Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Topic: Led Zeppelin... Posted: February 07 2007 at 22:18 |
I see Led Zep a lot like ELP in their approach to expanding thheir respective musical genres.
ELP progged up classical music &
Led Zep progged up blues
|
|
|
progismylife
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2006
Location: ibreathehelium
Status: Offline
Points: 15535
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 17:51 |
Easy Livin wrote:
Alternatively, how about a classical music section in the forum, with separate threads for each relevant composer? |
Sounds like a novel idea!
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65268
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 17:43 |
andu wrote:
@Avatachron: I second your last post, but I have a nuance to bring. You say Zepp took what was best from 60s rock and and made an essential compilation of it. I think the essential 60s rock with a masterful guitar lead and a hard-edge rock approach was to be found not in Zepp I, but on Beck's albums (like Beck-ola and Truth). To my ears, what Zepp I brought was a new, different (than that of the 60s) way to write and play rock. It had in it what was the big difference, and that was more important than what it in common to 60s rock. I'm basing these comments on Dazed and Confused and How Many More Times on one side, for more complex rock, and on Good Times, Bad Times and Communication Breakdown on the other, for hard rock. Also one more thing - Zepp I is a sample of the way they related to rock in 68, not in 69. The album was released in the US in January 69 but it was recorded in October 68 if I'm not wrong, and Page was already playing parts of the material while still with the Yardbirds. |
Well, there certainly was a major connection between Beck/Stewart and Zep, in fact Zep took much inspiration from Jeff Beck's hugely talented group and capitalized on the vacuum left by them and the death of Hendrix. Your correct that LZ l was written and recorded in 1968 but since it was released in '69, I consider its impact to have taken place in '69.
Edited by Atavachron - February 03 2007 at 18:43
|
|
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 13:45 |
The addition of classical composers would require a lot more though before it could even be considered.
The obvious issue is that they are not performers. The site structure is set up around the model of recording artists and their work. There are many different recordings of the works of the famous composers, some excellent, some very poor. If we were to list every recording of Beethoven's 9th alone, we would have a list of several hundred albums.
Perhaps a more practical approach would be to add an extended essay to the proto prog description detailing how classical music influenced prog.
Alternatively, how about a classical music section in the forum, with separate threads for each relevant composer?
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24429
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 13:43 |
Kid-A wrote:
Well why don't we just add Bach and Beethoven to the progarchives? They had more of an influence on symphonic prog, so why aren't they in the archives by the same logic? |
I apologise for repeating myself, but I think that for some people a simple, basic fact is far from clear. This is not our website. The final decisions concerning site structure, subgenres, additions and such are made by the owners, Rony and M@x. Therefore, if none of us Admins or Special Collaborators has yet taken the initiative of adding Bach, Beethoven, Miles Davis or what not to the site's database, it is for this very simple reason. Like it or not, this is the way things are. Personally, I wish that those people who like to criticise PA's current policy would write to the owners in order to present their suggestions to them. I keep on seeing people saying they are against Proto-Prog and Prog-Related, even when they've been told dozens of times that it is the owners' wish to have those two categories. Is it so difficult to be proactive instead of complaining all the time, or making snide remarks?
|
|
Philéas
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 14 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 6419
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 13:28 |
Kid-A wrote:
Well why don't we just add Bach and Beethoven to the
progarchives? They had more of an influence on symphonic prog, so why
aren't they in the archives by the same logic? |
I'm positive to the idea of adding Bach, Beethoven and a multitude of
other composers to the Proto-Prog section. If we are going to have a
Proto-Prog category, let's make it complete.
Edited by Philéas - February 03 2007 at 13:29
|
|
Kid-A
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 613
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 10:24 |
Well why don't we just add Bach and Beethoven to the progarchives? They had more of an influence on symphonic prog, so why aren't they in the archives by the same logic?
|
|
|
andu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 27 2006
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 3089
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 08:14 |
@Joolz: you're right from this perspective. Also, most of their fans really were "heavy-blues-hard-rock" fans. However, I think they way Zeppelin is considered must change, at least now and here; if at the time the fans didn't feel much of a difference when Zeppelin started making more complex music (with many prog sides) because the band perfectly integrated it in their normal sound, that doesn't mean this side didn't exist and shouldn't be acknowledged by us. How many "heavy-blues-hard-rock" bands could have done No Quarter, Kashmir, Achilles Last Stand, The Song Remains the Same, In My Time of Dying, Rain Song, Carouselambra, Trampled Under Foot or In the Light? @Froth - indeed the music of Zepp wasn't seminal for the prog area but for the larger rock genre; maybe they had some influence in some cases of prog bands getting rockier. Their contribution from prog comes from them being influenced by the major prog acts (like Yes, imo). The fact that they were rather influenced to get proggier than were themselves seminal for prog doesn't throw any shadow on their proggier material, however. It would, if it would be praised as prog's eight wonder, but up till now it hasn't been. Myself I don't think all prog's hotspots needed to be innovative in order to be accepted as progressive, and actually many weren't - and they were still both progressive and great. @Avatachron: I second your last post, but I have a nuance to bring. You say Zepp took what was best from 60s rock and and made an essential compilation of it. I think the essential 60s rock with a masterful guitar lead and a hard-edge rock approach was to be found not in Zepp I, but on Beck's albums (like Beck-ola and Truth). To my ears, what Zepp I brought was a new, different (than that of the 60s) way to write and play rock. It had in it what was the big difference, and that was more important than what it in common to 60s rock. I'm basing these comments on Dazed and Confused and How Many More Times on one side, for more complex rock, and on Good Times, Bad Times and Communication Breakdown on the other, for hard rock. Also one more thing - Zepp I is a sample of the way they related to rock in 68, not in 69. The album was released in the US in January 69 but it was recorded in October 68 if I'm not wrong, and Page was already playing parts of the material while still with the Yardbirds.
Edited by andu - February 03 2007 at 08:27
|
|
Joolz
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 24 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1377
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 07:03 |
S Lang wrote:
LZ were Prog to the generation that grew up on their contribution and nothing will take that away. |
Not in my neck of the woods they weren't! Zep were known as a heavy-blues-hard-rock band, hugely inventive and influential, but never were they considered to be Prog.
|
|
S Lang
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 01 2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 441
|
Posted: February 03 2007 at 06:11 |
LZ were Prog to the generation that grew up on their contribution and nothing will take that away. Try to find a comparable band today with a similar, versatile approach.
Blues, Rock, Prog were all there influencing and educating millions in music.
|
|
Froth
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 19 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 461
|
Posted: February 02 2007 at 13:21 |
Atavachron wrote:
Interesting, but I strongly disagree about Zep not being genuinely innovative-- sometimes it's forgotten what an astoundingly deep impact the first two albums had. Remeber, both Zep 1 and 2 came out in 1969, and they weren't like anything ever heard before-- sure Page took from everyone (especially Hendrix, Jeff Beck & Rod Stewart, CSN, etc.), but the result was a masterful, concentrated version of the rock of the 60s. They showed what could be done with real musicianship and form before most prog bands had developed a style.
|
Of course, they were certainly innovative in a rock context, but i would like to think you need more than that to be concidered 'progressive'. Think of Miles Davis. he did alot for jazz but he also did alot for music in general and that makes him truley innovative. I not sure what Led Zep did for anything other than hard rock. Thats not to say the band didnt make some very enjoyable music. Tangerine and the Rain Song are favourites of mine.
by the way i agree with that other guy. The Who have far more right be here than Zep
Edited by Froth - February 02 2007 at 18:33
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20250
|
Posted: February 02 2007 at 08:18 |
Kid-A wrote:
I love Led Zeppelin but their inclusion is rediculous. They are blues-rock and sometimes folk-rock.
This is prog-archives not thingswhichinspiredprog-archives so I see no reason for them to be included. |
Generally I'd agree with you. I fought against their inclusion too, (ans as Micky says in hios opening post, he did as well) but hey!!!!!!!! they won their inclusion
So please get over it (I did!! , I even reviewed their albums in roughly three hours time to legitimize their inclusion)
Stop yourself from growing an ulcer because Zep is included in the PÄ. Just not worth it.
|
let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24429
|
Posted: February 02 2007 at 08:07 |
mystic fred wrote:
Led Zep had a huge influence on all types of music including Prog - JP hated labels, the group played all sorts of music including Prog but not all - that is why they are in Prog-related.
...and so should The Who for the same reasons
|
Steve, you know I agree with you about The Who, but when we raised the question in the Collabs section the vote was overwhelmingly against. Unfortunately, unless we get a green light from the owners as we did in the case of LZ, The Beatles or other such additions, we risk starting another war. This is something that I, as part of the Admin Team, would rather not see happen.
|
|
chopper
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 13 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 20030
|
Posted: February 02 2007 at 07:55 |
I've never thought of Led Zep as a prog band and I'm not sure how many prog bands they actually influenced, apart from Rush. They do have a few songs with prog tendencies (mainly The Rain Song) and I have no problem with them being here.
|
|
clarke2001
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 14 2006
Location: Croatia
Status: Offline
Points: 4160
|
Posted: February 02 2007 at 07:45 |
Maybe Led Zeppelin are not prog, but they do have one thing in common with prog bands: an average LZ listener will listen to the band in a same way that an average prog fan will listen to some prog band.
What I mean is, listener will pay attention to complex solos, unusual guitar chords, complex drumming by Bonzo etc. in a same way Genesis' fan will listen to the mellotron, Hackett's solo etc.
You can listen music from different point of view - and get excited by lyrics, energy, sound, atmosphere - by listening to Clash or AC/DC.
But personally I think that much more people listen to Zep the same way Genesis' fan listen to Genesis, rather than AC/DC fan to AC/DC, despite the fact they are both hard rock bands.
|
|
mystic fred
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 13 2006
Location: Londinium
Status: Offline
Points: 4252
|
Posted: February 02 2007 at 07:35 |
Led Zep had a huge influence on all types of music including Prog - JP hated labels, the group played all sorts of music including Prog but not all - that is why they are in Prog-related.
...and so should The Who for the same reasons
|
Prog Archives Tour Van
|
|
Philéas
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 14 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 6419
|
Posted: February 02 2007 at 07:23 |
Not Prog, but they had a couple of Prog moments and I don't really have
a problem with them being in Prog Related. I don't like the idea of
having a category called Prog Related though.
|
|
andu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 27 2006
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 3089
|
Posted: February 02 2007 at 07:22 |
LZ is my love. Hehe. They never made an album that comes REALLY close to being prog (HOTH is not far, though). However, a compilation of their prog songs would be (if released) at least a top 20 issue for our top 100. They were a band influenced by prog, their own influence to prog was little and not essential - Yes' "Going fot the One" (the song) shows that. And more important, they brought complexity inside "hard and heavy music" since 1970 without it's fans even noticing it... they were too seduced for that. (Well some did notice - I read a booklet review inside Sabbath's "Master of Reality" where it said that this release came perfect to fill the gap left for hard rock fans when Zepp changed direction after their second album). Except for parts of their first two albums, who were also higly progressive regarding sound, there isn't much of their writing that could be called simplistic (again except for those light, humorous songs like Hot Dog, D'yer Mak'er, Rock'n'roll, Candy Store Rock, etc. - which were not meant to prove anything actually related to music). They were not considered prog at the time because they stole the show... so they were mainstream.
Micky's review is good, fair; there's just one thing I don't agree with: you can't say "selling lots of albums was important to them" while reviewing the album they released without any commercial marks just to show that their music and nothing else is what drives the Zeppelin phenomenon... and they put their sales at risk. Brave men they were.
|
|
spo1977
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 09 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 285
|
Posted: February 01 2007 at 23:22 |
I love it when people decid a band is not prog.
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: February 01 2007 at 21:17 |
Tony R wrote:
....a Prog Band influenced by Led Zep..........Rush perchance?
|
I see little influence on 'prog' Rush by Zeppelin.. there are
such things as inspirational influences.. and creative. I sure
don't see the creative.. and would love to know what they are if you
can explain Tony. I never have seen it.. but you're the expert on
them.. I'm just the guy who gives their good name wedgies and runs
their pants up the flagpole
Edited by micky - February 01 2007 at 21:18
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|