Two part Led Zep Poll

II-III.

 

The Crunge is far worse.
Interestingly enough the B side of the single D'yer Ma'ker.
I have never understood the hate for D'yer Ma'ker.
I love the feel and the moaning.
Feels real like he really is hurting.
"Baby I Love Ya"

 

For me it was I and II and second choice was I and II as well....I think 3&4 started with the off beat time signatures and lost me...Never was a fan after that.

 

I take it that you're not a progressive rock or jazz fusion fan.

 

Just a little case of The Crunge. Penicillin will fix that right up.

I like the tricky rhythm in Crunge. Not exactly a Zep high-water mark, but I don't dislike it. At least it's imaginative and interesting. D'yer Maker is just a plain old traditional-pop weeper in rasta wrapping paper; pretty trite for a band so well versed in breathing fire.

 

The drums are great, the reggae beat is there and the vocals are Lennon esque

 

Interesting Poll.

I went for thr first 4 because they are more 'cohesive' imo as a group of albums than the last 4.

I chose Presence/ITTOD because I like both albums but moreso because one represents in a way an 'end' and another 'a new beginning' but which was followed by a more tragic end.

Otherwise I would have maybe voted for HOTH and PG but because PG is already 4 sides, I didn't want to do that. Funny, if PG in and of itself was a choice in the poll! I like III and IV as a choice too. Other than trying to choose something 'different' I found voting Presence/ITTOD to be of sincere interest to me for the reason mentioned above and because I like both albums.

 

The spell was broken w/ HOTH; IMHO. Chipmunk vocals, varied styles, nude pre-teens on the LP cover....still, lots of good music in their future, but never quite the same for me.

 

They weren't actually nude. They were wearing body leotards.

 

Back to Back- IV to Houses of the Holy....though II is probably my favorite LZ album.

 

I love both "The Crunge" and "D'yer Mak'er"

 

The 'chipmunk' vocals are only on 'The Song Remains The Same'... the varied styles are a strength not a weakness... and that LP cover represents the accompanying album perfectly; atmospheric, mysterious, otherworldly, both innocent and ominous at the same time... I remember seeing it in a record store years before I even knew who Led Zeppelin were, and believe me, it made an impression even then.

Physical Graffiti may be Zeppelin's creative high watermark - and both Page and Plant have publicly stated this - but Houses of the Holy is my personal favorite... and with good reason, you could cut the atmosphere on that album with a knife...

... plus, 'No Quarter'... 'nuff said.

 

Don't forget Plant's huffing helium on "The Ocean."

It can be. I do enjoy the opening 'prog' trio of tunes, but I could never finish side 1 due to the funky meltdown. Most of side 2 doesn't float my boat anymore.

That's one way of looking at it.

 

With I & II they sort of go together.
Even if not your back to back choice, these two represent and era of their begining sound.
Late 68 and early 69 and both released in 69.
For me it's their real double album.

 

Three albums already existed before that. When their debut came out, that was obviously the only one.

 

Doesn't change that you had issue with using titles that weren't official or at least not using "Self Titled".
So "Untitled" is how you would refer to IV if you're gonna get on our case about calling the debut S/T as Led Zeppelin I.
We say I because they officially called the next two II and III.
It's like calling The Great War World War I.

 

I'm not seeing your logic.

The names of the three previous albums have no bearing on the name of the fourth.

References to Led Zeppelin IV have no greater validity than references to Led Zeppelin I.

 

Obviously the first 4 albums are Zeppelin's best run in terms of definitive material and growth, but I went with back to back options of III-IV and Physical Graffiti/Presence. I really like the varied qualities of III and PG the most out of the catalog, but IV, despite it being possibly one of the most overrated, overplayed and over-analyzed titles on the whole, really is the perfect blend of blues, rock and folk with an added sense of progression within the band's songwriting and performance collective. Presence, on the other hand, is the sound of the group running on pure heart and soul and while the impact of the album took a while to sink in, I find it to be the rewarding "sleeper" of the catalog.

So, I might have cheated a bit and/or not played along well with this thread, but that's my answer.

 

There is no logic.
He was being ticky tacky about S/T being galled Zep I then got called out, by more than one member, on his own hypocrisy when he used IV to refer to the Untitled.

 

Actually, that was nice thinking.

 

I am not a huge fusion fan, but I do like some prog. King Crimson, Early Genesis and a few others..

 

First five albums for me, not just the first four. After that I think the output get spotty and padded, esp. PG, whose reputation I never understood. Favorite back to back albums -- IV and HOTH

 

PG like the White album could have been a very strong single album.
Of course Time of Dying, Kashmir and In the Light would have to have been edited.

 

I like their entire output.
So I voted "IV-HOTH", the supposed gap between "eras".

 

My fav LZ albums are II, III & HOTH.