Why is this band regarded as one of the best band of all time? I just listened their whole discography (the album I liked the most was their debut and I think it's a 6.5/10) and everything (despite some songs) sounded so fucking bland and uninspired.
Stupid music thieves.
Led Zeppelin is horrible. The only people that likes them are kids and dads.
they rock
simple as that
True patricians recognize the "I hate led zeppelin to look cool" phase for what it is and accept the greatness of the Led.
this. they're a fun band that made great music. and a lot of that great music was written solely by them.
I don't hate LZ, I just think they are fuckin rubbish.
>Stupid music thieves.
This again. So were Beethoven and Mozart.
So, what bands/music do you like, OP?
>Why is this band regarded as one of the best band of all time?
Because they were. Its really quite simple.
Look at all the music they "stole" in one 20 minute song:
youtube.com
If you cannot appreciate the brilliance its because you are a Fucking Pleb. Just accept it.
Haven't heard this one before thanks for sharing mate!
sorry should have posted the full version
>I just listened their whole discography
>the album I liked the most was their debut and I think it's a 6.5/10
Translation: I just skimmed over this band's debut album, and now I'm going to pretend to have an educated opinion on why I don't like rock music
Why isn't your band regarded as the best band of all time, OP? Lazy piece of shit.
youtube.com
>uninspired
literally the first group to do mixed meter funk fuck you pleb
youtube.com
When Led Zeppelin is Pat Metheny Lite and people try to talk shit
>everything sounds so bland and uninspired
This is a common criticism thats really stupid. Yes, in 2016, you have heard it all before. But what they did in 1969 was pretty fresh
>inb4 they just stole blues
Yeah, like literally every rock group of that era, they were just noodling around blues ripoffs, how they transformed that into something new is the merit.
All these Led Zeppelin hate threads and I still haven't seen a single reasonable critical of them
Second rate Cream rip off! End of thread!
>Houses of the Holly> Physical Graffiti>4>3>2>1
This. Plus they wrote the Rain Song. Can't fuck with that shit man.
I just find them to be decent. they have some good moments.
mostly the music just didn't age well. they were actually a hugely influential band, but in retrospect they're boring
All these Led Zeppelin hate threads and I still haven't seen a single reasonable reason why they are praised
This
>2:30
holy kek
youtube.com
You're a faggot, OP. I say this because I care. Led Zeppelin is an extremely important rock band and each of the members were masters of their instrument(s). I'm not going into every aspect of why they're so good and why they deserve to be highly regarded, I'll try to be broad. The proof is in the pudding. The music has aged very well and you can see its influence everywhere. And not just in the music, Jimmy Page was a killer producer. The way he recorded and emphasized Bonhams bass drum on the tracks made it feel like you were in the room with them. And that's just one example. The music feels live and organic in the closed space of an audio track. And this wasn't Nigel Godrich or some modern day whiz with all the tools one could dream of. Zeppelin was raw, heavy, bluesy, and deep without sacrificing its roots. If you want to be a contrarian, fine. But understand that you're only disliking Zeppelin because you want to dislike them.
>tfw you have Jimmy Page hair but want Robert Plant's
>plagiarism what's that
Great musicianship, great song writing, being incredibly influential
I will concede that some parts of their songs were taken exactly from other songs, but people love to accuse Led Zeppelin of plagiarism and a lot of it is a stretch. There are some obvious influences, but show me a band that doesn't have those
Did you Gus know that les Zeppelins were a fake band? That's right, they never existed. Ask any old person if they remember them. Sure, they may tell you they do but itd a fake memeory planted in their mind by the government. Wake ul!
>There are some obvious influences
There is a difference between influence and direct plagiarism
Why is this thread still up? Why are people debating some shit tier band like LZ?
This thread should've been archived or deleted long ago.
Led Zepplin SUCK! End of discussion!
Cheap Trick is better
Found the nu-male
So this is copypasta now? Is it so hard to just discuss music without making a meme out of ti?
>stop liking what I don't like!
This. The edgy manchildren who hate LZ are just salty people don't regard whatever mediocre meme band Sup Forums has told them to like in the same esteem
>swans
kys
>patricians surely use the world meme in musical criticism
Bump to irritate nu males
...
>implying there is any worthy criticism on Sup Forums and low effort claims require more than low effort rebuttals
>I don't know music theory, therefor no one else does
jake holmes wasn't playing blues.
What do you mean?
i mean that dazed and confused was a psychedelic-folk song and not a blues song.
No shit. How did you figure that one out?
you can't say that they took his blues away if it's not blues it just doesn't make any sense
Both great songs though.
By "blues" meaning his "intellectual property", not literally The Blues.
Are you familiar with the concept of intellectual property? I can think of four people from the 1970s who did not, unless it was their own...
That's what I said. Some of their lyrics are obvious plagiarism, but I think a lot of what people point out as Led Zeppelin plagiarizing music is really just them taking influence
>Some of their lyrics are obvious plagiarism, but I think a lot of what people point out as Led Zeppelin plagiarizing music is really just them taking influence
So directly lifting chord sequences and phrasing is just "influence"? Do you think lyrics are the only thing that can copyrighted?
No, I just think that lyrics are the most obvious form of Led Zeppelin's plagiarism
I take it you are not a musicologist?
>believing in intellectual property
>believing in property
kek
Confirmed for person who's never created anything in his life
>Stupid music thieves.
Thought OP was being real for a minute.
Imagine being so mad that you collect folders full of memes crying about dubious similarities between a blues-rock band and early blues songs and wait for Zeppelin threads to spam them
Imagine that!
my friend is a patrician but only in the genre of blues, and he dislikes led zeppelin not because they ripped off blues greats, but that they refused to credit them
Okay, they are better than Coldplay as for as thieves go. But really, all musicians are thieving bastards at the end of the day. Bowie took from Japanese plays and Syd Barret style writing, Corgan ripped off my Bloody Valentine and Cheap Trick countless times, Depeche Mode ripped off Pink Floyd on "Clean," The Cramps are the bastard children of Iggy Pop and John Waters etc.
I never really was big on Zeppelin, but I respect Plant and Page. Kinda like Red Hot Chili Peppers, I admire Flea and Frusciant but the music never connected with me. As for "Dad Rock" Queen and Rush are my go to bands.
>I still don't understand the difference between influence and plagiarism
You've figured me out
Well then by all means tell me more about copyright law!
The problem with zeppelin stealing songs was that in the time they were recording, intellectual property was an actual thing, and they were acting liek they were just bluesmen of the 1930s who all played eachothers songs