Is Deep Purple in the same league with Led Zeppelin?

[Gluvhand]

I'd probably rate Zeppelin a little bit higher if Plant could've managed to hit any note without a struggle and if Page's fingers weren't constantly tripping over themselves. The abomination that was the Song Remains The Same didn't help to sway me to Zeppelin either.

 

[darwin-bass]

Since I really dislike both, yes they are in the same league for me.

 

[Paul New]

they each had there own style and fans but even though some of Plant and Pages best came from stuff they ripped off other musicians mainly Willie Dixon they had far more success outside of europe than deep purple did

Blues are not written, they evolve. Led Zeppelin continued the tradition. Blues is essentially one song, with different tempos, feels, mix and match lyric phrases... The idea of plagiarism doesn't even apply.

Deep Purple is not in the same universe with Led Zeppelin. DP is for head bangers.

 

[Tommy Sparks]

Led Zeppelin is my favorite band, so to me Zep are in their own league. After hearing them probably 50 years ago they still blow me away.
I like DP but they aren’t on my top 5 favorite band list.
My vote is no... not in the same league as LZ. It’s musical taste I guess.

 

[dogbrained]

I find the number of passionate Deep Purple fans interesting, I always considered them to be a “generic” band. I never thought they were “unlistenable” but I also never thought they were special or unique. Chris Youlden seemed to put this into proper perspective with the song “I’m Tired” (Savoy Brown) “but wouldn’t it be a real drag if we were all the same”.
(I don't know why this is in "Bold Type").

 

[ELG60]

For me, Led Zeppelin is the alpha and the omega and has been since I was about 8-9 years old, and as weird as it may be, I considered that when I were to die and go to heaven, and were given the choice of two bands to whom I could listen for eternity, they'd be Led Zep, and Steely Dan, but some years later it occurred to me that were I allowed a thord, it would be DP. Their Mk II lineup and output was stellar. I saw them twice, and Rainbow one or two times back in the late 70's-early 80's

Sabbath isn't even in the same league, although I was into them for about 15 minutes when I was 12-13. Not that they're bad, but as a friend once described, they're just missing that unquantifiable "something." Maybe it's that they are a bit more simplistic, or as an above commenter said "riff based," but even though I really like some of their Dio stuff, and Paranoid was an important album, they really don't make the cut.

Simple, straight ahead R&R can work (see AC/DC) but there's just something about Sabbath which rubs me the wrong way (pretence, mebbe)

Edit to add: I consider DP-2 to have the tightest rhythm section in Classic Rock:

 

[Deleted member 165050]

Since I really dislike both, yes they are in the same league for me.

Yes but which do you dislike *more*...

 

[Coolhandjjl]

DP/MKII were better musicians.
Zep had better song writing chops.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Who? I don’t know…. Third Base? Sorry, just showing my own age here.

Aside from the brilliant Entwistle, the instrumental talent of The Who was not even close to many of the bands mentioned so far. Pete is a good rhythm player but did not become a good lead player until well after Moon had passed. Speaking of which, even Pete acknowledged that Moon was not a great drummer.

But here again, there are different tastes for different people - and different strengths within every band. Despite their shortcomings, they were a great live act… and Townshend was a very good writer and song craftsman. And Daltrey one of the best singers and live frontmen of (ahem) his generation.

The magic is that all those different combos create different appeals. Different things for different people. That’s what happiness is!

Your age and mine! Great post coyote1.

As for the song composition, and song craftsmen which I think is the most important part in evaluating a musical act, is way more than instrumental excellence for one reason.

You can be the world’s greatest musician, but you can’t play a bad piece of music good. You can blind people by your brilliance, but at the end of the piece, it’s only going to go as far as the composition takes you. On that, I’ll stand on what I said about The Who.

As for what Townsend says about his band mates, he did didn’t like any of of them and tended to look at them as a necessary nuisance. I wouldn’t put too much stock in his quotes.

As for Moon’s abilities, I’ll definitely beg to differ. As a technician, of course there were better, and his meter was not good especially towards his end, but in terms of energy, feel, providing what the band needed, especially in support of Townsends somewhat limited guitar skills, was second to none. JMO.

 

[ELG60]

And as I tyoe this, the videos in my gym are playing Whole Lotta Love from The Song Remains The Same. Go figure.

 

[Bassbubble11]

I like Zeppelin more but Deep Purple is still a great band. In the same league? Not even close. In my opinion Zeppelin has way more going on in musicianship and Jimmy Page was a master in the studio. Honestly, i don't see how it is even possible to compare these 2 bands. Just my opinion.

 

[Artman]

Back in the ‘70’s, Zeppelin, Purple and Black Sabbath were referred to as the “Unholy Trinity of British Hard Rock”

While each band was distinctly different, they defined that style of music.

I love all three bands for different reasons, and I put them in the same league.
Depending on my mood, I will choose to listen to one over the others.

^^^^This.^^^^^
I am fortunate that during my youth I got to see both Zeppelin and DP live. They were both amazing. Both bands put on an excellent show. Their sounds were very different. With all due respect, I don’t understand these Band A vs. Band B things. Music is art, and art is not a sport. The only finish line is death, and nobody is in a hurry to get there.

 

[blue4]

Setting aside the DP vs LZ for a moment.

I'm still shocked that some people still believe Page was on a level above Blackmore. Songwriting and studio magic is the only place Page is even close.

 

[FunkHead]

Blues are not written, they evolve. Led Zeppelin continued the tradition. Blues is essentially one song, with different tempos, feels, mix and match lyric phrases... The idea of plagiarism doesn't even apply.

Deep Purple is not in the same universe with Led Zeppelin. DP is for head bangers.

It sounds like theres a ton of DP that you’ve not listened to. Just check out “Lazy” for some amazing blues based greatness. I’m right there with the Europeans. DP is superior in many ways.

 

[FunkHead]

Setting aside the DP vs LZ for a moment.

I'm still shocked that some people still believe Page was on a level above Blackmore. Songwriting and studio magic is the only place Page is even close.

100% agree.

 

[Paul New]

^^^^This.^^^^^
I am fortunate that during my youth I got to see both Zeppelin and DP live. They were both amazing. Both bands put on an excellent show. Their sounds were very different. With all due respect, I don’t understand these Band A vs. Band B things. Music is art, and art is not a sport. The only finish line is death, and nobody is in a hurry to get there.

Usually, i agree. It's not a competitive sport. But these two units are so different, it's like asking if Bach and Elvis are equals in music. No, no they're not.

 

[swarfrat]

I'm in the US . Zep is probably seen as more original stole from more obscure sources, and DP seen as "anyone can come along and do it after seeing how it's done.

I don't really agree. He's absolutely an jerk, but at least Deep Purple had a decent singer instead of the rock n roll version of the nails grating on a chalkboard hillbilly whine.

 

[electracoyote]

Setting aside the DP vs LZ for a moment.

I'm still shocked that some people still believe Page was on a level above Blackmore. Songwriting and studio magic is the only place Page is even close.

I agree. Indeed, judged purely by technical skill, about the only real advantage Zep has is Bonham. And that's only by a nose. A decided win for DP in the keys and guitar departments.

So then, I'll add my bellybutton to the sea of opinions:

Both great bands, but LZ seemed to have more momentum and consistency. For various reasons, DP had a lot of personnel shuffling in and out. Still some of those recordings with different line-ups were just as amazing. And that goes beyond DP into Rainbow et. al. The DP historical family tree of personnel and recordings is fairly massive, nothing quite like it in pop/rock.

On a quality-of-song rating, I'd call it a tie. LZ just has more material to choose from. Yeah, LZ came from a pretty solid blues base and ripped off some standard formats, but that "studio magic" made it sound brand new to the masses. DP came from a more novel angle in their approach to songwriting, more classical than blues/folk, though both bands could cover both territories.

Live? Hands down DP. Page and Plant often sounded like they were barely hanging on in the studio to me (with paradoxically great results), but live they often lost their grip. DP a much more precise band studio and stage.

I love both bands equally for all the reasons above. Can't put one over the other. In a sense they are among the best of British hard rock in largely the same era and really set the stage for those bands that followed. I've spent many hours on both guitar and bass being mentored by both bands.

 

[tbz]

It would be awesome if Deep Purple had Zep’s production.

Zep always just sounds better as the overall recording quality of DPs stuff just isn’t as high. Even their most polished pre-1980s albums have somewhat ratty production.

 

[Black Out Jazz]

3) Black Sabbath sucked.