Is Deep Purple in the same league with Led Zeppelin?

[Rolling Thunder]

The bigger question is if there is a Greta Van Fleet for Deep Purple? Or is Greta Van Fleet the equivalent of the Monkees to the Beatles?

 

[Hounddog409]

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. Question answered. Thread done.

 

[leegreenman]

I think Zeppelin has more great material than Deep Purple.

 

[Hounddog409]

Sorry, DP can’t hold a candle to Zeppelin.

Dumbest post of the year.

Congratulations.

 

[OogieWaWa]

I don't know; I think it's a brain-side thing, each hits a different one. Do I want to ponder and work on it, or just sit back and groove out.

However, have you ever noticed that both names are appropriate, and tell much of the story?

Edit: And how in the heck did they come up with all that stuff, especially at that amount of lifetime?

 

[Aloe]

East Europe here. Deep Purple are indeed recognized to be very influential and iconic here. but not the Zeppelins, they're mainly known by 'stairway to heaven' and this drops them to a league like 'popular western band with one hit song', like Eagles or something similar.

 

[Herrick]

Watch Live Aid. Jimmy Page tried to blame their less than stellar performance on Phill Collins, who sat in on drums. From what I saw and heard, Phil was the best prepared person on the stage, not the least.

That's an odd example to use as they weren't a band anymore at that point and I'm assuming they hadn't played together in years...or played extensively with another drummer since Bonham.

I'm not a huge fanboy or anything and I'm not even a big fan of Plant's voice. Were they known for not being very good live? I haven't seen much live footage of them.

 

[Michedelic]

The bigger question is if there is a Greta Van Fleet for Deep Purple? Or is Greta Van Fleet the equivalent of the Monkees to the Beatles?

Uriah Heep was a bad imitation of DP, as far as I was concerned. The thing is, with your question, there have been plenty of Zep wannabes through the years(including, ironically, Coverdale/Page), so it would appear that they would have more to offer in the first place. Overall, apples and oranges, but keep in mind that while DP was around before Zep, they totally changed their musical direction in the transition between Mk I and Mk II(right after Zeppelin had arrived), especially Gillan’s screamer style vocals.
On the other hand, Yngwie took a lot from the Purps, all that ‘Bach Rock’ heavy organ, and there were other little trickles of DP influences here and there through the years….

 

[dougjwray]

East Europe here. Deep Purple are indeed recognized to be very influential and iconic here. but not the Zeppelins, they're mainly known by 'stairway to heaven' and this drops them to a league like 'popular western band with one hit song', like Eagles or something similar.

Interesting, but it's funny that you picked the Eagles. I believe they have the biggest selling greatest hits album of all time, and they had many, many more hit singles than Deep Purple and Led Zep combined. At least, in the United States...

 

[Dluxe]

At least Ian Paice swings.I love them both equally.

 

[57pbass]

Both great bands, but Zeppelin has more great songs IMO.

Exactly.. LZ just had so many great tunes but I still love DP. Machine Head is a classic.

 

[marchone]

I saw both bands live many times. Late 60s, early 70s. Zeppelin was gritty, accessible and powerful. Purple offered no surprises. Album-like performances every time. I suppose that’s telling. But I knew electricity when I saw it and Zeppelin provided more of it than Purple did.

One man’s opinion. That is all..

 

[whero]

I voted no, but that's probably just because I prefer Led Zeppelin's music. I mean, there are some Deep Purple songs I love, but I probably wouldn't listen to a whole DP album, whereas I still listen to LZ albums, 50+ years after they were released.

But also I think this counts for something:

LZ: Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, John Paul Jones, John Bonham

DP: Rod Evans, Ian Gillan (a couple of times), David Coverdale, Joe Lynn Turner, Ritchie Blackmore (a couple of times), Tommy Bolin, Steve Morse, Nicky Simper, Roger Glover, Glenn Hughes, Jon Lord, Don Airey, Ian Paice (plus Joe Satriani as a touring member).

 

[zontar]

I love both--and listen to both.
If forced to choose one, I'd go with Zeppelin over Purple, but They are in the same league for me.
Both had an impact on me for playing--and both influenced me musically in other ways.

Hearing In Rock for the first time was incredible.
And similar stiff for Zeppelin, especially the first album & Physical Graffiti.

Those albums were all old albums for the time frame I am describing.

But they are different in many ways--so it si kind of like comparing apples & oranges.
If comparing Mark II Purple with Zeppelin:
Both have incredible vocalists.
Both have fantastic guitarists who do cool things with riffs & the blues.
Both have fantastic drummers
Both have greta bass players.
And as mentioned before Jon Lord is the master of keyboards--easily my favourite keyboard player--and he influences my playing (on guitar mostly)
But JPJ is no slouch either.

Zeppelin was more diverse, both could get heavy and both could jam.

One had a meteoric rise & a crash when Bonzo died (But their legacy remains)
The other kept going, broke up, reunited & kept going--so many personnel changes--but still is Purple.

But same league?

yes.

 

[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)

 

[micguy]

That's an odd example to use as they weren't a band anymore at that point and I'm assuming they hadn't played together in years...or played extensively with another drummer since Bonham.

I'm not a huge fanboy or anything and I'm not even a big fan of Plant's voice. Were they known for not being very good live? I haven't seen much live footage of them.

Live Aid was broadcast all over the entire world. I work with a lot of different musicians playing church gigs - the folks I play with prepare more (and make less mistakes) for a weekend gig in front of 500 to 1500 people than Led Zeppelin did when they knew for months in advance that the entire world would be watching. So, they hadn't played together in a while? You'd think they' practice some - Phil Collins certainly did. Yes, he wasn't in sync with them - he was in time - he was the drummer, he knew the songs. They...didn't.

I'm not a huge fan of Led Zeppelin, though I like their songs, and have played many of them in various bands. I have many friends that are much bigger fans than I am. In various conversations, they have told me that seeing them in concert was ultimately a disappointment - "They were too drunk to play" was the usual observed source of the disappointment.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Your thoughts? Are these two bands in the same league? If not, why?

I think the European and American perspective on DP vs. LZ are quite different.
In America Deep Purple are generally not considered to be the same tier as Zep, while in Europe Zep and Purple are considered the same tier, because in Europe Deep Purple generally have a much higher status than in the USA. In America Zep could have a status "the ultimate rock gods". That was always my impression. Maybe I'm wrong.

Let's discuss.

I like the earlier Deep Purple as a pop band (Hush). Frankly, If I ever hear Smoke on the Water again, it will be way too soon. The Zeppers was a much stronger band with better players, and more intriguing material. But, if I ever hear Robert Plant go “ Ooo yeah! Ooo ooo Yeah” it will be way too soon!

One other comment on the Zeppers, not a John Bonaham fan. I’d much rather listen to Keith Moon any day of the week.

As for the Purples, Ian Piece was just annoying. Much rather listen to Mitch Mitchell.

 

[Joe Nerve]

A Zep Tribute will get lots more gigs and make much more money than a Deep Purple tribute.

Zeppelin has more hits than Deep Purple.

There are more books written about Led Zeppelin than about Deep Purple.

And that's just off the top of my head. Love both bands... played in Tributes for both bands, and got to play with actual members of Deep Purple. I'm not seeing that happen any time soon with members of Zeppelin .

 

[JKB1957]

Longevity. Deep Purple was a great band, but didn't last. Led Zep has been around a long, long time. Still both great bands.

 

[The Owl]