I could probably agree Zeppelin had better individual musicians. But as a group I can't accept that they create a better whole. Comparing front men, there is no comparison. Mick far in front and everyone else after.

Would be interesting to create a sort of matrix, that awards points for things like record sales, ticket sales, chart rankings for singles, albums. A sort of band comparison formula. If only for the sake of settling debates. I do enjoy the discussion and could easily argue either side of the debate.

IMO, certainly Pink Floyd, The Beatles and the Who need to be in the debate as well.

I love both bands because I found them both when they were still playing blues. I honestly think they went in such different directions in the end that there's no point in comparing them musically--there's only a few years between them, but even back then I loved them in completely different ways. (I will say I was glad when Zep scaled back from those endless self-indulgent solos.) Was thrilled to be at the Zep reunion in 2007, and even more to be at the O2/Hyde Park in 2012/13! But I also enjoyed Plant's solo show in Dallas a couple of weeks back. What a generation, that produced such amazing music!

Led Zeppelin was the best at doing Led Zeppelin and inspiring future hard rock bands and certainly the essence of change, with their acoustic tunes, strings and all the different styles they did.

The Rolling Stones were the best at doing The Rolling Stones and inspiring future rock'n'roll bands and certainly the essence of change, with their fantastic middle eights, strings, choirs and all the different styles they did.

Zep's drummer died and so they stopped.

It's music, not boxing or football.

Look at this, it's interesting, and on one of them, Single Albums - All Time Top Shipments USA, the Stones aren't even listed!

[www.ukmix.org]

This is not me, it's the dude who said this, which is interesting, from that site:

"Regarding US album sales, the riaa currently says

Led Zep - 111.5 million
Stones - 66.5 million

This includes all those multi-disc sets. Taking these out, the audited actual number of albums shipped is

Led Zep - 89.46 million
Stones - 57.167 million

Using Certification dates and soundscan, it is possible to estimate the total shipments of both bands since 1969 and 1964 respectively

Led Zep - 103 million
Stones - 80 million

However, in some ways it is like comparing Chalk and Cheese. Their music is very different and The Stones were very much a singles band in a way Led Zep never were.

Research has shown that Led Zep appeal much more to younger buyers who tend to view the Stones as old-fashioned. They might go to one of their concerts out of curiousity but won't necessarily buy any of their albums.

While we don't have any way of accurately estimating Worldwide sales, logic, charts and touring indicate that Led Zep sold more albums than The Stones. I think if you double US sales to 206 million for Led Zep and 160 million for The Stones, then you have as good an estimate for Worldwide sales as it is possible to come up with.

Their Soundscan totals since 1991 are surprisingly similar - Led Zep have just passed 25 million and The Stones are likely somewhere between 26 and 27 million.

The real winners in the Soundscan Era are Pink Floyd."

Quote
GasLightStreet
Led Zeppelin was the best at doing Led Zeppelin and inspiring future hard rock bands and certainly the essence of change, with their acoustic tunes, strings and all the different styles they did.

The Rolling Stones were the best at doing The Rolling Stones and inspiring future rock'n'roll bands and certainly the essence of change, with their fantastic middle eights, strings, choirs and all the different styles they did.

Zep's drummer died and so they stopped.

It's music, not boxing or football.

Look at this, it's interesting, and on one of them, Single Albums - All Time Top Shipments USA, the Stones aren't even listed!

[www.ukmix.org]

i have a similar way of putting it, athough i think led zeppelin was a greater agent for change. they really helped spawn a lot of the heavier, metal music. the stones to me were the ultimate refinement of blues-heavy rock-n-roll. strings, choirs, middle 8's - they had all been done before. but the stones took it all to its logical conclusion and laid down the best interpretations of the form.

Quote
GasLightStreet
This is not me, it's the dude who said this, which is interesting, from that site:

"Regarding US album sales, the riaa currently says

Led Zep - 111.5 million
Stones - 66.5 million

This includes all those multi-disc sets. Taking these out, the audited actual number of albums shipped is

Led Zep - 89.46 million
Stones - 57.167 million

Using Certification dates and soundscan, it is possible to estimate the total shipments of both bands since 1969 and 1964 respectively

Led Zep - 103 million
Stones - 80 million

However, in some ways it is like comparing Chalk and Cheese. Their music is very different and The Stones were very much a singles band in a way Led Zep never were.

Research has shown that Led Zep appeal much more to younger buyers who tend to view the Stones as old-fashioned. They might go to one of their concerts out of curiousity but won't necessarily buy any of their albums.

While we don't have any way of accurately estimating Worldwide sales, logic, charts and touring indicate that Led Zep sold more albums than The Stones. I think if you double US sales to 206 million for Led Zep and 160 million for The Stones, then you have as good an estimate for Worldwide sales as it is possible to come up with.

Their Soundscan totals since 1991 are surprisingly similar - Led Zep have just passed 25 million and The Stones are likely somewhere between 26 and 27 million.

The real winners in the Soundscan Era are Pink Floyd."

they are similar in soundscan era bu think of zeppelin. no tours or new albums of material and they have not done countless hits packages

Gimme a break! The Rolling Stones are light years better than anyone else!!

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet
This is not me, it's the dude who said this, which is interesting, from that site:

"Regarding US album sales, the riaa currently says

Led Zep - 111.5 million
Stones - 66.5 million

This includes all those multi-disc sets. Taking these out, the audited actual number of albums shipped is

Led Zep - 89.46 million
Stones - 57.167 million

Using Certification dates and soundscan, it is possible to estimate the total shipments of both bands since 1969 and 1964 respectively

Led Zep - 103 million
Stones - 80 million

However, in some ways it is like comparing Chalk and Cheese. Their music is very different and The Stones were very much a singles band in a way Led Zep never were.

Research has shown that Led Zep appeal much more to younger buyers who tend to view the Stones as old-fashioned. They might go to one of their concerts out of curiousity but won't necessarily buy any of their albums.

While we don't have any way of accurately estimating Worldwide sales, logic, charts and touring indicate that Led Zep sold more albums than The Stones. I think if you double US sales to 206 million for Led Zep and 160 million for The Stones, then you have as good an estimate for Worldwide sales as it is possible to come up with.

Their Soundscan totals since 1991 are surprisingly similar - Led Zep have just passed 25 million and The Stones are likely somewhere between 26 and 27 million.

The real winners in the Soundscan Era are Pink Floyd."

they are similar in soundscan era bu think of zeppelin. no tours or new albums of material and they have not done countless hits packages

Right. Plus they didn't do anything in the 1980s other than release Coda!

Quote
Wild Slivovitz
Gimme a break! The Rolling Stones are light years better than anyone else!!

Er, I hate to say it...but even The Beatles?!

Well, I'm not unbiased when it comes to the Stones...

Quote
sonomastone

Quote
GasLightStreet
Led Zeppelin was the best at doing Led Zeppelin and inspiring future hard rock bands and certainly the essence of change, with their acoustic tunes, strings and all the different styles they did.

The Rolling Stones were the best at doing The Rolling Stones and inspiring future rock'n'roll bands and certainly the essence of change, with their fantastic middle eights, strings, choirs and all the different styles they did.

Zep's drummer died and so they stopped.

It's music, not boxing or football.

Look at this, it's interesting, and on one of them, Single Albums - All Time Top Shipments USA, the Stones aren't even listed!

[www.ukmix.org]

i have a similar way of putting it, athough i think led zeppelin was a greater agent for change. they really helped spawn a lot of the heavier, metal music. the stones to me were the ultimate refinement of blues-heavy rock-n-roll. strings, choirs, middle 8's - they had all been done before. but the stones took it all to its logical conclusion and laid down the best interpretations of the form.

Zep a greater agent for change? Really? No. Historically speaking that just isn't so. The Stones pushed the boundaries, as did The Beatles, The Who, and The Kinks. The Stones showed that American Blues could be creatively interpreted and experimented with. They designed the modern rock tours. They did so much to influence Led Zep, and Zep did practically nothing to influence The Rolling Stones. The Stones were far more eclectic than Zep, with much more variety in their sound and music. I love Zep, but they copied most of what they created.

Quote
whitem8


Zep a greater agent for change? Really? No. Historically speaking that just isn't so. The Stones pushed the boundaries, as did The Beatles, The Who, and The Kinks. The Stones showed that American Blues could be creatively interpreted and experimented with. They designed the modern rock tours. They did so much to influence Led Zep, and Zep did practically nothing to influence The Rolling Stones. The Stones were far more eclectic than Zep, with much more variety in their sound and music. I love Zep, but they copied most of what they created.

I agree with you, except this last bit. There was a lot of, er, "borrowing" with Zep, but the Stones did the same in their early days. And a band that can produce Dazed and Confused, The Lemon Song, Kashmir, Going to California, Fool in the Rain, etc., rank as pretty darn varied in my book.

Yes, the stones borrowed, but then used that to move on to creating very original music. Again, I love Zep, but they are notorious for copping other people's work and claiming it as their own. And were sued for that by Willie Dixon (he won). Check out youtube for several very interesting videos about Zeps plagiarism. It is interesting you used Dazed and Confused as one of your examples, as that was pretty much nicked from a 60's pop singer. In later years, Plant in particular, has been pretty open in acknowledging the source of a lot of their music. Check out the links below and give them a watch. I admit to being a big fan of Zep, and I also admit to being quite disappointed when I watched those videos. Yes, everyone borrows music. That is the nature of playing music. But also, groups like The Stones and Beatles were very open about their influences, they also didn't take credit for writing lyrics they didn't write. It is quite shocking some of the examples on those videos showing very clear cases of plagiarism- with Plant and Page being the main culprits.

Yes those Zep songs you list are good examples, but they still don't go as far as The Stones did in creating varied material.

Quote
Aquamarine

Quote
whitem8


Zep a greater agent for change? Really? No. Historically speaking that just isn't so. The Stones pushed the boundaries, as did The Beatles, The Who, and The Kinks. The Stones showed that American Blues could be creatively interpreted and experimented with. They designed the modern rock tours. They did so much to influence Led Zep, and Zep did practically nothing to influence The Rolling Stones. The Stones were far more eclectic than Zep, with much more variety in their sound and music. I love Zep, but they copied most of what they created.

I agree with you, except this last bit. There was a lot of, er, "borrowing" with Zep, but the Stones did the same in their early days. And a band that can produce Dazed and Confused, The Lemon Song, Kashmir, Going to California, Fool in the Rain, etc., rank as pretty darn varied in my book.

Dazed and Confused was carried over, virtually note for note, from The Yardbirds, as was White Summer, which became Black Mountain Side on Led Zep I.

Zeppelin, which called themselves The New Yardbirds for the first couple months of their existence, even used the leftover sound equipment of The Yardbirds for a short while in 1968 before they burned their way through it. Yardbirds rhythm guitarist turned bassist may even have been offered the job as New Yardbirds/Led Zep bassist, but turned it down. As it happened, he wound up taking the band photograph used on the back of the album jacket for Led Zep I.









And, of course, White Summer is said to be taken from a Davey Graham adaptation of a traditional Irish melody.

Dazed and Confused is a re-working of a song titled 'I'm Confused' by a musician called Jake Holmes. He supported the Yardbirds in 1967 and the soon-to-be Led Zeppelin version was put together by Page and Chris Dreja of the Yardbirds. The group performed the track on French television in 1968 and even when performed today in their bastardized incarnation, it's still 'I'm Confused' Jimmy Page still does not acknowledge the plagiarism.

OK, in this clip, the French host refers to the song as Dazed and Confused, but I'm certain that the Yardbirds called it 'I'm Confused' when I caught them live in 2003.

When I was younger I really dug Zep. These days I have a very difficult time enjoying them. I can't really explain it except to say that I now find them boring. They don't move me. Maybe I am not angry enough to enjoy them! Used to love them when I was skateboarding.

Quote
nightskyman
Er, I hate to say it...but even The Beatles?!

I'd put those two about equal - the Stones because of their added post-60s output, and their mythic stage performances and tours. Dylan a close third. (The Trinity of Rock. Unoriginal but true.) Led Zep far below.

Quote
Big Al
Dazed and Confused is a re-working of a song titled 'I'm Confused' by a musician called Jake Holmes. He supported the Yardbirds in 1967 and the soon-to-be Led Zeppelin version was put together by Page and Chris Dreja of the Yardbirds. The group performed the track on French television in 1968 and even when performed today in their bastardized incarnation, it's still 'I'm Confused' Jimmy Page still does not acknowledge the plagiarism.

I have no idea what this means. The band doesn't perform today, period. If you're talking about the current version of the Yardbirds, that has nothing to do with Zep.

But I wish I hadn't used this example as I didn't want to open this can of worms, of which I'm totally aware, and which has now been settled in court. I REALLY don't want to get into Jake Holmes (who was hardly a pop star) getting the song from Anne Briggs in the first place, etc. etc. Or that the variations Zeppelin played on it that basically transformed the song anyway. Fact is that all bands of that era did the same thing, and with different degrees of arm-twisting have subsequently given more credit to the "borrowees". The Stones aren't exempt here.

My point was simply that Zeppelin produced some wildly varied music--I stand by that.

P.S. Stonehearted, you're missing your own point, in that Bert Jansch is the guitarist that that melody is clearly taken from, as both he and Page acknowledged. But then Jansch was influenced by Graham, just as the blues musicians all cross-pollinated.

Oh, and Dreja was never offered the job of Zep bassist. Jones was the first member recruited by Page, as a fellow session musician, there was never any question of anyone else taking that particular spot.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-16 10:38 by Aquamarine.

i prefer the stones, but give led zep their due.

led zeppelin was a legendary band. one of the few that even deserve to be compared directly with the stones.

in 1969 they played the blues in a new, fresh way (just has the stones had done years earlier) and they created entire genres of music (heavy metal for one).

they were without a doubt the most popular band of the 70s (and i know, i know, it's not about popularity. but still, to be a legendary band you gotta have an impact and an audience)

having said all that, the stones are much better. but led zep deserves credit where credit is due.

Zep was kinda boring live so to me the Stones are/were the better band.

Quote
rob51
Zep was kinda boring live so to me the Stones are/were the better band.

I think that's a first for me. I've heard them called kinda messy, kinda late, kinda loud...even kinda sloppy, kinda regimented or kinda short lived...kinda dungeony kinda dragony...kinda drunk kinda stoned kinda press unfriendly...I have never heard the four of them being called kinda boring...

I just don't think they were if you can live with 28 minutes of drum soloing...

That guy, Led Zeppelin...he's got a great voice.

Quote
treaclefingers
That guy, Led Zeppelin...he's got a great voice.

You mean Fred...Fred Zeppelin had the great voice, just didn't have an extra jimmy lying around

Zep had some good guitar riffs that captured the brown weed iron on t-shirt stoned in parent's basement early 70's. They are a long time gone and won't be played much in 30 years. I think one prominent critic last year called for permanently banning Stairway from airwaves.

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
treaclefingers
That guy, Led Zeppelin...he's got a great voice.

You mean Fred...Fred Zeppelin had the great voice, just didn't have an extra jimmy lying around

so true...that extra jimmy needed to get the lead out.

Beauty is in the ear of the beholder....

Quote
Shott
Zep had some good guitar riffs that captured the brown weed iron on t-shirt stoned in parent's basement early 70's. They are a long time gone and won't be played much in 30 years. I think one prominent critic last year called for permanently banning Stairway from airwaves.

And then he was shott.

Though not by me, it's not one of my faves of theirs.

Quote
Come On

Nice...that supposed to be Jimmy Page on the 'long distance call on the porcelain'?