|
Post by Nathan Versus on Dec 24, 2006 17:09:29 GMT
Simple enough question, which band was better; Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd?
Currently listening to my dad and my brother arguing about which was better.
|
|
|
Post by JimmyJackJericho on Dec 24, 2006 17:17:29 GMT
Anyone over Floyd
|
|
|
Post by rattledazzle on Dec 24, 2006 17:35:53 GMT
Zeppelin
|
|
|
Post by Cowards on Dec 24, 2006 18:04:52 GMT
But... They're different.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan Versus on Dec 24, 2006 18:09:26 GMT
So are Pink Floyd and Limp Bizkit, but you would still consider Floyd to be the superior band, and rightfully so.
|
|
|
Post by Cowards on Dec 24, 2006 18:22:03 GMT
But in cases like this, where they both have had a massive amount of success, it comes down to which is prefered. Or, probably in Dobber's case, how sick he is of my Pink Floyd fanatism.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan Versus on Dec 24, 2006 18:35:58 GMT
So how about Green Day? They sold a massive number of albums, won numerous awards, a large number of people know who they are, could somebody proclaim them better than Led Zep?
|
|
|
Post by Cowards on Dec 24, 2006 18:52:38 GMT
Yes, they could. They'd be a plank, but they could...
If by better, you mean which one has done best, which therefore would include how many records they've sold, concert numbers and public reception, then you'd have to do your research. In terms of album sales, Led Zeppelin would win, selling over 300 millions albums, compared to Pink Floyd's over 200 million.
But if by better you mean 'Which do you think was better?', then it's all about personal taste. They both played different music, LZ constisting primarily of hard rock, but PF played more Progressive Rock, which is like chalk and cheese.
I know you asked 'Which was better?', but until a definition is given as to what better actually means, I can't answer the question. I know I'm going in too deep to this, but I can and I will.
What was the outcome of the arguement between brother and dad, anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Andy_3:16 on Dec 24, 2006 18:55:27 GMT
I knew there was going to be a poll of this, I just knew it.
Why? Because I can't answer. They're both amazing.
|
|
|
Post by +Donald $. Carlos+ on Dec 24, 2006 18:56:36 GMT
So how about Green Day? They sold a massive number of albums, won numerous awards, a large number of people know who they are, could somebody proclaim them better than Led Zep? Not without being a major retard, they couldn't. Even I know that . . .
|
|
|
Post by Nathan Versus on Dec 24, 2006 19:18:39 GMT
You should know me better than to think I would rate anything based on commercial success. Album sales mean absolutely nothing when trying to determine the better band.
Is it impossible to compare bands from different genres?
Wasn’t you one of those who dismissed Papa Roach as shite? If it all comes down to personal opinion, Papa Roach have as much right to be considered the greatest band of all-time as Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd and The Who, or any other band… Right?
Presumably you dislike Papa Roach because they have weak lyrics, repetitive drumming patterns and numerous other flaws, not just because you, personally, dislike Rap-Metal?
|
|
|
Post by Cowards on Dec 24, 2006 19:32:35 GMT
I didn't actually say anything of Papa Roach, and didn't even vote for them in their Rate The Band.
But, to shut both of us up, I'll vote. For Pink Floyd. Because they're my favourite band, which therefore puts them above Led Zeppelin. In my opinion, Pink Floyd are better than Led Zeppelin.
I think Lance might be the one to ask on this subject, seeing as he is, to my knowledge, a big fan of both, and would be better able to do the comparison.
Now, the 2 questions I asked before: Define 'better'. And who won - Brother or Father?
|
|
|
Post by Nathan Versus on Dec 24, 2006 20:00:56 GMT
bet·ter 1 (btr) adj. Comparative of good. 1. Greater in excellence or higher in quality. 2. More useful, suitable, or desirable: found a better way to go; a suit with a better fit than that one. 3. More highly skilled or adept: I am better at math than English. 4. Greater or larger: argued for the better part of an hour. 5. More advantageous or favorable; improved: a better chance of success. 6. Healthier or more fit than before: The patient is better today. adv. Comparative of well2. 1. In a more excellent way. 2. a. To a greater extent or degree: better suited to the job; likes it better without sauce. b. To greater advantage; preferably: a deed better left undone. See Usage Notes at best, have, rather. 3. More: It took me better than a year to recover. n. 1. One that is greater in excellence or higher in quality. 2. A superior, as in standing, competence, or intelligence. Usually used in the plural: to learn from one's betters.
I prefer “Greater in excellence or higher in quality.”
To answer your second question, neither won. They agreed to disagree.
Another question for you; how do you rate Tool?
I think I recall you telling me you thought they were shite, but is that based on the fact you dislike their particular style of music, or because you genuinely consider them to be shite?
I mean, the general consensus is that Tool are an exceptional band, not just some passing fad. This isn’t just my personal opinion.
Lateralus, their third full studio album, was praised by just about everyone ‘in the know’ (as in, not just Kerrang or Metal Hammer, both of which suck). It has been voted the best rock album, in terms of drumming, ever recorded, something that both my dad and brother, both of whom are drummers (neither of whom hold modern music in particularly high regard), said when they first heard it. Danny Carey is held in extremely high regard in drumming circles, and surely these people know more on the subject of drumming than somebody who doesn‘t even know what a hi-hat is?
Surely there can be no question that Tool is a band comprised of four extremely talented individuals in their respective fields (not just drumming-wise) who make highly intelligent music, both lyrically and musically, that has proven influential to many others in the industry today.
This is different to other modern acts like SlipKnot, which feature nine members, none of which excel at what they do, have nothing particularly great about them as a whole, but have a legion of followers who consider them great.
How do they stand amongst other bands?
|
|
|
Post by Woody on Dec 24, 2006 20:47:17 GMT
Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin, in terms of both popularity and skill, are both top 5 bands of all time in my opinion.
Tool is easily a top 15 band of all time in skill, and they're beginning to receive their due credit from most music circles. Danny Carey's the best drummer of the past 15 years by far.
I'd give my vote to Led Zeppelin, even though I listen to far more Pink Floyd. Robert Plant: Top 5 All-Time Vocalist. Jimmy Page: Top 10 All-Time Guitarist. John Bonham: Top 5 All-Time Drummer. John Paul Jones: Well, nobody cares about him, but he holds his own. Now let's look at the Floyd.... Roger Waters: Top 10 All-Time Vocalist. David Gilmour: Top 15 All-Time Guitarist. Nick Mason isn't anywhere near the top 25 for drumming in my book, but Richard Wright is a top 5 keyboardist. All in all, Led Zeppelin has more actual skill.... even though the songwriting for Floyd may have been a touch better.
It's tough. It really is. I almost had to demand a recount. But Led Zeppelin over Pink Floyd it is, by a hair.
Both are still skunk the hell out of The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, and The Kinks. And Hendrix. And thousands of other bands.
|
|
|
Post by Cowards on Dec 25, 2006 20:43:18 GMT
I think I recall you telling me you thought they were shite, but is that based on the fact you dislike their particular style of music, or because you genuinely consider them to be shite? I have never listened to them, and therefore, I have no clue as to where this consensus of mine would have come from... I don't recall ever saying such a thing, and if I did, I was probably talking out my arsehole. Or drunk. Most likely, both. From what you've said, though, I might have to check them out. When I have my own computer back, I'll download a couple of their albums and give them a listen.
|
|
|
Post by euanzooom on Dec 26, 2006 15:55:39 GMT
Led Zep are BETTER.
|
|
|
Post by Joker on Dec 26, 2006 16:51:31 GMT
Just wanted to drop my 2 cents in:
To me better means which do you like over the other. and if that's the case then all the questions on bands will be personal prefrence which is what I think they are going for. So different strokes for different folks as it were.
And I haven't heard enough of LZ or PF to comment.
|
|
|
Post by Mr-Brightside on Dec 26, 2006 19:10:23 GMT
Zeppelin.
|
|
|
Post by Mutant_Couch on Dec 29, 2006 0:57:57 GMT
Led Zeppelin, though I would give Floyd the edge in the lyrics department.
|
|
|
Post by soccergalaxy13 on Dec 29, 2006 4:44:38 GMT
C'mon guys you can't like a guy screaming into a microphone for 30 minutes more than a killer beat and awesome lyrics.
|
|