|
|
Post by kmc on Dec 1, 2006 13:22:21 GMT -5
Ok, it just sucks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Dec 1, 2006 14:35:57 GMT -5
The QUESTION SHOULD BE--if you were a musician would you rather be in the CLASH or Led Zeppelin.....The answer is not so simple. This is obviously because I'm not a musician and could care less about cred as such, but I'd much rather be in Led Zeppelin. I'd be hung like a horse and have ridiculous technical proficiency in whatever instrument I played. I'd put animals in women's vaginas. I'd be rich beyond my wildest dreams. I'd write lyrics about orcs and dragons. I'd play with P Diddy on the MTV Music Awards. The only drawback would be that I'd have to play shitty music for a couple hours a night. But then I'd just go back to my room, put on London Calling, and show my giant wang to groupies. This is seriously one of the best post I've ever read! my vote goes to the Clash, but after reading the above, I don't know.... |
|
|
|
Post by tuneschick on Dec 1, 2006 15:53:37 GMT -5
I don't have a giant wang, so I vote for the Clash.
|
|
|
|
Post by RocDoc on Dec 2, 2006 0:46:06 GMT -5
Which is not to say that I like Led Zeppelin better than the Clash. Not at all. I can't remember wanting to listen to anything Led Zeppelin (other than Led Zeppelin 2) in years. On the flip side, I'm staring at London Calling right now, and I listen to the first three Clash albums on a more regular basis (but not all the time. It IS 2006). So yeah, I like the Clash better. But I wouldn't fault anyone for thinking differently.
I've listened to more Led Zep than probably anyone here (except maybe glenh) simply because they were HUGE in my time...and I bought '...Rope' strictly from a Rolling Stone rave review (DESPITE Sandy Perlman's presence...and fuck anyone who dares to say that BOC then, did not rock) and found a sum total of two good songs...
Zep nor Clash figure into any sort of a rotation for me these days.
But Zep was the far more interesting band over their first 5 discs.
Did the Clash even DO 5 discs?
The defense rests.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Dec 2, 2006 1:13:27 GMT -5
The Clash did 8 discs over 5 albums.
|
|
|
|
Post by wayved on Dec 2, 2006 1:59:17 GMT -5
LMMFAO Luke.
Comparing the Clash to Zeppelin is actually cool...But for people who werent there when both of these bands were in their prime is pretty difficult--Stones vs. Ramones....Television vs. My Bloody Valentine....Talking Heads vs. Radiohead...
Led Zeppelin and the Clash were both good at what they did.
If I had to choose I would pick Zeppelin cos I was raised on it. By the time I was in 10th grade all of that music was in my blood. From I to Coda. I dont care what anyone says...Plant pontificating--whatever! I really never knew what they looked like--never saw any concert footage.... Bonzo kicked anyones ass at drums, John Paul Jones was the sneakiest bass player ever--and Jimmy Page is just some OK guitar player with some good compositional and producing skills--forget that occult false mystery bullshit. Damn good kick ass ALTERNATIVE rock and roll.
(Additionally, If anyone tries to tell me anyone in the Clash had the musical talent of Led Zeppelin, I would invite them to my house for a drink and hopefully we could start a band. Cos that person would be so preposterious and crass I would want him or her as a friend.)
When I discovered Echo and the Bunnymen, The Clash, the Smiths, REM and all that (i thought those bands they were just as cool as Zeppelin) a few years later, my parents insisted that I was either gay or on drugs--my parents were going to Judas Preist concerts (ironic,eh?) I was neither gay or on drugs, nothing wrong with either of those.....Maybe it was just a generational thing. Looking back it probably was. If I had a 14 year old child right now would I would chide them--"Whats this My Chemical Romance bullshit?"--no I wouldnt actually. I dont think I would...I would want them to check out any music they wanted to and I would help them in any way I could.
My Fav Clash album IS Give Em Enough Rope....when I first heard/bought it my mind was fucking blown. The whole album kicks ass front to back. I had no idea Sandy Pearlman produced it--which fuels my fire that the Clash were as hungry for success as any other band....
|
|
|
|
Post by upinkzeppelin2 on Dec 2, 2006 17:36:08 GMT -5
The only song I'm familiar with off of Give 'Em Enough Rope is "Young Punks," and I frickin love it! Maybe I should purchase that one soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Dec 3, 2006 14:26:15 GMT -5
The only song I'm familiar with off of Give 'Em Enough Rope is "Young Punks," and I frickin love it! Maybe I should purchase that one soon. The best songs on Rope (All the Young Punks, Safe European Home, Stay Free, Tommy Gun, a few more) are awesome. But it does have two really bad tracks -- Last Gang in Town and Cheapskates, which are probably the worst songs (or close to it) that the Clash cut while Mick Jones was still in the band (i.e. that aren't on Cut the Crap). |
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Dec 3, 2006 18:23:58 GMT -5
This is the exact same BlahBlah vs. BlehBleh argument that saturated the pages of Creem magazine in the late 80's. Back in the day I sided with the Clash, even though I can guarantee you that I listened to just as much or more Led Zeppelin as RocDoc did back in the day. Of course the question wasn't who was technically more proficient or who could write the best politically charged anthem...after all, we were working at that time with only 2 Clash albums, while Zep had just issued what became their last (as the impending death of Bonzo loomed near). It was so new back then.
I'm gonna vote here with hindsight and the only thing that counts is which band I think is the most important in the grand scheme of music history.
You might be surprised if I revealed my choice here...so I'm not gonna.
All anyone REALLY needs to know is that they both rule...
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Dec 3, 2006 18:40:11 GMT -5
I'm really pleased (and very surprised) to see the Clash taking this one. I never thought I'd see the day when "critical concensus" of any sort put my generation's Only Band That Matters over the commercial collossus of Fred Zeppelin.
Everybody slash up your seats, and rock to this brand new beat ...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ayinger on Dec 3, 2006 20:36:11 GMT -5
Of course the question wasn't who was technically more proficient or who could write the best politically charged anthem... This leapt out at me.....and points to how it's a bit ridiculous to compare the two bands. How many "politically charged anthems" did Zeppelin ever roll out??? It's just not what they came out of as it was with The Clash. I'm not pointing a finger at JAC as if he said that they did but c'mon, you're talking apples & oranges here. |
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Dec 4, 2006 16:47:17 GMT -5
Of course the question wasn't who was technically more proficient or who could write the best politically charged anthem... This leapt out at me.....and points to how it's a bit ridiculous to compare the two bands. How many "politically charged anthems" did Zeppelin ever roll out??? It's just not what they came out of as it was with The Clash. I'm not pointing a finger at JAC as if he said that they did but c'mon, you're talking apples & oranges here. No, we're talking about apples and nails. As in "I'd rather eat nails than listen to any LZ album start to finish." |
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Dec 5, 2006 13:45:13 GMT -5
I don't think so, Ken. Led Zeppelin II is awesome. Hell, even with all the modern stuff I listen to nowadays, Led Zeppelin II still works for me.
The Who are WAY better than the Clash. How do we all feel about that?
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Dec 5, 2006 13:46:25 GMT -5
The Kens disagree, the Kens disagree!
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Dec 5, 2006 14:18:13 GMT -5
The Who are way better than both Zep and Clash ...  |
|
