- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is it fair to compare Led Zeppelin to the Beatles?
Posted on 6/1/23 at 8:40 am to prplhze2000
Posted on 6/1/23 at 8:40 am to prplhze2000
When it comes to studio stuff like production techniques, etc. It's hard to chose. Although Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones were much more involved in production than the Beatles.
The Beatles though really had some revolutionary sounds for the time. Most of that post Sgt Pepper was probably attributable more to McCartney who had become more of the creative driving force for the Beatles who really became a studio band from 1966 on. Hard to chose between the two in that respect.
Zeppelin though was blues oriented rock for the most part and at least for a while were a touring force. The Beatles were more "adventurous" for lack of a better term. Zeppelin "ripped off" some of their music from old delta blues guys....doesn't make what they did any less great though.
Pink Floyd really does not get the kind of respect that the band is due though and they get a lot. Starting with Dark Side of the Moon they really challenged a lot in rock music. From production to just sheer musicianship they did things and incorporated sounds that were not being done elsewhere. Gilmore and Waters are every bit the equals of Page and Jones or McCartney and Lennon and later Harrison.
The Stones were Blues guys pure and simple and there is no pretense with them. Straight up R&B guitar driven and kind of raw until the Some Girls album. Their work from 1968/69 until 1977 was some of the best music of the rock era put out by one band....not ridiculously hard, but not soft. Blues, blues rock with a touch of country.
The Beatles though really had some revolutionary sounds for the time. Most of that post Sgt Pepper was probably attributable more to McCartney who had become more of the creative driving force for the Beatles who really became a studio band from 1966 on. Hard to chose between the two in that respect.
Zeppelin though was blues oriented rock for the most part and at least for a while were a touring force. The Beatles were more "adventurous" for lack of a better term. Zeppelin "ripped off" some of their music from old delta blues guys....doesn't make what they did any less great though.
Pink Floyd really does not get the kind of respect that the band is due though and they get a lot. Starting with Dark Side of the Moon they really challenged a lot in rock music. From production to just sheer musicianship they did things and incorporated sounds that were not being done elsewhere. Gilmore and Waters are every bit the equals of Page and Jones or McCartney and Lennon and later Harrison.
The Stones were Blues guys pure and simple and there is no pretense with them. Straight up R&B guitar driven and kind of raw until the Some Girls album. Their work from 1968/69 until 1977 was some of the best music of the rock era put out by one band....not ridiculously hard, but not soft. Blues, blues rock with a touch of country.
1
Posted on 6/1/23 at 11:06 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
Gilmore and Waters are every bit the equals of Page and Jones or McCartney and Lennon and later Harrison.
Gilmore/Waters and Page/Jones were great band duo’s but aren’t on the same level as Lennon/McCartney/Harrison. No way.
Posted on 6/2/23 at 7:32 am to prplhze2000
Before my time but agree with comment that The Beatles, Zeppelin, & Stones are greatest ever.
I think The Beatles did a little of Blues covers also but not their forte. Watching that recent footage of Let it Be gave me the impression Paul McCartney was the greatest musician ever.
The ‘sound’ of Zeppelin’s material from 1st album through Houses of the Holy is my favorite. Once AI advances to the point of letting us upload a bunch of songs to create a new original song, I’m choosing Zeppelin first.
Delta blues plus British influence was a match made in a stairway to….
I think The Beatles did a little of Blues covers also but not their forte. Watching that recent footage of Let it Be gave me the impression Paul McCartney was the greatest musician ever.
The ‘sound’ of Zeppelin’s material from 1st album through Houses of the Holy is my favorite. Once AI advances to the point of letting us upload a bunch of songs to create a new original song, I’m choosing Zeppelin first.
Delta blues plus British influence was a match made in a stairway to….
Posted on 6/3/23 at 7:50 am to TexTigah81
Ehhhh. I think Lennon's legend outstrips his reality. From about 67 on the band was mostly McCartney with assists from Harrison and Lennon with Harrison asserting himself more as the time went on. Lennon was a great songwriter/lyricist and George really began to show his chops as a guitarist but I still think that Pink Floyd (Gilmore and Waters) through the Wall album were just better. Better production, better musicianship...equal in songwriting abilities. Just not as prolific as the Beatles were
Page and Jones were monsters in the studio and Page was the better guitarist by a mile....song writing not so much but it was a different style of music. Lennon liked Zeppelin and they had a friendly relationship. But Zeppelin's style and sound was and some would argue IS so profound that the music holds up to this day....I still find new things in Zeppelin's music to this day....Page and Jones were very gifted when it came to production. Same with the Beatles . Not not to the same extent. Led Zeppelin was so far ahead of its time at least in my opinion that rock music since still has not caught up and probably gave up trying.
Page and Jones were monsters in the studio and Page was the better guitarist by a mile....song writing not so much but it was a different style of music. Lennon liked Zeppelin and they had a friendly relationship. But Zeppelin's style and sound was and some would argue IS so profound that the music holds up to this day....I still find new things in Zeppelin's music to this day....Page and Jones were very gifted when it came to production. Same with the Beatles . Not not to the same extent. Led Zeppelin was so far ahead of its time at least in my opinion that rock music since still has not caught up and probably gave up trying.
Posted on 6/3/23 at 8:11 am to SteelerBravesDawg
Paul is a fine musician, but he's inferior to John Paul Jones and Roger Waters in that respect. I think Harrison could hold his own with Gilmore. But no way he could hang with Page.....few could , only guys better imho were Jeff Beck who was in a class by himself and EVH.
Posted on 6/3/23 at 8:47 am to KiwiHead
quote:
Paul is a fine musician, but he's inferior to John Paul Jones and Roger Waters in that respect. I think Harrison could hold his own with Gilmore. But no way he could hang with Page.....few could , only guys better imho were Jeff Beck who was in a class by himself and EVH
Fair.
Posted on 6/3/23 at 8:48 am to KiwiHead
quote:
From about 67 on the band was mostly McCartney
This is a true statement.
Lennon was too wrapped up in Yoko
and heroin by then. Posted on 6/3/23 at 11:06 pm to prplhze2000
Beatles
LZ
PF
Stones
LZ
PF
Stones
Posted on 6/4/23 at 3:14 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
hogcard1964
quote:
No, the Beatles had more talented bowel movements than what every member of Zeppelin possessed in musical talent. Especially song writing. Zeppelin is actually several notches back to the Beatles, Stones, The Who and The Kinks.
I would just sit out the rest of this thread if I were you. Edgy hot takes are just annoying. And always wrong.
Posted on 6/4/23 at 4:39 pm to jimmy the leg
1a. Beatles
1b. Rolling Stones
2. Pink Floyd
3. Led Zeppelin
There is not but gap between 1a and 3 though.
1b. Rolling Stones
2. Pink Floyd
3. Led Zeppelin
There is not but gap between 1a and 3 though.
Posted on 6/4/23 at 5:44 pm to prplhze2000
No…The Beatles are the GOAT’s. Period. Only together roughly 8 years and have sold more records than the Stones and LZ combined. More versatile than Stones, LZ & PF. The Beatles had so many really good songs that weren’t hits or #1’s. I’m not saying they were better musicians than LZ or PF but their total body of work is not comparable IMO. McCartney is more talented than any single member of any of the other bands mentioned considering his songwriting, vocals, ability to play bass and lead guitar, piano and drums. He played every instrument on his first solo album “McCartney”.
Lennon, McCartney & Harrison all had multiple #1 albums in their solo careers. Even Ringo had 2 #1 singles. NONE of the members of the Stones, LZ or PF had successful solo albums to speak of. Beatles, Stones, LZ, PF were 4 totally different bands. Everyone has their own musical tastes and preferences. To each his own…
Beatles
Stones
LZ
PF
Lennon, McCartney & Harrison all had multiple #1 albums in their solo careers. Even Ringo had 2 #1 singles. NONE of the members of the Stones, LZ or PF had successful solo albums to speak of. Beatles, Stones, LZ, PF were 4 totally different bands. Everyone has their own musical tastes and preferences. To each his own…
Beatles
Stones
LZ
PF
Posted on 6/4/23 at 11:29 pm to prplhze2000
I love Led Zeplin, but The Beatles are in a class by themselves.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News