*was

Seriously, 8 individual people said this album was a 10/10, just perfect, wonderful album. It's frankly quite ridiculous. Led Zeppelin IV may be one or two people's genuine favorite in this thread, but 8? Just give it a 9 if you think it's really great, 10 shouldn't be for that. Regardless, 7/10, I think this album is okay, When the Levee Breaks is undoubtedly a great song, and Rock and Roll is similarly enjoyable for me, but otherwise this album doesn't really have much to offer. I suppose Stairway to Heaven is pretty good, but at this point in my musical listening journey it's a bit too restrained. In fact, this whole album is a bit too restrained. And I don't mean restrained in terms of volume or tempo, but in terms of experimentation. It's just so standard. There's nothing here I couldn't get better anywhere else.

Four Sticks standard? It's basically Jane's Addiction 3 decades earlier.

I'm just not very passionate about ranking degrees and vote how I feel at the time like a real American.

:laughing: RIP context.

My context is everything before Zep, not just the pop charts. Also what's experimental about this album exactly?

Black Dog, Rock and Roll, Misty Mountain Hop = standard blues rock fare
Battle of Evermore, Going to California = standard folk fare
Stairway to Heaven = both of the above
Four Sticks = standard psych rock fare
When the Levee Breaks = a dang good blues rock anthem I'd actually enjoy listening to just for kicks

The rest is radio/road trip fodder. Anyway, perhaps I used the wrong word with "experimentation". What I meant is that in terms of songwriting, most of these tracks are pretty bland, and personally the performances don't really do much to alleviate that. Plant's vocals do indeed sound like garbage on a couple of these tracks. That said, it's well enough written to make up for it. Bland is correlated with bad, but is not bad itself.

By this logic, Edgard Varese is no longer experimental.

You know how you just called all of the tracks standard? Led Zeppelin set that standard by making music that was different for their time. That's where the experimentation lies (because idgaf about their nerdy production, but it's there too if you really want to look). Treating IV as if it were a 2018 release and not a 1971 release is incredibly short-sighted in terms of musical appreciation. I have no qualms with how you rank the record btw, I just think presentism can close you out of appreciating a lot of great art.

**** Jane's Addiction too tbh.

I think I voted this an 8 or a 9. I've always thought of Led Zeppelin IV as one of their most consistent overall albums. Physical Graffiti and Houses Of The Holy have more of my favorite Zep songs on them ('No Quarter' is a phenomenon), but when you hear that opening drum break on 'When The Levee Breaks' or the progression of the fun yet overplayed 'Stairway To Heaven', it isn't hard to see why this album is regarded as of the immortal greats even if it isn't to everyone's taste. Every song has at least a couple of good ideas going through it even at their most conventional. And 'Black Dog' is a good stormin' opener.

Sig'd.

EDIT. Nope. Exceeded my 500 cigarette limit.

I guess the question is should we rate something higher just because it set certain standards? Or should it completely stand or fall on its own merits as music/whether we like it?