I have quite a few live Faces DVD's. Did the unmentionable and paid for what are clearly bootlegs but justfied it after years of not seeing a single clip. The SFS was one, this was about ten years ago before it made the rounds on TV. I also have a complete '73 show, the '70 Marquee show, a '71 show and bits and pieces of some other early stuff. Of course I have the commercially available Faces DVD's too. All show Wood in fine form.

No, the radio thing was just an example of an early experience. LZ was one of the first "love affairs" I had with music. I bought every album, dissected everything from the art to the lyrics. The allure lasted quite some time. I scoured record shows and thrift shops for vinyl boots, had the Dannmarks stuff on VHS in the early 80's. I was pretty hardcore. Though I came to LZ via Hendrix, he was my first exposure to hard rock. For me LZ was a gateway band not a stopping point. All of the 60's-70's artists\bands were. Once I started working back from there I started losing my appreciation for some, not all. Since LZ came into the scene late their value plummeted quite a bit. I'll stop there because I don't want people to think this is some passive aggressive attempt to undermine them.

Like most rock guitarists his roots are blues but he doesn't just play blues. EC is adept at playing many styles of music. I think people confuse his deep appreciation of the blues with the actual music he makes. He's definitely done some straight up blues stuff but the majority of what he's performed should be considered rock music.

For whatever reason the dynamic of the band changed. RW and KR were explosive when KR guested with the Faces and later in New Barbarians. There were moments in The Stones but as things progressed from the outside looking in it appears they made a decision to reign it in. That said I don't think it was a detriment to the sound. I love what they did Some Girls through Dirty Work.

Ever hear "Presence Of The Lord", that is one rippin' solo.

I like EC in every era but there are times when I think he should have been more thoughtful with the production. There are some great mid period songs that suffer from too much keyboard where there should be guitar. But it's not a problem that is unique to him. At the time change was necessary or the market left you behind. Many of those that stayed the course to avoid pastel silk suits, synths and corny hairdos in favor of continuing in the hard rock vein ended up playing for peanuts in small venues.

I can't say for sure when I took an interest but I remember why. Back in the 70's the local hard rock radio station counted down the top 500 songs every Labor Day weekend. I always listened as much as I could and made sure I was in front of a radio for the top 20. To a kid this was fascinating stuff. Waiting and waiting to see if anything had changed. Every year it was the same and when it came time to play the number one song we always wondered if we'd somehow missed Stairwas To Heaven. Of course we hadn't and it would play and the weekend would be over. Good memories though I can honestly say my interest in the band has diminished over the years. I'm pretty far from being hooked. Can't remember the last time I actually listened to an entire LZ album.

Good to see this thread is still kickin'. I've been listening to a lot of surf\instro\lounge stuff lately but Blues is still my main source of inspiration. Recently renewed my interest in the Fabulous Thunderbirds.

Just put on the Herb Alpert Xmas album.

I bought this.

Not sure without listening closer, I'm not really a fan of RP's harmonica so I never really studied it. His technique is somewhat limited but chances are he's playing "cross harp", which is common for blues stuff where there are bent notes. I'm sure you can find out more about cross harp by searching the net but since BIOH is in E playing cross harp would mean he used an A harmonica. The other songs would be a little tougher to figure out due to the way the songs were recorded and mixed, studio effects, WTLB was pitch shifted a quite a bit. Anyway google cross harp and assume that RP either played his stuff in cross harp or straight and go from there.

I'm sure you've seen this, it's a legitimate release. There are a few others too. The Black Sabbath Story I and II have live snippets and there is a DVD with their performances at The Beat Club and MusikLaden are out there. Probably more I am forgetting ATM.

^That's a good score. I have a few copies of those shows, that package looks well done. Let us know if the DKRS is good quality, every copy of that I have is somewhat fuzzy.

This is what rock and roll is about, I love this.

I've heard The Rebel before, it's usually included in most documentary clips as an introduction to the bands beginnings. The other not sure but it sounds familiar, though that could be because you can hear the influence Ten Years After had on the Sabs in that one. With all that is out there these days, youtube, torrents etc. I haven't taken the time to go back and explore what rare Sabbath stuff is out there. Thx for posting those.

I'm sorry if you feel insulted that was not my intention. If I've mistakenly decoded what you claimed was a serious post comparing two albums it was because it lacked any musical comparisons and read like a Rolling Stone editorial. Edited to add BTW I really did find it entertaining.

Had no clue he hadn't been inducted yet, good for him. As far as the HOF goes I understand why they can't and don't induct everybody worthy at the same time. Unfortunately like anything else, including Led Zeppelin, it's a business with a bottom line to look after. They induct a mix of long overdue artists, a few forgotten names and those just eligible each year for a reason, so they don't run out of name brand inductees capable of getting people through the door.

Do me a favor and stop trying to interact with me on this forum. I've tried to be civil with you, actually have defended you a few times, even sent you a PM stating that I feel at times others have been overly aggressive towards you. However you are simply too wrapped up in your Zep worship, complete with bizarre opinions and no grasp of facts to discuss anything, with you it has to be a circle jerk declaring Zep the champions of all things music or nothing. My payback for that was you doing to me what has made you the enemy of others here and now I realize the problem has been you all along. Anyway back to Sabbath. I still haven't picked up the Heaven and Hell releases yet and hopefully I will this weekend if I have time to head to the indie store, it seems the CD\DVD selections at the big box stores is getting smaller every day. Was fortunate enough to catch them live a few times before Dio passed, good times.

Now this is great writing, seriously entertaining to read. However it fails to demonstrate differences between the bands in musical terms and that's what I was asking for. But again kudos for taking the time to post your opinions in such a creative way. Though I must say it actually helps prove my point, that the casual listener with an untrained ear doesn't really understand what they are hearing. That you consider BIOH, which is a blues in E with 3 chords, an example of superiority is puzzling. I should also point out things like dynamics, volume and tempo changes, aren't really signs of musical sophistication. It can help to create tension and draw the listener in but it was a well worn technique long before either Zep and Sabbath came along. BTW my point was never to pit Sabbath against LZ, both have always been on my short list of faves. The only reason I've posted what I have, and I stand by this, is that most rock bands are not treading the ground of musical sophistication. I know that's difficult for some to grasp, when they hear a band like Zep delicately pick out a tune with acoustic guitar in hand most don't understand that the only difference between that and their harder material is the type of guitar used and the volume. More often that not it's more of the same, simple songs with little movement. That's not a bad thing and certainly not an insult, it's the simplicity of rock and roll that makes it breathe. That's the genius of bands like Sabbath and Zep, they can take you on a rollercoaster ride without being fussy about it. That said without a doubt some bands inject a little more complexity into it than others. Bands like King Crimson and others that dabbled in more experimental music pushed it pretty far out there. This doesn't make them better or worse than anyone else it just means they had different musical goals. Anyway I digress. Since I've made my point as well as I care to and since there isn't any interest to discuss the actual musical differences between the two bands some have chosen to compete against each other, in ways that would be nearly impossible to distinguish due to there being more similarites than differences, I'll leave it like this. Rock and roll is the music of rebellion and by and large rooted in simplicity and repetition. It's not classical or jazz where complexity is the norm but at times it's practioners utilize those elements and more in creative ways.

Fair enough, care to take a minute and demonstrate how Zep II is more sophisticated than Paranoid? More than a little ironic some people are using LZ as an example of musical sophistication in rock considering the minute they started to become a bit more sophisticated they got slammed for it, In Though The Out Door. Even today a vast majority lament that they ever veered from the formula of the first 4 albums, which were arguably the most straight forward.

Agreed, everything he did was gold.

I never implied I was playing Zep, Sabbath or any rock when I started, I simply pointed out I have been playing that long. I only posted that fend off your attack because you've tried to portray yourself as some kind of expert when your posts in Musician's Corner tell the truth about how little you know about music, specifically guitar playing. There's no way you could understand what's complex and what's not. I haven't insulted the mighty Zep, all I've done is point out rock and roll is the antithesis to more sophisticated music. It's not jazz or classical, it's a genre firmly rooted few chords, repetitive phrases and simple scales. Sure there were a few that stretched the boundries a bit but bands like Zep and Sabbath were pretty simple in their approach, they aren't prog bands or moonlighting jazzers and their simple roots music influences are well publicized. These are bands whose musical talent was often shadowed by their excessive lifestyles, drug abuse, overtly sexual stage moves and penchant for repetitive riffs. You're trying to make Zep out like their freakin' George Benson or something. For someone that claims to be a HUGE fan I think you missed the point.

You are nut, lots of kids start playing at 6 or earlier. Heck Ellen DeGeneres has some young guitar slinging kid or pianist on her show almost weekly. Yes I've been playing since 1976, I got my first guitar that Xmas. For you to imply that is unique is just another example of how little you think.

Oh go away. Don't come here and try to school me about music. I can play Zep and Sabbath songs in my sleep, been playing guitar since the mid 70's, and you're some dope that thinks bending guitar strings is a bad thing. Yeah I've seen the depth of your musical knowledge in Musician's Corner, it isn't much.

Rubbish. Rock and roll is unsophisticated by default, it's simple structure has always been the antithesis to grander forms of music. Zep is no exception to this with their more often than not blues based arrangements and heavy handed approach. To speak of them like their Bach or something is absurd.