Tell Me :
Talk
They have to be pretty ignorant of the world of music to not know who Led Zeppelin are.
A simple google search of zep related twitter, facebook, flickr etc etc accounts and posts will show you many young people love Led Zep, the stones, hendrix etc etc.
Led Zep are up in the top league of sales, dwarfing the stones by millions. Led Zeppelin were and are a huge band, the numbers involved are just too vast...
Millions of sales, millions of ticket requests, regular updating of their back catalogue, ace DVD sets, dedicated books, many articles in music magazines etc etc.
Led Zeppelins official facebook page has 10 million likes, millions of those likes are by young people.
You are clueless about their popularity.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-12-12 23:05 by His Majesty.
Like me you know what "Famous on Fb" really means... nothing!
And the young people have no idea about the band, 95% of them weren't even born when the Zep revival started (Sept. 90 with the orange LZ boxset and the "Travelling Riverside Blues" (ugly) video).
I see teeners with the "fallen angel" T-shirt cos it looks cool, but frankly I doubt they know who JPJ was or what "Dancing Days" sounds like...
It means those people are at the very least aware of them. The world wide likes are essentially matched by worldwide sales anyway.
They remain a successful ongoing interest. Music is so easy to access these days,
you need only own an iphone or similar to be ale to obtain thousands of bands entire back catalogues after a few selections on a touch screen.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-12-12 23:47 by His Majesty.
Where did I state that it was a fact? Of course everything that is said in this forum is an opinion unless you are talking about sales numbers or something else that can be verified.
You seem to be very defensive when it comes to somebody taking a jab at Led Zeppelin. Relax man. After all it's only Rock 'n Roll.
"Lyin' awake in a cold, cold sweat. Am I overdrawn, am I going in debt?
It gets worse, the older that you get. No escape from the state of confusion I'm in.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-12-15 21:27 by FrankM.
Yes, alas, there is no question that Led Zep is far more popular than the stones across the board, no matter how you measure it.
Sadly, in the younger generations the main thing the Stones are famous for is being old.
Yeah, the stones have substitutes.
I fail to see what part of my post constitutes "spin," but whatever.
Btw, JB's death wasn't the wake-up call you imagine, if you follow the stages of Page's addiction through the next several years.
YES!!!
Holy cow, that's 3 times as much than ABBA. I must be getting old.
Don't agree about the 1st 5 albums but do agree about this one - Love this 1979 version (Play it LOUD):
Well you are...
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: December 12, 2013 22:50
Quote
kleermaker
Wrong conclusion. The same goes for her friends and many other young people here. Ah, all secluded from the world of music, duh.
They have to be pretty ignorant of the world of music to not know who Led Zeppelin are.
A simple google search of zep related twitter, facebook, flickr etc etc accounts and posts will show you many young people love Led Zep, the stones, hendrix etc etc.
Led Zep are up in the top league of sales, dwarfing the stones by millions. Led Zeppelin were and are a huge band, the numbers involved are just too vast...
Millions of sales, millions of ticket requests, regular updating of their back catalogue, ace DVD sets, dedicated books, many articles in music magazines etc etc.
Led Zeppelins official facebook page has 10 million likes, millions of those likes are by young people.
You are clueless about their popularity.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-12-12 23:05 by His Majesty.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: December 12, 2013 23:13
Quote
His Majesty
Led Zeppelins official facebook page has 10 million likes, millions of those likes are by young people.
Like me you know what "Famous on Fb" really means... nothing!
And the young people have no idea about the band, 95% of them weren't even born when the Zep revival started (Sept. 90 with the orange LZ boxset and the "Travelling Riverside Blues" (ugly) video).
I see teeners with the "fallen angel" T-shirt cos it looks cool, but frankly I doubt they know who JPJ was or what "Dancing Days" sounds like...
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: December 12, 2013 23:26
Quote
dcbaQuote
His Majesty
Led Zeppelins official facebook page has 10 million likes, millions of those likes are by young people.
Like me you know what "Famous on Fb" really means... nothing!
And the young people have no idea about the band, 95% of them weren't even born when the Zep revival started (Sept. 90 with the orange LZ boxset and the "Travelling Riverside Blues" (ugly) video).
I see teeners with the "fallen angel" T-shirt cos it looks cool, but frankly I doubt they know who JPJ was or what "Dancing Days" sounds like...
It means those people are at the very least aware of them. The world wide likes are essentially matched by worldwide sales anyway.
They remain a successful ongoing interest. Music is so easy to access these days,
you need only own an iphone or similar to be ale to obtain thousands of bands entire back catalogues after a few selections on a touch screen.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-12-12 23:47 by His Majesty.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: December 13, 2013 00:08
You could say the same of all the Stones fans who don't know who Mick Taylor is. these young people just love the Stones' and Zep's music, who cares who's on the T-shirts?
Re: OT - Zeppelin Plagairism
Posted by:
FrankM
()
Date: December 15, 2013 20:59
Quote
BluzDudeQuote
FrankM
Yeah but like Hamburger Helper you can only take so much of it. Led Zeppelin's music is good in small doses, not seven days a week.
That's YOUR opinion.....
....please don't state opinion like it's fact
Where did I state that it was a fact? Of course everything that is said in this forum is an opinion unless you are talking about sales numbers or something else that can be verified.
You seem to be very defensive when it comes to somebody taking a jab at Led Zeppelin. Relax man. After all it's only Rock 'n Roll.
"Lyin' awake in a cold, cold sweat. Am I overdrawn, am I going in debt?
It gets worse, the older that you get. No escape from the state of confusion I'm in.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-12-15 21:27 by FrankM.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
TeaAtThree
()
Date: December 16, 2013 04:03
Arguments everywhere, sigh....
I do know that now that the Zep is available on Spotify, I have been grooving to them for the last few days nonstop.
My current fave is Led Zep I, which I never liked as much as II and IV as a teenager. I'm also digging into Physical Graffiti more, particularly sides 3 and 4 more than before.
What's interesting is how influential they are with such a relatively small body of work. Nine studio albums is it (before Coda); I think 81 songs total.
I'm sure I'll be done with this phase in a week or so, but it's fun to be a teenage again.
T@3
I do know that now that the Zep is available on Spotify, I have been grooving to them for the last few days nonstop.
My current fave is Led Zep I, which I never liked as much as II and IV as a teenager. I'm also digging into Physical Graffiti more, particularly sides 3 and 4 more than before.
What's interesting is how influential they are with such a relatively small body of work. Nine studio albums is it (before Coda); I think 81 songs total.
I'm sure I'll be done with this phase in a week or so, but it's fun to be a teenage again.
T@3
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Title5Take1
()
Date: January 30, 2014 07:31
interesting.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-30 07:32 by Title5Take1.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-30 07:32 by Title5Take1.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
sonomastone
()
Date: January 30, 2014 11:27
Quote
His MajestyQuote
kleermaker
Wrong conclusion. The same goes for her friends and many other young people here. Ah, all secluded from the world of music, duh.
They have to be pretty ignorant of the world of music to not know who Led Zeppelin are.
A simple google search of zep related twitter, facebook, flickr etc etc accounts and posts will show you many young people love Led Zep, the stones, hendrix etc etc.
Led Zep are up in the top league of sales, dwarfing the stones by millions. Led Zeppelin were and are a huge band, the numbers involved are just too vast...
Millions of sales, millions of ticket requests, regular updating of their back catalogue, ace DVD sets, dedicated books, many articles in music magazines etc etc.
Led Zeppelins official facebook page has 10 million likes, millions of those likes are by young people.
You are clueless about their popularity.
Yes, alas, there is no question that Led Zep is far more popular than the stones across the board, no matter how you measure it.
Sadly, in the younger generations the main thing the Stones are famous for is being old.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Silver Dagger
()
Date: January 30, 2014 11:36
Is the match still being played? OK, extra time it is.
The ball is played out to Richards on the left wing, he crosses the ball to Wood who nods it back into the path of the advancing Jagger who curls a superb shot just inside the right hand post. 2-1 to the Stones.
The ball is played out to Richards on the left wing, he crosses the ball to Wood who nods it back into the path of the advancing Jagger who curls a superb shot just inside the right hand post. 2-1 to the Stones.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
caschimann
()
Date: January 30, 2014 13:12
It´s pretty simple:
Led Zep are the perfect Rock-Band.
My very Stones are the perfect Rock´n Roll-Band.
Led Zep are the perfect Rock-Band.
My very Stones are the perfect Rock´n Roll-Band.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Grison
()
Date: January 30, 2014 13:52
For me each Band is great with a one more point to the Stones as they did continue playing live after 1980 and survived bandmate changes.
On our last visit to North America and specially the last months staying in BC Canada there was a change in the Radio Stations towards the Stones. In previous years when we came to North America Led Zeppelin still had a big airplay on all stations. However since last Summer this has changed already when visiting California and definitely during the December/January when being in Canada. Especially Canadians seem to like Heavy Rock even more out in the Country. This is why they had so many RockRadioStations. It seemed to me with the 50years Celebration there is a tendency and appreciation to the Stones. That does not mean it declined for Led Zeppelin.
On our last visit to North America and specially the last months staying in BC Canada there was a change in the Radio Stations towards the Stones. In previous years when we came to North America Led Zeppelin still had a big airplay on all stations. However since last Summer this has changed already when visiting California and definitely during the December/January when being in Canada. Especially Canadians seem to like Heavy Rock even more out in the Country. This is why they had so many RockRadioStations. It seemed to me with the 50years Celebration there is a tendency and appreciation to the Stones. That does not mean it declined for Led Zeppelin.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: January 30, 2014 14:06
Quote
Silver Dagger
Is the match still being played? OK, extra time it is.
The ball is played out to Richards on the left wing, he crosses the ball to Wood who nods it back into the path of the advancing Jagger who curls a superb shot just inside the right hand post. 2-1 to the Stones.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: January 30, 2014 15:43
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Silver Dagger
Is the match still being played? OK, extra time it is.
The ball is played out to Richards on the left wing, he crosses the ball to Wood who nods it back into the path of the advancing Jagger who curls a superb shot just inside the right hand post. 2-1 to the Stones.
Yeah, the stones have substitutes.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: January 30, 2014 22:57
What amazes me is how LZ bowed down to the pressure of getting up to speed somewhat of being 'older' with their change of clothes ie Page with the stupid tie... obviously the silly dragon suit and bare chest would have had to go at some point. As great as LZ was they chose not to evolve with the trends and instead made such tepid songs that are on like IN THROUGH THE OUT DOOR with just a few decent tunes on it and didn't plow ahead with the rock where as the Stones said OK fine and made SOME GIRLS etc.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: January 31, 2014 00:49
They weren't bowing down to anything, they were refusing to get stuck in the past and changing their image to something more contemporary. The tie thing was really hot at the time. I also love pretty much all of ITTOD, as I do all their albums, but that's just me. I love the dragon suit too, but it's true, it sadly had to go.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: February 1, 2014 16:45
Well that is one way to spin Page's practically debilitating heroin addiction. He was almost non existent on ITTOD, and most the music was done by Plant and Jones, and did kowtow to the emerging sounds of the 80s. New wave synth all over the album with very little meaty guitar, that was Zeps signature trade mark. It is their weakest album by far. There are a few interesting ideas on IN the Evening, Carasulamba, and South Bound Suarez...but the music is mostly uninteresting and sterile. Actually, with JB's death it was a wake up call, had Zep continued Page would most probably have been another casualty.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: February 1, 2014 19:06
What I find amusing about LZ is they started to be interesting once they ran out of inspiration.
Let me explain : most people love songs the 1st 5 albums (69-73) because all the classics are there : Black Dog, SIBLYou, Heaven etc. Well I loathe these songs I always thought the riffs were either stolen from old blues (LZ 1 & II) or completely tacky : BDog, Heaven, Rain Song are utter crap to me.
Otoh when they started to run out of inspiration and had to invent songs in the studio (PGraffiti or Presence) that's for me when they did the most interesting stuff.
My fav LZ song ever? Achilles Last Stand!
Let me explain : most people love songs the 1st 5 albums (69-73) because all the classics are there : Black Dog, SIBLYou, Heaven etc. Well I loathe these songs I always thought the riffs were either stolen from old blues (LZ 1 & II) or completely tacky : BDog, Heaven, Rain Song are utter crap to me.
Otoh when they started to run out of inspiration and had to invent songs in the studio (PGraffiti or Presence) that's for me when they did the most interesting stuff.
My fav LZ song ever? Achilles Last Stand!
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Carnaby
()
Date: February 1, 2014 19:20
No comparison. One is rock n roll and the other is rock.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: February 1, 2014 23:33
Quote
whitem8
Well that is one way to spin Page's practically debilitating heroin addiction. He was almost non existent on ITTOD, and most the music was done by Plant and Jones, and did kowtow to the emerging sounds of the 80s. New wave synth all over the album with very little meaty guitar, that was Zeps signature trade mark. It is their weakest album by far. There are a few interesting ideas on IN the Evening, Carasulamba, and South Bound Suarez...but the music is mostly uninteresting and sterile. Actually, with JB's death it was a wake up call, had Zep continued Page would most probably have been another casualty.
I fail to see what part of my post constitutes "spin," but whatever.
Btw, JB's death wasn't the wake-up call you imagine, if you follow the stages of Page's addiction through the next several years.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: February 1, 2014 23:50
Yeah his addiction continued, pretty horribly. I do think though it could have been even worse had Zep continued on tour. Although, he still was playing incredible. I think he was amazing on the Knebworth show, and I think that was more the sound should have been on ITTOD. From what I have read, Page was barely able to function in the studio during the making of the album. I wan't trying to be derisive toward you saying spin, just a way to add a different opinion to the merits of the album and a way of refuting your assertion that this was a Zep plan to reinterpret their sound. I think it was more due to JPJ and Plant wanting to change the sound, the the guitarist, who undoubtably was the architect of a lot of their melodies and sound, was mostly MIA.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: February 2, 2014 00:04
I agree, Jimmy had very little to do with the making and vision of ITTOD, but since, as you said, that's because he was out of it generally, he was also out of what what going on in the music scene, whereas Plant and JPJ were more aware of how music was evolving, and wanted to evolve along with it. There were four guys in the band, after all, and the other three had ideas and visions too.
I'm just glad Jimmy got himself back together, and wish to goodness he'd get out on a stage again, and not just for the odd guest appearance.
I'm just glad Jimmy got himself back together, and wish to goodness he'd get out on a stage again, and not just for the odd guest appearance.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
BluzDude
()
Date: February 2, 2014 00:23
Quote
Aquamarine
I agree, Jimmy had very little to do with the making and vision of ITTOD, but since, as you said, that's because he was out of it generally, he was also out of what what going on in the music scene, whereas Plant and JPJ were more aware of how music was evolving, and wanted to evolve along with it. There were four guys in the band, after all, and the other three had ideas and visions too.
I'm just glad Jimmy got himself back together, and wish to goodness he'd get out on a stage again, and not just for the odd guest appearance.
YES!!!
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
LuxuryStones
()
Date: February 2, 2014 00:30
Quote
His Majesty
Led Zeppelins official facebook page has 10 million likes, millions of those likes are by young people.
Holy cow, that's 3 times as much than ABBA. I must be getting old.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
2000 LYFH
()
Date: February 2, 2014 01:05
Quote
dcba
What I find amusing about LZ is they started to be interesting once they ran out of inspiration.
Let me explain : most people love songs the 1st 5 albums (69-73) because all the classics are there : Black Dog, SIBLYou, Heaven etc. Well I loathe these songs I always thought the riffs were either stolen from old blues (LZ 1 & II) or completely tacky : BDog, Heaven, Rain Song are utter crap to me.
Otoh when they started to run out of inspiration and had to invent songs in the studio (PGraffiti or Presence) that's for me when they did the most interesting stuff.
My fav LZ song ever? Achilles Last Stand!
Don't agree about the 1st 5 albums but do agree about this one - Love this 1979 version (Play it LOUD):
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: February 2, 2014 01:09
That version of ALS live at Knebworth is stunning. Amazing, and what could have and should have been. Page looks like the walking dead, but damn is he playing his heart out. He obviously loves this song, and it is so inspiring to watch Page play when he is so passionate about Zep's music. I have a bootleg of that entire show and it is simply amazing. It reminds me a lot of Celebration Day, how they came back from oblivion and stunned and surprised the world with their passion and musical muscle. Love it.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 2, 2014 17:08
yes, that's 9 min 11 sec of my life I didn't mind investing in!
OT: Truth about jimmy page??
Posted by:
You Got to Roll Me
()
Date: March 24, 2014 23:42
Dont mean to start a whole thing here...But is there any truth behind the Jimmy Page, 14 year old girl, Kidnapping story.... I cant imagine if there was an ounce of truth behind it he would be given the kennedy center honers
.....keep on rolling.....
.....keep on rolling.....
Re: OT: Truth about jimmy page??
Posted by:
crawdaddy
()
Date: March 24, 2014 23:46
Never heard anything about it.Was it on the national TV News tonight ?
I never seen or heard it.
Must be old news or b**llsh*t.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-03-25 00:18 by crawdaddy.
I never seen or heard it.
Must be old news or b**llsh*t.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-03-25 00:18 by crawdaddy.
Re: OT: Truth about jimmy page??
Posted by:
big4
()
Date: March 24, 2014 23:50
From the 14 year-old looking back all grown up:
Infamous shark story and Jimmy's 14 year-old paramour
Infamous shark story and Jimmy's 14 year-old paramour
Re: OT: Truth about jimmy page??
Posted by:
Koen
()
Date: March 25, 2014 00:12
Quote
You Got to Roll Me
Dont mean to start a whole thing here.
Well you are...
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
bluecore , daspyknows , DeadHead4Ever , Gigbag , Halup , IGTBA , IrelandCalling4 , jmd , joguema , jp.M , Mabru , MJAGGER123 , rootsman , spunky , StonedRambler , thetiger
Guests:
1772
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10