Jump to content

Doctor Jimmy

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Doctor Jimmy

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 05/07/1997

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Greece, Piraeus
  • Interests
    Guitar, music, films, tv series, video games, comic books

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. As others have pointed out, I think they should have taken better care of their setlists from 75 onwards...NQ was awesome, but DAC felt tired and longwinded, nowhere near the 73 versions - I don't think there was any new ground to cover in the song improvisationally after July '73 and, since it's a live number dependent on freshness and vitality...they should have left it out. MD was always boring to me, so 75 is no exception. I get that Zep wanted a fair amount of songs that had the ability to change from show to show in order to keep things exciting, but Rover, Wanton Song, In The Light, Cus
  2. Truth is, that OTHAFA solo with the "disastrous phrasing" happens to be one of my favorites he did for the song. Too many moments and licks where it's just bloody awesome and, yes, I fully acknowledge and can hear the sloppiness
  3. I think the OTHAFA solo peaked in 1975. By that time, Jimmy had completed his vision for how he wanted the solo to sound, what styles to incorporate etc. With that in mind, I think 3.21 might be his finest hour (ok, 3 or so minutes) on the solo
  4. Pretty hard to decide, but for sentimental reasons I'd go with the debut, since it's the first studio album I listened to after my father introduced me to Zep at the sweet age of 11. And, since that introduction was in the form of SIBLY and STH from the TSRTS movie, I would say the TSRTS soundtrack would be pretty high in my book as well (if we're including live releases).
  5. Amen to that! I'll take brutal honesty over these half-assed, ass-kissing "Oh I love [insert classic band name], they're the best!" remarks that celebrities often say
  6. I'll admit these songs have all very interesting lyrics, but: a) they're the exception, not the rule, they still don't measure with the finest lyrics of the Stones, imho. But we're getting into dangerously subjective territory here, I'm afraid
  7. 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?
  8. 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 eac
  9. 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...
  10. 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'
  11. I don't get the Stones/Richards "bashing" at all (I mean, look at my avatar ). 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
  12. I'll agree with the Earl's Court & Japan 71 crowd, these are the most likely candidates for release given the information on multitracked material we have so far. All in all, I think Page has covered most of the touring years of Zep with at least one show: 1969 - the bonus disc of the debut (could definitely use some shows with the "ALAIHY setlist" as I call them ) 1970 - RAH (fantastic representation of early '70 - no complaints at all- although I would love SIBLY, TY and Heartbreaker from this show) 1971 - BBC (this one's a little underwhelming, Japan or NA are ten times
×
×
  • Create New...