Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
stanlove

Bigger Live Attraction in the 70s The Stones or Zeppelin?

Recommended Posts

Sell more records + have bigger attendance at concerts = Bigger band of the 70's

It's a Zeppelin sweep! :yesnod:

Plus look at all the influence they had on future groups, the record industry, and concert promotion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Led Zeppelin was clearly THE biggest live rock attraction of the 1970s. My reason for saying so is that despite having toured the US extensively in 70, 71, 72, 73, 75 & 77 the demand was such that they could have also easily toured there in 74, 76, 78 & 79. During this same time the Stones maintained a business plan (so to speak) begun in 1966 of touring the US every three years (66, 69, 72, 75, & 78 & 81). The Stones were an incredible attraction however I don't think they could have toured profitably every year such as Led Zeppelin could have done. In fact, I'd say it was Kiss who gave Led Zeppelin and all others a run for their money as the #1 live rock attraction in the world from '77-'79.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kiss? I bought tickets AT THE DOOR for their "Rock & Roll Over" show at the Forum, so they couldn't even sell out one night there. Jethro Tull and Elton John, however, both sold out several nights at the Forum, but not SIX like Zeppelin did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kiss? I bought tickets AT THE DOOR for their "Rock & Roll Over" show at the Forum, so they couldn't even sell out one night there. Jethro Tull and Elton John, however, both sold out several nights at the Forum, but not SIX like Zeppelin did.

I don't show they played California on that tour (1976-77), but that was a 70 DATE tour and they did play three nights at the LA Forum on the Love Gun tour in '77. They also played Japan for first time in '77, playing four sold out nights at the Budokan in Tokyo, breaking the previous attendance record held by the Beatles. They broke their own record by playing five nights there on the Alive II tour in '78.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeppelin! D'oh... [rubbing it in]Obviously the biggest, the best, the most influential band ever to grace the world with it's presence.[/rubbing it in]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't show they played California on that tour (1976-77), but that was a 70 DATE tour and they did play three nights at the LA Forum on the Love Gun tour in '77. They also played Japan for first time in '77, playing four sold out nights at the Budokan in Tokyo, breaking the previous attendance record held by the Beatles. They broke their own record by playing five nights there on the Alive II tour in '78.

No doubt, this was their peak era ( KISS ) Maybe I attended the 3rd show of three or something, I don't recall. Of course, then Neil Diamond proceeded to play TEN nights at the Forum, blowing all other records out of the water as far as that went

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Led Zeppelin was clearly THE biggest live rock attraction of the 1970s. My reason for saying so is that despite having toured the US extensively in 70, 71, 72, 73, 75 & 77 the demand was such that they could have also easily toured there in 74, 76, 78 & 79. During this same time the Stones maintained a business plan (so to speak) begun in 1966 of touring the US every three years (66, 69, 72, 75, & 78 & 81). The Stones were an incredible attraction however I don't think they could have toured profitably every year such as Led Zeppelin could have done. In fact, I'd say it was Kiss who gave Led Zeppelin and all others a run for their money as the #1 live rock attraction in the world from '77-'79.

Sorry, you're out of your mind if you think KISS was bigger than the Rolling Stones, let alone rivaling Led Zeppelin. badgeholder is right, you could get tickets at the walk up for the Kiss Forum shows. The Kiss revisionist history has gotten out of fucking control over the past couple of decades. They were nowhere near as big as they make themselves out to be. One thing they did lead the industry in was unnecessary "holdover dates". Their only real "hit" album was "Kiss Alive". By the time of "Kiss Alive II" they were already on the downward spiral, as the number of copies that soon flooded the cut-out bins made plain.

Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones were both huge concert attractions...they were 1A and 1B essentially, that's how close they were. Where Led Zeppelin overtook the Rolling Stones in being the BIGGEST band of the 70s is in their album sales along with their concert sales. That's where the Stones lagged behind Led Zeppelin, although they still received plenty of radio airplay and in fact, were far more popular than Led Zeppelin on AM radio.

As someone who was there and actively going to concerts in the 1970s, here is a list of at least 10 bands/artists bigger than KIss in the 1970s:

1. Led Zeppelin

2. Rolling Stones

3. Pink Floyd

4. Elton John

5. The Who

6. The Eagles

7. Fleetwood Mac

8. Neil Diamond

9. ZZ Top

10. Aerosmith

Edited by Strider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, you're out of your mind if you think KISS was bigger than the Rolling Stones, let alone rivaling Led Zeppelin.

As I stated, from 1977 to 1979 (and arguably 1975 to 1979) KISS was the #1 live rock attraction in the world. During this time, KISS played more than four times as many shows as The Stones and sold more than twice as many live albums as Led Zeppelin.

Tour Dates (1975-1979):

Kiss...457 shows

Rolling Stones...113 shows

Led Zeppelin...88 shows

Live Album RIAA Certified Sales Figures:

Kiss, Alive (1975) 6,000,000

Kiss, Alive II (1977) 3,500,000

Led Zeppelin, TSRTS (1976) 4,000,000

Rolling Stones, Love You Live (1978) 500,000

Edited by SteveAJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I stated, from 1977 to 1979 (and arguably 1975 to 1979) KISS was the #1 live rock attraction in the world. During this time, KISS played more than four times as many shows as The Stones and sold more than twice as many live albums as Led Zeppelin.

Which only goes to show there's no accounting for taste :lol:

On a purely musical basis -never mind talent, or lack thereof- fuckin' Kiss don't even deserve to be mentioned in the same goddamn sentence as Zeppelin, or the Stones! Paul Stanley isn't even worthy of wiping the finger gunk off of Page or Keith's guitar strings...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a purely musical basis - never mind talent, or lack thereof - fuckin' Kiss don't even deserve to be mentioned in the same goddamn sentence as Zeppelin, or the Stones! Paul Stanley isn't even worthy of wiping the finger gunk off of Page or Keith's guitar strings...

Personally, I think Paul Stanley is one of the greatest front men in rock history. He's over 60 now yet still putting entertainers a third of his age to shame. Aside from that, he's just an all around great guy. I can't wait to see him perform at the Tokyo Dome next month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were all pretty damn big. To compare Zeppelin and Kiss from 75-79 is kind of pointless. Led Zeppelin were largely inactive for reasons we all know. 3 Dog Night were selling out stadiums in the 70s. David Cassidy was as well.

Edited by the chase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, you're out of your mind if you think KISS was bigger than the Rolling Stones, let alone rivaling Led Zeppelin. badgeholder is right, you could get tickets at the walk up for the Kiss Forum shows. The Kiss revisionist history has gotten out of fucking control over the past couple of decades. They were nowhere near as big as they make themselves out to be. One thing they did lead the industry in was unnecessary "holdover dates". Their only real "hit" album was "Kiss Alive". By the time of "Kiss Alive II" they were already on the downward spiral, as the number of copies that soon flooded the cut-out bins made plain.

Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones were both huge concert attractions...they were 1A and 1B essentially, that's how close they were. Where Led Zeppelin overtook the Rolling Stones in being the BIGGEST band of the 70s is in their album sales along with their concert sales. That's where the Stones lagged behind Led Zeppelin, although they still received plenty of radio airplay and in fact, were far more popular than Led Zeppelin on AM radio.

As someone who was there and actively going to concerts in the 1970s, here is a list of at least 10 bands/artists bigger than KIss in the 1970s:

1. Led Zeppelin

2. Rolling Stones

3. Pink Floyd

4. Elton John

5. The Who

6. The Eagles

7. Fleetwood Mac

8. Neil Diamond

9. ZZ Top

10. Aerosmith

....and I would argue ABBA and Queen were bigger live attractions than PISS in the 70's (overall)

I think one could safely say Zeppelin owned North America for most of the 70's. That was Zeppelin's biggest market; they sold the bulk of their records there and played the majority of their shows in North America. The Rolling Stones were most probably a bigger draw in the U.K, parts of Europe and Australasia (though I don't have any empirical data at hand to back this up) so surely a distinction has to be made between North America and worldwide.

Edited by Pagesbow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To compare Zeppelin and Kiss from 75-79 is kind of pointless.

Not when the question is who was the biggest live rock attraction of the '70s. I think I've proven Kiss ruled (as they used to say) from '75-'79 and that ain't revisionist it's a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....and I would argue ABBA and Queen were bigger live attractions than PISS in the 70's (overall)

ABBA was a bigger live rock attraction than Kiss? That's what we're discussing here - rock acts,

not Tony Orlando & Dawn's chart mates - I don't consider ABBA to be a live ROCK act. They

were a family friendly pop band who spent half the decade playing Swedish folkparks. Hell, even

if they are considered a rock act they didn't perform a show in the United States until '79. Get real.

Queen? They played less than 100 shows in North America from '75-'79.

Anyway, I never said Kiss ruled the 1970s, I said from '75-'79. THAT is the era of Kiss dominance.

Edited by SteveAJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ABBA was a bigger live rock attraction than Kiss? That's what we're discussing here - rock acts,

not Tony Orlando & Dawn's chart mates - I don't consider ABBA to be a live ROCK act. They

were a family friendly pop band who spent half the decade playing Swedish folkparks. Hell, even

if they are considered a rock act they didn't perform a show in the United States until '79. Get real.

Queen? They played less than 100 shows in North America from '75-'79.

Anyway, I never said Kiss ruled the 1970s, I said from '75-'79. THAT is the era of Kiss dominance.

No, that's what you're discussing as, if we're being pedantic, may I mention that the thread is titled:

Bigger Live Attraction in the 70s The Stones or Zeppelin?

Started by stanlove

Not:

Biggest Live Rock Attraction in the 70s In North America

Started by SteveAJones

However, feel free to start that thread.

My reply was to strider's post "here is a list of at least 10 bands/artists bigger than KIss in the 1970s" (note he doesn't use the word rock) also, at number eight in his list, he has bloody Neil Diamond for god's sake, whom I presume you consider rock seeing as you didn't admonish strider over Neil Diamond being included in your discussion about rock acts.

Yes, ABBA are easy to dismiss, yes they are uncool and naff, however, they wrote some of the greatest pop songs of all time. I happen to respect them as songwriters and for the fact that they have refused to reform. Unlike.......

PISS?

Jesus.....just look at them. :hysterical:

Edited by Pagesbow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Abba? Abba? Swedish? I knew them when they were a Lancaster club-dancing trio"

Although it pains me to agree with SAJ on anything, it's really not fair to compare Zep and The Stones as attractions in the 70's. It's easier to point out the differences than to compare the similarities. Going back to the sixties, The Stones have always been a part of American mainstream culture. They were a hit machine in the 60's and the 70's, on the radio, and in the mainstream media. Zeppelin and KISS were never mainstream, especially in the seventies. All three bands surely shared some of the same fanbase, but Zep and Kiss likely had fewer casual fans. So it is a credit to these two that they filled arenas with a limited audience. It does make more sense to compare Zep and KISS or The Stones and The Eagles. The truth is all of these bands sold lots of tickets and albums and were very successful.

Any respect due Abba (Abba?), a pop vocal group, is most certainly due the producer. I mean, if you like "Dancing Queen", how can you not dig "I Was Made For Loving You"? It's all music for shakin' yer ass, right?

As far as the "I hate KISS" badge of honor hogwash, I've got three words for you: "Whole Lotta Love". A three note riff, barely two chords, cheesy lyrics, and a bunch of sound effects. Who's gimmick free? If you think you're too cool for KISS, you ain't. If you don't like KISS, fine. But of you don't get KISS, you don't get Rock & Roll. Very few bands are more Rock & Roll than KISS. They've been successful doing their thing their way for 40+ years in spite of haters and and a lack of support from the mainstream media (kinda like Zep except for the longevity). I'd say that deserves some respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a little boy in the late '70's, but I do remember Kiss being a huge fad between about '77 and '79. They didn't compare in quality to Zeppelin and the Stones, though -- not even close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But other than your pretentious personal tastes, what is that conclusion based on? I don't understand how "Duece" is not a R&R classic in the same league as "Satisfaction" or "Communication Breakdown". It has raw, honest energy played by a band with an original sound. How else do you define R&R? Pretty please, with sugar on top, substantiate your claim. Is it really the make-up and flashpots? The Stones used make-up and flashpots. The Stones dabbled in disco. Gimmicks? All three of these bands had gimmicks coming out their asses. What's your actual knowledge of the band and their songs? They're not a great band because you don't like them? That's weak sauce. I bet you can do better. Otherwise you're talking out your ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...