I said PARANOID is first punk record.
How is it punk? Its an overtly political record. Its 3 chord oriented. There is kick ass drum work.. but yeah i know its not a popular opinion

I'm not sure I agree that there was anything "punk" about Paranoid though, SFAD.

I think there's a definite sonic link between some of the work Sabbath did on both paranoid and Master of Reality, and some of the proto-punk that was being made in the U.S. at that time. You can hear something akin to Sabbath on Fun House, only it was coming from a very different place...

But I'm not going to challenge you on it. I am interested actually. I just played Paranoid from start to finish with an ear open for what you're referring to.

When people are deeply invested and interested in a style or genre of music, they make connections. I have felt some strange, foreshadowing whispers of the shout that punk would ultimately be in some of the damnedest places. Like... Fuck... improvisational jazz, clawhammer banjo, delta blues... So I won't tell you you're wrong.

But I'd love to hear more about why you feel that way.

To me, White Light/White Heat will always be the first punk album.

War Pigs, lyrically is straight up punk. However it also has certain sonic elements that feel punk to me.. the guitar work on the verse.. the drum work through out..

Paranoid has fucking blast beats and other punk drum work and its a straight up three chord verse chorus verse song..

Those tom rolls in Ironman sound like some crusty to me..

The intro to Electric Funeral reminds me of Subhumans People Are Scared and again its such a political song lyrically..

Fairies Wear Boots is PUNK AS FUCK! Yeah, technically its blues.. but it sure ain't Muddy Waters yo!

I know its not a true punk record, and my bias is I am very absorbed in a lot of punk music, but I've been in punk bands and playing punk music for years, intuitively I feel there are similarities in Paranoid. I can't explain it mathematically but it just feels that way to me from a musician's perspective

You're that guy who friends send out to Blockbuster to get a horror film, you come back with Ghostbusters then spend the rest of the night arguing your case.

hahaha

Hey now... Both Ghostbusters and Ghostbusters II had some seriously terrifying moments.

I mean, anyone else see this shit in the theatre?

Or THIS memorable little comic gem? Haha, mother screaming as baby Oscar crawls out the window and stands on the ledge of a fucking 500 foot building (babies flirting with suicide = sidesplitting!) only to be snatched up by crazy ghost pervert's extendo-arm as he cycles through sky in antique maid's uniform, sporting a fangy grin and glowing red eyes...

Ghost Janosz Snachting Oscar

Oh man, fun for the entire family. So few people appreciate the humor in paranormal kidnapping scenarios, but I tell you, it's a goldmine.

Cramps has always been very important to me although it`s maybe not in my 20 favourite artists list. I think it was just year after I have started to listen punk when I heard Cramps first time. Song was Human fly and it really hit me! That lux shameless insane vocal, other guitar with tremolo & other deep, dirty fuzz! It really was something I´ve never heard before. Of course punk & rockabilly have same roots, but Cramps really showed them! I was so impressed that we even put up own psychobilly band and just like Cramps, we have vocalist & two guitars (no Poison Ivy, sorry) and no bass. Also I saw Cramps twice, the other with Sclavunos on drums was really memorable!

In a way they made more cultural sense to me than anything specifically musical. I loved the songs but more important was the way they seemed to draw in a whole kind of comic book/B movie/trash culture sensibility. As a teen I was far more into crappy 50s sci-fi and sleazy 70s horror than I was music, so they were key to introducing me to stuff like The Ramones, The Stooges (both of whom I only heard after listening to The Cramps), Pussy Galore, Gun Club, Tav Falco, early White Zombie, the Back From the Grave comps, etc. My original love of SY was also based on their earlier interests in that kind of sleazy B Movie/Horror culture, and the further away they moved from that the less interested I became.

Even I am quite big Zeppelin-fan, I think Zeppelin is quite fully based on recycling. I think without these there would not been Zeppelin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpkXMSvwmZw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXcYZsqkZ-g

Also I think Zeppelin and Sabbath came quite the same time and were almost as popular, so their comparison is not reasonable. Also I have always think even they both are kind of metal bands, they are still quite different.

But this band did quite a lot same as Zeppelin although not ever put into metal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtZ6SuFq5m4

But I think they did that all a lot better than Zeppelin. In that song I think Family created intensity Zeppelin ever made for example in Black Dog etc. In Zeppelin only John Paul Jones was a virtuoso, in Family all were. Even Zeppelin first 5 albums are great, they didn´t made such a masterpiece as Music In a Doll´s house is. Also I think all the other Family albums are much better than any of Zeppelin albums. Even I am not a expert of lyrics, I think Chapman wrote lot better lyrics than Plants romantic nonsense. Chapman´s voice of course divides people to lovers and haters but I think Plants voice also irritates many.

But there are of course reasons why Zeppelin became so famous and Family not. There were also a lot of bad luck in Family, but I think Family just was so elite music to the masses when Zeppelin did great, but more mediocre music. Also, even prog bands like Yes and Genesis become popular, I think Family just made so great music both in the very roots area as in the "intelligent" music area, so the big audience just never found them.

Here´s another powerful Family piece:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PviyXIthU_E

I think Sabbath is underrated when compared to Zeppelin only because Ozzy lyrics were better than Plant's, Iommi as much a virtuoso at guitar as Page.. both band were innovative and extraordinarily creative and versatile in their styles of music yet Sabbath also managed to be much heavier sound and Bill Ward is the superior drummer. I would say Zeppelin has more reach and influence though..

Agree about the lyrics and I much prefer Ozzy's voice to Plant's, which has always been the biggest obstacle to me ever being able to like LZ, but while I prefer listening to Iommi's guitar playing to Page's I can't agree that Iommi's as much the virtuoso. More innovative maybe, but technically, in terms of skill, I doubt there's anything in Sabbath's back catalogue that Page couldn't play, but I'm not sure the same could be said the other way around. If only cos of Iommi's finger accident.

Oh, i cant stand Plant's voice,indeed the only Zepp record i like is III where Plant is tamed a bit. If Zeppelin was instrumental id listen to all their music. You may want to pull up some Sabbath and reassess your Iommi comments

Ozzy didn´t make almost any lyrics in the seventies Sabbath (in Paranoid only Fairies Wear Boots are partly Ozzy made) it was Geezer who wrote them. In paranoid making document there is first version of Paranoid where Ozzy sings something like "I love you baby don´t ever leave me etc." Very funny part of that document. They rehearse the song that way and then Geezer made the real lyrics into it.

I think Sabbath made something original, I think quite many modern metal genres also say Sabbath to their predecessors. I don´t think Zeppelin was influental at all, they just manage made great music from the pieces somebody has already made (for example first album is almost a copy of Jeff Beck´s Truth). Peter Grant was very succesful manager and made them big. Of course that band had all the elements to become a big and there is nothing wrong but I think it´s meaning of the popular music history (I mean just the meaning of the development of the music history) is overrated.

I think also Page´s guitar skills are overrated. If you listen his solos for example Song Remains the same double, they´re just mess (yes, he was using heroine or cocaine quite much that time). He´s done great work in the first album for example in Dazed & Confused, he´s innovation to use a bow with guitar and also most of his acoustic work is great, but anyway all the way I like more Iommi´s guitar work although he may not been as skillfull.

Agreed why i think Iommi is "better"

Yeah III's the only one I can stomach, too. 'Tangerine' and 'That's the Way' both work cos Plant sounds the least like 'Plant' on them. I'm not really in a position to assess Page's guitar skills so I'll take your word for it, and besides I prefer listening to Iommi's guitar stuff, anyway, even though I''d been led to believe Page was better from a technical standpoint. Not enough of a guitarist myself though to be able to say.

I suppose there's a little bit of Zeppelin DNA in every hard rock band but Sabbath have defined entire genres (Doom/Stoner). There's something very modern about Sabbath whereas LZ seem more stuck in their era.

Well I think Zeppelin, Deep Purple and Uriah Heep all did quite the same although Purple was the most innovative band in the begin of the seventies (it´s one of the first putting symphony & rock into same album, I think there are many opinions about it´s artistic quality, but I think it´s great, also Purples sixties albums are quite interesting and underrated). Maybe quite many today´s metallists still listen Zeppelin & Purple when Uriah Heep has left from the seventies (yes I know there are still some hardcore Heep-fans, I quess there are not many under fifty). But anyway Sabbath differed then from those others all the way.

It was a process of GeeZer working together with Ozzy. It wasn't like Geezer showed up with a notebook full of songs like John Lennon. Indeed Ozzy contributed more than say Jerry Garcia worked with Bob Hunter