Led Zeppelin...

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.

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.

@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

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

The addition of classical composers would require a lot more though before it could even be considered.

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!