boo boo

Similarities is not ripping off. I already discussed they're taking of lyrics, this discussion began with the whole Page stealing riffs thing, and ALL you've managed to give me is one similar riff (and something John Lennon is also guilty of) and 2 uncredited adaptations of traditional folk songs with no credited writer to begin with.

Biased? You bet. But at least I check my sh*t, I make sure the facts are on my side.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

sl1ck

Oh, there's no doubt that Jimmy Page wrote some good riffs. The riff to "Heartbreaker" is awesome. I'm not trying to discredit Page's ability to write a catchy riff. "Hey Hey What Can I Do" is another good example. I actually like "Hey Hey What Can I Do," Plant's vocals are tolerable, and the lyrics aren't stupid. Don't know why that song isn't as well known as their other stuff, I would consider it one of the best B-Sides ever.

Oh, and Bonham was an incredible drummer. I don't normally care about drummers, but he was fantastic. He had a truly unique style that is instantly recognizable. His drumming on the "Stairway to Heaven" nearly overshadows the solo for me.

__________________
Last.FM
RYM

boo boo

Then attack them personally. Don't use this to justify calling them bad musicians or calling their music bad and insulting people who enjoy their music.

I'm pretty sure blues musicians steal lyrics all the time.

And thats really only true of his earlier material. He showed a lot of improvement on later albums.

Agreed.

Zeppelin did take lyrics and they did do uncredited covers. But they didn't steal riffs. And even so a lot of things have been incredibly exagerated or just plain made up. Communication Breakdown is the best example, you have idiots who obviously haven't actually heard the song Nervious Breakdown by Eddie Cochran and just make the retarded conclusion that its a ripoff based on the similar song title.


Lyrics. And if you recall Ethan didn't say stolen lyrics, he said stolen riffs.

Lyrics.

Have you even read anything I said? I took all the examples made from Slick and that link he posted. Looking past all the lies and inaccuracies. The only good example I found regarding riffs is the one for Moby ****. And I think Jalen has already covered that for me.

For crying out loud. I just explained that with all the alleged examples of stolen riffs that it was only the lyrics. Try listening to the actual songs, youtube them.

This is where its more about the band personally then their music. Plagiarism? Sure, but they're covers, therefore not ripoffs, besides they did credit them eventually, its in the past, get the f*ck over it. The assh*les just didn't credit the writers, THATS IT. Do you want to f*cking ban covers now? Every band does covers, lets talk about hey they steal songs and riffs eh?

And is the fact that a lot of these uncredited covers sound a lot freaking different from the originals anyway completely insigificant? Zeppelin are completely unoriginal after all.

And look, I have NEVER made it out that the band did no wrong, I can't stress that enough. What I have a problem with is people taking the truth and completely fabricating things, exagerating it to death with baseless conclusions and stuff that are just plain lies. That link for example, most of the songs they called uncredited covers are NOT uncredited covers, at all. Just songs with stolen lyrics. And never mind the fact that blues artists steal lyrics all the time, or that Zeppelin were never a lyrics band. Its just fine and dandy to take THAT and try to discredit the band completely. It justifies all the lies, amirite?

Yes I am a Zep fanboy, but because I actually know a few things about this band I can tell you when something is not true or full of crap.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Son of JayJamJah

This thread is on life support

Shame too, it's a great idea for a thread

boo boo

Yeah I wasn't really referring to you.

Actually I could easly make an argument for it.

You gotta understand, the style of blues is a very restricted one. Both with the style of chords, 8 and 12 barre blues and with the simple blues and pentatonic scales. Now when you have god knows how many musicians playing within the confines of this very restricted style of playing. Its pretty much inevitable that some sh*t is going to sound the same. The same goes for a lot of punk and metal.

There are god knows how many musicians in the world. And god knows how many people play basic chord changes and use the basic pentatonic scale. If this is what you're playing, then its goddamn impossible for you to be completely original.

Nope. Its a cover. A ripoff (in the context of music) is directly taking or imitating something like a riff or a melody or whatever and applying it to something else. Warning by Green Day, which uses the same riff from The Kinks Picture Book, that is a ripoff.

Doing an uncredited cover of a Jack Holmes song that barely even sounds like the original song at all, is not a ripoff. Its an uncredited cover. Stop exagerating.

And yet if you watch the videos of the songs they covered, you wont find the riffs that Page "stole", there, or goddamn anywhere. Because its a lie. Even with their covers, his riffs were original contributions. Seriously listen to the songs they covered and tell me how much of the stuff in Zeppelins versions are stolen.

They did uncredited covers and it was certainly wrong for them not to credit the writers. But they took these covers turned them inside out and made them their own, that dosen't justify not crediting the writers. But it certainly contradicts all the crap about them being uncreative. Band members having a bit of an ego problem does not justify all the stupid crap that is said about them, that they were completely unoriginal and completely incapable of composing their own songs. I can tell you weither you like Zeppelin or not, that is bull****.

And lets remember this all began with Ethan describing IV with the words "stolen riffs", and hilarious enough none of the examples given relate to that album at all, because theres no alleged plagiarism on that album at all, let alone any stolen riffs.

Except for the alledged stealing of the riff from Spirits Taurus for the Stairway to Heaven intro, never mind that it just a similar use of chords changes but with different notes used, something that could be used to discribe material from countless musicians, generic use of chords is not plagiarism. It is known that Page got the idea of that part from Spirit however, and wouldn't you believe it? He actually approached the band about it.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

jackhammer

I have'nt been on for a couple of nights to moderate this. You are spot on JJJ. The idea was to discuss an ALBUM WITH case's for and against. I thought this would make good discussion not a bunch of posts discussing the band and NOT the album. I do not dislike Zeppelin, I am just not a huge fan. I was hoping people would follow my lead and look at the album objectively and the album ONLY. The thread will be moderated more closely know.

The thread begins anew with the aforementioned ASTRAL WEEKS.


Who's first with a view?

__________________

ProggyMan

Case Against:
This is considered Van Morrison's first 'classic' album and it's easy to see why. His songwriting, while not as top notch as on Moondance, Tuplo Honey or Veedon Fleece, is still excellent. Not to mention the title track is one of, if not the, best song he's ever written. Unfortunately nothing else on the album quite reaches the heights of 'Astral Weeks' and ultimately there's a point where even the best of ideas can get old. Especially one so reliant one aspect of the music, Mr. Morrison's aforementioned angelic vocals. His voice doesn't have quite the richness or depth of later albums, and he's obviously not as experienced vocally, because there's made little use of his vocal agility and dynamicness. Also the lyrics often seem a bit clumsy, even contrived. This is still a good album, but it lacks the relative musical diversity of Moondance and just plain gets old quickly.

Son of JayJamJah

Wile you make some valid points Porggy, I don't agree. I think there is outstanding utilization of Van's vocals on the album. As far as contrived lyrics a number of the songs were written in stream of consciousness, and it's that raw, pure emotion that elevates the album to it's iconic pedestal.

This album is amazing, from end to end a classic; the unique song cycle concept allows the album to flow song to song and end to end in an almost perfect elegance as natural as Van's gifts.

jackhammer

Does anyone want to offer up an opinion on a classic album?

__________________

ashtray

I will comment on Led Zeppelins IV. I think that album gets a lot more credit than it deserves (just because of stairway, though I'm not a huge Zep head as it is). I am really enjoying these threads you guys know a lot.