| January 11th, 2006 06:27 PM |
|
|
| speedfreakjive |
I say no, apart from the 1973 MSG performance- captured on DVD.Nice clothes. A lot of it is fantasy bollocks lyrics for me, Page is better than Plant for me; the riffs really make it, whereas with the Stones its always pretty much equally about Mick as Keith, which makes for overall better music. I know they're very different styles, but I can never understand how they beat the Stones in various "best bands ever" lists. |
| January 11th, 2006 06:59 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
most definitely cool....they deserve most of their accolades
[Edited by lotsajizz] |
| January 11th, 2006 07:00 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
not cool to be praised on this board...no where near the same league as the stones |
| January 11th, 2006 07:04 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
you fanatacists are like Stalin and Zinoviev and Bukharin arguing fine points of doctrine...like all doctrinaires you come off looking silly
btw, the Beatles AND U 2 rock!!
deal with it
U 2 sells more tiks too
deal with that...or just have your freakin' heads explode and quit whining
|
| January 11th, 2006 07:06 PM |
|
|
| speedfreakjive |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
you fanatacists are like Stalin and Zinoviev and Bukharin arguing fine points of doctrine...like all doctrinaires you come off looking silly
btw, the Beatles AND U 2 rock!!
deal with it
U 2 sells more tiks too
deal with that...or just have your freakin' heads explode and quit whining
Take a look at my avatar. At least u2 are not raping their fans. There's no royalty/high society overtones/aspirations in u2
[Edited by speedfreakjive] |
| January 11th, 2006 07:11 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
and that pisses off those around here who actually think getting royal accolades is a good thing
Keith thinks such is shit
he is right
|
| January 11th, 2006 07:13 PM |
|
|
| speedfreakjive |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
and that pisses off those around here who actually think getting royal accolades is a good thing
Keith thinks such is shit
he is right
simple fact is, u2 are as good as the Stones, and their singers are equally as egomanic as eachother, just in different ways. |
| January 11th, 2006 07:14 PM |
|
|
| ShaneJazz |
Led Zep is most definitely cool! Immigrant Song still blows my socks off. It was mentioned that they were amateurs a few weeks ago around here. Wow, grow the fuck up, these guys were amazing musicians. Amateurs are the guys playing Huey Lewis and the News covers at your local pub. Not a band that makes an album like PG or IV. Trust me, you can totally love the Stones and Led Zep, it is, in fact, humanly possible. But you can not love both the Stones and Human League. |
| January 11th, 2006 07:24 PM |
|
|
| Egbert |
Cool, but to a lesser degree than the Stones. Best enjoyed during adolescence. |
| January 11th, 2006 07:27 PM |
|
|
| speedfreakjive |
actually, given more thought, Physical Graffiti is one cool motherfucking album, a monster, i'm not too fond of Led Zep I & III |
| January 11th, 2006 07:55 PM |
|
|
| highwire |
Zep and the Stones are 70's contemparies. Along with Floyd and the The Who, the 4 monster bands of the decade and probably the all time 4 biggest bands of classic rock.
I like all 4 but put the Stones miles ahead of the other 3. Who a strong second. Zep third. Floyd a distant 4th but I still like them. I like the Beatles too and even McCartney and Harrison solo stuff but I'm sorry U2 does not even appear on the radar. Do not listen to them at all. Yes they have fans but my Stones primed ears just do not tune them in at all. Couldn't even name the bassist and the drummer and don't care. Not in the same league IMHO. Same goes for Oasis. |
| January 11th, 2006 07:57 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
We have higher gross sales and anyone who thinks Keith doesnt approve of the ticket prices, setlists, etc is out of their mind.
I hate U2, and other such posers!
Led Zeppelin was cool to me when i was in high school and mad at the world!! now they are dated and tired! |
| January 11th, 2006 08:00 PM |
|
|
| speedfreakjive |
FAir enough, but in that case, The Who are the most overrated band ever, there's an emotion to their music which is lacking. I like The Seeker, Baba 'o' Riley. I agree on Floyd, too stoner-like music for me.
Just try and give Achtung Baby a listen though; its rewarding once you get into it, its not like the sound of the new stuff. |
| January 11th, 2006 08:01 PM |
|
|
| speedfreakjive |
quote:
voodoopug wrote:
We have higher gross sales and anyone who thinks Keith doesnt approve of the ticket prices, setlists, etc is out of their mind.
I hate U2, and other such posers!
Led Zeppelin was cool to me when i was in high school and mad at the world!! now they are dated and tired!
WTF? Jagger isn't a poser? |
| January 11th, 2006 08:04 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
quote:
speedfreakjive wrote:
FAir enough, but in that case, The Who are the most overrated band ever, there's an emotion to their music which is lacking. I like The Seeker, Baba 'o' Riley. I agree on Floyd, too stoner-like music for me.
Just try and give Achtung Baby a listen though; its rewarding once you get into it, its not like the sound of the new stuff.
I tried to give U2 a chance. As a musician I could not get past Edge playing "computer" instead of guitar as he uses far too many effect pedals, and Bono's act grew tired long ago....for that I hate them.
The Who may be overrated in some aspects, particularly that I never found Pete to be that outstanding of a guitarist (especially considering his peers are Richards, Clapton, Taylor, etc). Ox is a top notch bassist, Moon brought emotion to an instrument that rarely seen it, thus making him innovative. I find Roger to be a great vocalist and an average frontman...he doesnt captivate an audience the way some of the best frontmen in music do (see Mick Jagger) |
| January 11th, 2006 08:16 PM |
|
|
| the good |
Zep sucks. Cacophony, I say. I used to love them, but I just cannot listen to them anymore. And its not because I am a Stones fan who feels threatened by other "great" bands. I just truly think much of their output is pretty awful. They sound contrived. I don't know what in the world I once saw in Black Dog. When I hear it now, it sounds like nails down a chalkboard. I mean, I can still crank one or two of their tunes when they come on the radio (in the evening, when the levee breaks) but I haven't thrown a Zep CD on in years. In fact, I gave the guy down the hall my ZEP CD's for Christmas last year. No regrets  |
| January 11th, 2006 08:17 PM |
|
|
| speedfreakjive |
quote:
voodoopug wrote:
I tried to give U2 a chance. As a musician I could not get past Edge playing "computer" instead of guitar as he uses far too many effect pedals, and Bono's act grew tired long ago....for that I hate them.
The Who may be overrated in some aspects, particularly that I never found Pete to be that outstanding of a guitarist (especially considering his peers are Richards, Clapton, Taylor, etc). Ox is a top notch bassist, Moon brought emotion to an instrument that rarely seen it, thus making him innovative. I find Roger to be a great vocalist and an average frontman...he doesnt captivate an audience the way some of the best frontmen in music do (see Mick Jagger)
Yes, technically The Who are ace; but all i'm saying is that the overall product lacks the emotional punch needed for 'first rate' music, i.e. the Stones & u2. |
| January 11th, 2006 08:19 PM |
|
|
| speedfreakjive |
quote:
the good wrote:
Zep sucks. Cacophony, I say. I used to love them, but I just cannot listen to them anymore. And its not because I am a Stones fan who feels threatened by other "great" bands. I just truly think much of their output is pretty awful. They sound contrived. I don't know what in the world I once saw in Black Dog. When I hear it now, it sounds like nails down a chalkboard. I mean, I can still crank one or two of their tunes when they come on the radio (in the evening, when the levee breaks) but I haven't thrown a Zep CD on in years. In fact, I gave the guy down the hall my ZEP CD's for Christmas last year. No regrets
Indeed, but I think Led Zep II and Physical Graffiti deserve redemption. |
| January 11th, 2006 08:19 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
quote:
voodoopug wrote:
Led Zeppelin was cool to me when i was in high school and mad at the world!! now they are dated and tired!
them?
or
you?
|
| January 11th, 2006 08:28 PM |
|
|
| Nellcote |
Cool then.
Cool now.
Paid homage to great blues R & B musicians.
Recorded with Ian Stewart.
Had the most memorable line.."Where's that confounded bridge?" which my kids still scream to hear.
Makes them forever cool for me. |
| January 11th, 2006 08:34 PM |
|
|
| Egbert |
quote:
Nellcote wrote:
Paid homage to great blues R & B musicians.
Didn't Willie Dixon sue 'em for ripping off his stuff without crediting him? |
| January 11th, 2006 08:37 PM |
|
|
| Nellcote |
Probably.
George Harrison got sued for "My Sweet Lord" also.
Stones gave credit for ASMB to KD Lang, before it even was released.
Fill in the blank why.............. |
| January 11th, 2006 09:00 PM |
|
|
| doo doo doo Dude |
outgrew Zeppelin years ago. And Bono is the new Sting.
Both lame. |
| January 11th, 2006 09:00 PM |
|
|
| gypsymofo60 |
Studio; greatest of all time.
LIVE; sucked! |
| January 11th, 2006 09:13 PM |
|
|
| jb |
Cock suckers who are overrated....and if you guys like them so much, post on their boards and not here........obviously, you come here to annoy Stones fans....I guess it must really hurt that despite the Stones being 60 plus years old , they still generate more interest than Zeppelin ever could...and while U2 is at the zenith of their otherwise mediocre career, they will be forgotten like all the rest............Stones is a way of life..Zeppelin was a 70's super-group whose time passed long ago, and U2 simply never had anything much to offer but Ipods, UN publicity, and gutless techno-pop for 80's college kids....They mean absolute shit compared to the Stones..."Jimmy Page is quite the rage, I could not see the reason why"..........indeed Mick....indeed.
[Edited by jb] |
| January 11th, 2006 09:19 PM |
|
|
| Nellcote |
JB, come to Bahston, all will be well.
I'm working now, to get time off this weekend.
It's an ear training festival in my office,
good ol' "bang hard rock" as my grandmother used to call it... |
| January 11th, 2006 09:19 PM |
|
|
| keefjunkie |
"The Who are the most overrated band ever, there's an emotion to their music which is lacking."
im just wondering what who you heard because it certainly isnt THE WHO that i love...
i mean... emotion.. lacking... the who..... ????? |
| January 11th, 2006 09:40 PM |
|
|
| jb |
quote:
Nellcote wrote:
JB, come to Bahston, all will be well.
I'm working now, to get time off this weekend.
It's an ear training festival in my office,
good ol' "bang hard rock" as my grandmother used to call it...
I will be there...and comments not directed to you....I know you like the Stones more thna U2 and LZ(I think?) |
| January 11th, 2006 09:46 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
quote:
speedfreakjive wrote:
Yes, technically The Who are ace; but all i'm saying is that the overall product lacks the emotional punch needed for 'first rate' music, i.e. the Stones & u2.
U2 is not first rate as they are shitty, not even in the same league as the Who....no where near the Stones...need proof, play Magic Bus, Sympathy for the Devil and then play Pride (in the name of love). No comparison |
| January 11th, 2006 09:47 PM |
|
|
| Nellcote |
1st Stones show=07/19/72
$6.50 1st row balcony, Bahston Gahden
My 1st concert ever.
My allegiance to the cause was sealed on that date.
|
