Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
weapon2010

Whats up with Keith Richards on LZ?

Recommended Posts

No English bands at the time seemed to give respect towards each other, especially the successful ones. Richards, Townsend, and Ian Anderson all threw shade toward Zep, but bands from other countries adored them. I think it's just a penis contest for who gets bragging rights for being the hometown heroes.

The Who and Tull I can understand. They wrote lyrically driven concept albums that made you think. I could understand why they'd think Zep were shallow. But the Stones wrote basically the same riff rock "Whoa mama" type music. Of course it's also easy to see that Zep were a "circus" act in the early days, with Bonzo being the power drummer of power drummers and Page using endless gimmicks and effects. Easy to understand how other musicians could just roll their eyes at them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Strider said:

 

He is a major part of one of the greatest rock and roll bands ever, and has written innumerable classic songs and riffs. He's earned the right to an opinion.

agreed, great classic songs and riffs, I like the Stones, he has a right to an opinion, my opinion is he's a dbag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gibsonfan159 said:

No English bands at the time seemed to give respect towards each other, especially the successful ones. Richards, Townsend, and Ian Anderson all threw shade toward Zep, but bands from other countries adored them. I think it's just a penis contest for who gets bragging rights for being the hometown heroes.

The Who and Tull I can understand. They wrote lyrically driven concept albums that made you think. I could understand why they'd think Zep were shallow. But the Stones wrote basically the same riff rock "Whoa mama" type music. Of course it's also easy to see that Zep were a "circus" act in the early days, with Bonzo being the power drummer of power drummers and Page using endless gimmicks and effects. Easy to understand how other musicians could just roll their eyes at them.

endless gimmicks and effects?can you please list them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, 76229 said:

Playing at The Oval or Lord's has always been a good way to get noticed by the selectors. Playing for Glamorgan or Northants a good way to get ignored.

By the way chillum, if it's Stoneman you're referring to, did he not go to Surrey not Essex?

I think it is. Surrey, well that shoes in nicely to my post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, weapon2010 said:

endless gimmicks and effects?can you please list them

Wah pedal, violin bow, theremin. Later on the effects he used during his solo in 77.

Page absolutely used everything to accent the music, no doubt, but I can see where a guy who just plays rhthym guitar might see it as a circus act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Strider said:

 

He is a major part of one of the greatest rock and roll bands ever, and has written innumerable classic songs and riffs. He's earned the right to an opinion.

Agreed.

I'm entitled to my opinion too though & I think he's a bad tit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, gibsonfan159 said:

Wah pedal, violin bow, theremin. Later on the effects he used during his solo in 77.

Page absolutely used everything to accent the music, no doubt, but I can see where a guy who just plays rhthym guitar might see it as a circus act.

ok i see what you mean, I dont define those as gimmicks.Gimmicks to me are more like The Who's destroying of their instruments, non music based stuff like explosions , lazers and fire.Hendrix lighter fluiding his guitar.Page's use of the bow was expanding his sound on  basically one song, the wah pedal was standard in the mid 70,s, Ill give you the theremin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2017 at 3:36 PM, Strider said:

It was fairly pronounced, even to this ignorant Yankee kid at the time, the disdain the Londoners had towards Birmingham and other Midlanders. When I first travelled to England and got a first-hand look at this North-South schism, a lot of the comments I had read over the years suddenly came into context.

But even then, I couldn't give a rat's arse what X thought of Y and what Y thought of Z, and so on and so on. I like The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, The Kinks, the Stones, Bowie, The Move, The Who, Black Sabbath, Faces, Mott the Hoople, Pink Floyd...some a lot more than others and some only pertaining to certain years and/or certain lineups. But nothing Keith or Pete or David or Jimmy or Robert or anybody says about anybody isn't going to change who I like or don't like.

So stop caring so much about what Keith or whoever says about Led Zeppelin...and yes, it has been discussed ad nauseam on this forum already. Multiple threads exist on this very subject.

I agree with this sentiment, however...I will say this:  Bonzo and Pagey would play the shit out of any Stones song , I can't say the same of Keef and Charlie on most Zeppelin tunes ( except the 12/8 or basic numbers). Can you imagine Charlie on In My Time Of Dying ? Or Achilles...or In The Light ... or.....???😆 A thundering 18 wheeler indeed...but not uncontrolled by any means. Sorry Mr Richards, wrong. 

Edited by porgie66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect, and I love the Stones, but their venture into disco disqualifies them from criticizing anyone. And I'm not talking a mockup disco track like Trampled (which was too up tempo to be disco anyway).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gibsonfan159 said:

With all due respect, and I love the Stones, but their venture into disco disqualifies them from criticizing anyone. And I'm not talking a mockup disco track like Trampled (which was too up tempo to be disco anyway).

No disco song is better than I Was Made For Loving You.

 

Edited by BledZabbath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith Richards is just high up on his little pedestal, so he doesn’t really have much of a worldly view touring with that corpse of a band.

At least he acknowledges that Jimmy was lightyears ahead of him musically, but that doesn’t excuse his comments about JB, especially with that metronome of a drummer in the Rolling Stones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Here Jimmy, try this heroin... it'll make you more creative and your band will soar higher than ever when you're snortin' this baby!" - Keith Richards, 1975.

"Bastard!!!" - Jimmy Page, 1976 onwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. This fact is also reported in the pages of Barney Hoskyns book. This is Keith Richards who is responsible for having turned Jimmy into an heroin addict. Pure felony. Richards the bastard.

Edited by seaweed gate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the daggers toward Keith for the intro to the white horse, but come on guys, personal responsibility. If Keith was to never exist - do you really think someone else, or Jimmys own curiosity / adventure / whatever you want to call it - would not have led him to trying this? Maybe - maybe not, but personal choices - even if encouraged to do something, is still personal choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what If he doesn’t like Led Zeppelin! Everyone has their own taste. I don’t particularly like sardines but for some reason I like toast and marmite with Tabasco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get the Stones/Richards "bashing" at all (I mean, look at my avatar :P ). Richards has a not-so-flattering opinion about a band. What's the big deal? Others have covered the various possible reasons for his opinion (and the most likely -and simplest- of all is simply "personal taste"

On 12/23/2017 at 4:24 AM, gibsonfan159 said:

The Who and Tull I can understand. They wrote lyrically driven concept albums that made you think. I could understand why they'd think Zep were shallow. But the Stones wrote basically the same riff rock "Whoa mama" type music. Of course it's also easy to see that Zep were a "circus" act in the early days, with Bonzo being the power drummer of power drummers and Page using endless gimmicks and effects. Easy to understand how other musicians could just roll their eyes at them.

No, the Stones didn't just write the same riff rock "whoa mama" type music. First of all, they were more diverse than Zep (and that's saying something given the fact that LZ were incredibly diverse too): the roots rock period is just four albums, before that we have pop/psychedelia (with all kinds of influences thrown in), after that funk/R&B/disco and some other genre hopping along the way. The Stones settled down for the "whoa mama" style (for the most part, but even then not completely) from Steel Wheels onwards. The majority of their discography is filled with brave experimentation.

Another key difference is the lyrical output between the bands' hard rock material. Let's face it, Jagger in his peak creative years (1965-1972 at least) wrote much more creative and interesting lyrics than Plant. For a quick conclusion, just compare the hits: Black Dog, Rock And Roll, Communication Breakdown, Whole Lotta Love on one side, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Satisfaction, Sympathy on the other. The LZ picks are undeniable classics, but the actual words are rather...ordinary "squeeze my lemon" or "girl problem" tropes -only Rock And Roll tries to tell something with its nostalgic theme. The Stones cuts, on the other hand, in addition to being equally classic in the musical sense as the LZ choices are much more inspired. You have a metaphor for getting out of tough situations, a hilarious tale about a "baroom queen in Memphis", a cry against social issues of the 60's and a critique against mankind's evil ways from the POV of the Devil and a rather ambiguous.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Doctor Jimmy said:

I don't get the Stones/Richards "bashing" at all (I mean, look at my avatar :P ). Richards has a not-so-flattering opinion about a band. What's the big deal? Others have covered the various possible reasons for his opinion (and the most likely -and simplest- of all is simply "personal taste"

No, the Stones didn't just write the same riff rock "whoa mama" type music. First of all, they were more diverse than Zep (and that's saying something given the fact that LZ were incredibly diverse too): the roots rock period is just four albums, before that we have pop/psychedelia (with all kinds of influences thrown in), after that funk/R&B/disco and some other genre hopping along the way. The Stones settled down for the "whoa mama" style (for the most part, but even then not completely) from Steel Wheels onwards. The majority of their discography is filled with brave experimentation.

Another key difference is the lyrical output between the bands' hard rock material. Let's face it, Jagger in his peak creative years (1965-1972 at least) wrote much more creative and interesting lyrics than Plant. For a quick conclusion, just compare the hits: Black Dog, Rock And Roll, Communication Breakdown, Whole Lotta Love on one side, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Satisfaction, Sympathy on the other. The LZ picks are undeniable classics, but the actual words are rather...ordinary "squeeze my lemon" or "girl problem" tropes -only Rock And Roll tries to tell something with its nostalgic theme. The Stones cuts, on the other hand, in addition to being equally classic in the musical sense as the LZ choices are much more inspired. You have a metaphor for getting out of tough situations, a hilarious tale about a "baroom queen in Memphis", a cry against social issues of the 60's and a critique against mankind's evil ways from the POV of the Devil and a rather ambiguous.

 

Damn, you're right. I've never realized the lyrical complexity and deeply perplexing concept of honky tonk women before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gibsonfan159 said:

Damn, you're right. I've never realized the lyrical complexity and deeply perplexing concept of honky tonk women before.

Oh, it doesn't have to do with complexity and perplexing concepts at all...it's all about telling an entertaining story or talking about something interesting. Plant very rarely (if ever) did that on Zep rockers. Mind you, this isn't a criticism on the actual songs...they're rightful classics. But the Stones were always more intelligent lyrically, that's my point. On your previous post you seemed to put only the Who and Tull on the "intelligent lyricists" club and all I'm saying is that the Stones belong there, not on the "whoa mama" club...Honky Tonk doesn't have a particular message, but it's a wonderfully funny little story that's tons more interesting than Plant's generic cock rock ramblings...and I say that as a hardcore Zep fan 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's So Cold

The Rolling Stones

I'm so hot for her, I'm so hot for her 
I'm so hot for her and she's so cold 
I'm so hot for her, I'm on fire for her 
I'm so hot for her and she's so cold 
I'm the burning bush, I'm the burning fire 
I'm the bleeding volcano 
I'm so hot for her, I'm so hot for her 
I'm so hot for her and she's so cold 
Yeah, I tried re-wiring her, tried re-firing her 
I think her engine is permanently stalled 
She's so cold she's so cold 
She's so cold cold cold 
Like a tombstone 
She's so cold, she's so cold 
She's so cold cold cold like an ice cream cone 
She's so cold she's so cold 
I dare not touch her my hand just froze 
Yeah, I'm so hot for hot for her, I'm so hot for her 
I'm so hot for her and even so 
Put your hand on the heat, put your hand on the heat 
Aw c'mon baby, let's go 
She's so cold, she's so cold, cold, she's so c-c-c-old 
But she's beautiful, though 
Yeah, she's so cold 
She's so cold, she's so cold 
She was born in an arctic zone 
She's so cold she's so cold, cold, cold 
I dare not touch her my hand just froze 
She's so cold, she's so goddamn cold she's so 
Cold cold cold she's so cold 
Who would believe you were a beauty indeed 
When the days get shorter and the nights get long 
Lie awake when the rain comes 
Nobody will know, when you're old 
When you're old, nobody will know 
That you was a beauty, a sweet sweet beauty 
A sweet sweet beauty, but stone stone cold 
You're so cold, you're so cold, cold, cold 
You're so cold, you're so cold 
I'm so hot for you, I'm so hot for you 
I'm so hot for you and you're so cold 
I'm the burning bush, I'm the burning fire 
I'm the bleeding volcano

 

32f2165dab6df6efab8681f2d545d0b4752897e9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, now you're playing dumb, right? First of all, I was talking about the peak years of each lyricist and second, I never said every single lyric Jagger ever penned was a timeless piece of art. But, here we go...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr Jimmy I also have to respectfully disagree mate. Peak years as a lyricist to my understanding includes Kashmir, In the Light, Stairway to Heaven, Going to California, Thankyou, Immigrant Song, That’s the Way, Over the Hills and Far Away, No Quarter, Rain Song, SRTS, Achilles Last Stand etc. All far more evocative tunes than anything the Stones ever did. 

Don’t get me wrong, I love the Stones.....actually, let me qualify that. I listen to the Mick Taylor era Stones A LOT. Occasionally the stuff before that....BUT NEVER anything after. Don’t think they have done anything any good since ‘73. Just my opinion, and I very often have heated debates with my Dad about it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Xolo1974 said:

Dr Jimmy I also have to respectfully disagree mate. Peak years as a lyricist to my understanding includes Kashmir, In the Light, Stairway to Heaven, Going to California, Thankyou, Immigrant Song, That’s the Way, Over the Hills and Far Away, No Quarter, Rain Song, SRTS, Achilles Last Stand etc. All far more evocative tunes than anything the Stones ever did. 

Don’t get me wrong, I love the Stones.....actually, let me qualify that. I listen to the Mick Taylor era Stones A LOT. Occasionally the stuff before that....BUT NEVER anything after. Don’t think they have done anything any good since ‘73. Just my opinion, and I very often have heated debates with my Dad about it. 

 

First things first: i was talking about hard rock numbers, prompted by the "whoa mama" comments of gibsonfan. Percy has of course written his fair share of beautiful/smart/evocative etc. lyrics, but my point was: although on first glance the hard rock songs of the Stones and Zep may seem to be of equal lyrical quality, closer inspection reveals that the former had a way better knack for rocking out AND having words that most of the time (not always, of course) go far beyond the cock rock cliches Plant wrote.

Second, I'm sorry, but Thank You has really banal lyrics for my taste, but to each his own, I guess.

Finally, "all far more evocative tunes"? Really? Gimme Shelter, You Can't Always Get, Wild Horses, Dead Flowers, Moonlight Mile, Sister Morphine, Sympathy, No Expectations, Paint It Black, Shine A Light, Winter, 100 Years Ago, Waiting On A Friend are only some of the songs in their discography that display an astonishing marriage between music and lyrics. But I guess the thunderous terror of Shelter, the spiritual uplift of YCAGWYW, or the spooky, creepy "dark alleway" vibes of Sister Morphine are less evocative than what Zep had to offer...

And don't make the mistake of dismissing their post-73 output...the "they sucked after that" myth is exactly that...a myth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doctor Jimmy said:

First things first: i was talking about hard rock numbers, prompted by the "whoa mama" comments of gibsonfan. Percy has of course written his fair share of beautiful/smart/evocative etc. lyrics, but my point was: although on first glance the hard rock songs of the Stones and Zep may seem to be of equal lyrical quality, closer inspection reveals that the former had a way better knack for rocking out AND having words that most of the time (not always, of course) go far beyond the cock rock cliches Plant wrote.

Second, I'm sorry, but Thank You has really banal lyrics for my taste, but to each his own, I guess.

Finally, "all far more evocative tunes"? Really? Gimme Shelter, You Can't Always Get, Wild Horses, Dead Flowers, Moonlight Mile, Sister Morphine, Sympathy, No Expectations, Paint It Black, Shine A Light, Winter, 100 Years Ago, Waiting On A Friend are only some of the songs in their discography that display an astonishing marriage between music and lyrics. But I guess the thunderous terror of Shelter, the spiritual uplift of YCAGWYW, or the spooky, creepy "dark alleway" vibes of Sister Morphine are less evocative than what Zep had to offer...

And don't make the mistake of dismissing their post-73 output...the "they sucked after that" myth is exactly that...a myth.

Whoa there....somebody disagrees with you in a respectful manner and this is how you respond? This discussion has passed the point of being a productive and positive use of my time. I guess that means that you “win”. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Xolo1974 said:

Whoa there....somebody disagrees with you in a respectful manner and this is how you respond? This discussion has passed the point of being a productive and positive use of my time. I guess that means that you “win”. 

Please show me where I have been disrespectful in my response...and it is not a matter of winning and losing, I am just not fond of the constant underrating the Stones get when compared to other famous classic bands when they were equally fantastic (if not more in many areas)

But i guess this is not the kind of thing to say on a zep forum, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Doctor Jimmy said:

Another key difference is the lyrical output between the bands' hard rock material. Let's face it, Jagger in his peak creative years (1965-1972 at least) wrote much more creative and interesting lyrics than Plant. For a quick conclusion, just compare the hits: Black Dog, Rock And Roll, Communication Breakdown, Whole Lotta Love on one side, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Satisfaction, Sympathy on the other.

Yes the Stones had some great lyrics, but you are underestimating Plant given the songs you chose for this comparison.  I think Plant wrote some great lyrics in a hard rock context.  

Celebration Day 

Misty Mountain Hop

For Your Life

The Rover

Sick Again

Royal Orleans - a great story song by the way

Hots on for Nowhere

Night Flight

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×