What's so great about Led Zepplin?

They pinched songs and ideas like there was no tomorrow, stairway is basically a cover, the intro and verses anyway. Jeez and the thee most annoying phrase in music is "everyone was influenced by the beatles", they aint done anything for me! They suck!

Originally posted by GeorgeHarrison
I wouldnt say Led Zeppelin invented hard-rock. Long before they appeared in scene, the Beatles and other bands had been creating that "new sound".
However, it is true that Zeppelin was the first hard-rcok band ever, that is, the first band that really got into hard-rock.

The Beatles didn't have a Hard rock sound! More of an acid rock meets folk rock sound. The Beatles influenced very few stylistically speaking. They were definitely a catagory unto themselves. And no, Axl, they don't suck. You just don't like them. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it "sucks" all it means is that it doesn't agree with your tastes...jeez be a little more open minded. And next time, Axl, please list REASONS why something sucks. I'm sick of people saying this sucks or that's terrible without backing it up!

[i]Originally posted by Jolly McJollyson
The Beatles didn't have a Hard rock sound! More of an acid rock meets folk rock sound. The Beatles influenced very few stylistically speaking. They were definitely a catagory unto themselves.[/B]

True, true...you're right: they are actually acid rock. They do have some songs that could be "considered" as hard-rock (e.g."Helter Skleter"), and those songs could have influenced the Yardbirds in a way. However, the Beatles were too folk to really get into hard-rock. In fact, in their last years, they returned to good old rock 'n' roll.

P.S."They were dffinitely a category unto themselves" is such a good statement! Couldn't have said it better...

Many bands come and go. They have their moment in the sun and their music dies with the sun's light. Zep's music has held up now for over 30 years. It has crossed over into rap and hip hop. Great songs, great albums, talented musicians. All of you guys have failed to mention John Paul Jones. What a pitty. I play bass, mando, guitar, violin.. pretty much anything with a string on it. JPJ was and still is one of my main influences. I have been hooked on them since I saw them in '74 at the ripe age of 10. I still hear different things that I love and that I am in awe of. This band is complex and yet simple at the same time. Blues roots and complex rythms are keys to good rock. Most people that say they suck has either never played an instrument in a rock and roll band or has and can't pull it off. Their stuff is hard enough to play just picking with a tab. The real test is if you can do it with a complete band. There are not many people who can cover Zep note for note and to speedThere is one last thing that proves they were great. When you hear one of their songs come on , you know who it is. Maybe we need to listen to the music more rather than just hear it. Thanks for the rant

Zep was a very, very influential band. If you look at interviews with many current and former heavyweight rock and roll bands, almost all of them speak of Zepplin in a rather reverent tone. Now maybe because I'm a huge blues fan, I've always thought that Zep 2 was their best album. And like someone else said earlier on, yes, they did 'rip other bands off' - heck, they outright stole stuff from some of the Delta blues players and never gave them a nod. 'Stariway to Heaven' was almost a total rip of a Spirit song (which was a weird bastardization of Greensleeves anyway...) But the stuff they 'stole', they made their own. Jimmy Page was, before Zepplin, one of the most sought after and respected session guitarists in London. Robert Plant has a voice like none other, before or since, in rock and roll. Jones and Bonham were, in my opinion, about the only two, at the time, who could have filled out that band. Their CD's still sell thousands upon thousands of copies every year.

Another reason I think that Zep will always live on in the Pantheon of Rock is that we got to watch them mature and change as they went through their career. Presence is a very solid album. It shows where they were as opposed to Zep 1.

Now as far as the Beatles are concerned, I hear that statement ("they sucked") from a lot of people and I've always been confused by that. When you look at a band, you have to look at the times as well. They were the band the moved music from Bill Haley and Comets and Elvis into your Cream, Hendrix, Zep...etc. It's kinda like one of those biblical passages in the old Testament that no one bothers to read. 'Blind Lemon Jefferson begat Robert Johnson who begat Muddy Waters who begat Elvis who begat the Beatles and the Stones....etc...etc"

They were powerfully influential. Amazingly so. And look at their history; they started out as basically a garage band playing skiffle and R&B hits to moving into Rock and Roll covers. Then they were discovered, cleaned, groomed and presented as pop idols. And the world got to watch and listen as rock and roll changed right before their eyes and ears. If you can listen with an open mind and an appreciation for the times and their history (recording on antiquated equipment, cranking out an album every six months - at least for the first few years) and the number of truly inovative material - Sgt. Pepper, Revolver, Rubber Soul, The White Album -I think you'll find them to be an amazing band.

You don't have to like the music, but you can appreciate them for what they did. Hey, I don't like the BeeGee's but I can appreciate the fact that they were huge 'back in the day'.

WARNING! Reading this post, and following the enclosed links, may cause serious disillusionment among Led Zeppelin fans who do not know where a lot of their music came from!

If you love LZ as they presented themselves, and have no wish to explore their roots, go no further...


Oh, yes, both Jimmy and Robert were very nuaghty boys, indeed. Jimmy richly deserves much of the disapproval accorded him by his contemporaries. He was a >thief<, >plain and simple<. His only redeeming grace was the awsome majesty that he brought to his version of these songs.

I think History will mark Jimmy Page as an inspirational, if sloppy, guitarist, and a brilliant, though >immoral<, producer.

I remember assembling a cassette tape of some wonderful blues artists for a friend of mine. He later howled that I had ruined his enjoyment of listening to Led Zeppelin, because he could no longer hear any of their songs without wondering who that wonderful music had been stolen from. I admit that my own sense of wonder has been greatly diminished, but I realise that I was young, and ignorant, when I first heard Led Zep (when they first hit the airwaves). I have come to be thankful that they introduced me to a lot of artists that I might never have known about otherwise.

Tread softly as you follow these links. There is indeed blood on the tracks, and the shattered dreams of those who were denied the chance to present their creations as well as Jimmy Page ultimately did.

i knew they were blues standards when i heard 'em ...they were so far removed from the originals that i could give a rip....he should have given credit and said transposed or something like that.....the taurus thing is just stupid to call it a rip off ....then i can say rush ripped off zep on "fly by night" from zep's "over the hills and far away" they both have same bit in it (the c to b-flat pick run)......the fleetwood mac thing....please!!!!total stretch there ....they were young and well...uncaring??zep 3 on has alot of original zep music.....houses of the holy----physical graffiti-----presence( 1 cover)-----in through the out door-----coda------most of zep 4 is their stuff.........
you want to know a ripoff??? the eagles "hotel california" totally snagged from jethro tull's "we used to know"but i don't think less of them for it it was probably unconscious and it is different.....if one plays g-d-a progression is that now patented so i can't use it???

Originally Posted by: noticingthemistakeYeah. On the BBC Sessions cd, the solo page plays on that song is fricking awesome!

i concur :D

Originally Posted by: sambobI have the first four Led Zeppelin albums (given to me), what other ones do you suggest?

Although they are not straight blues rock, its very blues influenced.

physical graffiti ....their best :cool:

Originally Posted by: z0s0_jpthe taurus thing is just stupid to call it a rip off

How do you figure that?

That decending figure in Stairway is an almost note-for-note copy of Spirit's song. Unless they've given credit and pay royalties to Spirit, it is plagiarism in its purest form.

If a painter steals his paints, brush and canvas then with them makes a spectacular portrait, he's still a theif.

I think the best thing about Led Zeppelin is that you can bring them up in conversation and within 30 seconds of conversing you can tell whether or not a person is a pesimist or an optimist...

The pesimist point of view... Zeppelin are thieves and get too much credit for what they did... they're not that good of a band....

The optimist point of view... Zeppelin may have used certain inspirations to create the music that they made but they still broke ground in the world of rock and roll... as well as sonic art....

I personally... don't care if Zepp used lyrics or previously written music. I know plenty of songs that use the exact same chord progressions... does this mean they stole it on purpose... no... What if a song uses the same chord progression and arpeggoiation??? There are only so many notes on a fretboard... and only so many ways to play... some things are going to sound similar... I've written songs before then heard a song that I'd never heard before and have to completely throw out a whole music section because a riff sounded too much like it for my own taste...

I think the only people that have ever downloaded Taurus by Spirit are the ones that are curious to see how much it sounds like Led Zeppelin... perhaps Zepp did them a favor by "stealing" their music... Otherwise... who here would have never heard of Spirit... nor cared who they were... *raises hand*

Originally Posted by: aschlemanI think the best thing about Led Zeppelin is that you can bring them up in conversation and within 30 seconds of conversing you can tell whether or not a person is a pesimist or an optimist...

The pesimist point of view... Zeppelin are thieves and get too much credit for what they did... they're not that good of a band....[/quote]
That's not my view of Zeppelin at all.

There can be no doubt of their talent, their importance to rock and roll and that they moved the genre forward in ways that no other band could have done.

However, we should also remember that in doing so, they stepped on a lot of people and did a lot of things which are simply inexcusable. It's not about taking credit away; it's about historical accuracy, it's about personal and artistic accountability, and it's about giving due credit to those who deserve it.

Originally Posted by: aschlemanI personally... don't care if Zepp used lyrics or previously written music. I know plenty of songs that use the exact same chord progressions... does this mean they stole it on purpose... no... What if a song uses the same chord progression and arpeggoiation??? There are only so many notes on a fretboard... and only so many ways to play... some things are going to sound similar... I've written songs before then heard a song that I'd never heard before and have to completely throw out a whole music section because a riff sounded too much like it for my own taste...

1. There are, for all practical purposes, an infinite number of ways to play. People come up with new ideas all the time. It's a question of how creative a person an individual is or how willing they are to work at doing something new.

2. Led Zeppelin opened for Spirit on their first US tour something like three years before Stairway to Heaven was written. Taurus was part of Spirit's set on that tour, so to suggest that Led Zeppelin plagiarized that very unique melody by accident is absolutely ludicrous.

3. Page and Zeppelin established such an extensive pattern of plagiarsm, it's really a moot point if any one example is an 'accident;' this is something they did a lot because it made them money and they usually got away with it.


[QUOTE=aschleman]I think the only people that have ever downloaded Taurus by Spirit are the ones that are curious to see how much it sounds like Led Zeppelin... perhaps Zepp did them a favor by "stealing" their music... Otherwise... who here would have never heard of Spirit... nor cared who they were... *raises hand*

I'd hardly describe a handful of [mostly] illegal downloads 30 years after the fact to be a "favor."

Getting permission at the time, giving due credit and making sure to say "Hey! Check these guys out!" at the time they released it... now THAT would have been a favor.

Who here has never heard of Spirit besides when they're mentioned in the same sentence as Led Zeppelin.... *raises hand*

I think that pretty much says enough. You make a good case... but ^^ that ^^ says all I need to say.

I've never been so upset at the fact that Zepp "stole" music or lyrics that I've went and researched it. I'm the kind of person that takes things as they are. Zepp was a great band... simple as that... regardless of where they got their inspiration... I don't think, after 30 years... it really matters... Leppelin is infinitely more popular than Spirit... maybe there's no justice to that... but I don't think it's that way on accident. I think my perspective on the situation is that it doesn't really matter how they got popular... they did... A lot of bands start out covering other peoples acts... MAYBE... JUST MAYBE... they use to cover Spirit tracks and Stairway evolved from that... who knows? like I said... I don't even care... You're perspective seems to be more based on the fact of "justice must prevail". Which is understandable... I'm not negating your points at all... (unlike the way you approach this argument)... I'm just weighing in and making a strong point...

Maybe the thing that's so great about Led Zeppelin is the fact that they managed to be more popular than any band they plagiarized... They must have done something right...

Metaphorically speaking... "If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it... did the tree ever fall??"

If Spirit recorded Taurus... and no one heard it until after they heard Stairway... what's the big deal...??? I don't hear them crying about it.

Interesting piece of trivia, toally off topic but related to LZ...

Jimmy Page was big into the occult (why many said there was a satanic reference in Stairway... which of course nobody ever found or explained!) and was (not sure if he still is) a priest in the Golden Dawn. He lived in Alistair Crowley's old mansion (the dude Ozzy sung about on Blizzard (the founder of he Golden Dawn)). Saw a facinating program a couple of years back about the birth of '80's metal and the satanic undertones from Black Sabbath and Venom through to Slayer. Anyway, almost all of the bands interviewed praised LZ as being big influences in them wanting to lift the guitar in the first place and there were a lot of Page interviews... can't remember the name of the documentary though... was around the time of "The Decline Of Western Civilisation' (a cool doc with loads of great live footage from Metallica, Slayer, Megadeth and co.).

Oh well.... nothing else to add.....................zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Yeah, I read that about Jimmy... I saw a little tidbit about Alistair Crowley on the History Channel as well...

Some more trivia... The lead parts of Stairway to Heaven were recorded several times on different "one-take" recordings, all having different verse leads, chorus leads, and different solos... Then Jimmy went back and cut and pasted the best parts. The other takes have never been released. The version we all know is a compilation of many many different takes.

Originally Posted by: aschlemanI'm just weighing in and making a strong point...[/quote]
"It's OK because I and a lot of other people like the end-product" ?

Sorry, but that argument could excuse virtually any injustice.

Originally Posted by: aschlemanMetaphorically speaking... "If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it... did the tree ever fall??"[/quote]
Yes.


[QUOTE=aschleman]If Spirit recorded Taurus... and no one heard it until after they heard Stairway... what's the big deal...??? I don't hear them crying about it.

Of course you don't...

[QUOTE=aschleman]I've never been so upset at the fact that Zepp "stole" music or lyrics that I've went and researched it.

You're not even listening for it.


How about the guys who had to sue to get their writing credit and royalties?

How about the poor bastards who were too destitute to even afford a lawyer to look into the possibility of there being a case?

What if it had been your work which had been taken by somebody else without any credit or recognition for your contribution?


My point isn't that we should wipe Led Zeppelin out of our record collections or enjoy their music any less...

My point is that for posterity's sake we shouldn't gloss over or excuse the ugly bits because they're a part of what happened, too.

Originally Posted by: Raskolnikov

My point is that for posterity's sake we shouldn't gloss over or excuse the ugly bits because they're a part of what happened, too.

As far as I know, I haven't said that they didn't "steal" any songs. I understand your point of view completely, I do.

Led Zeppelin is so often revered as a rock an roll icon and influencial figure... But no one gets credit that "influenced" them. I understand that. I agree. I've not disagreed with you...

I've just been trying to say that >>I<< don't really care. It's good music... and I'd rather not invest my own time, energy, and mind in the legality of all that goes on around Zeppelin and their music. I like their music more than any music that they "plagiarized"... it's my opinion... Why would I care about a legal battle... for the fact a sympathy for the poor soul that got their music ripped off?? Yeah, I suppose so... But we're talking about events that occurred 30 years ago. Not exactly current events here...

PRS blatantly stole Gibsons Les Paul design... tweaked a few things smoothed a few edges... The Les Paul was already a great guitar... PRS made it better... Gibsons loses the law suit... PRS continues making the single cut taking all profits... Taking a product and improving it... Making it just enough unlike the original product that it doesn't fall under the original patent... That's they way I look at it.

I agree that it's terrible that Zepp has stepped on so many people to get to the top. But honestly, isn't that the only way to get there... It takes a certain kind of person to do that to another human being and I'm not that kind of person... But I believe that the music industry isn't as innocent as you'd like to think... if you think Zeppelin is the worst of it.

Like I said earlier... these are my perspectives and opinions. Shared, or otherwise... they are still mine... and I own them. Doesn't mean I don't see, or even share, your own beliefs on the matter... It just means that my specific point of view happens to differ from yours... you shouldn't have to defend your opinions just like I shouldn't have to defend mine. I know what I believe and I'm not looking for anyones approval for such thoughts...

Any player will show their influences in the music they create. That is the way of things. Even if those influences are not openly acknowledged, they will still be apparent to those who listen closely, and have also heard the music of those influences.

But that is not the situation revealed by a close examination of Led Zeppelin. We don't see the common result of influence and inspiration, but of bald-faced plagiarism and outright theft. Yes, Jimmy Page and Robert Plant were very good at what they did, often better at it than the people they stole from. But while we may be able to understand why they felt justified in what they did, we can not condone their actions.

I do not believe that giving credit where it was due would have made LZ less successful. If anything, I think such acknowledgement might have enhanced listener's appreciation of their talents for improving the originals, much like Jimi Hendrix's "All Along The Watchtower" is recognized as the definitive version, even though Bob Dylan is simultaneously recognized as the writer of that song.



And if people who have only heard the LZ version of a song wish to delude themselves with the circular logic of "I haven't heard of them, therefore they aren't important, therefore I don't expect to hear about them" as an excuse for dissing the original artists......

May Fred Durst cop your best chops while you languish in obscurity! :mad:

I think LATS has hit right on. Not acknowledging Spirit as the original composers and paying royalties would be like Stevie Ray Vaughan blatantly taking sole credit for composing and originating Little Wing or Voodoochild, which was originally done by Jimi Hendrix.

Obviously its not a matter of which version is more widely acclaimed or what not it is giving the originator there rightful credit. This is nothing new bands have been covering and borrowing rights to songs for as long as copyrighting has been a part of the music business.

Also I am a HUGE ZEPPELIN fan and am NOT a pessimist so don't pin that stereotype on me! I am just a firm believer in giving credit where credit is due and abiding by laws that are set in place with no if ands are buts about it! Ok I'm through :)

the taurus thing is not the same......it is similar but not worth giving credit.....that is not a rip off...