Zep vs. The Who

[Farin 2]

I don't think a terrible band could stay in business for over 45 years.

you probably don't know much of German "Schlager"

trust me, it is possible...

[blue_n_white 0]

you probably don't know much of German "Schlager"

trust me, it is possible...

No but I like German lager.

[Batman 2]

I don't think millions of people would smack down hundreds of dollars to see a band in concert because its "nostalgia". So in 45 years,if one of your favorite bands is still around,you going to say you are going to see them because of "nostalgia"?

I wouldn't personally but a lot of people would, apparently. Let me just put it this way: If "A Bigger Bang" was released by a band that hadn't been around as long as the Rolling Stones and wasn't as well loved as the Rolling Stones it would not have made the Billboard top 40 charts.

I do think people would still pay to see the Rolling Stones if nostalgia was not a factor, but if nostalgia was not a factor I doubt anyone would pay 300 something dollars to see a rock band.

[TheLizard 1]

When did the Stones do a classical song? That's not a challenge, I'm just curious.

I suppose "When Tears Go By", "Ruby Tuesday", and "She's A Rainbow" have a sort of Baroque influence. That's the best I can do.

[The Seeker 0]

What about Lady Jane?

[TheLizard 1]

Ah yes, I knew I forgot one.

[edna 6]

Back Street Girl

[Kevin 3]

Isn't this thread dead yet ?!

[Batman 2]

I would consider those songs to be rock songs, not in the traditional sense, but certainly not classical songs.

Ah, screw it, you all know my opinion, I know everyone else's opinion, and we all know these opinions won't be changing any time soon.

[Dappled 0]

I agree with you, Batman. The Who did a cover of Grieg. That's classical!

[Super Ry 71 0]

Isn't this thread dead yet ?!

Aren't you?

[blue_n_white 0]

It seems the topic of this thread has again shifted from its original question concerning The Who and Led Zepp to the ongoing discussion of The Rolling Stones being diverse or not.

[_Laurie_ 11]

B & W, that happens alot around here...we're use to it though...

[blue_n_white 0]

B & W, that happens alot around here...we're use to it though...

Guess I better get used to it then,huh?... ...oh and like I have said before in this thread,The Rolling Stones are very diverse .

[Farin 2]

more so than Beck?

*deja vu *

[_Laurie_ 11]

see what I mean B & W?

[blue_n_white 0]

It's like deja vue all over again .

[_Laurie_ 11]

It's like deja vue all over again

[musiclvr 0]

It seems the topic of this thread has again shifted from its original question concerning The Who and Led Zepp to the ongoing discussion of The Rolling Stones being diverse or not.

I kept with the topic but it shifted, I see that alot here and can understand it, but why not make a thread about the diversity of bands and take the discussion there about The Stones? I will say I was weary of discussing, you all get very worked up sometimes.

[_Laurie_ 11]

There is a thread about Stones and Beatles in this forum.

[blue_n_white 0]

I kept with the topic but it shifted, I see that alot here and can understand it, but why not make a thread about the diversity of bands and take the discussion there about The Stones? I will say I was weary of discussing, you all get very worked up sometimes.

I don't know if "worked up" is the correct term but I think most on here are passionate about their opinions concerning music,which is why this site is here. To voice your opinion of the topics being discussed. No reason to be "weary". If you have something to say,you may as well speak your mind. I don't think any responses to your opinions would be personal attacks although I am sure there will be those who disagree with your thoughts. Which is fine too. Would be a very boring site if everybody agreed on everything .

[musiclvr 0]

I don't know if "worked up" is the correct term but I think most on here are passionate about their opinions concerning music,which is why this site is here. To voice your opinion of the topics being discussed. No reason to be "weary". If you have something to say,you may as well speak your mind. I don't think any responses to your opinions would be personal attacks although I am sure there will be those who disagree with your thoughts. Which is fine too. Would be a very boring site if everybody agreed on everything .

Yes I agree it would be boring, but I have read some threads where things got somewhat heated, but I will hold you to your thoughts and just jump in head first!

You could take that as a warning or a promise!

[Batman 2]

So anyways, I think the reason I picked Zeppelin is because even though both bands rock really hard, moreso than pretty much any rock band ever, Zep rocked in a more mystical and mysterious way, and that appeals to me a lot.

[blue_n_white 0]

I think they both stand alone. They have different styles that are hard to compare. I think this is more about personal choices and which band a person would rather listen to if given the choice. I think if I were asked daily,I would have a different choice every day. Depending on my mood and what I wanted to listen to at the time.

[doqmsday 0]

A month ago I would have said Led Zeppelin for sure. Now however, I'm not so sure. The Who were more famously known for smashing guitars, so I figured Zep would have my answer. But now I listen more to the actual music. The Who's complex keyboard riffs really complement The Who's rebelious songs and look. Plus, everyone loves a good old smashed guitar. That doesn't necessarily make The Who the winner. I don't think Led Zeppelin is the greatest band of all time (Beatles), but the're still up there. Zep has all the makings of a great rock band. Plant could sing with energy and scream like a rock star. Page is one of the best guitarists ever, and any band would benefit from him. Bonham could play the drums, period. Jones was a very flexible bass player, and the bass playeris the keystone of the band.

Either one would be great to make a rockband game out of, but in the end I'm ging with: The Who.