Jump to content

Led Zeppelin vs Deep Purple


Balthazor
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 11/13/2018 at 7:16 AM, gibsonfan159 said:

Excellent musicianship, but my brain will never accept an organ as a rock instrument. It's one of the reasons I get so turned off by the band and I'm so glad Jones used it sparingly. 

You know that Lord connected his organ to a Marshall amp, making it more rocker. 

Here they recreate something similar.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zep is more on the Radio over Purple.  Zep has more exotic Jams than Purple.  Purple to me military precision than Zep.  It comes down to Stairway vs Smoke.  It is unfair for me to point out the contrast.  As I am way more into Zep than Purple.  To me Purple always has this dark feel to their songs like The Doors  It always feels like there is this Nocturnal feel to most of their songs.  Where Zep goes all over the place.

I saw Purple for free once and I was not impressed.  My city's local cover band did a better job with Purple material than Deep Purple.  One thing I can say that Purple studio and live songs synch up more than some of Zep's Studio/Live songs.  For me.  Even though I referenced Stairway and Smoke.  Smoke's counterpart to Zep's equivalent song is basically Levee.  Imagine playing with Zep's history and Levee became that signature song.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/23/2018 at 8:54 AM, The Rover said:

I went to see DP on their Machine Head tour. I also went to see LZ before and after the DP tour. LZ wins the live presentation. DP are just BORING to watch. LZ are exciting to watch and to listen to.

That in my opinion is subjective, the copenhagen live is very good. The live performance of child in time has blow the heads of many who react here on youtube.

 

 

Edited by Ayton Kaleb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a fact that Zeppelin was more influential than Purple. I honestly stick with both bands. But I see a lot of people give wrong reasons why this happens, like they were bad musicians or because of the "keyboards", those reasons in my opinion are not good reasons. They had a break nowadays. child in time on their official channel has almost 100 M views. 

Watching this kind of debates I sincerely find many things wrong and some things true, even Gillan himself commented 
regarding the major success of ZP and BS.
"It doesn't irritate me at all. I'm happy that there are people who liked us then, enough to create this mystical, long-lived air, and also that there are people who like us now. You can't do something for 50 years unless you've done it right."

 

 

Edited by Ayton Kaleb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/3/2022 at 2:47 AM, McSeven said:

My city's local cover band did a better job with Purple material than Deep Purple.

I don't think you've seen the Child in Time live on Granada TV.
Zeppelin is bigger, but Purple's musicians were very good. Besides, the strongest line-up broke up.

I think that lowering purple to that degree is something wrong, although there were bad formations like MK V.

 

Edited by Ayton Kaleb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2018 at 1:40 PM, Balthazor said:

I just saw this article pop up in a few places:

https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/general_music_news/opeths_akerfeldt_led_zeppelin_would_disappear_against_deep_purple_on_top_form_black_sabbath_wouldnt_stand_a_chance_either.html

"When Deep Purple are on top form, there is no other band that can rival that. You couldn't put Led Zeppelin against Deep Purple on top form... they would disappear. And especially Black Sabbath, they wouldn't stand a chance! It's high energy at the top of its game"

I've never been a big fan of Deep Purple, they frankly bore me. I actually prefer the early Rainbow stuff to Purple, but that's all just a matter of taste. And I can't say much about comparing the talent level of these bands, I just don't know enough to have a worthwhile opinion.

However, I do find fault with Akerfeldt's "no band could touch Deep Purple" statement given that, to my recollection, Purple has nothing that even approaches songs like No Quarter, Stairway to Heaven, Kashmir, Achilles Last Stand, When the Levee Breaks...I mean seriously. Child In Time is a great song, my favorite Deep Purple song in fact, but it's not in the same league as these masterpieces.

Ironically, it seems like these days Deep Purple is best known for Smoke on the Water, a great rock song, yet one so simple it's literally the first song many aspiring rock guitarists learn to play.

Akerfeldt has been a Deep Purple fanboy forever, and admittedly I'm probably just as big a Led Zeppelin fanboy, but really I think he's being a bit delusional here. Even if you wanted to argue that Purple's musicians leave Zeppelin in the dust, which may be a fair argument, the fact that their catalog seems to pale in comparison to Zeppelin's, well I think that's got to ne taken into consideration. The Beatles weren't exactly a band of Steve Vais and Neil Pearts, yet their catalog is unmatched in all of rock history. So this whole "Led Zeppelin disappears next to Deep Purple" seems a bit of a stretch to me.

Not sure why this was moved from the news forum, since it is involving a news story, but ok. One final point I wanted to make is that Akerfeldt says if Led Zeppelin was put up against Deep Purple in their prime, Led Zeppelin would disappear. That seems silly to me because, as it happens, Led Zeppelin WAS put up against Deep Purple at their prime. Both bands were hitting their peaks at roughly the same time. Only, Zeppelin didn't disappear. Instead, they sold more albums, sold more tickets, wrote more memorable songs...in every way possible, Led Zeppelin did the exact opposite of disappear against Deep Purple.

That is only your subjective opinion, it does not have to be definitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ayton Kaleb said:

That is only your subjective opinion, it does not have to be definitive.

True, but the link quoted there isn't entirely unreasonable, e.g. he says some nights Page was red-hot, other nights not so much (he's surely talking post-73 here).  (And as far as subjectivity goes, I put Coverdale-era Blackmore ahead of Gillan-era.)  It does seem to be the case that DP had a bigger influence on the continent than in US or Britain (Opeth is Swedish).  Not sure why that is, maybe blues-based rock isn't as popular there (although DP was certainly within that genre), maybe the incorporation of some classical elements was more appealing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest reason DP was not quite as successful as LZ was due to the basic arrangements of the songs. When I listen to DP I hear five outstanding musicians constantly trying to one up each other. You have Lord going crazy on the keys, then Blackmore comes in with, "oh yeah, listen to this," followed by Paice and then Gillian screaming. Zep were always about the overall song construction and not the individual players (at least on record). Live is another matter but even then Zep were more experimental and the sonic battles were mostly between Page & Bonham but still within the framework of the song (Page soloing, Bonzo responding, Page responding to Bonzo etc.) Or Page vs. Jones in WLL but still within the context. DP usually did these individual solo runs but no real back and forth like Zep.

I enjoy both bands but for me DP could be more a stroke-a-thon at times. Yes, Zep were indulgent but it seemed their indulgences were more directed toward the overall song being played and not just a "Wheeeeee...look at me! Look how awesome I am on my instrument, wheeeeee."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, BobDobbs said:

I think the biggest reason DP was not quite as successful as LZ was due to the basic arrangements of the songs. When I listen to DP I hear five outstanding musicians constantly trying to one up each other. You have Lord going crazy on the keys, then Blackmore comes in with, "oh yeah, listen to this," followed by Paice and then Gillian screaming. Zep were always about the overall song construction and not the individual players (at least on record). Live is another matter but even then Zep were more experimental and the sonic battles were mostly between Page & Bonham but still within the framework of the song (Page soloing, Bonzo responding, Page responding to Bonzo etc.) Or Page vs. Jones in WLL but still within the context. DP usually did these individual solo runs but no real back and forth like Zep.

I enjoy both bands but for me DP could be more a stroke-a-thon at times. Yes, Zep were indulgent but it seemed their indulgences were more directed toward the overall song being played and not just a "Wheeeeee...look at me! Look how awesome I am on my instrument, wheeeeee."

I don't think so at all, glover hardly did any bass solos or anything like that, and paice just followed the song.
My reasons could be. A little bit of people's taste, it influences, their strongest lineup broke up, marketing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 7/11/2019 at 6:35 PM, Strider said:

Awww...I totally forgot about this kerfuffle. Thank you for replying as I would not have known where to look.

This is just Deep Purple fanboys going against Led Zeppelin fanboys. You are not going to convince a Deep Purple head that Led Zeppelin was better than Deep Purple any more than you will convince a Zephead that Purple was better.

But your articles are still full of bogus numbers and record company hype, Dario. I don't use Wiki as a source for anything. I use RIAA stats, Billboard, Cash Box and British charts, and Deep Purple websites.

Of course my thoughts on Cal Jam are my own personal opinion. I was just having a wind up. Deep Purple had their moments (Glenn Hughes was a revelation) that day...as did Black Sabbath and ELP and Rare Earth. Frankly, I was glad when it ended. It was a long day and I was tired and exhausted and uncomfortable for most of it...and the sound was hit and miss. It confirmed my dislike for giant, outdoor festival type shows...especially ones at Ontario Motor Speedway.  I chose not to go to Cal Jam II for that very reason.

Anyway, I have already spent more time on Deep Purple than I care to spend. I could show you reams and reams of facts that show DP's record sales are inflated in those articles but who cares...it's still not going to change your mind. So why bother?

If some people like DP more than LZ, more power to them. I leave this thread for good now. \m/

 

I am a Purpulian, but I know that Zeppelin was better, because without them there would be no Purple's formation 2. There is just one or two wrong opinions here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2018 at 2:59 AM, the-ocean87 said:

 Y

On 11/13/2018 at 2:59 AM, the-ocean87 said:

Zep has better songs, better grooves and they had Bonzo and Jones.

 

I think Zep has better songs than Purple, and Purple has better songs than Zep, depends on what song. Although if Zep is a few steps higher.
 

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...