To write a good riff is one thing... to play it for 25 minutes because you know the prepubescent crowd is going to eat it up is entirely another.

But this isn't the case - they had self-indulgent songs, it's true, but in general that came out in their incredibly self-indulgent live shows. On records, Dazed and Confused, Whole Lotta Love & other ten-minutes-on-the-LP stoner rock songs were the exception, not the rule.

So their riffs are good, and maybe to some (myself included) at times sound just so goddamned awesome they make my head spin; and no one denies the quality of the drumming... the lyrics are painful at times, self-indulgent live shows, and they probably used drugs and had premarital sex. Still, not close to crap.

Sure their output was prolific, sure they rocked loud and hard, but c'mon people. There's a reason that they were loved by teenage boys and reviled by critics in their own time, and thats because the music was uninteresting. To write a good riff is one thing... to play it for 25 minutes because you know the prepubescent crowd is going to eat it up is entirely another.

i guarantee you have not listened to most of led zeppelin's music

If you think Led Zeppelin music is all rock, but too long and drawn out, listen to III. Probably my favorite album of theirs.

sandpanda wrote:Sure their output was prolific, sure they rocked loud and hard, but c'mon people. There's a reason that they were loved by teenage boys and reviled by critics in their own time, and thats because the music was uninteresting. To write a good riff is one thing... to play it for 25 minutes because you know the prepubescent crowd is going to eat it up is entirely another.

Defending the Zep now is like defending the Bizkit as groundbreaking in 20-30 years. Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that "Chocolate Starfish and the Hotdog Flavored Water" is a brilliant concept album that manages to elucidate the angst of adolesence through apt metaphors and insightful lyricism.

This critique is an overly simplistic and unfair characterization of one of the greatest rock bands ever to prowl the Earth. The thing is, I'm not even particularly a fan of Led Zeppelin, but I believe that their merits are beyond question.

i guarantee you have not listened to most of led zeppelin's music

Actually, I HAVE listened to most of Led Zeppelin's music... Just not since I was 15. And this is no bullshit line. I learned Stairway, Black Dog, blah blah when i was playing guitar... I had all the studio albums and some live recordings in my cassette collection; As a matter of fact I remember the day I realized I didn't really like them and sold them all to the other guitar player in my shitty high school band for 2 bucks each. Simply put, I got over it.

Don't get me wrong, they were an important band, they had some good stuff, but in my opinion, using the rules of "Crap/Not Crap" as specified here... CRAP.

I watched the new DVD, it was OK, Hammer of the Gods is still my favorite Rock and Roll book of all time... but... CRAP.

And to assert that the only way someone could have a different opinion than yours is if they are ill informed is just silly.

>>Actually, I HAVE listened to most of Led Zeppelin's music... Just not since I was 15.

this is basically the same thing as not having ever listened to it

>>I learned Stairway, Black Dog, blah blah when i was playing guitar...

you could play 'black dog' sometime before age 15?

>>And to assert that the only way someone could have a different opinion than yours is if they are ill informed is just silly.

not what i said

i said i guarantee you have not listened to most of led zeppelin's music if you think the crux of it is a 'good riff' repeated for 'twenty-five minutes'

you know, they might've been a better band if that was true....

sandpanda wrote:And to assert that the only way someone could have a different opinion than yours is if they are ill informed is just silly.

Seems like a reasonable assumption based on your Limp Bizkit analogy.

jupiter wrote:To compare Led Zeppelin with Limp Bizkit is even more silly.

This argument is totally out of hand. Obviously, if people don't like a certain band, they're not going to be up on every single thing the band does. That's to be expected - people don't want to sit around listening to crap. That doesn't make their dislike any less valid. I'm sure you guys voted crap on bands without hearing a lot of their material. Recommend something you like of theirs and hope that it connects with someone else. If it doesn't, get over it. Obviously that comparison was silly. But it was funny, and I'm sure that was the point.

The fact is, the number one reason I don't like Led Zeppelin is because for my entire life, their music has been continually forcefed to me. When I think of their music, I only associate it with the unpleasentness of being coerced to do something. This argument is no exception.

I would go so far as to say that Led Zeppelin is one of the top 5 all time most pretentious bands. Look at the way their music is marketed, it's like you're supposed to accept their greatness without ever hearing their music or even liking it. Every fucking ad of theirs says "the all time greatest rock band" or whatever the fuck.. let me fucking decide for myself who the best rock band is..

that alone makes them CRAP

in addition to plant's "nutsack in bear trap" voice

For the record, my edit was simultaneously posted with your response, not because of it.

sixteenrev wrote:
I would go so far as to say that Led Zeppelin is one of the top 5 all time most pretentious bands. Look at the way their music is marketed, it's like you're supposed to accept their greatness without ever hearing their music or even liking it. Every fucking ad of theirs says "the all time greatest rock band" or whatever the fuck.. let me fucking decide for myself who the best rock band is..

Do you think Led Zeppelin ever claimed they were the greatest rock band?
I think its a safe bet that public opinion has a lot more to do with that title than anyone the band.