Led Zeppelin's "1" = completely plagiarized

cryptowonderdruginvogue · 07.06.2007, 03:16 PM

http://www.esnips.com/doc/3a626981-0.../Stern-Denny-S

Bollocks_to_Pop · 07.06.2007, 03:22 PM

It may be true, but I still love listening to every now and then. Probably my favorite Zeppelin release besides 2 actually.

cryptowonderdruginvogue · 07.06.2007, 03:27 PM

im not a big zeppelin fan

pbradley · 07.06.2007, 05:19 PM

This is extremely old news. Most everyone who listens to the Zepp is aware of the fact.

Are you trying to use this as evidence that Led Zeppelin suck or something? Because around that time many bands were basing songs off of or out right covering blues standards. Early Rolling Stones, early Yardbirds, and others had albums full of covers. The lack of Led Zeppelin's ability to credit the right musicians speaks more about their management and legal abilities rather than their artistic creativity and talent. I just don't see the big deal and the members have since appologized and have publically thanked the musicians that they took inspiration from.

terminal pharmacy · 07.06.2007, 10:02 PM

must spread some butter around before giving it to pbradley again

demonrail666 · 07.06.2007, 10:03 PM

apart from the music and the vocals, I love em.

pbradley · 07.06.2007, 10:06 PM

Really, the Led Zeppelin rule versus suck debate has been so overdone that I always find it funny when people go on tirades either way.

luxinterior · 07.07.2007, 12:33 AM

I can understand people having problems with Plant's voice. If I hadn't gotten into the band so early on, I doubt I would have been able to appreciate them today.
But the music is so good. It's too bad for the people who think their music is good, but who have issues with Plant's singing. Most of their songs could function just as well without the vocals. They were a very good band. Houses of the Holy is my favorite album of theirs.

Torn Curtain · 07.08.2007, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbradley

Really, the Led Zeppelin rule versus suck debate has been so overdone that I always find it funny when people go on tirades either way.

I think some people bash Led Zeppelin here simply because they assume it's a band hated by SY. And they're wrong. From what I read in interviews if it's true Kim doesn't like Led Zep Thurston and Steve are fans (I don't know regarding Lee).

Torn Curtain · 07.08.2007, 06:31 AM

On Led Zeppelin I most of the songs "ripped off" are actually traditionals so the debate is a bit lame (EDIT: I'm not referring to the discussion here itself but to the debate which inspired the thread).

Protectmeyou · 07.08.2007, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cryptowonderdruginvogue

http://www.esnips.com/doc/3a626981-0.../Stern-Denny-S

this thread is completely palagarized:

http://www.ateaseweb.com/mb/index.ph...opic=235011591

07.06.2007, 03:16 PM	#1
cryptowonderdruginvogue invito al cielo Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: the party Posts: 10,281	http://www.esnips.com/doc/3a626981-0.../Stern-Denny-S
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

07.06.2007, 03:22 PM	#2
Bollocks_to_Pop children of satan Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 296	It may be true, but I still love listening to every now and then. Probably my favorite Zeppelin release besides 2 actually.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

07.06.2007, 03:27 PM	#3
cryptowonderdruginvogue invito al cielo Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: the party Posts: 10,281	im not a big zeppelin fan
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

07.06.2007, 05:19 PM	#4
pbradley invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: SoKo Posts: 10,621	This is extremely old news. Most everyone who listens to the Zepp is aware of the fact. Are you trying to use this as evidence that Led Zeppelin suck or something? Because around that time many bands were basing songs off of or out right covering blues standards. Early Rolling Stones, early Yardbirds, and others had albums full of covers. The lack of Led Zeppelin's ability to credit the right musicians speaks more about their management and legal abilities rather than their artistic creativity and talent. I just don't see the big deal and the members have since appologized and have publically thanked the musicians that they took inspiration from.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

07.06.2007, 10:02 PM	#5
terminal pharmacy invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Australia Posts: 3,358	must spread some butter around before giving it to pbradley again
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

07.06.2007, 10:03 PM	#6
demonrail666 invito al cielo Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 18,509	apart from the music and the vocals, I love em.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

07.06.2007, 10:06 PM	#7
pbradley invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: SoKo Posts: 10,621	Really, the Led Zeppelin rule versus suck debate has been so overdone that I always find it funny when people go on tirades either way.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

07.07.2007, 12:33 AM	#8
luxinterior invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Missouri, land of the free and home of the brave Posts: 2,351	I can understand people having problems with Plant's voice. If I hadn't gotten into the band so early on, I doubt I would have been able to appreciate them today. But the music is so good. It's too bad for the people who think their music is good, but who have issues with Plant's singing. Most of their songs could function just as well without the vocals. They were a very good band. Houses of the Holy is my favorite album of theirs. __________________ "I sweat like a fucking nun on Sunday...I don't even know what that means." - Sebastian Bach
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

07.08.2007, 06:31 AM	#10
Torn Curtain invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: France Posts: 7,997	On Led Zeppelin I most of the songs "ripped off" are actually traditionals so the debate is a bit lame (EDIT: I'm not referring to the discussion here itself but to the debate which inspired the thread).
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|