williams's Avatar
Ian Williams Ian Williams is offline
Rebel
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Venezuela.
Posts: 3,247
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Some people tend to overlook - Presence - due to Physical Graffitti hit, but it's an excellent album as well.
__________________
"Forget the message, forget the lyrics, and just play." - Ginger Baker
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-09-2009, 02:19 PM
Pocket-full-of-gold's Avatar
Pocket-full-of-gold Pocket-full-of-gold is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
Posts: 10,007
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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!!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-09-2009, 04:21 PM
DSCRAPRE's Avatar
DSCRAPRE DSCRAPRE is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Packer Country
Posts: 786
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Rediculously awesome is more like it.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-09-2009, 05:37 PM
zambizzi's Avatar
zambizzi zambizzi is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Big Bad Boise
Posts: 4,048
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-09-2009, 06:06 PM
Thaard's Avatar
Thaard Thaard is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,462
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-09-2009, 06:26 PM
Skulmoski's Avatar
Skulmoski Skulmoski is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 1,314
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nhzoso View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-09-2009, 11:51 PM
Pocket-full-of-gold's Avatar
Pocket-full-of-gold Pocket-full-of-gold is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
Posts: 10,007
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thaard View Post
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.

Last edited by Pocket-full-of-gold; 11-10-2009 at 01:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-10-2009, 01:07 AM
rogue_drummer's Avatar
rogue_drummer rogue_drummer is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 1,221
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
__________________
I don't aim to be the best, just the best looking.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-10-2009, 01:48 AM
Mark Ahle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

"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
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-10-2009, 02:01 AM
Bonz0's Avatar
Bonz0 Bonz0 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 86
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
__________________
"Drumming was the only thing I was ever good at." - John Bonham.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-10-2009, 02:27 AM
DSCRAPRE's Avatar
DSCRAPRE DSCRAPRE is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Packer Country
Posts: 786
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue_drummer View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-10-2009, 05:08 AM
zephead19's Avatar
zephead19 zephead19 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Western New York
Posts: 239
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Ahle View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-10-2009, 08:14 AM
wy yung wy yung is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,029
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-10-2009, 08:19 AM
donv donv is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 545
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-10-2009, 06:09 PM
rogue_drummer's Avatar
rogue_drummer rogue_drummer is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 1,221
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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...
__________________
I don't aim to be the best, just the best looking.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-10-2009, 07:12 PM
Thaard's Avatar
Thaard Thaard is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,462
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket-full-of-gold View Post
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)
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-11-2009, 02:13 PM
nhzoso
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Ahle View Post
"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.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-12-2009, 01:16 AM
Darbuka Darbuka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 33
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nhzoso View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-12-2009, 01:19 AM
Darbuka Darbuka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 33
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-12-2009, 01:50 AM
Pocket-full-of-gold's Avatar
Pocket-full-of-gold Pocket-full-of-gold is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
Posts: 10,007
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darbuka View Post
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..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-12-2009, 02:45 AM
Deathmetalconga's Avatar
Deathmetalconga Deathmetalconga is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 7,231
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue_drummer View Post
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.
__________________
Ironwood kit Tiki kit Openhanders Vids
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-12-2009, 08:26 AM
Pollyanna's Avatar
Pollyanna Pollyanna is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cyberspace, Sydney connection
Posts: 10,000
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathmetalconga View Post
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 ...
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-12-2009, 09:33 PM
Strangelove's Avatar
Strangelove Strangelove is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somewhere west of sanity
Posts: 1,133
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathmetalconga View Post
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.

Last edited by Strangelove; 11-12-2009 at 09:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-12-2009, 10:09 PM
donv donv is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 545
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strangelove View Post
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!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-12-2009, 10:58 PM
Strangelove's Avatar
Strangelove Strangelove is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somewhere west of sanity
Posts: 1,133
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by donv View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-13-2009, 12:24 AM
donv donv is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 545
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strangelove View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 11-13-2009, 03:30 PM
Pollyanna's Avatar
Pollyanna Pollyanna is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cyberspace, Sydney connection
Posts: 10,000
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-13-2009, 03:50 PM
Mediocrefunkybeat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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?
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-13-2009, 04:06 PM
Pollyanna's Avatar
Pollyanna Pollyanna is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cyberspace, Sydney connection
Posts: 10,000
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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 ...
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-13-2009, 04:19 PM
Mediocrefunkybeat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pollyanna View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-13-2009, 05:32 PM
PQleyR's Avatar
PQleyR PQleyR is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Godalming, UK
Posts: 2,283
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
__________________
Drummer for Gloryhammer
My facebook page
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-13-2009, 11:32 PM
donv donv is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 545
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediocrefunkybeat View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-13-2009, 11:49 PM
Strangelove's Avatar
Strangelove Strangelove is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somewhere west of sanity
Posts: 1,133
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-14-2009, 12:42 AM
Ian Williams's Avatar
Ian Williams Ian Williams is offline
Rebel
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Venezuela.
Posts: 3,247
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

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!
__________________
"Forget the message, forget the lyrics, and just play." - Ginger Baker
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-14-2009, 01:04 AM
nhzoso
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strangelove View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-14-2009, 01:58 AM
Mediocrefunkybeat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Led Zeppelin is Rediculous.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Bernhard Castiglioni's DRUMMERWORLD.com