The negativity in this thread is so ludicrous that it hardly warrants a response.

Local pub have quite a good Led Zep selection. Beer, pool and Zeppelin tunes. Very good times.

I'm sure there was a Led Zeppelin thread before.

There was but they're so good they deserve two.

Lies.

led zep are lame

The Fourth Norseman wrote:led zep are lame

You don't mean that. You're lucky I know you're joking or I'd dickslap you...

they really are the most overrated band ever

I'm staying out this one, otherwise I'll get too angry and turn into The Hulk.

I'm looking forward to the members dying.

you mean some of you actually saw them fucking live what had a moments relapse no other bunch of guitar twangers about that night you know a whole 3 chord feed back fiends. Boston there as as about as interesting as watching paint dry and kiss are a complete fucking joke .
Eagles now they deserve a listen , all things consudered thats the funiest statement ive heard on here

Your first sentence makes no sense, your second is a pack of lies and the third is a half-truth.

Boston are fantastic. Not only are they better musicians than Led Zeppelin, they're better song writers too. Moreover, Brad Delp is dead so there's little opportunity of a horrible reunion tour.

KISS are just the most underrated band in the history of time, including Level 42. Again, they are musically superior to Led Zeppelin and write better songs (see Rock Bottom) yet they managed to be the most marketable band ever. Plus Ace Frehley, unlike Fat Bonham, can handle his drink.

John Bonham, what a jesse. Steve Clark, a man who most on here would write off as a woman for being in Def Leppard, had twice the blood-alcohol level of that of John Bonham when he died. This, in turn, makes Def Leppard a better band than Led Zeppelin though Hysteria had already done that before Steve Clark died.

In summary, you're talking bollocks.

how are kiss underated, theyre incredibly popular?! it's like saying the beatles are underated. All the bands you mention are incredibly poppy rock with standard song structures. Nothing wrong with that but that's not what Led Zeppelin were so comparing them is completely stupid.

boovidge wrote:how are kiss underated, theyre incredibly popular?! it's like saying the beatles are underated. All the bands you mention are incredibly poppy rock with standard song structures. Nothing wrong with that but that's not what Led Zeppelin were so comparing them is completely stupid.

Kiss, in this day and age, are perceived to be popular because they are the closest thing to a brand a band has ever come to being. This is, however, to ignore that prior to Kiss becoming what they came to represent, i.e. lunch boxes and pinball machines, the band put out stellar Classic Rock.

What you say is complete bollocks I'm afraid. Would you call the intro to Rock Bottom poppy rock with standard song structures? What about Detroit Rock City or Love Gun? The guitar harmonies alone in those songs put Kiss above most bands of the era. As for Boston or The Eagles, are you really implying that songs such as Something About You, Used To Bad News, Journey of the Sorcerer (much better than Kashmir), and even Hotel California are 'incredibly poppy rock with standard song structures'? If you are, you are just wrong because all three of the bands mentioned in this paragraph were capable of both musicianship and songwriting that the hacks in Led Zeppelin could only have dreamed of.

Led Zep were pretty good, also comparing them to KISS is hardly a good comparison, there's a good 5 years separating both bands finest moments, and rock was progressing very quickly in those days!

I reckon Led Zep were actually a good band (despite most of the songs/tunes being ripped off of already existing blues/rock songs...)... but tracks like What is and What never should be, when the levee breaks, the battle of evermore are just too good to turn off I find!!!!

Also, KISS were great, even though most of the songs are just hilarious ZZ Top songs