LED ZEPPELIN PROG OR NOT

Sometimes it can be a big help if you use punctuation it certainly helps to understand what you are descrining or asking it is also common courtesy as unpunctuated prose is so difficult to read and understand especially if you are asking for help or opinions and you want somebody to respond to you in a reasonable manner with helpful advice and hints and opinion

Some of Zep is progressive...most ain't!!

Yeah! Nice discussion!!

Of course Led Zep aren't prog - but you can hear so many proggy elements in their stuff that it's worth having a good think about - and dusting off the old albums and having a good old-fashioned rock-out BEFORE replying to this thread...

Think I'll do that now - thanks for the excuse!!!

Led Zeppelin are amazing, possibly my fave. band, but i cant say that they are prog. Although they have prog songs such as "Achilles last stand" and "no quarter" (which are some of their best), they are so diverse that i find it hard to classify them in a certain genre. Athough they are most often refered to as "CLassic Rock", i believe the term  conjures up memories of bands like The Rolling Stones and ACDC, which the ZEP certainly arent to be associated with. They are a very diverse band with elements of blues, folk, eastern music, prog , and many other styles which i cannot think of right now. I personnaly dont think of them as prog, but at the same time, how does one consider Jethro Tull a prog band and not ZEP? Still, in my opinion, their most progressive albums are  "Houses of the holy", "Presence" and "In through the out door". BUT PROG?.....hard to say!

Hangedman wrote: Although I enjoy Led Zepplin I dont think they are prog rock at all. A couple of songs do not merit calling a band prog at all. By that reasoning Gentle Giant would be a pop band because of "Giant For a Day". They are a rock and roll for the sake of rock and roll type of band(a very good one). Also the distinction between jethro tull and zepplin would simply be to look at the content of the albums, no one can deny the fact that "Thick as a Brick", "A Passion Play", or even "Aqualung" are all prog albums. I cant say ive listened to every Tull album (i can say that about Zep though) but it is at least reasonable to say they were a prog band in the early seventies.

Ok, they prolly arent prog...but a rock band for rocks sake?!? Dude, they deserve more credit than that, they are one of the most diverse bands ive ever heard.

Zepplin are not prog this is silly they are a great rock band and that is it.

"In through the out door" has some progressive leanings, definitely. JPJ was really getting into the synth textures. It would have been interesting to see that trend explored further.

Danbo and All:

I hear you!

Okay, let's try this again.  My understanding of the way in which the webmasters determine whether a band is "prog" (and thus worthy of inclusion on this site) is whether the majority of a band's output was composed, played and produced using a consciously "prog" approach.  Clearly, Zeppelin, as great as they are - and although they have a few tracks that are proto-prog or near-prog (Kashmir, Achilles Last Stand, et al) - does not fit this category, since the overwhelming majority of their music uses various approaches (yes, including, occasionally, prog) to blues/rock.

This is why Gentle Giant is prog despite "Giant for a Day": because the vast majority of their output is prog.  It is why Genesis is "prog" despite the fact that they tilted toward a more commercial sound after (imho) Duke (though Invisible Touch still had some proggish stuff); because the vast majority of their output was "prog."  It is why The Church is "prog" despite the fact that (with one exception) their first six or seven albums were not prog; because they virtually re-invented themselves, took a consciously prog approach to their music, and have since put out more "prog" work than they had non-prog work.

As an aside, I personally believe that, despite their place here, Supertramp is not "prog" (as defined on this site) by this standard.  Yes, COTC and most of EITQM are (somewhat arguably, but nonetheless acceptably) prog.  However, this is only two albums out of over a dozen, and thus does not equal the majority of their output, which was pop (prior to COTC) and (my term) "progressive pop" since BIA.

That's my two cents.  Take it or leave it...

Peace.

danbo wrote: The wheels on the bus go round and round....

The wipers on the bus go swish,swish,swish...

gdub411 wrote: danbo wrote: The wheels on the bus go round and round.... The wipers on the bus go swish,swish,swish...

Good thing I don't have wipers on my bus. hehe