Stairway is NOT stolen Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 Ummmm Zeppelin as a live band vs. The Who... Go listen to Zeppelin live LA Forum 1971 bootleg... not the greatest quality but crank it up listen intently and then tell me about a live band.... havn't heard that yet, but I've heard the 1972 LA Forum show (Burn like a candle). Probably my all time favorite Zeppelin show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sathington Willoughby Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 You really can't go wrong with any of the LA Forum shows, even the 75 ones are good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosmic_juice Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 havn't heard that yet, but I've heard the 1972 LA Forum show (Burn like a candle). Probably my all time favorite Zeppelin show. the first show on the 21st has lesser quality recording but with headphones cranked its unbelievable ... the second night you can tell they are a little tired from the first night but as they warm up wow... so on par with 71 Japan ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonidasCLG Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 (edited) I have heard the 71 LA Forum show but not the 71 Japan one, I should definitely check that one out. In any case, audio only both bands are to me a push live. Led Zeppelin is far more improvisational and expressive, while The Who seems a little more more focused and tight... except for Keith Moon who's all over the place yet still on beat. To me The Who was just visually more exciting and that's why I like them more live. They were a bunch of raving lunatics on stage: smashing equipment, screaming at each other and the audience, beating and blowing themselves up and so forth. Just more to my taste visually, hence my stance on this and my regret not seeing them live at their peak. Saw them in 2000 before Entwhsitle died and while still good, they were far past their prime and it just ain't The Who without Moon to me. Led Zeppelin's music was so complicated in studio and meticulously produced by Page that it was very difficult to recreate some of it live. My favorite song by them all time, When The Levee Breaks, was to my knowledge never played live and that likely factors into my thinking on this. Edited December 23, 2014 by LeonidasCLG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sathington Willoughby Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 I have heard the 71 LA Forum show but not the 71 Japan one, I should definitely check that one out. In any case, audio only both bands are to me a push live. Led Zeppelin is far more improvisational and expressive, while The Who seems a little more more focused and tight... except for Keith Moon who's all over the place yet still on beat. To me The Who was just visually more exciting and that's why I like them more live. They were a bunch of raving lunatics on stage: smashing equipment, screaming at each other and the audience, beating and blowing themselves up and so forth. Just more to my taste visually, hence my stance on this and my regret not seeing them live at their peak. Saw them in 2000 before Entwhsitle died and while still good, they were far past their prime and it just ain't The Who without Moon to me. Led Zeppelin's music was so complicated in studio and meticulously produced by Page that it was very difficult to recreate some of it live. My favorite song by them all time, When The Levee Breaks, was to my knowledge never played live and that likely factors into my thinking on this. They played 5 shows in Japan in 71 and 6 in 72, most of which were some of their best ever. Also this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stairway is NOT stolen Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 I have heard the 71 LA Forum show but not the 71 Japan one, I should definitely check that one out. In any case, audio only both bands are to me a push live. Led Zeppelin is far more improvisational and expressive, while The Who seems a little more more focused and tight... except for Keith Moon who's all over the place yet still on beat. To me The Who was just visually more exciting and that's why I like them more live. They were a bunch of raving lunatics on stage: smashing equipment, screaming at each other and the audience, beating and blowing themselves up and so forth. Just more to my taste visually, hence my stance on this and my regret not seeing them live at their peak. Saw them in 2000 before Entwhsitle died and while still good, they were far past their prime and it just ain't The Who without Moon to me. Led Zeppelin's music was so complicated in studio and meticulously produced by Page that it was very difficult to recreate some of it live. My favorite song by them all time, When The Levee Breaks, was to my knowledge never played live and that likely factors into my thinking on this. To me, the who smashing up their instruments shows that they don't care about their instruments. Pete Townsend smashing his guitar is like saying 'This is just a piece of wood. I could easily buy another' Zeppelin cared about their equipment, which means they have a bond with their instruments. Page wouldn't even think about smashing his Number 1. It's special and unique to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sathington Willoughby Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 To me, the who smashing up their instruments shows that they don't care about their instruments. Pete Townsend smashing his guitar is like saying 'This is just a piece of wood. I could easily buy another' Zeppelin cared about their equipment, which means they have a bond with their instruments. Page wouldn't even think about smashing his Number 1. It's special and unique to him. Right. Also, doesn't that stuff get old after a while? Seems like kind of a novelty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonidasCLG Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 (edited) Yes I have heard those before, but it has been years. Back in the mid 80's, a friend of mind dad had several boots of Zeppelin and we'd listen to them on turntable. his dad was a Zeppelin fanatic. Had at least a dozen different boots from them.That guy had an impressive collection of bootlegs from many other bands too. I know I've heard that version in Brussels before, but I'd forgotten it. Likely because of the poor quality. The one's from Japan sound familiar too, but I'm not sure. It has been a very long time though. Ah memories... Never been a fan of non-soundboard quality though. I know it is what it is, but for all bands, regardless who they are... meh. Rather listen to soundboard recordings. I meant a soundboard quality of When The Levee Breaks. Is there such a thing? I'd love to hear it! As for smashing their equipment, it was part of their shtick pandering to working class geezers in London during the 60's. Pete Townshend,a pretentious art student at the time, claims it was an expression based on the "auto-destructive art" of Gustav Metzger. Doesn't explain Moon the Loon though. Whatever, it was a gimmick that helped push the band. It's usefulness was largely over by the 70's and rarely done from then on and the mostly out of frustration and rage. I do know that Townshend had nine custom Les Paul's that he used in the 70's and he only smashed one out of rage, as he was notorious for his nasty temperament onstage. The rest he still owns or are in someone else possession. I read an article where he stated he only regrets breaking that one guitar out of the dozens he destroyed because how good a guitar it was in beauty and tone. He may be crazy, but he isn't stupid. Edited December 24, 2014 by LeonidasCLG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sathington Willoughby Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 (edited) Yes I have heard those before, but it has been years. Back in the mid 80's, a friend of mind dad had several boots of Zeppelin and we'd listen to them on turntable. his dad was a Zeppelin fanatic. Had at least a dozen different boots from them.That guy had an impressive collection of bootlegs from many other bands too. I know I've heard that version in Brussels before, but I'd forgotten it. Likely because of the poor quality. The one's from Japan sound familiar too, but I'm not sure. It has been a very long time though. Ah memories... Never been a fan of non-soundboard quality though. I know it is what it is, but for all bands, regardless who they are... meh. Rather listen to soundboard recordings. I meant a soundboard quality of When The Levee Breaks. Is there such a thing? I'd love to hear it! As for smashing their equipment, it was part of their shtick pandering to working class geezers in London during the 60's. Pete Townshend,a pretentious art student at the time, claims it was an expression based on the "auto-destructive art" of Gustav Metzger. Doesn't explain Moon the Loon though. Whatever, it was a gimmick that helped push the band. It's usefulness was largely over by the 70's and rarely done from then on and the mostly out of frustration and rage. I do know that Townshend had nine custom Les Paul's that he used in the 70's and he only smashed one out of rage, as he was notorious for his nasty temperament onstage. The rest he still owns or are in someone else possession. I read an article where he stated he only regrets breaking that one guitar out of the dozens he destroyed because how good a guitar it was in beauty and tone. He may be crazy, but he isn't stupid. Obviously the sound quality of audience recordings varies wildly, but myself and many others here will agree some of the best boots are audience recordings! IMO you get a more natural, ambient sound, the sound has room to breathe. Soundboards can be a bit flat. You know about the Mike Millard tapes, right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Millard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listen_to_This_Eddie The 1979 Copenhagen shows are great ones as well. It can take a while to develop 'bootleg ears' when it comes to audience recordings, but you should seek out some of the better ones, you're missing out if you don't! Cheers! Edited December 24, 2014 by Sathington Willoughby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sathington Willoughby Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Here's another one where the sound isn't the best, but the performance is a MUST HEAR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sathington Willoughby Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Here's one more good one, if I may. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
price.pittsburgh Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 I grew up on The Who to some extent. My dad was sort of a fan. Before I ever got into Zeppelin, I owned Who albums and cds. Unlike Zeppelin, I do feel like you can give a beginner a genuine feel for The Who with a solid greatest hits package. I'm not saying it does them full justice, especially since Tommy is so epic as an album, but The Who were a pretty darn good singles band. That's not an insult. Most of their signature tracks are somewhere in between a radio song and album cut. IMHO there is no way you can do Zeppelin even the slightest justice with even a double set greatest hits. Without being concept albums, Zeppelin's albums all had a great feel to them that made every track essential. The Who only had one album that was non concept and still classic. That was Who's Next, and even it was meant to originally be a concept album. Most of Zeppelin's albums are either on par with Who's next or close to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Duck Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 ...Thank God we had both bands, right?... Here, here! I'm grateful I grew up during the 1960's and 70's. There was just so much good music produced and recorded then across a wide array of genres: soul, country, funk, rock and and even jazz. I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithril46 Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 I definetly prefer Zep. However, there are certain apples vs. oranges issues here. Pete Townsend was basically the rhythm section of the Who. You can clearly hear this when Townsend would try to solo, Moon and the Ox would just sail off into space. And although Page is absolutely more versatile than Townsend overall, Townsend is superior as a rhythm guitarist. Page would Often lose a rhythm or be having a tug of war between him and Bonzo or him and Jones live. But that quality also made Zep more unpredictable. And Plant is possibly the best rock singer ever, although Daltrey could easily be in the top ten. Of course Bonzo is #1 forever, but Moon is not far behind. And the Who did cheese out some by going on without Moon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithril46 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Absolutely agree. Today's overall music scene is like looking in a pair of binoculars from the wrong end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Henry Moon Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 Both bands are amazing. When you break it down, Roger Daltrey and Robert Plant both had amazing voices however Robert Plant's is more iconic. Jimmy Page and Pete Townshend were both great guitarist but we all know that even though Townshend can rock the double neck Jimmy Page is the far better guitarist. John Paul Jones and John Entwistle are talented but if you watch Thunderfingers (aka John Entwistle) you know that John Entwistle is arguably the greatest bass player of all time. This is probably the most argued question in music history. Bonham vs. Moon, John Bonham is known for his iconic drum solos for example Moby Dick and Moon is also known as Moon the Loon, some people say he's a sloppy drummer but he's not, he is probably the greatest technical drummer of all time. In a close race Moon wins because when you really listen to all he does he is truly amazing. Since it's a tie when you break it down, I gonna have to go with with The Who Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
California Evermore Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 I love both bands, but I give the nod to Led Zeppelin. It's just my subjective preference. Someone mentioned in an earlier post the mystical bent to Zep's music. That speaks to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles J. White Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 21 hours ago, California Evermore said: I love both bands, but I give the nod to Led Zeppelin. It's just my subjective preference. Someone mentioned in an earlier post the mystical bent to Zep's music. That speaks to me. I know exactly what you mean, after giving it some thought recently I think I can explain what I and perhaps others mean by “mystical” nature of Zeppelin: Zeppelin did something that in my view was unique – the band would often combine alternate guitar tunings with light and shade i.e. acoustic and heavy in a particular song and sometimes introduce different instrumentation (funky sounding keyboards or middle eastern instruments or Celtic instruments and so on) and they did a really good job of mixing acoustic guitars and electric guitars within the same song which I think sort of creates that impression of mystical sounds. It wasn’t all standard tunings and standard drum beats. You don’t need to do that on every song, but if you do that every so many songs it creates a certain mood of change that excites the mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rover 75 Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 Both bands were fantastic, but the only similarity is that they were both rock bands. Zep had lengthy solos, the Who rarely did, except perhaps for Live At Leeds. Very talented musicians in both, but The Who had some punk overtones from time to time, where Zep had some Metal overtones occasionally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
in_the_evening Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 1 hour ago, The Rover 75 said: Both bands were fantastic, but the only similarity is that they were both rock bands. Zep had lengthy solos, the Who rarely did, except perhaps for Live At Leeds. Very talented musicians in both, but The Who had some punk overtones from time to time, where Zep had some Metal overtones occasionally. Well stated, and like LIVIN said, it's great that we had both bands. Who's Next is just sssooo good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zino Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 (edited) I hope that some critical and not very flattering views about that matter are not offending any rules of this forum.... https://unpopulartruths.wordpress.com/2007/08/09/the-who-are-on-a-completely-different-plane-than-led-zeppelin/ Edited January 5, 2017 by Zino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matjaz1 Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 (edited) Life is about creativity and cooperation really, not much about who is better. So maybe Mr. Keith Bonham and Mr. John Moon can answer. It's not like I remember, I heard it on a bootleg. Things that matter, stay in your heart and it's such a big universe, it would be quite weird, if you would forget, what day it is for example, but the universe is more of a philosophical thing really, the rest is for science to explore further. So by the way, anyone had any sex in the last ten years? It's such a warm and close thing, when you are really deeply connected with someone, it's nice when it will happen, but it has to be really right, although ten years is a lot, but it was really just the first time. Am I talking too much? Who am I? Anyone want's to talk now please!? We don't want to stay too far apart, quite seriously and I wasn't on the forum for quite a while, so let's continue at a rather slow and quiet pace. Edited January 5, 2017 by Matjaz1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matjaz1 Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 I think I just corrected all the grammar mistakes, anyone wants to discuss The Who and Zeppelin now!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigled Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 The Who are a great band. But nowhere near Zep in any category. Albums, Live etc,etc. And they are not the same type of artists to compare anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matjaz1 Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 They were both very positive bands, each had a different approach to music and some of the Zep approaches, required a lot more virtuosity and versatility, but that doesn't necessarily make them a better band. They are to me, they give me a lot more, I love their music, it gives a wonderful time to humanity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.