I agree that saying that one was miles above the other is silly. Both were at the top of rock and roll hierarchy. I think the Who had more of an impact, but that may just because Zep quit when Bonham died. The Who had a much larger volume of work.
Moon V Bonham - I’m sorry, but Bonham is better. Not to take anything away from Moon, who is an all-time great. But if anything, Bonham is underrated. Maybe the greatest ever.
Entwistle V Jones - Entwistle, by a large amount.
Townsend V Page - This is a toss-up. Very different styles but each created such great, influential music. Both were great songwriters. Don’t think Page really wrote lyrics. And Townsend could sing, so I guess he gets a slight edge.
Daltrey V Plant Though Plant had such a great voice, his on-stage persona turned me off (OK, I get it, already! You’re sexy!. Daltrey always seemed more manly, more honest and soulful. Plus the scream in Won’t Get Fooled Again is the greatest rock and roll scream of all time.
That said, I have to admit I like Zeppelin a little bit more.
Indeed. Back at my original high school, circa 1981-83, there were two junior high schools that fed into that HS. And somehow or other, the JHS I attended was just loaded with Rush fans, while the other JHS was loaded with Zeppelin fans. And so there were endless, raging debates amongst us 15-17-year-olds about which band was “better”. Looking back as an adult I can see what a silly argument it was considering the two bands had next to nothing in common stylistically (well, discounting Rush’s first album, which fooled some people, in 1974, into thinking it was “the new Zeppelin album”).
Somehow, though, I was just never exposed to The Who in my youth and I really didn’t know anybody who was into them, so they never entered the argument.
I think The Who has it over LZ (and a lot of other bands) in the intangible “raconteur” department.
On a good night, Pete can rattle off some hilarious stories in between songs. I don’t think Jimmy Page (or anyone n LZ or The Who, for that matter) could come up with this: Pete’s monologue about The Valencia Hotel, June 2001
Never listened enough to Led Zeppelin to be able to make a comparison. It’s always been The Who for me. In terms of rock they really do tick all the boxes for me (as do Thin Lizzy).
Could some of the people claiming that Led Zep ripped off other musicians/bands provide some background to that assertion? I have no dog in this fight, would just be interested in hearing some more about it.
+1. As far as I know, Zep appropriated songs from blues sources that everybody and their brother stole from, and added their own spin to make something new, just like everyone else (e.g. Cream). They also added other root sources from Welsh, Irish, etc. music. Where’s the ‘theft’ beef?
I’m a lover of Zep, but, yeah, they reappropriated a lot of music without giving credit to the original artist(s). There’s nothing new about this.
Here’s one example. I have a whole playlist of songs they borrowed from in iTunes. I don’t necessarily agree that all were “stolen” (like I would call “Rock & Roll” an homage to Little Richard’s “Keep on Knockin’”, not a direct rip-off), but there’s a lot that should have been credited.
The difference is that when Cream adapted songs by the likes of Howlin’ Wolf, Robert Johnson, Albert King, etc., unlike Zeppelin, they credited the original songwriters.
Love that Cracked article, esp about Metallica, which I hadn’t heard about…
As for Zep, the biggest issues is royalties. I have no problem with how they took musical ideas and updated them - for the most part, totally IMHO, their versions/reinterpertations/extensions of songs sound significantly different (Dazed and Confused vs. I’m Confused, and the intro to Stairway, not so different…). But regardless, they should’ve credited the original writers and folks like Willie Dixon shouldn’t’ve had to sue. But I am glad he did.
The Zep stuff is fine, but I don’t buy a lot of those examples, to be honest. The Metallica stuff is hardly damning, in my opinion, and the Black Eyed Peas stuff is a real stretch. ETA: Same with the Deep Purple and Pink Floyd stuff.
I could give Lloyd Webber a pass on his alleged theft of “Echoes” given that the part that is the same is just four notes of a chromatic scale. But I’d never heard “Maria Moite” before, and that was startling–it’s totally the same lick as “Smoke on the Water”; Deep Purple just slowed it down and left off the little twiddly ending.
Yeah, I see that, but that power-chords on the blues scale isn’t convincing enough for me. It could be subconscious; it could be intentional; it could be coincidence. It just not damning for me.
Thing is, as a musician, you create some riffs and eventually you will hear them on the radio. It’s happened to me and my brother, where we’ve made some songs, and a year or two later hear our riff on the radio. Now, there’s no possible way that artist stole it from us. It’s just that there’s only so many combinations that work, and eventually, we’ll stumble on them. I’ve also had it happen the other way around. I’ll compose a song, only to realize years later, on the radio, that there’s an old song from the 70s that sounds just like it. Now, did I plagiarize? Not that I know. Had I heard the song before? I suppose it’s possible and stuck in my subconscious. But there was no intention of ripping off. Or it’s simply just a matter of coincidence, that we both happened upon a progression that sounded cool.