Customer Discussions > Classic Rock forum

The Led Zeppelin Discography Breakdown Thread


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 890 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Dec 30, 2012 1:24:00 PM PST
Ok, being not such a big fan of Zeppelin I had made a promise to listen to all of their albums for analyzing, scrutinizing, critiquing and discussing.

I figured the best place to start would be with...Led Zeppelin I..................... since it was the first album. :)

Let me preface this by adding I do not HATE Zeppelin, there are many things I like from them, a little bit I love, and a whole lot that just does nothing for me at all. I don't expect much of that to change since we like what we like, right? I would also like to add that Plant's voice is a big hinderance to me. A guy having an orgasm and making noises was just never my thing...BUT, I promise to try to be as unbiased as possible and will not hold my personal dislike for his voice to interfere with my judgement...as much as possible.

Finally, I'd rather steer away from where Zeppelin 'stole' their songs from and just base my opinions on what I am listening to. I hope others feel free to add in their two cents, agree or disagree and everything in between.

NOTE: I am not a very verbose typer and can usually say what I need to say in a few sentences so for those of you looking for pages of in depth scrutinizing that goes on for pages and pages it will not be coming from THIS keyboard.

Let the games begin!

Posted on Dec 30, 2012 1:46:28 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 30, 2012 1:55:08 PM PST
Led Zeppelin I SIDE 1

After dusting off the old Zep boxset I gave this several spins. Already being familiar with the albums it was simply a matter of refreshing my memory and reaquainting myself with the material. The very first copy of this album I owned was a cassette that had the sides mixed up, so for the longest time I thought the album kicked off with "Your Time Is Gonna Come" and ended with "Dazed and Confused".

Good Times Bad Times - The album starts off positively enough. Good riff, good vocals, good chorus, good production.etc.. The lyrics are well developed as sometimes Plant can sound like he's making it up as he goes along so this has a nice, finished quality to it. A good opener, short and to the point.

Babe, I'm Gonna Leave You - Has anyone ever counted just how many times Plant says the word "baby" throughout, not just this song, but the entire record? Good lordie!! Anyhow Page gives us a nice acoustic flavored folk ballad. Page's ability to pick on an acoustic is one of the things I DO admire about Zep. He always adds so many colorings and flourishes to his acoustic playing and it's used to great effect here. The only problem I have with this song, and sometimes Zeppelin themselves, is this song outstays it's welcome after about 3 minutes. When the band gets to (please excuse my lack of musical terms) the 'heavy' part it brings a sort of climax to the song before settling back into the softer acoustic passages. It works to great effect the first time...and the second time...but Page and company decide to drag out this same pattern an extra 2 times where by the 3rd and 4th time it has lost it's initial impact and has now become tedious. Coulda been great, as it stands it's still a good version.

You Shook Me - Is it me or does EVERY blues song Zeppelin does sound the same? Other's we will get to but this is the first that sets the pattern. I love blues music, but I do not like blooze music. Don't believe me? Ask Foghat and they will tell you. :) There are two reasons a band covers a blues song: 1) to pay tribute or 2) they feel they have something to add to the original that was missed. This song does neither of those. It's just a blues song done louder and heavier than what came before it. Some people like that and think the heaviness is cool. I think it murders the subtley that is inherent in properly done blues songs. Simply put, I don't like Zep's style when covering these songs in this manner where feeling is sacrificed for heavy.

Dazed and Confused - I get this is what makes Zeppelin popular...That gigantic, louder and larger than life epic feel with a majestic quality. It Sounds good on paper, but not to my ears. The riff is pretty cool but other than it's heaviness I don't see it's appeal. Does it sound a little too spacey? Druggy? I honestly couldn't answer that nor as to why I just don't care for it. The song is pure Zeppelin so that may answer my own question. I have a preference for more subtle music, not necessarily soft, but with Zeppelin it often feels like they are just playing louder and bashing for the sake of bashing and being louder.

This is all I have time for today. I will get to side two tomorrow although I know by then there will be hundreds of comments telling me I'm crazy...LOL

Posted on Dec 30, 2012 7:51:03 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 30, 2012 7:56:44 PM PST
@Exile: a good start, and you are more descriptive and analytical than you let on! Anyways, I'll admit I'm a big LZ fan, and IMO their debut is one of the all-time greatest, right up there with the ones by Hendrix, The Doors, VU, and The Pretenders. So naturally, I like all the tracks. The sound of this album had been presaged by some of the later Yardbirds work and Jeff Beck's "Truth" album, but nobody bought those last Yardbirds records (so no-one really knew what Page had been up to) and while "Truth" was fairly successful, no-one had heard anybody like Plant before. So what listeners first heard when they put on side one and "Good Times Bad Times" came blasting out of their speakers...I can only imagine. But Plant wasn't just the first vocalist of his kind, he remains IMO the best.

I want to stress Robert Plant's contribution to this album because while the musicianship on LZI was among the highest in rock up to that point, what clearly set the group apart from all the other "heavy" virtuosic supergroups sprouting up in that period were the vocals. People can say what they want about Plant now, about his "girly-man" voice or "ooh babys" and orgasms or what-have-you, but quite simply no-one had ever heard a vocalist with that timbre or range before. He begins "Good Times Bad Times" in his lower register and already sounds quite rich and strong, but when he switches for the first time to his higher pitch at "I know what it means to be alone", I'll bet every single person in January 1969 listening to that did a double take: "did I just hear that?!"

There's a reason Plant says the word "baby" about 200 times in "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You". It's a vocal showcase for how many possible variations in timbre and emotion he can wring out of that one word. He goes from ringing to tortured to gentle to haunted to satanic and everywhere in-between. Of course, if you don't care for his voice, you don't care for his voice. But again, I want to stress here that the abrupt vocal changes from low to ultra-high pitch in this song had just never been heard before, *ever*, and it's an extraordinarily dramatic effect. It's not hard to see why Plant spawned thousands of imitators, and yet no-one later was able to pack in the depth and fullness Plant was able to, which is why all the rest sound so shrill, cheezy and emotionless. As for the repetition in "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You", it never bothered me, and each repetition carries its own little variation which keeps things interesting and constantly builds the track. In fact, the track seems shorter to me than it actually is.

For a long time "You Shook Me" and "I Can't Quit You" were my two least favorite songs on the album, for some of the reasons you mention. Slow blues was never my thing and can get a bit boring. However, I grew to appreciate these songs very much, and I think Led Zeppelin absolutely added their own stamp to these numbers. Plant's idiosyncratic contribution is again obvious--that's one thing you can say this cover has, that is all its own--but Page's tripped-out guitar solo is another highlight. The superb ending where Plant mimics Page's playing, with some backwards echo mixed into the brew, oozes a kind of otherworldly sex: Plant does indeed sound like he's having an orgasm...and this is a criticism, how? ;) Howlin' Wolf never sounded like this.

"Dazed And Confused" mixes slow heavy metal blues with a long, eerie psychedelic mid-section that then explodes. Spacey and druggy? Absolutely (and again, I ask--what's the problem?!). I do not agree that Zeppelin plays simply for the sake of bashing loudly (that would be Deep Purple, LOL). In fact, "Dazed And Confused" features plenty of dynamics, as does "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You", "You're Time Is Gonna Come", "How Many More Times", etc. Remember their original mission statement was to "blend light and shade", and they do it well throughout. There's no question that their music was more bombastic and dramatic than anything before them, even Cream and Hendrix, but they were one of the few hard rock bands of the 70s IMO who could sound bashy and bombastic, while at the same time being complex, dynamic and intellectual. Ask anyone who's tried to master playing "Good Times Bad Times", if they think the band were just bashers.

Which leads me to the musicianship, which is of course the best rock had to offer in 1968. I'm not going to go into a full analysis of Page, Jones, and Bonham's playing, except to say that each is completely identifiable; you could never mistake Bonham for anyone else. Aiding and abetting the musicians is the production, and I will elaborate here as I feel "Led Zeppelin" had by far the best production of any rock album up to that point. All that time as a session player had made Page an outstanding producer and he basically invented modern hard rock production on this album. The stereo pan is so far ahead of what any other band was doing at that time, it's a joke; the clarity and punchiness of the mix is also ridiculously good for the era. Each instrument sounds big, meaty and booming; the sound of Bonham's kick drum on "Good Times" is a famous example of this. Then there are the psychedelic/stoner production tricks, which are subtly and tastefully embedded throughout, such as the backward-echo and eerie bleed-through of Plant's vocals. These sounds do not overwhelm, but give the album much atmosphere; the group manages a pretty scintillating blur between a heavenly and hellish feel, frequently at once.

"Led Zeppelin" had the effect of an atomic detonation on release that profoundly influenced everyone from Ritchie Blackmore and Ozzy Osbourne, all the way to Dave Grohl and Josh Homme. This was a new kind of hard rock that finally shed its pop influences (although traces of a tighter 60s pop style still lingered on things like "Good Times Bad Times"). It could possibly be why you don't care for it as much (I noticed GTBT was the one song you definitely liked, the others were either too long or repetitive). Normally I prefer tighter, succinct statements as well, but Led Zeppelin's approach here is just so impressive and epic that it justifies the time they take to stretch out the compositions IMO. There are all kinds of twists and turns in vocal phrasing and instrumental variation that so many other hard rock/early metal bands never cared to bother with. On side one, all the riffs, rhythms, solos, and vocals impress mightily. Nothing sounds generic or dull (again, I used to be with you in dismissing "You Shook Me", but on further listens all kinds of things pop out in that arrangement).

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 30, 2012 9:12:24 PM PST
M. C. Jones says:
<< Dazed and Confused - I get this is what makes Zeppelin popular...That gigantic, louder and larger than life epic feel with a majestic quality. It Sounds good on paper, but not to my ears. The riff is pretty cool but other than it's heaviness I don't see it's appeal. >> (Exile)

Exile... I Just wanted to say that I enjoyed reading your thoughts on the songs you have gone through so far.

And I listed below just a few of the thoughts from Michael Topper on these songs from LZI - that I found very interesting... and fun to read. Some times I wonder if you write professionally, Michael. If you do not... perhaps you should.

<< There's no question that their music was more bombastic and dramatic than anything before them, even Cream and Hendrix, but they were one of the few hard rock bands of the 70s IMO who could sound bashy and bombastic, while at the same time being complex, dynamic and intellectual... >> (MT)

<< ...The stereo pan is so far ahead of what any other band was doing at that time, it's a joke; the clarity and punchiness of the mix is also ridiculously good for the era. Each instrument sounds big, meaty and booming; the sound of Bonham's kick drum on "Good Times" is a famous example of this. Then there are the psychedelic/stoner production tricks, which are subtly and tastefully embedded throughout, such as the backward-echo and eerie bleed-through of Plant's vocals. These sounds do not overwhelm, but give the album much atmosphere; the group manages a pretty scintillating blur between a heavenly and hellish feel, frequently at once. >> (MT)

<< Normally I prefer tighter, succinct statements as well, but Led Zeppelin's approach here is just so impressive and epic that it justifies the time they take to stretch out the compositions IMO. There are all kinds of twists and turns in vocal phrasing and instrumental variation that so many other hard rock/early metal bands never cared to bother with. On side one, all the riffs, rhythms, solos, and vocals impress mightily. Nothing sounds generic or dull >> (MT)

Posted on Dec 30, 2012 9:19:42 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 30, 2012 10:41:59 PM PST
AlexMontrose says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Dec 30, 2012 10:43:29 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 30, 2012 10:48:38 PM PST
First I would like to thank Alex for saving this thread. All of us on Amazon bow down to Alex the great for showing us poor minions the way. :)

Seriously folks, wow only 4 songs and I have a lot to comment on about Topper's comments...BUT...it's very late and I just got in so I will have to wait until tomorrow afternoon to do that.

It's true that Plant's vocals were like nobody else's...I will give him that. Prior to Zeppelin no other band had a singer that sounded like his penis was stuck in a vice. LOL...I could hear Peter Grant now urging Page to squeeze it a tad tighter because he doesn't quite sound like he's in enough pain yet....

Oops, broke my promise already.. :) ...I blame the beer. :)

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 30, 2012 10:47:38 PM PST
M. C. Jones says:
<< Prior to Zeppelin no other band had a singer that sounded like his penis was stuck in a vice. >> (Exile)

I thought you were going to say... got stuck in his zipper. ; )

Posted on Dec 30, 2012 10:53:41 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 30, 2012 11:02:39 PM PST
@AlexMontrose: This thread probably hasn't taken off like the DP thread because I titled mine "Deep Purple: Reviews From A Hater" which was sure to draw attention from all you DP fanboys. The Led Zeppelin "game" on this thread had many participants and went on forever, if I recall; the group has never had trouble drawing discussion here and you KNOW it (in fact, you complain about it incessantly, the number of posts LZ and the Stones get while your masturbatory fantasy DP gets so few), so just because there's only been four or five posts here in nine hours is not exactly time to claim "victory" just yet. You always make such a *Big Deal* about DP's sales status in 1973--do you want to know how many copies "Celebration Day" has sold *this month*? I don't know of any Deep Purple DVD's in the top ten best-seller lists, do you? But enough of my "predictable" attempt to demonstrate LZ's popularity; it's predictable because it's so crushingly true. Also, the "Led Zeppelin: A Better Band Than The Beatles" thread on the Beatles forum blew up in no time (again, it's all in how you title the thing).

"I forgot if that was another one they stole from somebody..."

It was, in fact "Dazed" IMO is the most egregious theft in their entire catalog--but even then, the sound of their version is on another planet entirely from Jake Holmes' (which I also like).

"...filled with fan boy love for Plants vocals"

True. And your opinion of Ian Gillan is...?

"his thorough non-understanding of the nuances of other hard rock bands..."

You seem to forget that I went *in depth* just a few weeks ago into the "nuances" of one particular hard rock band you love. All those "nuances" were discussed in great detail. DP has some nuances to their brand of hard rock, I'll grant, but doesn't come close to those in LZ's music (and no, sticking a jokey countryish number on "Fireball" doesn't suddenly make them masters of subtlety--although if they had followed the direction of their third album a bit more, I might feel differently. Ironically, though, it is the simpler, hardest-rocking bashers from the MK II era that I enjoyed the most). Certainly Black Sabbath doesn't come close--in fact Sabbath deliberately avoided nuance.

"...who he summarily dismisses as imitators."

No, I said Plant's vocal style spawned a lot of inferior imitators, that's it. I did not say every hard rock or metal band who followed LZ were imitative (though most were at least influenced by them, and admitted it).

"He also says that "the rest" of the singers, the "imitators" from that era all sound shrill, cheezy and emotionless by comparison."

Do I have to put an "IMHO" in front of *everything* for you? Or do I constantly have to cater to your amnesia and constant re-imagining that I say everything as a fact? Also, I'm not just talking imitators "from the era". I'm talking practically every heavy metal vocalist who sang in a high pitch, especially the ones from the 80s but you still hear 'em today. And they are ghastly.

"Then to top it off we get "lectures" about the timbre and depth and fullness of Plants voice but the guy doing the talking thinks Billy Corgan's voice is Nirvana."

I did not say Corgan's voice was "rich and full". I know it's hard for a decrepit, delusional, moron like you to comprehend, but I can actually like *different qualities* about different singers. Imagine that.

"Compare Plant "raising" his voice on Good times ("I know what it means to be alone") to Gillan RAISING HIS VOICE on Child in Time."

You totally missed the point, as usual. I was talking about the fact that no-one had ever heard a vocalist sing in that style before, and how it turned heads. Gillan's performance on "Child In Time" came 18 months after Plant; for the particular point I was trying to make, it's literally a matter of who came first and how startling and innovative it was, *not* who was "best" at it. And yes, CIT is more powerful than that one line in GTBT, but I just used that because it's the first time Plant used that pitch on the record and I was trying to imagine what a listener to the album would have thought on first hearing that style. On the very next track, "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You", Plant totally cuts to shreds anything that cheezy-shrill Gillan character ever did. WAAAAAHHHH!!!!

IMHO. Happy now? (sigh)

"Yes but there's something about much of their music that has aged like a Led Balloon."

Tell that to the Kennedy Center, the POTUS and the millions of people who just bought "Celebration Day". I know you're inwardly fuming and beyond-jealous that Led Zeppelin is getting these honors and sales when Deep Purple is relegated to the oldies touring circuit, with albums barely scraping the Billboard 100, but think of it this way--DP can now be that unknown cult band you like that makes you super-hip! Won't that be great!

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 30, 2012 10:59:43 PM PST
AlexMontrose says:
You're welcome Exile. Just throw in a little hot sauce with feelings and off we go. Glad I could help :)

Posted on Dec 30, 2012 11:14:29 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 30, 2012 11:17:58 PM PST
Children, children...I am going to bed so stop fighting!

Honestly, I couldn't care less how many people participate in this thread. I was perfectly content with however many people want to get involved, even if it were just Topper and I. I started this thread because we did a similar one on The Byrds and wanted to do another one but never got around to it and this time the timing was right and we both agreed on Zeppelin.

Like the original intention on the Byrds thread, I wanted to exchange ideas and thoughts and familiarize myself with The Byrds music and anyone who had anything to add was more than welcome to. It's not a contest and the popularity of this thread itself is entirely meaningless to me.

Now good night and keep it down! :)

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 30, 2012 11:57:30 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Dec 31, 2012 12:05:53 AM PST]

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 12:07:52 AM PST
I assume the deleted post is Alex's, and he's now scrambling to erase whatever profanity he had directed my way in order to clear the "PG"-rated version for the censors. ROTFL

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 12:55:47 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 12:56:21 AM PST
AlexMontrose says:
Deleted post again...lol. It really wasn't bad. Just the truth about Topper. Which some might consider bad. But let's see what I can do to clean up whatever truths were too much for Amamom.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It doesn't matter what the rest of world thinks of Zeppelin Topper because you're tiny little world of reviews is right here. You're talking to people here who unfortunately didn't seem to find Zeppelins first album even as interesting as Deep Purple Shades. WAAAAAHHHHHHH ! It wasn't because of the title of your thread, it was because Purple is just as popular HERE as Zeppelin. Hate to break it to you but you've "only" been around for what, a year and half? While some of us go back three, four, five years. And if you want to call Amazon one day and request the number of Zeppelin and Purple threads, I would be willing to bet it's close and wouldn't be surprised one bit if there's more Purple ones. As hard as it is for some insecure puke like you to write a post without trying to put down other bands in the process, your "review" of this album was nothing more than your attempt at downing other singers and bands while touting your love for Zeppelin.

Case in point:
It's not hard to see why Plant spawned thousands of imitators, and yet no-one later was able to pack in the depth and fullness Plant was able to, which is why all the rest sound so shrill, cheezy and emotionless.

Notice the "no-one" part?...you phony, talking out of your a*s one post later id**t. That means NO ONE. Not Toppers gibberish that uhhhh, well duhhhh, wasn't it obvious I meant singers from the 80's?? Yeah sure Topper, I'm sure everyone connected those dots. It was so obvious that's what you meant. LOL....what a joke, always trying to cover your pompous, bonehead remarks with total nonsense.

You love Corgans voice and timbre so your opinion on timbre is a joke to me. Especially since you don't grasp that Plant has a shrill voice at times. I said he was a good singer but timbre wise it can be very off putting. Just like you feel about Gillan. It's as simple as that. Not Plant was on top of the mountain when it came to great vocalists and *no-one* else, or should I say everyone else was shrill, cheezy and emotionless. Your words.

And in case a black and white boob like you can't figure it out the main reason Zeppelins popularity is so high right now is because yes they are still revered but why is that? At least one of the *main* reasons? Would it have something to do with the fact that they give people little specs of hope that they might reunite? Is it because they haven't been a band for 30 + years? While many of the other "classic" rock bands are still together so naturally it's not the same for current working bands to get the same headlines as a band that millions want to get back together. And one that keeps teasing that maybe, just maybe it could happen. In the meantime we get Celebration day. Hey God bless them and their marketing team. They present these albums like there long lost Beatles records and foster the image that Zeppelin is Godlike. Works for them and all the Zeppelin fanatics and there's nothing wrong with that. It just is what it is.

Sorry pal, your post is littered with nothing more than Zeppelin had more of this, Plant had more of that and everyone else pales by comparison. But naturally after the fact you're spinning and coughing up your usual I didn't mean it that way crap, the usual Topper pomposity where it's clear (only to you) that every other singer *from that era* was shrill, cheezy etc. But hey but maybe you were only talking about Gillan ;) God knows, everyone knows that half your posts are a lame attempt to deal with everything that's still stuck in your craw. You could always review a few more DP Albums if that helps your neurosis ;)

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 1:55:10 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 2:03:40 AM PST
@AlexMontrose: "it was because Purple is just as popular HERE as Zeppelin."

Yes, and the dozen or so people who regularly post to this forum are *of course* a perfect microcosm of the hundreds of millions of rock fans in the outside world. But really, it's not a popularity contest, though you tried to paint it as one by pointing out the paucity of posts in this thread (but we're sure rectifying that, aren't we?). I've already said many times that sales has nothing to do with quality. Even if LZ only sold ten copies of their debut album and DP sold twenty million of "Shades", LZ would still outclass DP fifty to one. And I thought "Shades" was one of their better albums. But it just so happens that LZ is a lot more popular, as well. If you want to deny it, that's fine with me. No skin off my back.

"...your "review" of this album was nothing more than your attempt at downing other singers and bands while touting your love for Zeppelin."

The quote you picked to prove this point *was*, in fact, an attempt by me to do just that, when it came to the vocals. I've seen Plant downed a number of times on this forum and I will defend him to my dying day; I think people are nuts if they can't hear how otherworldly that voice is. The way I feel about people downing him, is the way you felt about my downing Gillan. So I spent an extra amount of time in that review, I will freely admit, focusing on Plant. It's all just IMO, but it is a review nonetheless. If I want to compare Zeppelin to their cheezy imitators in a review, that's perfectly legit--I don't see why you're so "outraged". But you get outraged at anything, so I'm used to it. The other times I compared them to other groups was to say they were more bombastic than Cream/Hendrix, and had better production than virtually everybody else at the time. So? Does that not make it a review, somehow?!?

I'm sure if I had said in the Deep Purple thread that they were head-and-shoulders above everyone else, you would have had absolutely no problem with that statement and perfectly agreed with me. You're such a blinding hypocrite, whose double standards are on an epic level the size of "Dazed And Confused" itself.

"That means NO ONE. Not Toppers gibberish that uhhhh, well duhhhh, wasn't it obvious I meant singers from the 80's?? It was so obvious that's what you meant. LOL...."

You are just so mind-blowingly stupid, you top yourself in complete and utter retardation every time. If I'm talking about *Plant's* imitators, then it's obvious I'm talking about SINGERS, and I clarified that I meant singers from every era. It's as obvious as the gap in your teeth, and the fact that you're implying it isn't obvious just makes you look even dumber.

"Not Plant was on top of the mountain when it came to great vocalists and *no-one* else, or should I say everyone else was shrill, cheezy and emotionless. Your words."

D**m straight those are my words. You always act like I "backtrack", when in fact I completely stand by everything I said. I honestly don't believe any hard rock/metal vocalists ever came close to Plant's soul, feel or power. Even the few ones I like, like Ozzy or the guy in Budgie, just aren't in the same league. It's my frigging opinion, which I'm perfectly allowed to express. Sorry that gets under your goat. But I'm talking purely about the vocals here, which I was doing for half the review, not the bands in general (although many of the overall bands were inferior, as well, I don't feel it's as across-the-board like I do for the vocals).

"Would it have something to do with the fact that they give people little specs of hope that they might reunite? Is it because they haven't been a band for 30 + years?"

That has a little to do with it, but if the band were no good or people didn't have great memories of them, there would be no demand. The 02 reunion shows in '07 from which "Celebration Day" was taken received *twenty million* ticket requests at the time. Maybe it *is* great marketing--yet another thing LZ are better than DP at.

"You love Corgans voice and timbre so your opinion on timbre is a joke to me."

Corgan has more heart and soul in his whiniest, most nasal vocal than Gillan had on his best day. You talk about "grey areas", yet you have no clue about the real nuance and subtleties that divide bad/good/great singers or players or anything else, for that matter. You want your music "mean and slit-your-throat". That sounds pretty f'ing black-and-white to me.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 10:23:22 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 10:31:37 AM PST
AlexMontrose says:
Topper,

I'm just glad whoever is tuning in this time doesn't have to wonder how glaringly neurotic and full of sheet you can be. It's all right here without your inevitable "I never said that !". Whenever someone (me) catches your pompous garbage out comes the Topper spinning machine. Again fortunately it's just a few posts back. But we are all supposed to know that this Topper line "meant" something else:

"It's not hard to see why Plant spawned thousands of imitators, and yet no-one later was able to pack in the depth and fullness Plant was able to, which is why all the rest sound so shrill, cheezy and emotionless"

Do you understand why you are such a clueless bonehead? We're back to Toppers therapy sessions. Happens in every thread where you make remarks that cannot be misconstrued. That line above has nothing to do with 80's singers like you so amazingly and incredibly tried to claim. It says *no-one*. Even a caught with his pants down brain dead moron like yourself can see that. Now you are backtracking ofcourse and saying you "clarified" it was singers from every era. Which was exactly my point before you started spinning. That you said *no-one*, no singer "ever came close to Plant's soul, feel or power". Before it was 80's singers. Now it's no one. LOL......yeah that's exactly what I said you said. But when your dealing with pathological numbskulls who don't have the capacity to tell the truth from one post to the next you end up arguing with this id*** about what he just got through saying. Post after post. It's such a pleasure to get people who say what they mean, mean what they say. Instead we always end up with mealy mouthed Topper.

Re: Even if LZ only sold ten copies of their debut album and DP sold twenty million of "Shades", LZ would still outclass DP fifty to one

I also said Zeppelin easily outstrips the popularity of almost any other hard rock band so as usual you had no point above and wasted our time with more of your wet dreams about Zeppelin. *My* point was that in *these* threads whether it's 12 people or 1200, Purple and Zeppelin both get gobs of respect. But look who I'm talking to. A guy who puts Billy Corgan, The guy from Budgie (good band but another annoying Geddy Lee type vocalist, Ozzy, totally average singer at best and Robert Plant as representatives of singers with the best timbre. LOL......sometimes there are opinions and sometimes there are complete morons who shouldn't be allowed to have an opinion.

Re : Corgan has more heart and soul in his whiniest, most nasal vocal than Gillan had on his best day

Care to put up a thread about that ;) ?? LOL.....on *your* best day you'd be lucky if one person agreed with that retarded statement.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 10:40:52 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 10:50:13 AM PST
"I want to stress Robert Plant's contribution to this album because while the musicianship on LZI was among the highest in rock up to that point, what clearly set the group apart from all the other "heavy" virtuosic supergroups sprouting up in that period were the vocals."

I would never put Zeppelin's instrumental prowess up for questioning. They are proven, skilled musicians. Plant's vocals may have been different but that still doesn't mean people won't have a problem with them. For me, I have no trouble listening to him when he does a simple, straight forward reading of a song. It's his so-called "I'm a dog in heat" ad libs that are a turn off. He CAN sing, it's the posing and , like everything Zeppelin, his over the top approach at times. We can build it bigger, better and faster and louder and more in your face...We HAVE the technology...(Yawn)

"For a long time "You Shook Me" and "I Can't Quit You" were my two least favorite songs on the album, for some of the reasons you mention. Slow blues was never my thing and can get a bit boring. However, I grew to appreciate these songs very much, and I think Led Zeppelin absolutely added their own stamp to these numbers. Plant's idiosyncratic contribution is again obvious--that's one thing you can say this cover has, that is all its own--but Page's tripped-out guitar solo is another highlight. The superb ending where Plant mimics Page's playing, with some backwards echo mixed into the brew, oozes a kind of otherworldly sex: Plant does indeed sound like he's having an orgasm...and this is a criticism, how? ;) Howlin' Wolf never sounded like this."

Your last sentence...how do I put this..Well, of COURSE Howlin' Wolf never sounded like that! Nor did Muddy Waters, who did the original of "You Shook Me" and that's exactly my point! These are two of the greatest blues singers in history and you're saying that Plant sounds nothing like them or vice versa. Thank God! Thanks to this discussion I was inspired to take out my Muddy Waters and play "You Shook Me" and I'll be damned how that version makes my body groove and this one falls flat. Yeah, Page plays a nice solo but that hardly redeems the entire song. I hear none of the nuances or depth of Plant's vocals you speak of (go listen to the Muddy version). I hear a guy singing "I'm sooooo stooooooned right nooooow and I'm doing this bluuuuuuuueeesss song in my divebombing vocaaaaaalllsssss...does anyone remember laughter?" kinda thing.. Again, blues is all about subtleties and Zeppelin being Zeppelin is purely doing a blues song louder and brasher without keeping anything that makes the original so compelling intact at all. I think they get better as they progress but sorry, not here.

And the Plant orgasm thing? No, it doesn't bleed 'sex' for me. It bleeds, again, an overly dramatic interpretation that makes me roll my eyes. And then Plant mimics Page's playing..Again, not so much chill inducing as cringe inducing.

The production is absolutely top notch, as is the musicianship but I'm not impressed by musicianship alone. I want to see what you can do with that and where you take it. In the future Zep will take it many places, but there is very little of that yet that I have heard, other than being louder and trying to sound larger than anybody that preceded them.

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 11:17:56 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 11:18:48 AM PST
Great first album. Some of my favorite songs by Zep are here.

"Good Times" with that cool riff, then silence, great song. My friend saw them on the first album tour and he still remembers the way the air moved against the crowd on the du, du, riff here.

"Babe I'm Gonna Leave You" great song. The acoustic building to heavy thing. Taking folk and making it heavy. Joan Baez dug it. That pattern Jimi plays the simplified Baez chords are just memorable then the rock out thing, cool. When they juiced me up for my wisdom teeth pulling i had this song on my walkman and to me the whole process in my altered state was time lapsed to this song, then i was one the street wobley, gettin' a bus home. :) Love this song!!!

The two blues numbers like most 60's bands slow blues numbers haven't aged well to me. "You Shook Me" i know Beck was pissed when Jimi played him the demo. Like the vocal but song is so so now, loved it before. "I Can't Quit You Baby" Otis Rush was happy to hear this one, more cash! Just so so now. I'll listen to the source for the real thing.

"Dazed" is real fun to goof with on guitar, but the song boars me as a listen now. I love the get down heavy riff change but the rest just goes on and on... to long. Poor Jake Holmes, hope he finally saw some cash from this one.

"You Time Is Gonna Come" Is a real cool pop song, like it, good stuff, nice pedal steel. Lasts pretty well.

"Black Mountain Side" is great. Love Jimi's fluid acoustic stuff, real tasty.

"Communication Breakdown" !!!! and "How Many More Times" !!!! are on my top Zep songs. Both really rock. "Breakdown" is just such a great rocker, heavy, simple, short and sweet, what rock n roll is about a burst of Little Richard through a Tele and cranked Marshall overdriven to the sky. "How Many More Times" is such a cool song long rockin' and heavy love it a lot. Great groove, cool bass line, just perfect to me.

Gotta add "Baby Come Home" the real cool 50's 60's r & b, traditional soul ballad found years later on a tape reel from the first album sessions. Great song. I think it was a tribute to a soul balladeer who had recently died. Really cool. Would have fit nice on the first record.

Rockin' record four songs that are Zep's best and my faves by any artist. Of the rest of their records the third album, Physical Graffitti and Coda are all you need by Zep after this album. Rock on...

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 11:24:05 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 11:29:39 AM PST
Side 2

Your Time Is Gonna Come - For some reason this song always reminded me of the first songs the Stones began writing together. It has a bit of a folksy acoustic-based country feel and it's a good song but only hints at the songwriting ability that was about to reveal itself in the near future. In that way, it's a charming song although, for me, the chorus falls a little flat. This song is actually the precursor of much of what we hear on Zeppelin III...It's not their best song and their songwriting chops still need a little more refining but an enjoyable song nonetheless. I love the country flavored flourishes at the end.

Black Mountain Side - What can really be said about this song? It's filler, but in a good way. It serves as a nice interlude and, as usual, Page's sensitive and thoughful playing on an acoustic guitar is endearing as anything in Zeppelin's catalogue. Zeppelin WERE capable of many things and this song is a prime example of the sort of thing that all of the Zeppelin imitator's didn't quite get.

Communication Breakdown - HA, you KNOW I love this song! There is no farting around, just a straight reading of a fantastic punkish rock song. There are no crazy vocal acrobatics, Page just rocks it without getting too self-concious and trying to WOW us with his abilities and they don't belabor the point. Yes, I like succinct songs that get right to the point but that's not always the case. Any way you slice it, this is just a good song.

I Can't Quit You Baby - Ok, NOW we're getting somewhere. What makes me like THIS blues interpretation much more than "You Shook Me"? I don't really know for sure but the fact that there is less showboating about and the overall sound is less forceful in terms of heaviness may be a start. While "You Shook Me" sounded more like an exercise in genre, this song has a warmer, richer and more approachable feel to it.

How Many More Times - This song reminds me of the closer "Warning" on Sabbath's debut in that it's a long song that tries to do a lot of things at once but comes off, more or less, as sounding a bit unfocused. This is kinda like a long, twisting story with realtively little plot taking place. Again, it's Zeppelin being louder than everyone else. And hey, if that was their goal then they succeeded triumphantly but it's still too unfocused for me to be blown away by the song based on sheer power alone..

Overall it's a strong debut album. The band is tight and visionary and have all of the ingredients of the making of a great band. Right now they are a very good band. I would rank the debut 3.5/5 stars.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 11:26:55 AM PST
You and I are actually pretty close in our analyzations, Anthony.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 12:00:53 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 12:07:07 PM PST
@AlexMontrose: you're so brain-dead that even though I've explained it in drawn-out fashion, you still don't get it. But I'll try one more time: there's nothing in my original quote that contradicts what I said later. I said none of the later Plant imitators matched him. Period. I talked about the 80s later on because *you misquoted me* and said I was talking about singers from "that era" (ie. late 60s/early 70s). I wanted to stress that by "later", I meant *every era* later, and then talked about how bad the 80s were. The original point was clearly maintained, and I never said I was only talking about the 80s. I was stressing *every era* of hard rock/metal singers, I said it clear as day, which is perfectly in tune with my original statement. I should've known you just wouldn't get it no matter how many times I explained it, or perhaps you're just deliberately twisting my words again to get under my craw. It doesn't make any difference, my point has always been the same: none of Plant's imitators, IMO, were as good as him. I don't know how I can make it any simpler for you. 70s, 80s, 90s, now...I haven't heard any hard rock/metal vocalists I like as much as Plant. Certainly not any of Plant's obvious imitators, who I was mostly addressing in that statement (and specifically said I was talking about the imitators, so no twisting of my words to mean that I was saying "all singers" or something like that). There's some hard rock/alternative vocalists I like, as you know, but even the best of those do not match Plant IMO.

I still don't know exactly why you got so upset originally when you (wrongly) paraphrased me as saying "He also says that "the rest" of the singers, the "imitators" from that era all sound shrill, cheezy and emotionless by comparison" (it's wrong because you said "that era", when by "yet no-one later was able to match...etc." I was talking about ALL later Plant imitators, which is how this silly side-argument about the "80s" thing began). Like I said in my original reply, it was an opinion. Just like you think Gillan is the be-all, end-all of hard rock singers, I think the same of Plant. Simple. But you act like I made some outrageous statement. It's a pretty sweeping critique of all those later singers, I'll admit, but I don't think I'm off-base, here. You really think Axl Rose and Sebastian Bach are as good or better than Plant? You don't even like Ozzy that much.

The only reason we get into these constant round-and-round explanations for what I say is that you seem to be pathologically incapable of interpreting simple sentences.

"*My* point was that in *these* threads whether it's 12 people or 1200, Purple and Zeppelin both get gobs of respect."

No, actually you weren't saying that at all, this is a blatant LIE. You were saying that because this thread hadn't taken off in its first three hours, that indicated that no-one here cared about LZ. It is you who are totally backtracking. As usual, you accuse me of doing the very thing you then proceed to do *in your very next sentence*!!! It's getting beyond-tired.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 2:02:31 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 3:37:19 PM PST
AlexMontrose says:
Can I start charging you money Topper for all the times you either steal or use my words/lines because you have so little game? No wonder you love Zeppelin so much, your pilfering nature is a mirror image of theirs.

Sigh....my work is never done, always cleaning up Toppers spinfests. You originally said that *NO-ONE* could match Plant blah blah...

"Plant spawned thousands of imitators, and yet no-one later was able to pack in the depth and fullness Plant was able to, which is why all the rest sound so shrill, cheezy and emotionless"

Why don't you deny this so we can laugh some more?
Then you said......

"Also, I'm not just talking imitators "from the era". I'm talking practically every heavy metal vocalist who sang in a high pitch, especially the ones from the 80s but you still hear 'em today. And they are ghastly"

Mmmmmm ;) So to recap you have gone back and forth with "especially ones from the 80's" to *NO-ONE* was as good as Plant.
Wow...how can anyone "misunderstand" those clearly defined statements...lol ?

Amazingly enough I don't have a problem with either of these statements, if that's how you *feel*. It's the condescending put downs of everyone else who in your opinion wasn't as good as Plant. Everything from the totally snobbish and totally Topper like comment that any "heavy metal" singer you don't like was an imitator. That's your contention, the same as your ELP nonsense that other keyboard players, specifically Lord of course, lifted from Emerson.

Did it ever dawn on you that every other hard rock singer from Ozzy to the guy in Budgie was in some band honing their chops before they hit it big with their respective bands? And that they weren't "imitators" but just rock singers with their own style? Your incessant accusations that every musician you worship shaped other musicians you either don't get or don't like is delusional fanboydom..

In your world...because Plant went up one octave, for one line on Good times that must have been the reason that Gillan became the hard rock singer he was, one who raised his voice during Deep Purple songs. LOL.....if it wasn't for Plant doing that Gillan never would have been that type of rock singer. Nahhhh he would have been a choirboy. But Plant raising his voice in Zeppelin while Gillan was doing the same in Episode Six means that without Plant, Gillan would have ended up a choirboy. I mean those early days with his pre-Deep Purple rock band had nothing to do with anything. Let alone his early early days with dreams to be a rock singer. No...it was only after hearing Plant that Gillan became Gillan. Yeah, why would anyone argue with a demented idea like that? Or that Lord never had thoughts of becoming a hard rock keyboard player until he heard Emerson? I mean he never dreamed of being in a band playing that style of music. I mean, you know this right? But even so, once they got with their respective bands they were "imitators". And you wonder why people find your pompous, condescending crap as off putting as Billy Corgans voice?

Alex : "*My* point was that in *these* threads whether it's 12 people or 1200, Purple and Zeppelin both get gobs of respect."

Uhhhh, one step at a time Topper, I know you get confused. This was simply conversation. Uhhh I *was* saying that even if your black and white mentality can never grasp any grey areas. It's called adding another thought. You had said sarcastically that the 12 people here who love Purple was not exactly a great microcosm for how the rest of the world feels about any Zep/Purple comparisons. I'm saying that *here* on Amazon, they are pretty much equal as far as posters who like both bands. Plain and simple, even for you.

Re : It's a pretty sweeping critique of all those later singers, I'll admit, but I don't think I'm off-base, here. You really think Axl Rose and Sebastian Bach are as good or better than Plant? You don't even like Ozzy that much.

Axl Rose? LOL...haven't I used him as someone I don't like...numerous times, someone who has an annoyingly similar timbre to Plant? Or have you forgotten that already? Don't think so since you predictably came back and said that Rose sounds like Gillan. Sebastian Bach ?? LOL....C'mon Topper you can do better than that. If not there's always Wikipedia if you can't name every 80's singer. But of course we all know you can ;)

And yeah Ozzy defines average in every way, shape and form. I'm sure you agree. Oh wait, you don't....
Shocking !

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 3:22:21 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 3:34:06 PM PST
@AlexMontrose: "So to recap you have gone back and forth with "especially ones from the 80's" to *NO-ONE* was as good as Plant."

So...explain to me how these are mutually exclusive statements. "No one of Plant's imitators was as good as Plant, especially in the 80s": this makes perfect logical sense to anyone with a functioning brain. The fact that you find these two claims contradictory boggles the mind. As usual.

"Amazingly enough I don't have a problem with either of these statements, if that's how you *feel*. It's the condescending put downs of everyone else who in your opinion wasn't as good as Plant."

You and others here condescendingly put down Plant, so I don't see what the problem is. I really don't care for any of the imitators. At all. You don't like some of what Plant does. It's all opinion, I've always said it was opinion (and I quote from a few posts back: "Do I have to put an "IMHO" in front of *everything* for you? Or do I constantly have to cater to your amnesia and constant re-imagining that I say everything as a fact?"), and if I'm dismissive of people I don't like it's because--shock, horror, gasp!!--I *don't like them*!!!

"Did it ever dawn on you that every other hard rock singer from Ozzy to the guy in Budgie was in some band..."

I did not claim that Ozzy or Burke Shelley were Plant imitators. I said they were among the few hard rock/early metal singers I *liked*, although they weren't as good as Plant. Burke Shelley does have a bit of the Geddy Lee timbre about him, and I can't stand Geddy Lee, but somehow I like Shelley.

"In your world...because Plant went up one octave, for one line on Good times..."

Talk about spin. Plant's previously unheard-of vocal style and range is on EVERY track on that album (sans BMS) and you know it. Why do you even bother trying to make up stuff that is so clearly inaccurate? I singled out that one line for a reason, a reason I've already explained. You, in your over-eagerness to prove a point, resort to twisting, cherry picking and distortion. As usual. Snore.

"But Plant raising his voice in Zeppelin while Gillan was doing the same in Episode Six means that without Plant, Gillan would have ended up a choirboy."

Yeah, because this prime Episode Six clip has Ian Gillan sounding *just* like Robert Plant! The resemblance is uncanny!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE8rqjlwsFk

Seriously, do you know ANYTHING about rock history that isn't warped to make it look like Lord, Blackmore and Gillan were the first at what they did?! Just as Lord didn't have a trace of his more aggressive, classically-influenced keyboard style in The Artwoods, so Gillan's high-pitch vocal range is *completely and totally absent* in Episode Six. I know these bands better than you do, because 60s mod/psychedelia is my thing. I've heard a fair bit of Episode Six's output and it just isn't there. In fact, this only proves even further that Gillan was probably following Plant's lead, since he was around playing in bands since 1965 but you don't hear any of his annoying high-pitched wail until after Zep's debut was released. It's blindingly obvious why his vocal style changed in that year. If he had actually known that the high-pitched thing would be so popular, he would have used it in 1967 and become famous first. But he didn't. Same with Lord, The Artwoods and The Nice. Clearly, the *capabilities* in both men were there prior to hearing Emerson or Plant (Lord's classical training, Gillan's vocal range), but neither thought of utilizing those skills until AFTER they heard Emerson/Plant. It's not an insult or criticism of either Gillan or Lord, nor do I mean to sound condescending (there's other reasons I can't stand Gillan, it's not because I don't think he was 'original'). It's just the plain truth and an irrefutable observation: you don't hear them develop their signature styles until after these other figures broke through.

"Uhhhh, one step at a time Topper, I know you get confused. This was simply conversation."

More spin and backtracking. Your statement was "*My* point *WAS* that in these threads blah blah blah". Not "my point is", like you're adding to the conversation, but my point WAS. And the only point you'd made earlier was that Zep didn't mean anything to anybody on this forum. Nice try.

"Axl Rose? LOL...haven't I used him as someone I don't like...numerous times, someone who has an annoyingly similar timbre to Plant?"

Uh...that's exactly why I brought him up, lard-for-neurons. Because he's clearly a Plant imitator, but even you agree he sucks. I think he ended up sounding way more like Gillan than Plant; Axl probably revered both singers. But even if Rose was copying Gillan only, Gillan copied Plant, so it still leads back to LZ; the debut in January 1969 is where the whole high-pitched vocal thing in rock began, and yes, it starts with that one line in "Good Times Bad Times" and then carries through the entire rest of the record. And yes, I wholeheartedly believe that Gillan heard that debut album, a light bulb went off in his head, and he started developing his own high-pitch wail as a result. Just watch the frigging Episode Six clip, you'll see how incredibly lame he sounded just a year or two before LZ's debut.

"And yeah Ozzy defines average in every way, shape and form."

Ozzy has a limited vocal range both technically and emotionally, but his timbre is extremely distinctive and appealing, at least to these ears. I thought you liked Sabbath? Or is it just the music? Actually, come to think of it I haven't heard you mention them much in these threads. For all I know you think they're as overrated as Zeppelin. I think Sabbath are overrated (esp the first two albums), but I do like them up to and including "Sabotage". "Sabotage" was their peak IMO.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 4:21:13 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 4:23:37 PM PST
@Exile: "Plant's vocals may have been different but that still doesn't mean people won't have a problem with them."

Oh, I don't deny that.

"We can build it bigger, better and faster and louder and more in your face...We HAVE the technology...(Yawn)"

So, what is your opinion of Deep Purple, then? I know you had commented once or twice on my thread a few weeks back, but I can't remember what you said.

"I hear a guy singing "I'm sooooo stooooooned right nooooow and I'm doing this bluuuuuuuueeesss song in my divebombing vocaaaaaalllsssss."

LOL awesome description--and of course that all sounds perfectly great to me! Divebombing vocals--that kind of technique was also pretty new to rock, the way he slides up and down the register like that. I think it's an incredible effect, but if something about the attitude of it turns you off, I understand. I have not heard the Muddy Waters version, but I do know that a lot of "authentic" blues vocals kind of bore me. I prefer the hyped-up, amped-up rock interpretations of blues (though not from everyone). Blues isn't the kind of thing I really care is subtle or not, perhaps because I don't care much for the genre to begin with. But I'll see if I can youtube the Muddy Waters take.

"...as is the musicianship but I'm not impressed by musicianship alone. I want to see what you can do with that and where you take it."

Neither am I impressed solely by musicianship (see: Rush, Van Halen). But I don't see LZ as merely trying to sound "louder and larger" than anyone else on this album. Sure, they were trying to do that, too, but the actual music they play is highly inventive and exciting to these ears, with tons of atmosphere, dynamics and feel. But I guess someone could claim the same about Rush and Van Halen, too, LOL. I guess I like LZ's particular *brand* of atmosphere, dynamics and feel.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 4:46:38 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 5:14:24 PM PST
@Exile:

"Your Time Is Gonna Come"--I agree the chorus is slightly flat (but acceptable), but overall it's a great song. I like how it moves from the church-style organ to a country-tinged number; the group's eclecticism is already evident here, and belies the stereotype of the album as just being heavy blues/hard rock stuff. Again, the production with its bright combination of acoustic/electric textures, really shines. There's good harmony vocals, which the group didn't do too much of. A nice soulful feel, and I can see how you might like it more since it's a tightly constructed song with Plant singing without too many of his affectations (although actually, I never liked it when he says "this is all I gotta say to you, woman!"--kinda cheezy).

"Black Mountain Side": short, very pretty, and again belying the reputation the album has of being all in one style.

"Communication Breakdown": one of the definitive early metal songs, probably the most influential of tracks on an influential album. Short, to the point, flawless. Although I do see some vocal acrobatics here, especially more of that divebomber effect.

"I Can't Quit You Baby": I prefer this to "You Shook Me", too, and the track was even better live (ie. the Royal Albert Hall performance).

"How Many More Times": I agree the song attempts to fit a lot in, and goes through many twists and turns. To me, though, it doesn't sound unfocused or meandering, but very much like an epic journey. I like every part--the bone-crunching riff (and the way Page doubles the riff here on both channels sounds divine), Page's trademark psychedelic guitar solo, the triumphant insertion of "Beck's Bolero", the bowed section, "Hunter" section (Jones' organ playing smokes here)...it doesn't sound unfocused to me because each part flows so beautifully from the last, it's a very logical progression leading back to the reprise of the main guitar riff. There is a lot of power here but clearly a lot of dynamics, too.

Overall, a classic, which I give 4.5/5 stars or an "A-" grade (the two blues numbers, while I like them, do bring it down slightly for me). 1969 was so extraordinary for rock music, though, that it actually only places at #7 on my top ten list for that year, behind "Stand Up", "Abbey Road", "Hot Rats", "Unhalfbricking", "Unicorn", and "Happy Trails" (rounding out the top ten are "Stand!", "In The Court Of The Crimson King" and a tie for #10 with "Let It Bleed" and "The Marble Index")

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 5:17:32 PM PST
@Anthony Fernandez: I never cared much for "Baby Come Home", and don't feel it really fits in with the rest of the album. I can see why they left it off. I mean, it's not bad but I just don't see where it would fit on the album.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 36 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Classic Rock forum
Participants:  31
Total posts:  890
Initial post:  Dec 30, 2012
Latest post:  Feb 3, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions