Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
Say what? Presence is a damn good album, and the most under appreciated of their work. I mean c'mon, Achilles Last Stand? Ten For One? How can you go wrong with those?
It's better than In Through The Out Door, thats for sure. Please don't even try to defend that abomination.
Who Sell Out, Tommy, Live At Leeds, Whos Next and Quadrophena (which is overrated by Who fans, but still damn good).
C'mon now, you're being a little fanboish.
|
No, and I repeat, no, Presence was not a great album. Both it and In Through The Out Door were simply albums to fulfill their contract obligations; they were written in a hurry (well, ITTOD was - Presence was abridged by tragedy).
As for The Who albums, I refuse to accept Tommy as a genuine work of musical talent. And if we're comparing live albums, don't even try to wage war when there's
How The West Was Won, which destroys Live at Leeds in every ****ing category. I know, it came about thirty years too late, but it is the single greatest live album since
At Fillmore East (by The llman Brothers Band). I admit, I liked Quadrophenia a lot. But it wasn't nearly as profound as Led Zeppelin IV.
Most of my displeasure with this entire idea of comparing the two bands stems from their approach to music. While The Who used radio to ensnare looming fans with their most popular singles, Zeppelin intended to focus upon making good albums - not good singles - to sell themselves. I don't dislike The Who. I think they are an extremely talented band. But Led Zeppelin's all-encompassing talent simply surpasses them.
If I'm a Zeppelin fanboy, I come by it honestly.
(And for those of you who claim Daltry was a much better vocalist than Plant, understand first that they are
different. Plant never intended to be a crooner or someone who would shout phrases with unbroken vocalization. But it takes vocal talent of an unwieldy nature to change "baby I'm going to lose my worried mind" to "baby baby baby baby baby baby...I'm going to lo-o-o-ose my worried mind.")