Krish Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 One of the things that really sets Zeppelin apart from EVERY OTHER BAND in my opinion is that they never made the same album twice - even though it was the same 4 musicians and the same producer, each album explored different and multiple genres simultaneously, never duplicating or resting on past glories. This is how I would describe each album and although there are several different influences on each album, somehow the following shine through for me when considered separtely: 1. Led Zeppelin I - the blues 2. Led Zeppelin II - rock & roll 3. Led Zeppelin III - folk 4. Symbols - hard rock 5. Houses of the Holy - funk/reggae 6. Physical Graffiti - progressive rock 7. Presence - heavy metal 8. In Thru the Out Door - alternative 9. Coda - punk/grunge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lzfan715 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 I know they're all different but I don't think Coda is grunge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 You could say Presence isn't Metal, with progressive rock, pseudo rock'n'roll, blues, funk etc !! but I get your point of they are all so diverse !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlton Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 The best description I have heard is each Zeppelin album is like ice cream, none of them are bad. Also, my brother in law made the great point that Zeppelin doesn't have two songs that are alike. Being a little more of a fan I would mostly agree except for Since I've Been Loving You and Tea for One. Yes, Zeppelin is the best band ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Klu Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 Dyer Maker makes the whole album reggae? The Crunge makes the whole album funk? You're not taking your thesis to its natural conclusion. Each song is unique. Well, maybe not the blues stuff when Plant was jacking lyrics left and right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeD-kHaN Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 This is what makes Zeppelin the Greatest rock band of all times. Leave alone their albums, even the songs in one album are so different and there is so much variety. Page may not be the best fingers on the fretboard, but he is the best musician that ever lived! The way he created one new melody after the other, one brilliant album after the other .... unbelievable! The only bands that could come close to such diversity are The Beatles and Queen .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gollum6668 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 ok this is how great zeppelin is..my wife loves country music..but i'm not too crazy about it..she loves rascal flatts and all that good stuff..then one day we were driving in the car to home depot and i was blasting in through the out door..and hot dog came on..and i was jamming..and she was like "i don't wanna hear u cracking on my country music again if u loving that song." haha. anyways..zeppelin was..IS..so diverse..i love all their albums...think about it...Zeppelin did Zeppelin III before MTV even thought about doing Unplugged..very ahead of their time..and i'm sure they knew at the time they were taking a change/gamble..but they did what they loved..shame the left-overs like i wanna be her man and travel to wales we'll never hear... "The price to nowhere has increased a dollar more." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
achilleslaststand77 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 I would say he does have the best fingers on the fret board. Agree with the Beatles, But Queen?? Dont get it. I wouldn't put Queen up there with The Beatles and Led Zeppelin either. They (meaning the Beatles and Zepp) are way above anybody else. Queen is a really good band though.. I find their stuff really fascinating. They put a few different melodies in some of their longer songs.. much like Zepp did live with DAC and WLL. Their harmonizing was brilliant. Freddie Mercury had a voice that seemed to have no limit in range. Brian May was a underrated guitarist I think. All four members could/did write songs and they all could play more than one instrument. I would say they rank somewhere in the top ten for bands all time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krish Posted December 30, 2007 Author Share Posted December 30, 2007 This is one of the best posts Ive ever seen! I would add that in Phrysical Graffitti, Page seems to be on a mission to blend hard rock with all kinds of other music. For instance: Kashmir (Hard Rock and Classical mixed-and I wont even read the thread that questions this song as overated-it is incredible!), and then :Down By the Seaside is really a mix of country and hard rock. And Trampled Under Foot actually mixes disco and rock! Just amazing!! I totally agree that Kashmir is a hybrid hard rock-classical masterpiece - great pick-up! There are so many bands that are repetitious (many of whom I absolutely love like AC/DC, Maiden, the Stones & even Springsteen), but only Zeppelin shifts gear so seemingly effortlessly with each album, and as another poster pointed out in this thread with each song - it is true that The Crunge doesn't make HOTH all funk nor does D'yer M'aker make the album all reggae, but for me when I think of those albums, those are the genres that stand out. I think if I have time I will try to list all of the different influences in each song rather than each album - anyone care to help? Krish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 This is a great thread because it underscores a problem I have with so many other bands. It seems that as a band becomes successful, they have a tendency to fall into a rut and attempt to keep a consistant sound or style. I'm not sure I'm explaining clearly enough, but it's as if after a while Rush was just putting out "Rush" albums - the sound was so similar as to cause me to lose some interest. Same with Pink Floyd. Here's where I really felt this problem - in 94 we heard Floyd was releasing a new cd. At the time, industrial was pretty popular and openly acknowledged Pink Floyd as the major influence - if not actual creator - of the genre. I remember thinking how incredible it would be if Floyd's new release was fresh, cutting-edge industrial-style, kind of a "since we created this, allow us to take command and demonstrate for you why we are The Masters of Sound." Perhaps even collaborated with artists like Ogre or Al Jourgensen to ensure a forward-sounding production. Instead, we got The Division Bell, which was basically more "Pink Floyd" music. Not to say it wasn't a good album, I just think it would have been incredible to see a legendary band step right to the forefront in their approach, rather than reaching to the past, sticking to a proven formula, not taking chances. Conversely, as the OP has stated, LZ managed to push the envelope and expand their sound with each new release. As a postscript, please realize I LOVE Pink Floyd and Rush, and to Rush's credit, Snakes and Arrows is a nice balance between achieving the Rush sound and still having a "new", edgy feel. This post isn't a callout to debate these bands, I only cited them to demonstrate my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redanger Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 One of the things that really sets Zeppelin apart from EVERY OTHER BAND in my opinion is that they never made the same album twice - even though it was the same 4 musicians and the same producer, each album explored different and multiple genres simultaneously, never duplicating or resting on past glories. This is how I would describe each album and although there are several different influences on each album, somehow the following shine through for me when considered separtely: 1. Led Zeppelin I - the blues 2. Led Zeppelin II - rock & roll 3. Led Zeppelin III - folk 4. Symbols - hard rock 5. Houses of the Holy - funk/reggae 6. Physical Graffiti - progressive rock 7. Presence - heavy metal 8. In Thru the Out Door - alternative 9. Coda - punk/grunge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gperkins151 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 The only bands that could come close to such diversity are The Beatles and Queen .... I think some of the previous posters have misinterpreted this simple statement. Me, I would go a step further and say that for diversity, there has never been a band more diverse than Queen. Unfortunately, that aspect worked against them a lot of the time, as their albums often lack focus. The Beatles were surely diverse, but never rocked as hard as Queen or Zeppelin and therefore to me are simply not as diverse, since they didn't have any songs in that end of the spectrum. I still like them more than Queen, though, and dare I say even more than Zeppelin. *ducks* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gollum6668 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 This is a great thread because it underscores a problem I have with so many other bands. It seems that as a band becomes successful, they have a tendency to fall into a rut and attempt to keep a consistant sound or style. I'm not sure I'm explaining clearly enough, but it's as if after a while Rush was just putting out "Rush" albums - the sound was so similar as to cause me to lose some interest. Same with Pink Floyd. Here's where I really felt this problem - in 94 we heard Floyd was releasing a new cd. At the time, industrial was pretty popular and openly acknowledged Pink Floyd as the major influence - if not actual creator - of the genre. I remember thinking how incredible it would be if Floyd's new release was fresh, cutting-edge industrial-style, kind of a "since we created this, allow us to take command and demonstrate for you why we are The Masters of Sound." Perhaps even collaborated with artists like Ogre or Al Jourgensen to ensure a forward-sounding production. Instead, we got The Division Bell, which was basically more "Pink Floyd" music. Not to say it wasn't a good album, I just think it would have been incredible to see a legendary band step right to the forefront in their approach, rather than reaching to the past, sticking to a proven formula, not taking chances. Conversely, as the OP has stated, LZ managed to push the envelope and expand their sound with each new release. As a postscript, please realize I LOVE Pink Floyd and Rush, and to Rush's credit, Snakes and Arrows is a nice balance between achieving the Rush sound and still having a "new", edgy feel. This post isn't a callout to debate these bands, I only cited them to demonstrate my point. Totally agree with you. When division bell was announced, I was hyped. Picked it up the day it came out and listened to it over and over. Although i did enjoy it, only a few tracks really stood out..the rest were just like "ok, FF." Floyd co-producing with Ministry's and Al's name in the mix? Very interesting..Perhaps the cure, NIN, Manson (who was at the O-2 show), The might AL of Ministry and Tool could hook up and help LZ produce a new album..Tool did a wonderful remake of No Quarter. Anyways, if I feel like blues I'd pop in Zep. I...damn wait a min...maybe even II, III, etc. etc. I'm in a "slow, pop" mood...ok Babe i'm gonna leave u, II, III, etc. etc. anyways they put everything into their albums. One exception: I LOVE Presence, but I do think that album was so rushed that they didn't rehearse enough to make the tracks as diverse and flowing as the others. Page & Plant did most of the stuff without much input/creativity from Jones & Bonham. So yeah..which makes another good point (sorry Zep heads)...There weren't of been no LZ without Jones and Bonham..it was def. not just Page & Plant..or else all their albums would have sounded the same I think! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phhhl Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I totally agree that Kashmir is a hybrid hard rock-classical masterpiece - great pick-up! There are so many bands that are repetitious (many of whom I absolutely love like AC/DC, Maiden, the Stones & even Springsteen), but only Zeppelin shifts gear so seemingly effortlessly with each album, and as another poster pointed out in this thread with each song - it is true that The Crunge doesn't make HOTH all funk nor does D'yer M'aker make the album all reggae, but for me when I think of those albums, those are the genres that stand out. I think if I have time I will try to list all of the different influences in each song rather than each album - anyone care to help? Krish I have always felt Kashmir builds it's crescendo in the fashion of Ravel's Bolero. Page's guitar playing on so many songs, from Dazed and Confused to Nobody's Fault But Mine, mimics the virtuosity of a Mozart Violin Concerto... with so many notes coming hard and fast and making impossible sounds tangible and brilliant. Speaking of, it would be impossible to recreate Robert Plant's improvisation in live performances without a level of intelligence and chemistry between all four members of the band that has never been achieved by other bands, even the Beatles. The Grateful Dead defined the jam, but Zeppelin were the masters of it in a pure Rock form. Bonzo basically reinventing the drums for the darker and more sinister age from which Zep emerged, and Jones' technical perfection on keyboards and bass.... The original poster was correct. To simply use the word eclectic to describe this band seems unjust, but it is probably the closest word in the English language to describing their sphere of influence in the history of music. I would challenge anyone who claims to fixate on any genre of music NOT to find an entire block of tunes from the Zeppelin catalogue that does not fit their agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xmas Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 The diversity they have had is great,but whats most impressive is that they all sound like Zepplin.Other bands may change their styles and you think that doesnt sound like so and so at all.Simply amazing what Zeps done. The other band that comes to mind are the Stones.They have quite a bit of different sounds over the years and also keep it Stonesy sounding. Another amazingthing about Zep is that theres no klunker in the bunch.All top notch in thier own way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bomber Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Led Zeppelin I-Blues Rock Led Zeppelin II-Heavy Metal Led Zeppelin III-Folk Rock Led Zeppelin IV-Hard Rock Houses Of The Holy-Funk Rock Physical Graffitti-Prog Rock Presence-Jamming In Through The Out Door-Psychedelic Rock Coda-Rock & Roll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.