Greatest 5-Year Creative Output: Zep vs Beatles vs Stones

[chef free]

Wow! That's tough, such great runs! It's too hard to discount the Beatles, they completely changed music, I just can't argue with the following logic:

It's The Beatles way above the others.

That period for The Beatles, from 1965 to 1969, was the same period that saw the biggest shift in direction and quality of popular music in the world.

Just compare an album like Help to Abbey Road, the scope there is enourmous. Not only in songwriting direction and style, but also in the art of studio recording itself.

Help was one of the first pop stereo albums, when vocals and lead guitar would be mixed to the left channel and everything else would be mixed to the right. By Abbey Road that had completely changed, Stereo mixing, because of The Beatles, had achieved a new hight and level.

Sticking with the technological aspect, don't forget at this time, because of The Beatles technical needs and explorations, this period saw the incredible technical creativy of the Abbey Road staff responding to their needs by inventing such things as automatic double tracking (ADT).

All you have to do is listen to Revolver, and compare it to any other album recorded in 1966 (with the possible exception of Pet Sounds) and you can hear The Beatles were far and away ahead of everyone else.

In that 5 year period, The Beatles gave us the first pop album to use Sitar, the first pop album to use backwards recordings, the first pop album to use higher bass levels, the first pop concept album, the first pop album to use atonal music, the first pop album to contain a full Indian-instrument backing track, The first pop album to use musique concrète...the list gones on...

I mean yes you may prefer Led Zep's music to The Beatles or even The Stones, to each their own, but in the history of popular music and the impact it had on the international music scene, audio recording techniques and the influence of future generations, nothing compares to that 5 year period of The Beatles.

Well, I can argue with one point: The first rock "concept" album is Frank Zappa's Freak Out. In fact Sir Paul has said that Brian Wilson's Pet Sounds was the inspiration for Sgt. Pepper, But Brian Wilson says that Pet Sounds was inspired by Freak Out.

[jimmie ray]

Wish You Were Here, I probably just haven't given it much of a chance. I found it harder to get into than The Wall. Animals could've been great but we sorted of ended up at the arse-end of some of Roger's more dull numbers...

"Animals" is a masterpiece, from start to finish. "Wish You Were Here" is very solid, if not exceptional. "Meddle" is a mixed bag of that has some low points, but also contains some of the highest points in their music. "The Wall" contains some of the dull numbers, but these go with the theme Roger was setting...

[docron]

I would have rather seen Pink Floyd up there over the Stones.

IMO, the Stones didn't really "create" much of anything. Their albums were all "alright", but creativity was not one if their strong suits.

I would pick Pink Floyd from 1973-1978 over the Stones.

The only bad part about Floyd's "Animals" were the short Pigs on the Wing (Parts I & II) tracks and the short 5-track album run-time. Those two interludes mentioned above should have been combined into a short 2 minute track. Sheep is obviously good as is, but Dogs and Pigs (Three Different Ones) both could have stood to be a few minutes shorter I guess, making room for one more substantial 5 minute track that could have woke the album up. - Pigs, Dogs & Sheep... awesome tracks though. This album has a real vintage sound for 1977.

Dark Side of the Moon (1973) is an epic story teller that you really don't have to change if you like their sound (I mean come on, have you ever sync'd this up with "The Wizard of Oz" and got high!? lol), and Wish You Were Here (1975), although could have stood a few more tracks as well, really is essential (probably their best stand-alone album). Lots of creativity here.

The Wall (1978) is probably my least favorite from this era, beacause of all the "filler".., too much for my tastes. IMO, could have been just as good as a single lp, but whatever floats your boat I guess. You can't deny this album beats the shit out of alot of other bands' Greatest Hits albums. I probably haven't sat down and listened to this whole album all the way thru to see if it sets some sort of mood with all the fillers (which knowing Pink Floyd, I'm sure it does). I should probably get on that sometime.

Pink Floyd's creativity > Rolling Stones "creativity"

[jimmie ray]

I'm kinda suprised that " Dark Side of the Moon" has stood as being so popular, while Animals is not. I like all the songs, but most begin with sound effects that are not music. The breathing intro takes up quite a bit of space, and the clock chimes come out way too loud, if you have it turned up. Great Gig goes nowhere, I would think - for the average listener who isn't totally stoned?

The Stones are a great garage type band, not much more. Complete followers - who ventured into psychedelic, country, disco, etc. during various points in their heyday...

[docron]

I'm kinda suprised that " Dark Side of the Moon" has stood as being so popular, while Animals is not. I like all the songs, but most begin with sound effects that are not music. The breathing intro takes up quite a bit of space, and the clock chimes come out way too loud, if you have it turned up. Great Gig goes nowhere, I would think - for the average listener who isn't totally stoned?

The Stones are a great garage type band, not much more. Complete followers - who ventured into psychedelic, country, disco, etc. during various points in their heyday...

I totally agree with the clock chimes. WTF is that? Did somebody accidentally hit a button on the mixing board or some shit?

Scares the piss outa me every time.

[jimmypage4ever]

well i dont see why everyone thinks the rolling stones are the greatest band.atleast every member of zep was at the best of their game. the only reallly good people in my opinon in trs was keith richards and mick jagger. the rest was average

[Olipticle]

def led zeppelin, I mean What they had done at that time was the only thing to compeat with the beatles they changed everything how music was given man much kudos led zeppelin.

[Otto Masson]

Well, of course I voted for Zeppelin, but in my opinion you get an even stronger run of albums if you count III - fourth album - HOTH - Graffiti - Presence. No biggie though!

On the other hand the periods chosen for The Beatles and The Rolling Stones are without doubt their strongest. Amazing albums. I've always thought The Stones just surpassed themselves in this era, especially on Let It Bleed; Mick Taylor isn't just a good guitarist, he made Keith work harder and better, it seems to me.

As for The Beatles, I find I sort of forget how great albums like Rubber Soul really are. And when I play it, it's just really fabulous. And, it may be a cliché to like it, but Sgt. Pepper's in my opinion really deserves all the acclaim - it's a FANTASTIC album throughout. The white album has some of their best songs, but I just think it's a lot more uneven.

[TonyV]

Tough call. Zeppelin comes out ahead of the Beatles, but not by a whole lot. No shame in the Rolling Stones coming in third.

[Adi]

I voted Led Zeppelin because i don't like the beatles (they are not "rocky" enough for me) and the stones so much so it was a very easy choice for me...

[Zachman]

hahar....we can now throw out zep1 cause it was already in the can before '69.

wtf.. its came out january 12th.. they recorded it in 68 but didnt come out until 69'

[Zachman]

zeppelin of course.. love the beatles but noone comes close to zeppelin... stones are OK.. nothing special.. solid band.........popularity wise why not throw in physical graffiti which imop is the greatest album of ALL time... i love them all by zep but at one point all of the first 6 albums were on top 200 chart.. i mean thats umbelievable! cant leave p.g. out of the list either so extend the 5 years to 6 or 7

[ledzeppelinfan1]

I voted Zeppelin cause the stones are awesome but zeppelin is just better!

[slave to zep]

never liked the stones.

love the beatles, but not as much as the zep.

zep win everytime with me.

[Mofostone]

I'm so glad I get to have all of them, what a great trio of rock n roll founding fathers

[dazedcat]

Given the choices and having to choose one I voted for the Rolling Stones five year period.

Nice poll, very tough choices to choose from. All were very very good periods for all three bands but I chose the Stones simply because it started with a stone cold classic album and ended with an immortal one.

[ledzepfilm]

Very obvious answer for me.

[Mattmc1973]

Holy crap, this poll is still going? I went back to the beginning, and didn't even realize I was the one who started it!!

[imPLANTed]

Beatles.

[Little Robert Anthony II]

Led Zeppelin, and it's not even all that close, IMHO. And I'm saying that even though I love those two other bands too.

[Pagesbow]

It's The Beatles way above the others.

Help was one of the first pop stereo albums, when vocals and lead guitar would be mixed to the left channel and everything else would be mixed to the right. By Abbey Road that had completely changed, Stereo mixing, because of The Beatles, had achieved a new hight and level.

Interesting. On my copy of Abbey Road, all of the vocals and lead guitar are mixed to the left, drums etc, to the right. Just like on all Beatles albums? I really don't like the way they mixed their albums that way. I believe they re-released all of their albums with a true stereo mix a few years back.

As for "most creative output" They were all creative periods for the respective bands. But i'm going to go with......Zeppelin, because I love all of their albums in that 5 year period; of the other bands, I only love The White Album and like, or am apathetic to the rest, of their output.

[lukeduggan]

I presume the point of this was contrasting British bands. Bob Dylan's not a British band, but:

BOB DYLAN

(1963-1968)

The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan; The Times They Are A-Changin'; Another Side of Bob Dylan;

Bringing It All Back Home; Highway 61 Revisited; Blonde on Blonde; John Wesley Harding

Beat that.

[joe (Liverpool)]

If any of us were to chose which band to hang out with in any of those 5 year periods, the superior beings would chose Led Zeppelin. Hands down. I do not respect people who would chose otherwise.

Same goes for the music.

The Beatles sound like a bunch of private school thugs who hit puberty early and never got beat up and let loose upon creativity.

The Rolling Stones have a strong visceral drive, but little substance to it. Having murder on your conscience doesnt make every mundane gesture you make magical for other people. AND Jimmy Page played on a lot of their tracks, same for JPJ.

Led Zeppelin was, is and is likely to be the best. Comparing Led Zeppelin to the Beatles and the Rolling Stones is like comparing Jesus Christ to the Mormons and George Bush, respectively.

Only jesus christ did not exist. It has to be The Fabs for me.