Customer Discussions > Music forum

The Who vs. Led Zeppelin....which one do you prefer?

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 176-200 of 474 posts in this discussion
Posted on Aug 18, 2011 10:47:28 AM PDT
zlh67 says:
Ok, so I thought the Deluxe 2 cd release of "Leeds" was the whole show? No? What's missing?

I had the initial release for years but finally decided to upgrade and looked real hard at the 2cd deluxe version, but a lot of reviews indicated that the live "Tommy" portion was no better (or even not as good) than what was already available on the "Isle of Wight" cd which I already had, so I just got the single disc remaster "Leeds" that added most (all?) of the performances except for "Tommy" and that works for me.

"Young Man Blues" kills at that show. One of my favorite Who songs (even though it's a cover) and the best performance i've heard is definitely from Leeds. Shame they could never capture that magic in the studio...

Posted on Aug 18, 2011 11:56:30 AM PDT
Fischman says:
When I bought early Zep on CD to replace my vinyl, the sound quality was horrible. Sometime later, they released nicely cleaned up remastered versions. Ouch! To me, that's treating your fans/catalog poorly. At least with the Who, I didn't have to buy all the re-releases since I already had all the source material.

Posted on Aug 18, 2011 12:15:45 PM PDT
MC says:
Fischman - How much of that is the label and how much the band? I know that Zepp had unprecedented control , but it was new tech and maybe it was just a terrible effort; not unlike the Beatles catalog....

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 18, 2011 12:50:16 PM PDT
Actually, It was Entwhistle "who" said that!

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 18, 2011 2:08:36 PM PDT
Feldman says:
Bass Boy,
Sure, there are good moments in the videos you referenced, but on the whole, they seemed lacking to me. I actually have most of their videos because I do get into my "The Who is the greatest band of all time" modes and like to re-watch the shows. The only ones I don't have are The Who in Boston, but I rented it through NetFlix a few weeks back - it was OK - and "Live At Albert Hall".

I saw The Who in 1982 in New York State (touted as their farewell tour - the 1st of many) and was hoping "The Who In Toronto" would bring back the fond memories, but it wasn't a very good show.

For me, and comparatively to The Who's prior work, "Face Dances" and "It's Hard" were just OK, where as "Who's Next", "Quadrophenia" and even "Who By Numbers" were much better albums. I suppose you could say the same about "In Through the Out Door" and you wouldn't be wrong necessarily. But compare their work to not just themselves or even each other and the quality is clear even in their less exalted works.

As to "Coda" well it is what it is - a collection of leftovers - glad to have it, but that is about it.

As to the Led Zep black box - I absolutely love it and it is as complete at it gets for their studio and live offering of their original releases. The mini-lps are beautiful and complete right down to the spinning disc of "Led Zeppelin III". In fact, the remasters are so clear that you can hear Bonzo's squeaky pedal on "Since I've Benn Loving You". They sure got it right on that set and the price was reasonable too. I'd love to have something like that for The Who that doesn't cost $1200. As a note, the upcoming release of the deluxe "Quadrophenia" package lists at more than what I paid for the whole mini-lp Zep collection.

Maybe "nicer" wasn't the right choice of words, but I have always felt that I got my dollar's worth with Zep and not so much with The Who.

Posted on Aug 18, 2011 2:27:22 PM PDT
two great bands
LZ first2 albums unbeatable,
total Who discography may give them the life time achievement

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 18, 2011 3:01:19 PM PDT
zlh67 says:
All fair points, Steve, although the 1982 "Farewell Tour" wasn't quite the "first of many". Like most great boxers, The Who said "farewell" in 1982 but then couldn't stay away. Seven years later they did a tour to revisit "Tommy" and a few years after that went out with "Quadrophenia" since the technology to properly present that one was finally available (I'm sure you know they were less than satisifed with most of the original Quadrophenia shows in '73). But neither of those tours were billed as a "Farewell" tour and neither has any tour since. As long as they've been at it, ANY tour could be their last now, but they've not done a 2nd "Farewell Tour".

No, the winner for "Most Farewell Tours" has got to be... KISS. Their next one will be called the "This Time We Really Mean It" Farewell Tour. Not sure what they'll call the one after that...

Posted on Aug 18, 2011 3:41:09 PM PDT
Bart Fargo says:
I don't prefer either.I like both equally.You can't compare the bands because their styles and their songs are so different..

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 18, 2011 3:49:16 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 19, 2011 9:16:42 AM PDT
AlexMontrose says:
Then I guess those other posts must be a mirage. And preferring one over the other is not possible either, since they are different. Mmmmm.

Well we're done then, shut down all the music forums.

Edit : Gary, just wanted you to know that your rather 'simplistic' views, opinions? about the Who and Zeppelin are forgiven. I just happen to click on your name and saw that you are a big time Laurel and Hardy fan. No way bigger than me but......big. I might have to look into that box set even though I have almost everything. Except the Rogue song :) And if you don't know what that is then for shame, for shame. Any hardcore fan should know.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 19, 2011 4:19:35 AM PDT
Feldman says:
zlh67, you misunderstood my aside about "Farewell Tour" or took it in a literal sense, so I thought I would clarify. Basically, what I was trying to say is that although the '82 was their "official" Farewell Tour, it really became the 1st of many ... tours/shows to follow. I didn't mean to allude that they had literally named more farewell tours (like Kiss), but instead, kept coming out of "retirement". Some, as you noted, were done with the purpose of revisiting "Tommy" and "Quadrophenia" (I picked up the 3 disc set that was released in 2005). Others were done to make money - I read or heard that Pete said they toured due to fact that John needed money to pay bills for his r-n-r lifestyle. Others were for good causes, and others, well Who knows.

So much for "hope I die before I g-g-g-g-get old".....

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 19, 2011 6:24:50 AM PDT
new guenea says:
guy joe says:

I really like both bands an awful lot. But truth be told I'm a bigger fan of The Who. I heard them before I every heard Led Zeppelin and along with their show from Woodstock I would like have to say the honors go to The Who. Don't get me wrong I own all the cds of both bands but The Who get my vote!

Posted on Aug 19, 2011 7:55:37 AM PDT
MC says:
Steve - Unfortunately it was true for two of them.....

Posted on Aug 19, 2011 8:58:11 AM PDT
Fischman says:
Almost prophetic for one of them.

Posted on Aug 19, 2011 10:09:07 AM PDT
Saw Zeppelin twice and the Who at Woodstock in 1969 ; own a lot of their tracks on CD today; when I was 21 it was Page all the way , but now that I'm 61 I find that Moon is my current demi-god and I listen to Tommy near constantly.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 19, 2011 10:17:43 AM PDT
zlh67 says:
Yeah, Steve, I guess it did come off to me as if you felt the Who had suckered people in by doing "Farewell Tour" after tour. Doing a "farewell" tour full well knowing it's not your last is just a money grab and to me, a real slap in the face to a band's fans. And that's what Kiss has been doing because nobody cares about any new music from them and once you've seen their schtick once or twice, it gets old. So in order to keep selling tickets, they start with the "Better come see us now, cause this is your last chance!" And it is. Till next time.... And that's pretty lame imo, but not what The Who have done.

Even the 1989 "Tommy" and 1990's "Quadrophenia" tours weren't like 1982: there was no new album and I don't think anyone thought that The Who were "back". Those were one-offs for pretty specific reasons.

And yep, you heard right that the 2000 tour was mainly for Entwistle's pocketbook. Roger had been wanting to do it (along with a new album), but Pete had always told him 'no'. It wasn't until the request came in the form of a "we have to help John" plea that Pete found himself unable to say 'no'. Even then, it was to be a one-off tour more than a full-scale reunion with continued activity, but the tour went so well that it did lead to the band picking up and deciding to remain together with a little more activity (ie, a new album, future touring).

And of course, just as they're moving in that direction, Entwistle ups and dies, but.... oh well.

Posted on Aug 19, 2011 10:40:23 AM PDT
I personally prefer Led Zeppelin. I'll even rate John Bonham above Keith Moon as a drummer. I've noticed over the years that the drum track is the main thing I'm focusing on when I'm listening to Led Zeppelin. His beat is just so forceful, so compelling, even while it is deceptively complex. There's several Zep songs I have a hard time counting along with, because he just throws curveballs all the time without even calling much attention to it. Moon's got to be a close second though. And I gotta give the whole band their due. As musicians, probably better than Zep on the whole.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 19, 2011 10:47:42 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 19, 2011 10:47:55 AM PDT
Rare Goat; Glad to see your opinion ! I have to admit Page is a better guitarist than Townsend ( and Jeff Beck cuts Page easily these days ), but Moon , as young as he was at the Who's prime (? 1969-1971 ) is what draws my old fart ears these days!

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 19, 2011 11:13:23 AM PDT
Alicia says:
led zeppelin will rock your face! the band will make you smile and just be like, i love led zeppelin, yeah!

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 19, 2011 11:16:29 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 20, 2011 7:27:04 AM PDT
The Who will rock your a--
The Who will rock your face
The Oo' will kick
your b---s into outer space!

Posted on Aug 19, 2011 12:38:26 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 19, 2011 12:49:31 PM PDT
Actually, for me, this entire thread confirms three things I've always believed to be true:

1) Today's bands are lazy. They sit on their butts and take two-to-three years just to make ONE album. The Beatles wrote, recorded and released everything they ever did in SEVEN-AND-A-HALF YEARS !!! That's unbelievable. And they did so at an incredible level of excellence which never wavered. That's why they will remain the greatest band ever.

2) As far as all-out rock 'n roll is concerned, the greatest winning streak a band ever had was the Stones releasing 'Beggars Banquet', 'Let It Bleed', the live 'Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out !', 'Sticky Fingers' and 'Exile on Main Street' back-to-back from 1968 through 1972. While I do rate the Who over the Stones (though both are two of my five all-time favorite bands), the Stones' winning streak during that time period remains unequalled.

3) Song-for-song, 'Who's Next' remains the most perfect rock album ever. And live, no band has a more powerful set-closer than "Won't Get Fooled Again".

As a final comment...

I think what irritates me so much about Zeppelin is that so many people consider them the greatest thing since sliced bread, when there were so many better bands around. Hell, the Byrds were a better band than Zeppelin ! I don't deny that, next to the Beatles, Zeppelin remains the 2nd most popular band of all time. I'll just never understand the reason why, and I've listened to all of their albums (as well as bootlegs) many, many times over trying to figure it out. I just don't get it.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 19, 2011 12:51:57 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 19, 2011 12:52:07 PM PDT
Robert B; I watched the DVD set of LZ that Page had edited and the longer it ground on and on ,the less I was impressed w/ Plants voice, and Page's chemical preference back then didn't add much to his live playing ability. Likewise , when I saw their movie "Song Remains the same" all I could think was "You're kidding ? ". But whenever"Rock n Roll" (fourth album ) comes on the radio while driving I become the king of air guitar !

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 19, 2011 1:58:30 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 19, 2011 2:06:50 PM PDT
zlh67 says:
Robert, as you declare The Beatles the greatest of all time, what about their run of Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour and The White Album?

That's 5 studio albums of all new material -- 1 of 'em a double -- all done between 1965-68. Throw in their non-album singles and that's pretty much a *6th* album (See: Past Masters Vol. 2).

The run by the Stones was 4 studio albums and 1 live and was done in 5 years, not 4.


Posted on Aug 19, 2011 5:12:48 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 19, 2011 5:15:30 PM PDT
Working Man says:
This is personal. That people use phrases like 'best', 'hands down', 'enough said' etc. just drives me crazy, as if their opinion is the only one that matters.

I believe that Led Zeppelin is the greatest hard rock band ever, my sisters and wife will say the greatest band is the Beatles, my mother-in-law will say Elvis Presley is the best, my son will say it is Disturbed (or whatever band he's into at the moment), my mother will say Sinatra, my dad would have said Tammy Wynette.

I love the Beatles, but in the 70's Led Zeppelin were king of my world, topping everyone, the Who, Pink Floyd, Yes, ELP, The Eagles, Springsteen, Dylan, the Stones, Kiss etc. Why? Because they were my favorite and I have every right to say it. What seems to me is that there is a level of jealousy for those who don't care for Led Zeppelin. It's only natural, I fall into the same trap, when U2 or Nirvana or some other band comes along and their popularity seems to surpass that of my favorite, I tend to get a jealous and want to knock them down a peg.

Led Zeppelin seemed to dominate the 70's hard rock scene from my point of view, The Beatles, The Stones, The Who all made their presence felt but it was Zeppelin who seemed to be on top at the time. These were the years that I came of age, so the other bands were all good bands but they didn't share in the important moments in my life like Led Zeppelin did.

So, who's better? We're all right, but we have to realize that people will disagree and there is no real answer to who's best? but there is an answer to who's our favorite. Hands down, enough said, that's final, no ifs ands or buts, finis, without a doubt.

By the way, the original post asks, "which one do we prefer" and not which one is best. So, just answer the question asked. The Who or Led Zeppelin.

I prefer Led Zeppelin.

Posted on Aug 19, 2011 5:29:31 PM PDT
Fischman says:
I'm not so arrogant as to think my opinion is the only one that matters -- the opinions of those who agree with me are equally valid!

Posted on Aug 19, 2011 5:37:04 PM PDT
Working Man says:
Fischman, very good response. I agree, and I bet you don't care what other's think. Am I right?
[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

Recent discussions in the Music forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  153
Total posts:  474
Initial post:  Aug 9, 2011
Latest post:  Sep 5, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 6 customers

Search Customer Discussions