Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Severian
I do think they "did" Zeppelin, not in a derivative way. What I mean is that some of their songs seemed to come from a more wholistic Rock n' Roll perspective, one that relied on folk and blues and interplay between instruments, resulting in more of a "rock and roll" sound than a "metal" sound.
|
I agree that both bands are based on blues rock, but I see Zeppelin as a continuation of blues rock (well maybe Page got little more distortion than Clapton in Cream) and Sabbath developing something else to it. I think you can hear difference right in the start of both bands first albums. Zeppelin first started as a any blues rock album of that time. When Sabbath first starts you immediately notice the difference: Iommis guitars sound is heavier than anything before that, bass and drums also create something unique, those slow heavy beats create whole new world. Also whole Zeppelin first album is mostly recycling (From Beck Truth album, Joan Baez, Muddy Waters, Jake Holmes, Bert Janch, Willie Dixon, Howlin Wolf, only Good Times & Bad Times & Communication Breakdown are true new compositions) when Sabbath first is almost totally new music, those two covers are also quite unknown.
I think Zeppelin progressed very little from the first album, the peak of their progression is in IV & Houses of the holy, but even Song Remains the Same and Rain Song are quite far from the blues rock, there are nothing new in 1973 when they came.
Also, you can compare Plant easily to Gillan or Byron, but Ozzy´s voice is unique and no-one has sing like him before or after.
I think Zeppelin is just overrated, The great r`n`r swindle wasn´t Pistols, it was Zeppelin.