Put Led Zeppelin on the archives!

Adding LZ will be the begining of the end for this wonderful site

Kubla Khan wrote: what are the technical requirements to be a band in the prog archives?   led zeeppelin was always  progressing from album to album , mixing different stiles of music like rock, country , folk , blues , funk ,ethnic ,etc. zep`s musicians are a great inspiration for many comtemporary prog musicians (like m.portnoy)   in zep`s compositionthere are key changes, polyrythm paterns and "unnusual"time signatures in many of his songs . instruments like mellotron and  mandolina in many of his songs. here , i think, i this page , there is a prejudice against the rock bands. there are great albums in the career of zepellin and great songs too. I recomend "Phisical graffitti"  and  "the houses of the holy" to begin. in the album presence yo can find a great epic song: "achilles last stand".     ...and queen..is a nice band, but i think that they are closer to POP music than prog music.     led zeppelin is a "must have" to the prog archives.

In the 70s....QUEEN WAS NOT POP......make an argument if you want for the 80s....BUT IN THE 70s...QUEEN WAS NOT POP.....PERIOD!

I fully support the addition of Led Zeppelin to the Prog Archives site and in my opinion it will be a tribute to the true progressive rock movement, despite some cynical, venomous and mutinous statements! If you have made compositions like The battle of evermore, Stairway to heaven, The rain song, No Quarter and Kashmir, Led Zeppelin should be added immediately ... is my 'humble opinion'!

Just listened to lots of Zep -- I heard a classic hard rock band, not a prog band. (Though perhaps 3-4 of their tracks could fit in OK on a prog compilation.)

I vote no! Leave classic rock OUT of the Archives! (Queen don't belong here, either.)

When Zep were recording, they were never regarded as a prog band -- why do some think they are now?  Must everything you like be added here? Why, for goodness sake?

I have grown up (both physically as emotionally), I have seen them live in 1979 in Holland ("In through the outdoor" tour) and I don't understand why progheads oppose so cynically against an addition from Led Zeppelin to this site. For me it's almost more than obvious that they were a genuine progressive rock act! I would like to advise every 'stop-Led-Zep-to-PA-site' member to watch the superb second disc from the 2-disc live box set, what a stunning progressive rock act Led Zeppelin was in those days: Mellotron, Hohner D-6 clavinet, Fender Rhodes piano, Yamaha GX-1 synthesizer, lots of acoustic snare instruments, Gibson twin-neck, what a lush instrumentation!

erik neuteboom wrote: I have grown up (both physically as emotionally), I have seen them live in 1979 in Holland ("In through the outdoor" tour) and I don't understand why progheads oppose so cynically against an addition from Led Zeppelin to this site. For me it's almost more than obvious that they were a genuine progressive rock act! I would like to advise every 'stop-Led-Zep-to-PA-site' member to watch the superb second disc from the 2-disc live box set, what a stunning progressive rock act Led Zeppelin was in those days: Mellotron, Hohner D-6 clavinet, Fender Rhodes piano, Yamaha GX-1 synthesizer, lots of acoustic snare instruments, Gibson twin-neck, what a lush instrumentation!

Erik,I dont want to get into a battle with you but I would say that Led Zep have been one of my top 5 favourite bands since I was a young teenager.I have the albums,the DVDs,the interviews,the lot.I have been listening to them since I was 11 year old and I feel I am pretty knowledgeable about them.In fact I would put my encyclopedic knowledge of the band up a against anyone.
Lush instrumentation and a few high-profile "prog-type" keyboards does not a prog band make.They are virtually peerless in the annals of rock music and their legacy will be seen for decades to come-but they are not a prog-rock band.They are a blues-rock band and a bloody brilliant one at that.

I need an emoticon thet says "shakes his head in disbelief"....

Edited by Tony R

dmille wrote: Proglover wrote: Ummm.....actually, Led Zeppelin was more of a heavy BLUES BAND I guess it is easy to just re-write history and make up a genre. Proglover wrote: ....and Queen certainly fit into more categories than just GLAM ROCK. In fact to my understanding glam rock was a term used to describe the flash, and flamboyant way bands presented themselves on stage. The term had little to do with the style of music. What other glam rock band do you you know that played vaudeville music and combined classical elements to rock? I certainly can't think of any...........So before we DROP IT, as you suggest, perhaps you should get your facts straight. You can't think of any because you don't know the full scope of the careers of Roxy Music and David Bowie.

Whose re-writing history????????????? Led Zeppelin was basically a BLUES band....and with all due respect to Roxy Music and David Bowie...they WERE NOT QUEEN.

I would never have battled for Led Zeppelin to add them on this site but Prog Archives have scooped a precedent by adding bands like Queen, Radiohead, Talk Talk, etc. so I support to add Led Zeppelin to this site because of their progressive periode in the Seventies. Of course a band is not progressive because of only lush instrumentation or/and the use of vintage keyboards but in my opinion Led Zeppelin have written some excellent progrock compositions, then my simple question is: why Queen or Radiohead and not Led Zeppelin?

MikeEnRegalia wrote: We might introduce a special category for bands that are "almost" prog .

How about progressive hard rock?, it's a term i have seen prog fans use before so bands like Led Zeppelin wouldnt be put into the same category as "really prog" bands like ELP and Gentle Giant, it could be used for bands like Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, David Bowie, The Doors, Jimi Hendrix and The Who, all artists with progressive elements but don't really fall under any other prog catagory, think about it, what other classification could Zeppelin fall under?, Symphonic Prog?

Edited by boo boo

boo boo wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: We might introduce a special category for bands that are "almost" prog . How about progressive hard rock?, it's a term i have seen prog fans use before so bands like Led Zeppelin wouldnt be put into the same category as "really prog" bands like ELP and Gentle Giant, it could be used for bands like Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, David Bowie, The Doors, Jimi Hendrix and The Who, all artists with progressive elements but don't really fall under any other prog catagory, think about it, what other classification could Zeppelin fall under?, Symphonic Prog?

I'd say Art Rock ... or rather "Almost Art Rock".