Led Zeppelin?

I love Zep but NO.This has been discussed and debated many times over,use the search feature to see how many threads deal with this subject.

Again...........NO

And IMO the Deep Purple addition was wrong too.

And don't start up the whole Queen and Styx debate again,what a mess that was.

Edited by TheProgtologist

So....let's put them in because they had a FEW songs with slightly proggy moments?????

Yeesh

Andrea Cortese wrote: TheProgtologist wrote: So....let's put them in because they had a FEW songs with slightly proggy moments????? Yeesh If not included we would lose that their proggy moments!!!! For me Friends and Kashmir are only the most evident examples!

I am sorry if I seemed rude but I have never attempted to hide my utter disdain for the prog related and proto prog categories.

I think they provide a very large umbrella under which all kinds of bands,who are in NO WAY prog,could be construed as prog.

Zeppelin is one of my favorite bands,but they had far more of an influence on the development of hard rock/heavy metal than progressive rock.

I also don't think a band should be included here because a song or two in their large body of work is considered proggy.

TheProgtologist wrote: Andrea Cortese wrote: TheProgtologist wrote: So....let's put them in because they had a FEW songs with slightly proggy moments????? Yeesh If not included we would lose that their proggy moments!!!! For me Friends and Kashmir are only the most evident examples! I am sorry if I seemed rude but I have never attempted to hide my utter disdain for the prog related and proto prog categories. I think they provide a very large umbrella under which all kinds of bands,who are in NO WAY prog,could be construed as prog. Zeppelin is one of my favorite bands,but they had far more of an influence on the development of hard rock/heavy metal than progressive rock. I also don't think a band should be included here because a song or two in their large body of work is considered proggy.

Don't worry! It's always a pleasure to discuss with a person who has different opinions!

I only want to underline the fact that in the prog scenario's reality not always all is white or black!

Also the historic prog bands had had non prog albums (Yes and Genesis, for example, not VdGG, nor Peter Hammill!).

So to be absolutely correct we should remove all their albums that is difficult to fit in the prog category!

Edited by Andrea Cortese

So,your ONLY requirement for a band to be prog is for all the musicians to be very talented?

ello jody i am sorry that i did not reply on the chat as i was away fixing a wireless access point...anyways i would say that Led zeppelin is far from being as progressive as deep purple...just because you like led zeppelin does not mean it is prog

Zeppelin are most certainly worthy of inclusion in prog-archives. Although they are usually lumped in with hard rock/heavy metal, being forerunners, even definers of the genre, they defy this simple catergorisation. For example, Zep III's acoustic songs indicate a folk influence to their music which is developed on the fourth album (i.e. The Battle of Evermore). Houses of the Holy includes the classic No Quarter, a "prog " track if ever there was one, complete with synthesised bass and piano. Okay, got my drift? Let's just list a few more examples: Kashmir, In the Light, Achilles' Last Stand (covered by Dream Theater), Carouselambra.

Not convinced? Are Zep just your straightforward hard rock band? I think not. If experimentation with the form, a pushing of the parameters, and the inclusion of a diverse range of instrumentation is a hallmark of prog-rock then Zeppelin certainly meet the criteria. Many of today's prog-metal bands would acknowledge Zep's influence and inspiration, just ask Dream Theater, Opeth, Porcupine Tree et al. I rest my case.

Oooops! Martin W. does'nt wrote <FONT face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans- serif" size=2>, etcetera... Sorry!

It seems to be very personally about an addition from Led Zeppelin! I think it is a matter of time, despite the fact that some reviewers and collaborators are not realy pleased with it. I'm not pleased with lots of additions but I keep on saying that Prog Archives has scooped a precedent by adding bands like Queen, Talk Talk and Radiohead. You can keep on fulminating against an addition of Led Zeppelin but only justice is done when Led Zeppelin has been added to this site because even it's prooved by 'A Progrock Court' that Led Zeppelin only have some progressive moments, they still deserve an addition after Queen, Radiohead, Talk Talk, Deep Purple, Uriah Heep, Vangelis, JM Jarre, etc., etc.,!

TheProgtologist wrote: I love Zep but NO.This has been discussed and debated many times over,use the search feature to see how many threads deal with this subject. Again...........NO And IMO the Deep Purple addition was wrong too. And don't start up the whole Queen and Styx debate again,what a mess that was.

Personally I would add Led Zeppelin as prog related and I would not have added Queen. But in my role in the Band Admissions Team I would vote against the inclusion of Led Zeppelin. It's too bad that the team wasn't in place when Queen were added ... I'm sure that they would have been rejected.

I guess it's no use crying over spilled milk ...