Why does /mu/ overrate the beach boys but never like the superior led zeppelin ?
>>66143560
This post is ironic right?
>>66143560
Because of the plagiarism I guess. Though Zep makes the songs so much better.
Dad Rock lives in all of us... don't worry so much about it.
pioneers of artistic pop music vs a cover band
I really dont know OP
>>66143662
yeah, because 2 min vaudeville ditties is truly the high of art WOWSERS
>>66143560
Pink Floyd > Rush > Queen > The Who > Emerson Lake & Palmer > Aerosmith > almost any other popular 70s radio-prog band >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Led Zeppelin
>>66143731
of course /mu/ can't stay on topic
look bb led>beach boys
can't prove me wrong
Because rockists don't like "plagiarism" even though Surfin USA is literally a Chuck Berry song.
>>66143775
this lmao
chuck berry himself stole lots of stuff from the past too
>>66143560
Work moment for them is when they dropped charlie manson
>>66143602
>>66143662
>muh stealing meme
shut the fuck up. I don't care what you faggots think zepp stole; they didn't steal shit. WOW, SOME OF THEIR STUFF HAS A SIMILAR CHORD PROGRESSION TO SOMETHING SOME SHITTY BAND DID IN A SONG THAT WENT NOWHERE? PLAGIARISM!
NO, IT'S NOT FUCKING PLAGIARISM. The case was ruled in their favor, it is legally not stealing or plagiarism. And even if it was, Stairway to Heaven is fucking MILES better than Taurus - Spirit. Led Zeppelin made really unique, interesting music that changed the face of rock. I really don't understand this fad of undermining what they've done; their entire discography is EXTREMELY solid, and whether or not you take into consideration their innovation their music alone is fantastic and well put together.
Anyway JUST FUCK OFF WITH THIS MEME. Zeppelin was a great, classic band that made really good music and that's the end of it.
>>66143731
the who fucking sucked in the 70s
the same people who write off led zeppelin as plagiarists are probably the same people who listen to kanye west (famous for songs based on samples of other people's music) every single day
as somebody who grew out of their Dadrock phase right on cue at 17 years old, and has been listening to Kraut, Canterbury scene, post-punk, noise, etc. etc. since then... all I have to say is.... how the fuck could anybody not like Led Zeppelin? It's just straight up good shit. Like, some of the best, ever. Period.
>>66143822
>not liking Quadrophenia
>>66143849
>as somebody who grew out of their Dadrock phase right on cue at 17 years old, and has been listening to Kraut, Canterbury scene, post-punk, noise, etc. etc. since then
fucking kill yourself please you sound so fucking hilarious
im the one defending zeppelin in this thread too jesus christ
>>66143818
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTsvs-pAGDc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehwSEVbBZl4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Led_Zeppelin_songs_written_or_inspired_by_others
kek why do you think it's just stairway?
>>66143818
Do you have ears? The songs are obviously stolen to anyone with common sense. I agree Zep does it better though
>>66143731
how the fuck
have you actually listened to their albums in full? or do you just hate them cause they're your dad's favorite band?
i mean how are fucking aerosmith and queen better than led zeppelin?
Led Zeppelin literally has 4 10/10 albums. There is no disputing this. Even trying is trying-hard.
>>66143818
The fact that so many books still name Led Zeppelin as “the greatest or most significant or most influential” rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. Led Zeppelin sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that Led Zeppelin did anything worthy of being saved.
>>66143838
a sample is paid for, plagiarism is when a song is stolen without the original artist (or rather his record label) consenting or getting credit. One is legal the other is not. And Kanye isn't the only artist sampling m8
>>66143849
which is worse avant teen or prog teen?
>>66143957
Which ones? Obviously I and IV. But what are the other two? II, III, Houses of the Holy, or Physical Graffiti?
https://youtu.be/tWeejHJxGjs
When is this guy's estate going to sue Spirit? I mean, Taurus has more in common with this song that Stairway to Heaven has in common with Taurus.
>>66143818
Lol spaz.
>>66143904
So ONE SONG of their entire discography adapted a song and MADE A BETTER VERSION and you think it's plagiarism? This image is from the Zepp 1 record sleeve; if you did a little bit more research maybe you'd know that what you're claiming is stupid. Also, Stairway wasn't stolen in the first place. Even if they did "steal" that chord progression they made something entirely original out of it. Past the first few seconds Stairway and Taurus sound entirely different.
>>66143838
The sampling "real music" crowd is a large part of why Zeppelin gets so much shit for plagiarism.
Spirit and Jake Holmes are both shit btw. Led Zeppelin are literally the only reason anyone ever talks about them.
>>66144086
They changed that later, mate. After the lawsuit. They originally only credited it to Page. He also linked you a whole list of songs Zeppelin plagiarized. You should read it.
>>66144000
that's not the point. people are never arguing from the standpoint of legality. you really think people would stop listening to music because some part of the process was against the law? heaven forbid a rock star do something illegal. nah, that's not what's going through their head at all.
they're writing off the music itself entirely as if stealing a few bits and pieces of other songs makes jimmy page an artistic fraud. it's a slight against the legitimacy of the music itself.
meanwhile this board won't shut up about rap artists who do the exact same thing. legal or not, artistically, sampling is cut from the same cloth as what jimmy page did. great artists steal etc
>>66144139
Spirit was more famous for a while, actually. Zeppelin opened up for them. And songs of Spirit's have been critically acclaimed before Zeppelin stole Taurus. One of their best ones is Fresh Garbage. You're also implying that just because something is more popular, it's better. Which is retarded, of course.
>>66143949
Yes. The only songs I came away from Zeppelin REALLY liking were Trampled Underfoot, The Wanton Song, Achilles Last Stand, and Carouselambra.
>>66144188
Well see the difference is is that it's literally stealing someone's work. Making money off of what they did. People are okay with rock stars breaking laws as long as they're laws that have no good reason. No one defends Charles Manson for murder, now do they?
>>66144199
Spirit are still vapid shit though. They would be in the Country Joe and the Fish/Ten Years After/category of "literally who?"-tier bands if it wasn't for plagiarism accusations. Nobody talks about Spirit today unless they're trying to defame Led Zeppelin.
/thread
>>66143731
>aerosmith
>good
holy fucking shit kys
>>66144287
Mate, Country Joe and Ten Years After are great. Just because something is obscure, it doesn't mean it's bad.
>>66144245
you are free to have this theory, but i really don't think this is why people care about this issue at all.
>>66144086
m8 I love Led Zeppelin too, Houses of The Holy is one of my favorite albums, but it's silly to claim that they didn't steal, there is a fucking wikipedia article about songs they have stolen, not many (which I linked earlier), not many bands have that. No one who isn't a led zep fan will say they didn't steal, you're clearly in denial (like many of their fans are). And Dazed and Confused is a lot more than "inspired by", it's nice that they gave Holmes credit, but the songs are very fucking similar. Most of their stolen stuff is on their earlier records IIRC, but still. I remember reading something about Page and Plant going to underground blues and rock clubs and stealing songs from there, so if this is true it means that a large portion of their stolen catalogue is seemingly original because the original music was never recorded in the first place and was stolen from up and coming artist who performed in underground clubs, but like I said, I just recall reading about it somewhere, so maybe it's false.
why do you keep bringing up stairway? i didn't think it was a fair plagiarism claim either
>>66144199
stealing work from someone and making money off of it is NOT ok, even if you're a rockstar. Samples are a legal process that gives royalty to the original artist, stealing a song and claiming it as your own is not the same. Im a Led Zeppelin fan, but this is just the truth.
>>66144287
>>66144245
Literally Rockism: The Post.
How much money do you think John Lee Hooker's estate should give Leadbelly's estate? I mean, he "stole" from him just has much as Led Zeppelin "stole" from Howlin' Wolf, playing the same blues standards and all but making them more interesting and electric.
>>66144341
That's what I was arguing. Stealing is bad.
>>66144340
People care about it because it's repulsive and evil lmao. It's morally corrupt. Whereas when a rockstar does drugs people aren't upset because they aren't actually harming anyone.
>>66144363
sorry, that was meant for >>66144188
>>66144151
>>66143904
>>66144341
Alright I'll fucking own up when I'm wrong; you're right, they were influenced by and took inspiration from a lot of songs. Still, I stand by my point. When I said that their music is miles better than most of the stuff they supposedly stole from, I meant it. Maybe they did adapt a lot of blues and rock tunes, but what they did with the source music was fucking insane. Zepp was a group of very talented musicians who knew how to make and play great music. They made some of the most memorable and well-done rock tracks in history, and I can guarantee you that I would rather listen to Zepp's version of a song instead of the source any day.
>>66144035
not him, but 1,2,3,4, Houses of the Holy and Physical Graffiti are all 10/10s
[spoiler]In Through the Out Door as well[/spoiler]
>>66144406
They did great covers, but they should have given credit to the original writers. There's nothing wrong with doing covers. Look at Vanilla Fudge. They only did covers. However, when you do a cover and credit to yourself it's bad. You're basically doing it to get more mooney when you're already rich.
>>66143731
Prog faggot, kys
>>66144510
Actually I'm a pop fag. I prefer ABBA, Sparks, Bowie, and Wings to all of these.
>>66144441
>All of My Love
>10/10
Top kek
>>66143731
So cringey
>>66143775
No one talks about the early surfer shit when talking about the Beach Boys
>>66144406
i agree to a certain extent, they were all very talented musicians, and they often proved that they were capable of writing great songs without plagiarism (there are 0 plagiarism claims for Houses of The Holy and that is my record by them). But still making money off of other people's work and original ideas is not acceptable, even if they changed the stolen work into something you like better. Led Zeppelin is one of my favorite bands, but the fact is, they were perfectly ok with stealing music. I see where you're coming from, it's sad to learn about shit like this from artists you enjoy and admire.
this quote from Page is quite nasty, he admits to basing his songs on other songs and shifts the blame to Plant:
“[A]s far as my end of it goes, I always tried to bring something fresh to anything that I used. I always made sure to come up with some variation. In fact, I think in most cases, you would never know what the original source could be. Maybe not in every case– but in most cases. So most of the comparisons rest on the lyrics. And Robert was supposed to change the lyrics, and he didn’t always do that– which is what brought on most of the grief. They couldn’t get us on the guitar parts of the music, but they nailed us on the lyrics.”
>>66144309
Toys in the Attic and Rocks > any Zeppelin album.
>>66143818
you know they were stealing blues lyrics as well
>>66144613
>Houses of The Holy and that is my record by them
i meant favorite record by them
why do people whine about "stolen' work isn't the end result all we should care about
>>66144472
I agree, they should have given credit, but the fact of the matter is they didn't and it's over with. People keep bitching about this shit all the time and it's just starting to get on my nerves, I guess. If they were still making music I would understand why it was an issue, but it seems like all these plagiarism cases and upsets are coming out after they've already disbanded. It sucks that they didn't give people credit; if they did Zep fans like me would never defend what they did blindly. But it's over. They made a bunch of music that adapted other songs really, really well and inspired thousands of people to seriously get into music (such as myself), and if all this copyright stuff was such a huge deal to the musicians Zep supposedly stole from, said musicians should have brought it up before Zep was famous and packed full of money. I'm not defending their stealing anymore, I'm just saying that the essence of the band remains whether or not they stole, covered, or did whatever to a bunch of music.
>>66144564
>liking Zeppelin
>not cringe
>>66144665
just put yourself in the original artist's shoes, would you like it if a huge artist listened to one of your songs, changed it a bit and then released it as their own and then made crazy amounts of money from it? all without giving you any credit
>>66144613
>>66144666
and you're right, by the way. A huge part of my original rant was that Zep is one of my favorite bands. Every time I put on one of their albums it brings a smile to my face, and they've succeeded in making very listenable, timeless music. It just seems hard to accept that they could have stolen even any of their songs from other musicians because all of their stuff is so unique and beautiful.
>>66144721
what
so that makes it bad music?
what?
stop posting please
>>66144791
i never claimed it's bad music, i love Led Zeppelin, it's just a very shitty thing to do. All 4 members of the band were very talented, and Page and Plant proved that they were capable of writing excellent songs without stealing, yet they still resorted to it often
>>66144839
Its not a shitty thing to do at all, there are whole genres based around it, stop being a fucking baby
>>66144721
I understand that analogy but i think you're romancing the situation too much. In reality both of us are consumers
in certain cases if the original material is better than the stolen. I'd be agreeing with you on calling said artist a piece of shit. but with this situation led made the songs much better which still took talent and effort.
i'm more cynical than you so I envy your humbleness
>>66144839
They didn't steal from anyone. They played blues and folk standards that predate recording technology. They didn't owe anyone a thing.
>>66144888
grow up and use your logic. Think without the bias that is your love for Led Zeppelin. Stealing other's work and making money off of it is a fucking shitty thing to do, no way around it. Just imagine someone doing it to you or to your dad while you were growing up. Stop being so dense and accept reality.
>>66144924
i see where you're coming from, i'd rather listen to Zeppelin's version of their accused songs than the originals. For example, Taurus by Spirit is a two minute long song with a nice melody based around a simple chord progression, Led Zeppelin turned that into the monster that Stairway to Heaven is, and they changed the melody too, they only share the same chord progression (and it's only for 1/3 of Stairway to Heaven), which is not a crime in any way. But they have other songs that took too much from other songs, cases in which it would be a stretch to call it "inspiration". What bothers me most is what I said above, they proved they could write excellent songs, yet they stole so much.
>>66145058
Reality is you're fucking retarded and very likely just baiting since this shitty "stealing music" meme has been debunked like a million times
>>66145151
im done with you man
you haven't provided a single argument other than calling me a retard for saying profiting off of other's ideas is wrong, a completely normal statement that seems to have shocked you for some weird reason.
>>66145271
Just how fucking new are you anyway
>not listening to Zep because they were big meanies who stole ideas
Fucking moralfags, do you refuse to listen to Chuck Berry because he's a weird pervert?
>>66145328
3 years
>>66143560
>>66145402
Anyone who deosn't listen to them for this reason is a moron. It's practically tradition for blues and blues rock acts to steal each others songs. Especially back before it was so easy to sue over it. Zeppelin hit it big right at the new age of lawsuits over art is all. That's why "traditional" songs exist and are public domain. Because no one knows who the fuck original wrote them. (Zep used a lot of those songs, too.)
I agree Zep stole songs, but getting as crazy butt hurt about it as I see some people get and even refusing to listen to them is retarded. It's fantastic music.
