McSeven Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 If Zep only foucused on thier Acoustic side only. Do you all think they would have been successfull and popular? What do you think the Acoustic side to Zep did for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmie ray Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Well, Bonham would have been entertaining, playing "Moby Dick" on a tamborine... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmtomh Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 If Zep only foucused on thier Acoustic side only. Do you all think they would have been successfull and popular? What do you think the Acoustic side to Zep did for them? Absolutely would not have been anywhere near as successful. The heavy stuff is what made them. But without the acoustic stuff they wouldn't be as respected now, and they'd never have grown as a band. They likely would've been stuck at where they were musically with Zep II - which wouldn't have aged well if every album sounded like that as the '70s wore on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeldd Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 I think Zep would have been succesful with the acoustic, I mean they didnt just do either , some of their music combined both acoustic and electric i.e Ramble On. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Truly successful bands can do more than one thing. Led Zeppelin could do softer stuff, they could do harder stuff, and as much as I don't like the song, they even did something reggae-sounding. Had they only ever done one style of music, I don't think they would be as lauded now as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.