Rush vs Led Zeppelin

...


no... you missed my point

I explained it just fine.


In a poll where preference is in question it shouldn't matter who influenced who and who came first.

Alberto Muñoz wrote: zachfive wrote: Alberto Muñoz wrote: zachfive wrote: Individually the members of Rush are, imo, more talented musicians.So much of LZ stuff sounds the same, Rush is constantly re-inventing their style and sound. So like in the previous Beatles poll, my vote goes for Rush. And as for Zep being an influence on Rush, I'm sorry, but what Led Zep song did they cover in their Feedback album, oh thats right, none...(no Beatles cover either) not to say they didnt influence Rush but maybe not as heavily as people asume. Do they have to do one?? please what a bland argument you do... No they do not HAVE to do a LZ cover. But when a band like Rush comes out with an album of cover songs from bands that they said had influenced them in their youth; it is an important observation that there is an absence of LZ. Especially when it seems that a lot of people think that with out Zepplin there would be no Rush.   Please Zach, listen to their first albums, Rush, Fly By Night, Caress of Steel and 2112, if you hear right, you can even look (if you can look to the music ) the Led Zepp influences, they are very clear like crystal, or if you do not mind i can put examples of these albums to see the Zepp's influences on rush early output.   So, when  i said earlier, since A Farewell to Kings, Rush is out of Zepp's influence.

I never once said that LZ had no influence on Rush, because, like you so clearly pointed out they do. What I was merely suggesting was that the influence Zeppelin had on Rush was fleeting, you admit only 4 out of all their studio albums can be "accredited" to influences from Zeppelin, and me being an 80's Rush fanboy I draw no similariteis between them after AFTK. On this point we agree, and have always agreed on since my fist post, "...not to say they didnt influence Rush but maybe not as heavily as people asume." I can understand ones argument that those first four albums are some of Rush's finest moments, but like I said, I'm and 80's Rush fan and I'd be the first to dispute that claim.

People here have a nasty habit of not reading ones entire post to fully understand what was trying to be said. I hope now we can put this silly squabling behind us and leave it to the polls.

King By-Tor wrote: I explained it just fine. In a poll where preference is in question it shouldn't matter who influenced who and who came first.

Now this is a tough poll.  In some ways I wanted to vote for Rush.  They've had a longer and more varied career than Zep, have written their share of great songs, are respected as musicians, and so forth. 

Don't really listen to Led Zep anymore, and the few times I've tried to listen to them in recent times, it just hasn't interested me anymore to be honest.

I can listen to Rush, and feel genuinely excited by it and don't feel the need to turn it off halfway through a song.

HA! not even all the best rush albums put toghter as one comes close to the worst Zeppelin album.... IMO.

I can't remember if I posted here in this thread yet.

Anyway, I voted for Rush:P

I'm really surprised at Rush's popularity in a forum like this.  They're a vaery talented band but it seems like some folks have them in their top 3 of all time.  I voted Zep who I think are quite good but somewhat overrated.  I like to make mix/greatest hits CDs and I'd say that if you limit it to one CD per band (say, 60-75 mintes), Led Zep stacks up against anyone.  But man, they sure put out a lot of noisy, repetitive dreck. 

Swan Song wrote: Abrawang wrote: I'm really surprised at Rush's popularity in a forum like this.  They're a vaery talented band but it seems like some folks have them in their top 3 of all time. Well it's a prog site so it shouldn't surprise you at all. A decent prog band vs. the greatest band of all time. Rolling Stones  for me.