zeppphead Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Hi Guys. I need solid references (from links to authentic books, scholarly reviews, news reports, articles only) to refute the false allegation that Led Zeppelin was strictly a heavy (or even worse a hair) metal band. Your quick response will be highly appreciated. Thank you all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Can I just say I don't get it when these sort of do my homework assignment for me posts are made? Even minimal surfing gives countless references. Personally I'd be more inclined to assist one who demonstrates they've already done some independent research and just needs specific, finer details than one who merely hangs a blank canvas up and asks us to paint a picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deborah J Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Hi Guys. I need solid references (from links to authentic books, scholarly reviews, news reports, articles only) to refute the false allegation that Led Zeppelin was strictly a heavy (or even worse a hair) metal band. Your quick response will be highly appreciated. Thank you all. Hello zepphead, Steve is correct as their are places on the web where you can get a lot of this information. This forum alone, if you take the time to look at the different topics, then the post in those topics will provide great information. I would start your canvas with their heroes. The people they looked up to musically. That alone is a start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppphead Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Hello zepphead, Steve is correct as their are places on the web where you can get a lot of this information. This forum alone, if you take the time to look at the different topics, then the post in those topics will provide great information. I would start your canvas with their heroes. The people they looked up to musically. That alone is a start. This ain't no effin' homework in the first place. Stop whining if you can't do something else than complaining about how much crap is filled up on Wikipedia, trying to get a point across. You would never want to participate and help make things better. Be a "winner", not a "whiner". FULL STOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppphead Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Secondly, I ain't no feckin newbie and know much more about Led Zeppelin or even rock n' roll in general than any other member on this board. I don't regret to say that this board is a complete waste of time, and full of impracticable losers who just love to complain but hate to offer suggestions on how to make things better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deborah J Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Secondly, I ain't no feckin newbie and know much more about Led Zeppelin or even rock n' roll in general than any other member on this board. I don't regret to say that this board is a complete waste of time, and full of impracticable losers who just love to complain but hate to offer suggestions on how to make things better. Zepphead, slow your roll, calm down...you asked for the information...so honestly if you know more about Led Zeppelin's music, why ask?. I thought I was being respectful in answering your question. This forum has a lot of detailed information, just take the time and look. It's worth it IMHO. Calm down, life's to short to sweat the small stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Good luck with finding that out. I don't know if you will find it documented anywhere in books or articles etc. It's all a matter of opinion on whether they were "strictly heavy metal" or not. Listen to songs like GTC, TRS, DBTS, TY, TTW et all and let people make up their own minds. There are a lot of knowledgeable folks on this forum and in most cases are more than willing to help but sometimes it is easier to search through the topics to learn. In this case there is not much chance of finding a definitive answer because it is so subjective and open to debate. Personally I don't believe they were HM rather they were Rock / Blues / Folk. Did they influence HM? Hell yeah but that's not their fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bong-Man Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Cueing up "The Rain Song" is the only reference needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppphead Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Zepphead, slow your roll, calm down...you asked for the information...so honestly if you know more about Led Zeppelin's music, why ask?. I thought I was being respectful in answering your question. This forum has a lot of detailed information, just take the time and look. It's worth it IMHO. Calm down, life's to short to sweat the small stuff Deborah, sorry, that wasn't intended towards you. Yeah, its quite obvious that I won't ask for advice, help again at least from here, like I helplessly put together the whole legacy section and neutralized the bias from the entire band's entry on Wikipedia. While you guys may not give a damn about, Wikipedia is/will be the biggest source of information in the world, so that was hell as important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 My only issue with Wikipedia is it is too accessible for morons to corrupt information which happens all too much with monotonous regularity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppphead Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Effin' around this forum all day long isn't a constructive thing, but getting LZ steer clear from all that shitty bias, at least IMO, help things a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppphead Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 My only issue with Wikipedia is it is too accessible for morons to corrupt information which happens all too much with monotonous regularity. And I'm one guy from Rescue Squadron who doesn't/ won't let this thing happen, at least on LZ-related entries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Yeah, its quite obvious that I won't ask for advice, help again at least from here, like I helplessly put together the whole legacy section and neutralized the bias from the entire band's entry on Wikipedia. While you guys may not give a damn about, Wikipedia is/will be the biggest source of information in the world, so that was hell as important. Wikipedia is only a primary source of info for the intellectually lazy, so if you're not feeling the love here for what you did don't expect to feel it there. By the way, seems you are a rather fickle fellow. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- zeppphead, on 14 December 2009 - 09:35 AM, said:First of all, hats off to Steve for starting and exerting such effort on this thread! I steer clear from all those satanism and backmasking crap but here's my question: What's connection between those words and Urdu: In 1982, a California State Assembly consumer-protection-committee hearing featured testimony from "experts" who claimed that "Stairway," when played backward, contained the words: "I sing because I live with Satan. The Lord turns me off -- there's no escaping it. Here's to my sweet Satan, whose power is Satan. He will give you 666. I live for Satan." Using a reel-to-reel tape machine, *we* played the song backward. The greatest shock was that the words sounded just like "Stairway to Heaven," only in Urdu. In the verse that begins "If there's a bustle in your hedgerow," there is indeed something uttered that sounds like "sayntin." SteveAJones on 14 December 2009 - said: There is no connection, backwards masking on Stairway to Heaven is just a fish story that gets bigger with each retelling, which is why I don't waste time on it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppphead Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Wikipedia is only a primary source of info for the intellectually lazy And such "intellectually lazy" people generate 7 billion page views per month. Wikipedia results in Google searches are clicked on roughly 56 million times a day, so, according to you, roughly 47% of all internet users are intellectually lazy. Great Discovery, sir! So if you're not feeling the love here for what you did don't expect to feel it there. What "Love" are you talking about? You are a rather fickle fellow. Really? So were about 70% of the classic rock stars... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- zeppphead, on 14 December 2009 - 09:35 AM, said:First of all, hats off to Steve for starting and exerting such effort on this thread! I steer clear from all those satanism and backmasking crap but here's my question: What's connection between those words and Urdu: In 1982, a California State Assembly consumer-protection-committee hearing featured testimony from "experts" who claimed that "Stairway," when played backward, contained the words: "I sing because I live with Satan. The Lord turns me off -- there's no escaping it. Here's to my sweet Satan, whose power is Satan. He will give you 666. I live for Satan." Using a reel-to-reel tape machine, *we* played the song backward. The greatest shock was that the words sounded just like "Stairway to Heaven," only in Urdu. In the verse that begins "If there's a bustle in your hedgerow," there is indeed something uttered that sounds like "sayntin." SteveAJones on 14 December 2009 - said: There is no connection, backwards masking on Stairway to Heaven is just a fish story that gets bigger with each retelling, which is why I don't waste time on it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ OMG! Are you the same SteveAJones?.... Hats off to you, again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starbreaker Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 One, anyone who claims Led Zeppelin was Hair-Metal has no idea what the hell they are talking about since the first wave of the bands in the Los Angeles Hair-Metal Scene (Motley Crue, Ratt, WASP) didn't start to put out records until Zeppelin had been gone for a couple of years. Now as to whether Zeppelin was strickly Heavy Metal, the answer is no. Listen to any of their albums, even the two that most would say were their heaviest (and most influential in the early development of Heavy Metal), Led Zeppelin and Led Zeppelin II. While there are heavy (relative to other rock music in the late 60's/early 70's) numbers such as "Communication Breakdown," "Heartbreaker," "Whole Lotta Love," "Good Times, Bad Times," etc. there are also many songs on the softer side such as Black Mountain Side, Thank You, and Your Time Is Gonna Come. Any Albums after those two certainly are not Heavy Metal. However, even though Led Zeppelin was not strickly Metal, some people include them as being a Heavy Metal Band because of their influence in the early development of Heavy Metal in the late 60's and early 70's along with Deep Purple and Black Sabbath. There is a lot of debate as to whether or not Zeppelin fits into the category of Heavy Metal (This is differant than saying they were strictly Metal in that you can be part of Metal but not necessarily always play Metal. Example being Hair-bands putting out Power-Ballads, or even Metallica doing ballads such as Fade To Black, The Unforgiven, and Nothing Else Matters). If you want my personaly opinion on what I talked about in the third paragraph, I would say that Zeppelin is not a Heavy Metal Band, but they are as close as you can get to being Metal without being Metal. They are on the borderline between Hard Rock and Heavy Metal. While Zeppelin was heavy, their songs did not have the kind of malevolence and evil that makes up a lot of Heavy Metal songs, so in my opinion, Black Sabbath were the first band that you could call Metal. If anyone has taken the time to read this huge wall of text, I really appreciate it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 And such "intellectually lazy" people generate 7 billion page views per month. Wikipedia results in Google searches are clicked on roughly 56 million times a day, so, according to you, roughly 47% of all internet users are intellectually lazy. Wikipedia exits for those who are too intellectually lazy to click more than one link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 The first wave of the bands in the Los Angeles Hair-Metal Scene (Motley Crue, Ratt, WASP) didn't start to put out records until Zeppelin had been gone for a couple of years. This is true, however they borrowed some of their style from the glam acts of the mid to late 70s. I have six criteria an act must meet to be considered a bonafide hair-metal band: 1. Sound 2. Hairspray 3. Spandex 4. Makeup 5. Goofy stage moves 6. Silly videos Examples: Bulletboys, Cinderalla, Ratt, Warrant, Winger, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 One, anyone who claims Led Zeppelin was Hair-Metal has no idea what the hell they are talking about since the first wave of the bands in the Los Angeles Hair-Metal Scene (Motley Crue, Ratt, WASP) didn't start to put out records until Zeppelin had been gone for a couple of years. So what about these guy's? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_Riot Yeah it's Wiki but the date's of their time frame are right on time. But no, I don't think of Led Zeppelin as a "Metal Band" at all, but, they did influence the Metal Head's. Quiet Riot was for sure a "Metal Band"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starbreaker Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 That was the band I was thinking of!! Yes, quiet riot is Metal, but more specifically Hair Metal. Hair Metal is one of a number of subgenres of Metal like Thrash Metal and Death Metal. By the way, isn't that Randy Rhoads on the far left? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danelectro59 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Hi Guys. I need solid references (from links to authentic books, scholarly reviews, news reports, articles only) to refute the false allegation that Led Zeppelin was strictly a heavy (or even worse a hair) metal band. Your quick response will be highly appreciated. Thank you all. I know, i'm late responding and much shit has been flung against the wall already, but i can't help but say that who ever made that statement, quote or whoever you got that from, doesn't know much about music. All they would have to do is listen to LZ's music to know they aren't a metal band. Or any other kind of categorized group. The only thing that can be said about them is that they are a rock and roll band. And one of the best at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryD Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 It's quite obvious that Led Zeppelin's appearance, especially Robert Plant, influenced the look of many Hair bands. Just watch Spinal Tap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zdr Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Secondly, I ain't no feckin newbie and know much more about Led Zeppelin or even rock n' roll in general than any other member on this board. Dear Zepphead, I don't think I like you anymore. You're saying that you know much more about Zep than any other member on this board? You say that ON THE F**** ZEPPELIN OFFICIAL SITE??? Sorry, but IMO this quote is the quote of an asshole. I hope you're not one of that, but this quote surely in pointing to that direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mangani Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Hi Guys. I need solid references (from links to authentic books, scholarly reviews, news reports, articles only) to refute the false allegation that Led Zeppelin was strictly a heavy (or even worse a hair) metal band. Firstly, who made the 'false allegation' in the first place? If it was in a reputable newspaper/magazine/radio show/t.v shown then can you elaborate and show us the exact quote? If, on the other hand, it was some snotty nosed kid in a school playground then who cares? These are the same kind of idiots who call the Beatles 'evelator music'. It happens and it's not worth taking them seriously. Secondly, just play them Bron-y-Aur Stomp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppphead Posted December 31, 2009 Author Share Posted December 31, 2009 Who ever made that statement, quote or whoever you got that from, doesn't know much about music. The AllMusic Guide: 1-Led Zeppelin was the definitive heavy metal band. 2- Arguably the first true metal band, however, was Led Zeppelin. Metal: A Headbanger's Journey (2005) Kerrang Magazine: 40 years ago this week a little known British band released their eponymous debut album and single handily changed the face of music forever. That band was Led Zeppelin and the genre they subsequently spawned became known as heavy metal. Rhapsody.com: Together they developed the mother tongue from which every Heavy Metaldialect derives -- a tongue spoken in psychedelic blues phrasesdelivered at over-driven speeds. Inevitably, Zeppelin will continue tobe passed down like a sacred amulet by older brothers, uncles, fathersand eventually grandfathers to new generations of adolescents gettinghip all over again to bell-bottoms, long hair and marijuana. Rolling Stone: Led Zeppelin's seventh album confirms this quartet's status as heavy-metal champions of the known universe BBC: The predominant music fashions in the 1970s were Glam Rock, Heavy Metal and Punk. This was the decade where Heavy Metal first appeared as we know it, spearheaded by the likes of Led Zeppelin, AC/DC, Motorhead, and Black Sabbath. Britannica Encyclopedia: Facts about Led Zeppelin: Development of heavy metal Express & Echo (Exeter UK): Led Zeppelin, the heavy metal super group which formally disbandedamid tragedy 27 years ago, are coming back together for a one-offconcert at London's cavernous O2 Arena, and many of the instrumentsthey will be using for the massive gig will come from MansonsGuitars, of Fore Street. Heavy metal juvenile delinquency and satanic identification by Jonathon S. Epstein: The 1970s supergroup Led Zeppelin is most often cited as being the first "true" Heavy Metal band. Rock and Roll: Its History and Stylistic Development By Joe Stuessy, Scott Lipscomb, Scott David Lipscomb: The premier British heavy metal band of the 1 970s was Led Zeppelin. The Encyclopedia of Heavy Metal By Daniel Bukszpan, Ronnie James Dio Icons of Rock by By Scott Schinder, Andy Schwartz: Led Zeppelin was derided by some critics as an overbearing, overloud, and mindless "heavy metal" band. About.com: Heavy Metal Time-line: Groups like Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple were the first heavy metal bands. DearZepphead, I don't think I like you anymore..... Sorry, but IMO thisquote is the quote of an asshole. I hope you're not one of that, butthis quote surley in pointing to that direction. Who the f#ck told you to like me? I'm sorry, but your statement makes me think that "who gives a f#uck about you, C#nt! ("Surley", I hope you're not one of that) These are the same kind of idiots who call the Beatles 'evelator music'. It happens and it's not worth taking them seriously. Exactly, my reply was: Only morons categorize Zep as heavy metal. It's as ludicrous as calling the Beatles "pop" or Dylan a "folkie." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glicine Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Please be more careful with the language. There will be no posts meant to offend or hurt any other member, in a manner which is offensive or inflammatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.