| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Juiceboxbiotch 
Forum Groupie
Joined: January 12 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 50
|
 Topic: Beatles vs. Led Zeppelin
Posted: January 12 2010 at 16:25 |
There is no way anyone can make me choose between the Beatles and Led Zeppelin. They both influenced me musically. Led Zeppelin sucked me into making music with their virtuosity and rawness, but the Beatles taught me more about music in general later on... And i would assume Led Zeppelin would tell you that they were influenced by the Beatles somewhat.
Can't vote for both so I'm just gonna abstain.
|
 |
Dellinger
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12732
|
Posted: January 09 2010 at 21:20 |
|
Hard choice for me too, but I guess there's more songs I truly love by Zep, however, there are many magic moments from the Beatles too.
|
|
Purple Sky
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 04 2010
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 11
|
Posted: January 07 2010 at 09:53 |
|
hard choice. but I'm a huuuuuuuuuuge fan of the Beatles so... my vote goes to them. however, Zep are great!
|
|
Floydman
Forum Groupie
Joined: November 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 67
|
Posted: January 04 2010 at 18:52 |
 halabalushindigus wrote:
Know what I mean.. Jimmy Page can take you musically, by himself, to Heaven. Let's face it, Jimmy Page is extremely gifted....no? |
Yet as an all-around musician Paul McCartney might be one of the greatest rock musicians. Not only that Paul played, wrote and produced albums on his own. George Harrison as an all-around musician was not that far behind also and basically on his own invented a new style of slide guitar playing. Led Zeppelin had the better players on their main instruments but they were not all-around musicians like the Beatles.
Edited by Floydman - January 04 2010 at 18:53
|
|
Matthew T
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 01 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 5291
|
Posted: January 04 2010 at 13:50 |
Beatles of course  but I love the Zep 
|
|
Matt
|
|
halabalushindigus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 05 2009
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 1438
|
Posted: January 04 2010 at 13:47 |
|
Know what I mean.. Jimmy Page can take you musically, by himself, to Heaven. Let's face it, Jimmy Page is extremely gifted....no?
|
|
assume the power 1586/14.3
|
|
halabalushindigus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 05 2009
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 1438
|
Posted: January 02 2010 at 02:16 |
|
After whistling "Yellow Submarine" and "Wait" in my head, I have decided to change my vote. While these two Beatle songs are catchy and nostalgic, I have concluded that Jimmy Page alone is more talented than the Beatles
|
|
assume the power 1586/14.3
|
|
Kashmir75
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 25 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1029
|
Posted: December 31 2009 at 21:59 |
halabalushindigus wrote:
Led Zeppelin's albums were fantastic. But to say the Beatles were not good at their instruments is absurd.
They were very talented at songwriting. This is a no-brainer, children. Just listen to The Beatles before they came to America, when they were a cover band. No one could jell with Rhythm like John. And no one played the trap sound as good as Ringo. Wanna whole lotta love? I don't. Beatles hands down the superior band  |
The Beatles were better lyricists and songwriters. But instrumentally, Zep blow them out of the water.
|
|
Hello, mirror. So glad to see you, my friend. It's been a while...
|
|
Kashmir75
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 25 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1029
|
Posted: December 31 2009 at 21:58 |
|
I respect the Beatles for their songwriting and for their influence, but I prefer Led Zep personally.
|
|
Hello, mirror. So glad to see you, my friend. It's been a while...
|
|
chopper
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 13 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 20030
|
Posted: December 23 2009 at 07:29 |
sixpack127 wrote:
Zep was a much better band overall - just look at all the artists that come out of the band. The Beatles were for the teeny boppers, I think McCarthy was the only one to make something of himself after the band blew itself apart - and he stuck with the teeny bopper crowd. |
Beatles for teeny boppers? That may have been true for the first 2 or 3 albums but not afterwards.
As for "McCarthy". 
|
|
halabalushindigus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 05 2009
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 1438
|
Posted: December 23 2009 at 02:23 |
Led Zeppelin's albums were fantastic. But to say the Beatles were not good at their instruments is absurd.
They were very talented at songwriting. This is a no-brainer, children. Just listen to The Beatles before they came to America, when they were a cover band. No one could jell with Rhythm like John. And no one played the trap sound as good as Ringo. Wanna whole lotta love? I don't. Beatles hands down the superior band |
|
assume the power 1586/14.3
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: December 22 2009 at 20:31 |
|
I love both, and both were important in both were important in their time. I enjoy Led Zeppelin more, but not by much.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
sixpack127
Forum Newbie
Joined: December 22 2009
Location: Detroit Area
Status: Offline
Points: 3
|
Posted: December 22 2009 at 19:23 |
|
Zep was a much better band overall - just look at all the artists that come out of the band. The Beatles were for the teeny boppers, I think McCarthy was the only one to make something of himself after the band blew itself apart - and he stuck with the teeny bopper crowd.
|
|
Lyle - Eclectic Music Lover
|
|
akamaisondufromage
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
|
Posted: August 31 2009 at 16:18 |
This is mental 
|
|
Help me I'm falling!
|
|
Badabing666
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 30 2008
Location: Devon, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 248
|
Posted: August 31 2009 at 16:13 |
|
The Beatles for me
|
|
|
|
Rank1
Forum Groupie
Joined: March 26 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 53
|
Posted: August 19 2009 at 08:13 |
Tsevir Leirbag wrote:
There are no similarities between these bands; so they can't be compared; so I can't vote... |
Both great bands but I have the Beatles because they were more original. I like how they used completely non-blues based sources into their pop/rock sound.
The Beatles were masters of melody, using the middle eight, and using odd instruments or non rock sources in their songs. That is why they sound so different than most blues-based bands. The Beatles merged pop music with experimental/avant tape techniques and microtonal Indian music "Tomorrow Never Knows" and "Strawberry Fields Forever" or experimental/ avant tape techniques with symphonic music "A Day in the Life". I think some of the seeds of Progressive Rock/Art Rock starts with songs like this.
I don't know if Led Zeppelin were all that original. I could say that Cream and Hendrix were already pointing the direction to Heavy Metal or hard rock blues. I don't really hear anything that I would call that original until you get to "Kashmir".
Don't be fooled Led Zeppelin were influenced by the Beatles on how they recorded their songs or the techniques they were using. One song What Is and What Should Never Be uses the Beatles trick of putting vocals through a Leslie Speaker.
I love the Beatles but these days I have been listening to Led Zeppelin a lot more than the Beatles.
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: August 17 2009 at 16:27 |
|
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Phideaux
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 27 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 378
|
Posted: August 17 2009 at 16:14 |
|
I am a mild Zeppelin fan. I think they are good musicians with some excellent songs. That's the same way I feel about the Stones.
For me, Zeppelin was never better than as the back up group for Donovan's Hurdy Gurdy Man!
Beatles are like air and fire and water. I need them to survive!
|
|
inrainbows
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 20 2008
Location: on a rainbow
Status: Offline
Points: 489
|
Posted: August 17 2009 at 12:59 |
Tsevir Leirbag wrote:
There are no similarities between these bands; so they can't be compared; so I can't vote... |
same here
|
|
|
|
J-Man
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 07 2008
Location: Philadelphia,PA
Status: Offline
Points: 7826
|
Posted: August 17 2009 at 07:43 |
Kashmir75 wrote:
The Beatles may have been better lyricists and songwriters, but I think Zep were technically better at their instruments. It would take a brave man to say Ringo is better than Bonzo, for example.
|
It would take an idiot to say Ringo is better than Bonzo. 
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Beatles vs. Led Zeppelin
