What age might you be if you don't mind me asking? ~:cheers:
Printable View
What age might you be if you don't mind me asking? ~:cheers:
57 its right there in my profile. I also worked as a stage hand since 1968 for groups like Floyd, Deep Purple, the Birds and 10 years after to name a few. I still do it now and then. More recently Ive done shows for Mariah Carey and Phish.
I'm sorry, I looked over your stuff and didn't see your birthday :embarassed: .Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
As to your previous work, extra coooool. ~:pimp: .
Gah. Sorry that was in the old forums. My bad. :tomato:Quote:
I'm sorry, I looked over your stuff and didn't see your birthday
Well it seems the new line of conversation is "Whoever came first is best!".
First of all, thats not accurate. The Who and Zep both made music during the 70s, and Zeps was much better. Popular opinion, critical opinion, and every other opinion constantly put Zep on or near top and the Who somewhere down the list of best rock and roll bands.
Second, all of the members of Zep were seasoned veterans of the 60s. Simply because Zep was not formed doesnt mean all the members werent "on the scene" during that era.. do you think all that talent came out of thin air? Page, Bonham and JPJ were all known and recognized in the community as great artists. Plant was a little more obscure. Bonham was actually fought over quite a bit. Zep may have come after the Who but its members were veterans of that era just as much as the Who.
Excuse me. The Who made music in the 60s. The early 60s and as the Who.Quote:
The Who and Zep both made music during the 70s,
Thats just wrong. Popular opinion yes but not critical opinion. I venture most musicians and critics rate the Who higher.Quote:
Popular opinion, critical opinion, and every other opinion constantly put Zep on or near top and the Who somewhere down the list of best rock and roll bands.
Really ? What were they doing while the Who were realeasing Albums. The Who are a 60s band with their roots in the 50s where as Zep is a 70s band with its roots in the 60s. The Who were formed in 62 and Zepplin in 68 or 69. The Who are also a much more well rounded and diverse band than Zepplin.Quote:
Second, all of the members of Zep were seasoned veterans of the 60s.
Bull. They were playing as session workers while the Who were putting out albums . To try to deny that that the Who set the stage for Zepllin is beyond belief. Who do you think were the first to really bring synthizers to the forefront?Quote:
Second, all of the members of Zep were seasoned veterans of the 60s.
PS the true easure of how good a band is is how the play in concert. Having seen both these bands in their prime I can tell you there is no comparison. The Who blow them off the stage with their sheer energy alone. No one to this day brings down the house like the Who did. Watch a few dvds of the Who in concert and you will see what I mean.
I've seen the Who and Zeppelin DVDs. And I've listened to their albums extensivly. And I think that Zeppelin is better. The Who were good. But I just don't think they were better.
So you think that Zepplin was as exciting in concert as the Who? You need help my friend. Do you see page jumping through the air or making great windmilling motions. Do you see Bonham pounding his drum relentlesly fillling every little nook and cranny. Do you see Plant swing the mic in a 50ft arc above his head and then tossing it into the air and catching it. Do you see JPJ fingers runnning up and down the neck of his bass like a mad man. And then at the end do they smash all thier instruments or even the concert hall itself ? No you dont see any of these things. They basically just stood there and played. Again Ive seen them LIVE and there is no comparison. Zepplin is the worst super band Ive ever seen in concert. They were good in concert but not great. Their best work is in the studio. Also who invented the Marshall stack without which very little rock would sound as it does today? The Who are also the prototype for all punk rockbands that followed.Quote:
I've seen the Who and Zeppelin DVDs. And I've listened to their albums extensivly. And I think that Zeppelin is better. The Who were good. But I just don't think they were better.
Right, I hate when bands that smash their instruments. It's so stupid and wasteful. It's probably comes from the fact that I'd give a lot to have one of those babies that they smash so carelessly. I hate that, and that is a big reason why the Who loses points.
And I don't care about exciting. I don't care about fanciness. I just want good music. My favorite band is the Dead, rember? ~;) I like when bands just stand and play. It is far more sincere and likeable for bands who try and put on a show.
Do you know why they smashed their instruments?Quote:
Right, I hate when bands that smash their instruments. It's so stupid and wasteful. It's probably comes from the fact that I'd give a lot to have one of those babies that they smash so carelessly. I hate that, and that is a big reason why the Who loses points.
I thought you said you just want good music ~D I take back my previous statement that Zep was the worst superband I saw in concert. The Dead win that one hands down. I did two hits of acid and they still managed to put me to sleep.Im serious the girl I went with had to wake me up at the end. She was a deadhead and talked me into going.Quote:
And I don't care about exciting. I don't care about fanciness. I just want good music. My favorite band is the Dead, rember?
I've heard numerous tales of why Pete started. But later on, it became a gimmick, at least as far as I can tell.Quote:
Do you know why they smashed their instruments?
Well you're just nuts, so there isn't much of a point trying to argue with you. ~DQuote:
I thought you said you just want good music ~D I take back my previous statement that Zep was the worst superband I saw in concert. The Dead win that one hands down. I did two hits of acid and they still managed to put me to sleep.Im serious the girl I went with had to wake me up at the end. She was a deadhead and talked me into going.
Are you sure?Quote:
Excuse me. The Who made music in the 60s. The early 60s and as the Who.
It seems they made plenty of music during the 70s, maybe even their best. So my point still stands. The Who and Zep directly competed during the 70s. Both bands were famous, why didnt The Who do as well as Zep if they were such a better band?Quote:
By late 1970 Pete had the idea for the next project. Kit had made a film deal with Universal Studios for a Who film which he hoped would be "Tommy" with him directing. Pete instead came up with his own idea called "Lifehouse." It would be a science-fiction story about virtual reality and a boy who rediscovers rock music. The hero would hold an endless concert and at the end find the Lost Chord which would take them all to nirvana.
Pete had The Who perform at open door concerts at the Young Vic Theatre in London. People were supposed to wander in and out of the concert while they and the band were filmed. Audience members would become part of the film, their life stories changed into computer sequences to be played on the synthesizer. What resulted was disappointing. The audience just called out for Who favorites and the rest of the band grew quickly bored.
Pete's project was put on hold and The Who went into the studio to record the songs Pete had written for "Lifehouse." The two-record length work was whittled down to one album and the result was released as "Who's Next." It became another international hit and is considered by many as The Who's best album. "Baba O'Riley" and "Behind Blue Eyes" were radio staples and "Won't Get Fooled Again" became the band's closing song for the rest of their career.
With growing fame, the members of The Who began to chafe under the burden of being the voice for Pete's songs. John was the first to launch a solo career with the album "Smash Your Head Against The Wall" released shortly before "Who's Next." He would continue to record solo albums through the early 1970's, giving vent to his dark humorous songs. Roger also began a solo career after building a studio in his barn. His album "Daltrey" yielded a Top Ten British single "Giving It All Away" and gave him a power in the band he hadn't had since he'd had to beg for his job at the end of 1965.
Roger used his new power to launch an investigation into managers Kit Lambert's and Chris Stamp's financial practices. He discovered they had been misusing The Who's funds for years and worked to get rid of them. Pete, who looked on Kit as an artistic mentor, took Kit's side leading to a rift in the band.
Pete, meanwhile, began work on the next Who rock opera. It was to be a history of The Who, but after a meeting with Irish Jack, who had followed the band since their Detours days, Pete made it into the story of a Who fan. It concerned Jimmy, a mod fan of The High Numbers in 1964. He works a dirty job to make money to buy a GS motorscooter, hip mod clothes and enough leapers to get him through the weekend. The heavy doses of speed cause his personality to split four ways, each personality represented by a member of The Who. His parents discover his pills and kick him out of the house. He travels to Brighton to relive Mod's glory days but finds the head Mod reduced to a lowly bellboy. In despair he takes a boat out to a rock in the sea in a violent storm and has an epiphany ("Love, Reign O'er Me").
"Quadrophenia" developed problems shortly after recording. It was to have been mixed for the new four-channel quadrophonic system, but the technology was too inadequate. Once mixed down to stereo, the rich sound tended to bury the vocals, to Roger's consternation. On stage The Who tried to recreate the sound by playing along to backing tapes. The tapes, however, refused to cooperate and often led to chaos. In addition to all this, Keith's wife left him shortly before the tour taking their daughter with her. Keith drowned his sorrows in booze and whatever else he could get his hands on. At the San Francisco show that opened the U.S. tour, Keith passed out in the middle of the show and was replaced by Scott Halpin, a member of the audience.
Pete got no rest on his return to London. Production began immediately on the film of his rock opera "Tommy." Control of the film had been taken away from manager Kit Lambert and given to madman British filmmaker Ken Russell. Russell turned the work into a glittering comic book with guests stars like Elton John, Eric Clpaton, Tina Turner, Ann-Margaret and Jack Nicholson. The result was very gaudy and although it pleased few Who fans, it was a hit with the public. Two after-effects were that, playing the lead role, Roger became a star apart from the band which gave him much more leverage than he had had since 1965, and Pete worked himself into such a state that he had a nervous breakdown and began drinking even more heavily than usual.
It all came to a head at the Madison Square Garden concerts held in June 1974. When the audience called for Pete to "jump, jump" he realized he no longer wanted to. The passion of performing with The Who was beginning to fade for him. This led to the next Who album, "The Who By Numbers." A dark, bitter look at Townshend's soul, the album was heralded by a vicious shouting match between Pete and Roger carried out in the British music press.
The tours that followed in 1975 and 1976 seemed much more successful than the album. But there was a growing emphasis on playing the band's oldies and short shrift given to the new. After a particularly loud concert on this tour, Pete noticed he had a ringing in his ears that wouldn't stop. A trip to the doctor revealed that he tinnitus and would soon go deaf if he didn't cease touring.
After 1976, The Who did stop touring. All that was left was the final break between The Who and their old managers. In early 1977 Pete signed the final papers dissolving The Who's ties to Lambert and Stamp. He left the meeting only to run into two members of the Sex Pistols, the new punk sensation that seemed to be the new broom that would finally sweep The Who away. It ended with Pete drunk in a doorway told to move on by a policeman.
This became the song "Who Are You" the title track of the next Who album. After a two-year break from the recording studio, activity for the band began to increase. In addition to a new album, The Who were having a film made of their history that would eventually be released as "The Kids Are Alright." The Who even bought Shepperton Studios to film it in. However, when Keith returned from America after the hiatus, he was in sorry shape. He had gained a lot of weight, had become a severe alcoholic, and looked a decade older than his true age of 30.
The Who completed the album and the film in 1978 with a concert held at Shepperton for Who fans on May 25th, 1978. Three months later the album was released to massive sales. Twenty days after that, on September 7th, Keith Moon died of an accidental overdose of pills he had been prescribed to control his alcoholism.
Its not as if Zep was "commercial" and The Who were some obscure - but awesome - band only music junkies listened to. Both bands were very famous and liked it that way. Zep was just better. ~;)
(Also another little tidbit in that piece that I didnt know about. The Who played with background tapes? Like Ashlee Simpson?)
Not the ones ive heard.Quote:
Thats just wrong. Popular opinion yes but not critical opinion. I venture most musicians and critics rate the Who higher.
No way.Quote:
Really ? What were they doing while the Who were realeasing Albums. The Who are a 60s band with their roots in the 50s where as Zep is a 70s band with its roots in the 60s. The Who were formed in 62 and Zepplin in 68 or 69. The Who are also a much more well rounded and diverse band than Zepplin.
And Zep has always been described as one of the most influential bands ever.Quote:
Jimmy Page, who had led the last incarnation of the Yardbirds and had been an extremely successful session guitarist (Who, Kinks, Them, Donovan, Joe Cocker), formed the band in 1968 with veteran session bassist/keyboardist John Paul Jones, 19-year-old singer Robert Plant and Plant’s friend, drummer John Bonham. Commenting upon Page’s low expectations for the success of the band, Keith Moon suggested the name “Led Zeppelin.”
This bit describes their "well-roundedness".
Compare Led Zep 1 to Physical Graffiti and tell me they werent well rounded! Hrrumph!Quote:
Over a 10-year, nine-album career from 1969-79, Led Zeppelin was the most popular rock group in the world, ultimately selling more than 50 million records in the U.S. alone (more than 200 million worldwide), developing the blues-based power trio-plus-lead singer archetype in many directions including mystical English folk-rock, Middle Eastern-influenced exotica, quirky pop and every manner of heaviness. They also came to symbolize the Dionysian excesses of the rock lifestyle.
The Who set the stage just as much as the Beatles or the myriad of other rock bands before Zep. And The Who's stage was set by bands before them.. thats meaningless really. Again, what does being first have to do with being better? You would think since the Who had more years to grow and develope they would far outshine Zep by the 70s.Quote:
Bull. They were playing as session workers while the Who were putting out albums . To try to deny that that the Who set the stage for Zepllin is beyond belief. Who do you think were the first to really bring synthizers to the forefront?
Also, to my knowledge Plant never used synth - which is a positive thing.
Luckily both bands were filmed, so ive seen them both and I would say they both rock hard live. I prefer Zep but the Who live was much better than their studio recordings in my opinion and was awesome. I definately wouldnt say they were more energetic or better live though!Quote:
PS the true easure of how good a band is is how the play in concert. Having seen both these bands in their prime I can tell you there is no comparison. The Who blow them off the stage with their sheer energy alone. No one to this day brings down the house like the Who did. Watch a few dvds of the Who in concert and you will see what I mean.
Er, not quite. If you ever listen to Quadrophenia, there are lots of sound effects on the album-waves splashing, recording of old BBC radio announcements, rain falling, that kind of thing. They used tapes to provide these effects during the tour.Quote:
(Also another little tidbit in that piece that I didnt know about. The Who played with background tapes? Like Ashlee Simpson?)
Yes. I didnt say they stopped in the early 60s. They were still going in the 90s for Petes sake(pun intended). My pont is they were a succesful band before Zep was ever formed.Quote:
Excuse me. The Who made music in the 60s. The early 60s and as the Who.
Are you sure?
The point is they wer far more commercial than the Who. The Who were just better.Quote:
Its not as if Zep was "commercial" and The Who were some obscure - but awesome - band only music junkies listened to. Both bands were very famous and liked it that way. Zep was just better.
AAh so theres no synths on Zepplin albums.I could have sworn JPJ played them.Quote:
Also, to my knowledge Plant never used synth - which is a positive thing.
You see he was a session guy just like I said. Of course playing with the Who had no effect upon him.Quote:
Jimmy Page, who had led the last incarnation of the Yardbirds and had been an extremely successful session guitarist (Who
Your still young. Look around.Quote:
Not the ones ive heard.
I love this onw
Quote:
No way.
And then you go on to prove me right. ~D
So they got worse .That doesnt make them well rounded.Quote:
Compare Led Zep 1 to Physical Graffiti and tell me they werent well rounded! Hrrumph!
It has to do with who was more influential and theres no doubt in that repect that the Beatles are number one and the Who number 2. They brought the instruments to the front. Invented the marshall stack. Brought the synth to mainstrean use and were the prototype for all the punk and hard rock bands that followed including Zepplin.Quote:
The Who set the stage just as much as the Beatles or the myriad of other rock bands before Zep. And The Who's stage was set by bands before them.. thats meaningless really. Again, what does being first have to do with being better
Well Panzers right but not really as is BKS. Yes they did indeed play with tapes but it wasnt just effects. I saw them numerous times and they had no keyboard player on many of these occassions so the synths would be taped. Townsend said this made it very difficukt as if you made a mistake it would throw everything off. It showed their talent not their lack of it to be able to stay so tight.Quote:
(Also another little tidbit in that piece that I didnt know about. The Who played with background tapes? Like Ashlee Simpson?)
Er, not quite. If you ever listen to Quadrophenia, there are lots of sound effects on the album-waves splashing, recording of old BBC radio announcements, rain falling, that kind of thing. They used tapes to provide these effects during the tour.
PS I hear the best band ever to play Zepplins kind of music is reforming. Their called Cream and the blow Zepplin away in every manner.
Gawain, I think we just have to disagree on this. For the record, my dad and one of my brothers agree with you. Of course, they like punk and a lot of music I don't, so they're nuts. ~D
"Cream" is reforming? Wow. They did some of the best blues of the period- but will they still be able to do so well after so many years? (Then again, Floyd went far above my expectations at Live 8; I kind of wish they had been the only band there. They could have at least taken the Stone's slot. ~D)
Hey, the Stones were awesome. They could have taken Madonna's spot, or any of the rappers or pop people. Stones rock!
And I wish I could see Cream... the tickets would be insanely expensive, though...
Where is the option that says "Meatwad you are a hippie"
Jk
I like Led Zeppelin better. Idk why, just like their songs better.