Tell Me :
Talk
Yep! I noticed that also on this forum!!
agreed about beck. he is still trying to push himself and come up with something new
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
because Paul McCartney admitted being inspired by Pet Sounds when making Sgt. Pepper.
come on skippy...you gotta love it, if only for Sloop John B!
Good background on Pet Sounds here skip...if you want to ejumacate yoself!:
[en.wikipedia.org]
Full circle, then?
true...I'm not even making that up either!
I wonder what inspired Rubber Soul?
Dylan and pot and shankar etc.
That has to be the Beatles best album title by the way.
The audience, and myself, who sat through the entire album, delivered live by Brian Wilson with Al Jardine and other great musicians two nights ago at the Greek might beg to differ. It was wonderful. If Led Zeppelin's 1st, and Pet Sounds are pieces of shit to you, I feel very lucky that my ears enjoy them immensely. Thank you ears for turning shit into gold.
Trips in the woods of Norway?
Isn't it good?
How can you not like one of the greatest albums of all time?!
chronic ear wax has been a lifelong problem for skippy.
I've listened to it. It's crap. I don't get it. I don't get how it inspired The Beatles and I don't get how it's such a highy revered LP.
Because I can?
AHEM:
Because I can.
Wait.
Because I do.
Well, it did inspire the Beatles, that's a fact. So, should we consider your ears suspect from hear on out? Give us some other obvious classic albums you hate that everybody loves. Dark Side of the Moon the product of hacks?
Hey, everyone is allowed a couple of questionable calls.
I actually don't have a lot of love for the Beach Boys, I don't like a lot of the music but this album does stand on it's own.
lol. not the same JPJ
You need to read The Phantom Tollbooth.
Yes, I am aware of that fact. However, upon several listenings to it I can not fathom one iota of sense as to HOW it did.
Other than drugs.
Because Brian upped the game in terms of production values and musical innovation, which might have seemed more obvious at the time.
Another thing that might surprise you is the fact that without the Beach Boys--and surf rock in general--The Who never would have wound up sounding like The Who. Amazing, but true.
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:
bluesno1fann
()
Date: October 22, 2013 12:15
The Rolling Stones.
The Stones, The Beatles, and The Beach Boys are easily the three greatest bands of the 60's. The holy trinity, you can say.
Closely followed are The Who, Pink Floyd, The Kinks, and Led Zeppelin.
I do think that Zeppelin is slightly overrated. But to be totally honest, I don't have any problems with the band itself (other than all their plagiarisms). It's the hardcore fans that piss me off. They're so arrogant it's unbearable.
The Stones, The Beatles, and The Beach Boys are easily the three greatest bands of the 60's. The holy trinity, you can say.
Closely followed are The Who, Pink Floyd, The Kinks, and Led Zeppelin.
I do think that Zeppelin is slightly overrated. But to be totally honest, I don't have any problems with the band itself (other than all their plagiarisms). It's the hardcore fans that piss me off. They're so arrogant it's unbearable.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Wild Slivovitz
()
Date: October 22, 2013 12:19
Quote
bluesno1fann
I don't have any problems with the band itself (other than all their plagiarisms). It's the hardcore fans that piss me off. They're so arrogant it's unbearable.
Yep! I noticed that also on this forum!!
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
keefriffhard4life
()
Date: October 22, 2013 13:30
Quote
svt22Quote
His MajestyQuote
24FPS
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
The production is quite a step above that found on Truth.
Truth and LZI being similar is understandible given that Beck and Page were friends and on a partly shared similar musical path since they met.
There's similarities between their playing and sounds throughout the sixties. They both found the sound of their post Yarbirds bands during Beck's Bolero session. Dynamic fuzzy blues with a heavy rhythm section.
Truth and LZI are both ace!
Mmmm, I think one of Jeff's greatest efforts is that he kept on developing in the 7-tees and onwards : Blow by Blow, Wired, and later Beck's Guitar shop. He didn't doze off, like most of the 6-tees heroes.
agreed about beck. he is still trying to push himself and come up with something new
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: October 22, 2013 16:15
Quote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 22, 2013 16:28
What does Pet Sounds have to do with Sgt Pepper, except for Wilson admitting he was inspired by Rubber Soul when making it??
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 22, 2013 16:32
Quote
DandelionPowderman
What does Pet Sounds have to do with Sgt Pepper, except for Wilson admitting he was inspired by Rubber Soul when making it??
because Paul McCartney admitted being inspired by Pet Sounds when making Sgt. Pepper.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 22, 2013 16:36
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
come on skippy...you gotta love it, if only for Sloop John B!
Good background on Pet Sounds here skip...if you want to ejumacate yoself!:
[en.wikipedia.org]
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 22, 2013 16:44
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowderman
What does Pet Sounds have to do with Sgt Pepper, except for Wilson admitting he was inspired by Rubber Soul when making it??
because Paul McCartney admitted being inspired by Pet Sounds when making Sgt. Pepper.
Full circle, then?
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 22, 2013 16:53
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowderman
What does Pet Sounds have to do with Sgt Pepper, except for Wilson admitting he was inspired by Rubber Soul when making it??
because Paul McCartney admitted being inspired by Pet Sounds when making Sgt. Pepper.
Full circle, then?
true...I'm not even making that up either!
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
2000 LYFH
()
Date: October 22, 2013 17:25
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowderman
What does Pet Sounds have to do with Sgt Pepper, except for Wilson admitting he was inspired by Rubber Soul when making it??
because Paul McCartney admitted being inspired by Pet Sounds when making Sgt. Pepper.
Full circle, then?
true...I'm not even making that up either!
I wonder what inspired Rubber Soul?
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: October 22, 2013 17:35
Quote
2000 LYFH
I wonder what inspired Rubber Soul?
Dylan and pot and shankar etc.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 22, 2013 17:45
Quote
2000 LYFHQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowderman
What does Pet Sounds have to do with Sgt Pepper, except for Wilson admitting he was inspired by Rubber Soul when making it??
because Paul McCartney admitted being inspired by Pet Sounds when making Sgt. Pepper.
Full circle, then?
true...I'm not even making that up either!
I wonder what inspired Rubber Soul?
That has to be the Beatles best album title by the way.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: October 22, 2013 18:11
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
The audience, and myself, who sat through the entire album, delivered live by Brian Wilson with Al Jardine and other great musicians two nights ago at the Greek might beg to differ. It was wonderful. If Led Zeppelin's 1st, and Pet Sounds are pieces of shit to you, I feel very lucky that my ears enjoy them immensely. Thank you ears for turning shit into gold.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Shantipole
()
Date: October 22, 2013 19:35
Love Zeppelin, always will but Stones music to me has soul, it is not just rock but includes the roll.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 22, 2013 23:25
Quote
His MajestyQuote
2000 LYFH
I wonder what inspired Rubber Soul?
Dylan and pot and shankar etc.
Trips in the woods of Norway?
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 23, 2013 02:15
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
His MajestyQuote
2000 LYFH
I wonder what inspired Rubber Soul?
Dylan and pot and shankar etc.
Trips in the woods of Norway?
Isn't it good?
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
bluesno1fann
()
Date: October 23, 2013 02:41
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
How can you not like one of the greatest albums of all time?!
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 23, 2013 04:22
Quote
bluesno1fannQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
How can you not like one of the greatest albums of all time?!
chronic ear wax has been a lifelong problem for skippy.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: October 23, 2013 16:29
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
come on skippy...you gotta love it, if only for Sloop John B!
Good background on Pet Sounds here skip...if you want to ejumacate yoself!
I've listened to it. It's crap. I don't get it. I don't get how it inspired The Beatles and I don't get how it's such a highy revered LP.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: October 23, 2013 16:30
Quote
bluesno1fannQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
How can you not like one of the greatest albums of all time?!
Because I can?
AHEM:
Because I can.
Wait.
Because I do.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
BluzDude
()
Date: October 23, 2013 21:16
I think it's really great that John Paul Jones has an arena named after him in Virginia. Is there a Bill Wyman arena anywhere in the US?
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: October 23, 2013 21:44
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
treaclefingersQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
come on skippy...you gotta love it, if only for Sloop John B!
Good background on Pet Sounds here skip...if you want to ejumacate yoself!
I've listened to it. It's crap. I don't get it. I don't get how it inspired The Beatles and I don't get how it's such a highy revered LP.
Well, it did inspire the Beatles, that's a fact. So, should we consider your ears suspect from hear on out? Give us some other obvious classic albums you hate that everybody loves. Dark Side of the Moon the product of hacks?
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 23, 2013 22:30
Quote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
treaclefingersQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
come on skippy...you gotta love it, if only for Sloop John B!
Good background on Pet Sounds here skip...if you want to ejumacate yoself!
I've listened to it. It's crap. I don't get it. I don't get how it inspired The Beatles and I don't get how it's such a highy revered LP.
Well, it did inspire the Beatles, that's a fact. So, should we consider your ears suspect from hear on out? Give us some other obvious classic albums you hate that everybody loves. Dark Side of the Moon the product of hacks?
Hey, everyone is allowed a couple of questionable calls.
I actually don't have a lot of love for the Beach Boys, I don't like a lot of the music but this album does stand on it's own.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
keefriffhard4life
()
Date: October 24, 2013 03:43
Quote
BluzDude
I think it's really great that John Paul Jones has an arena named after him in Virginia. Is there a Bill Wyman arena anywhere in the US?
lol. not the same JPJ
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: October 24, 2013 04:17
Quote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
treaclefingersQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPSQuote
abQuote
24FPS
The first Led Zeppelin album, regardless of plagiarism, is a singular work of art that shot the blues into outer space. Led Zeppelin seemed built for the short haul, and the Stones for 50 and Counting.
The first Led Zeppelin album isn't a singular work of art by any means. Jeff Beck provided the blueprint for it on Truth.
It is to my ears. It's like saying Sgt. Pepper wasn't a singular work of art because of Pet Sounds. Led Zeppelin kicked it all up a notch in the ears of the general public.
Pet Sounds was and remains a piece of shit too.
come on skippy...you gotta love it, if only for Sloop John B!
Good background on Pet Sounds here skip...if you want to ejumacate yoself!
I've listened to it. It's crap. I don't get it. I don't get how it inspired The Beatles and I don't get how it's such a highy revered LP.
Well, it did inspire the Beatles, that's a fact. So, should we consider your ears suspect from hear on out? Give us some other obvious classic albums you hate that everybody loves. Dark Side of the Moon the product of hacks?
You need to read The Phantom Tollbooth.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: October 24, 2013 04:20
Quote
24FPS
Well, it did inspire the Beatles, that's a fact.
Yes, I am aware of that fact. However, upon several listenings to it I can not fathom one iota of sense as to HOW it did.
Other than drugs.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: October 24, 2013 06:37
Quote
DandelionPowderman
What does Pet Sounds have to do with Sgt Pepper, except for Wilson admitting he was inspired by Rubber Soul when making it??
Because Brian upped the game in terms of production values and musical innovation, which might have seemed more obvious at the time.
Another thing that might surprise you is the fact that without the Beach Boys--and surf rock in general--The Who never would have wound up sounding like The Who. Amazing, but true.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: October 24, 2013 18:09
All this who is better than who crap, record sales vs tour attendance and charting and blah blah blah blah blah is nothing but similar to the "I'M TELLING" mindset of one particular multi-named troll.
Zep aren't the Stones. Stones aren't the Beatles. And on and on and on.
IT DOESN'T MATTER.
The only "winners" of any of this crap are the estates with the money they've made. Woo hoo.
Zep aren't the Stones. Stones aren't the Beatles. And on and on and on.
IT DOESN'T MATTER.
The only "winners" of any of this crap are the estates with the money they've made. Woo hoo.
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
stonesstein
()
Date: October 29, 2013 03:36
I don't care what the haters or the homers say - Led Zeppelin was one incredibly bad-ass band that did ntohing but rock the floor every single night they played and with every single rekkid they released. Some were better than others, sure, but overall, their proficiency was incredible.
I agree with GasLight - no comparison b/t Zep and the Stones, and who cares? They are both amazing!
stonesstein
Kick me like you did before
I can't even feel the pain no more
Rocks Off, 1972
I agree with GasLight - no comparison b/t Zep and the Stones, and who cares? They are both amazing!
stonesstein
Kick me like you did before
I can't even feel the pain no more
Rocks Off, 1972
Re: Rolling Stones vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: October 29, 2013 03:52
Quote
stonesstein
I don't care what the haters or the homers say - Led Zeppelin was one incredibly bad-ass band that did ntohing but rock the floor every single night they played and with every single rekkid they released. Some were better than others, sure, but overall, their proficiency was incredible.
I agree with GasLight - no comparison b/t Zep and the Stones, and who cares? They are both amazing!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Heart for Stones , hj3009 , hockenheim95 , HonkyTonkJan , NedKellyBandit , spiderman , Taylor1 , woodyrichards
Guests:
2128
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10