Led Zeppelin III...

All things Rugby
User avatar
Harveys
Posts: 1990
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 12:39 pm

Re: Led Zeppelin III...

Post by Harveys »

Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Harveys wrote:
Dark wrote:
mr bungle wrote:How many stolen song titles, melodies and lyrics on III?

Stolen from where?
Everything comes from somewhere by way of inspiration.

Haters gonna hate.

Fudge em.

:roll:
Look, I'm a massive Led Zep fan and while blues chords and lyrics are fairly derivative, they just put their names on songs written by someone else.

Sure, their arrangements were innovative and their performances incredible, but there's a good half dozen cases of outright theft that go well beyond 'inspiration'.
yes yes yes yes yes.....But still...

Image

:P
User avatar
mr bungle
Posts: 12517
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Led Zeppelin III...

Post by mr bungle »

Dark wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Dark wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Harveys wrote:
Everything comes from somewhere by way of inspiration.

Haters gonna hate.

Fudge em.

:roll:
Look, I'm a massive Led Zep fan and while blues chords and lyrics are fairly derivative, they just put their names on songs written by someone else.

Sure, their arrangements were innovative and their performances incredible, but there's a good half dozen cases of outright theft that go well beyond 'inspiration'.
Fair enough

Just tell them who wrote "The Maid freed from the Gallows" and they can add their name to the credits

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Maid_ ... he_Gallows
Stuff like that is fine, it's a traditional song reworked and to be fair, they listed it as such in the credits. They did claim other traditional songs as being written by them at other times, which is stupid but not actually costing someone else money.

It's stuff like Whole Lotta Love, Lemon Song & Dazed and Confused that are the egregious ripoffs.
It is hardly a thing one band is to be singled out for.

The Beatles were particular renowned for it

https://ultimateclassicrock.com/classic-rock-rip-offs/
I realise you're one of the biggest dipshits on here to bother conversing with, seems like in 2020 you'd never even heard of Led Zep famed theiving. But Zeppelin took a completed song, first recorded in the late 60s, the f**king late 60s! song title, lyrics and melody and passed it off as their own work. This is nowhere near inverting a riff to create a new song. They are out on their own with regards to stealing others work.

Take the time to research any other acclaimed band doing similar. Look forward to some examples from you.
User avatar
Dark
Posts: 6142
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 2:38 am
Location: NZ

Re: Led Zeppelin III...

Post by Dark »

mr bungle wrote:
Dark wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Dark wrote:
Fair enough

Just tell them who wrote "The Maid freed from the Gallows" and they can add their name to the credits

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Maid_ ... he_Gallows
Stuff like that is fine, it's a traditional song reworked and to be fair, they listed it as such in the credits. They did claim other traditional songs as being written by them at other times, which is stupid but not actually costing someone else money.

It's stuff like Whole Lotta Love, Lemon Song & Dazed and Confused that are the egregious ripoffs.
It is hardly a thing one band is to be singled out for.

The Beatles were particular renowned for it

https://ultimateclassicrock.com/classic-rock-rip-offs/
I realise you're one of the biggest dipshits on here to bother conversing with, seems like in 2020 you'd never even heard of Led Zep famed theiving. But Zeppelin took a completed song, first recorded in the late 60s, the f**king late 60s! song title, lyrics and melody and passed it off as their own work. This is nowhere near inverting a riff to create a new song. They are out on their own with regards to stealing others work.

Take the time to research any other acclaimed band doing similar. Look forward to some examples from you.
I had and they did.

I am not denying this.

Don't be such a precious cock newbie

I just pointed out the example given wasn't and there are loads of other bands that did it including the Beatles.

Take a step of your pedestal for a moment.
Santa
Posts: 11079
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm

Re: Led Zeppelin III...

Post by Santa »

Dark wrote:
mr bungle wrote:
Dark wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Dark wrote:
Fair enough

Just tell them who wrote "The Maid freed from the Gallows" and they can add their name to the credits

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Maid_ ... he_Gallows
Stuff like that is fine, it's a traditional song reworked and to be fair, they listed it as such in the credits. They did claim other traditional songs as being written by them at other times, which is stupid but not actually costing someone else money.

It's stuff like Whole Lotta Love, Lemon Song & Dazed and Confused that are the egregious ripoffs.
It is hardly a thing one band is to be singled out for.

The Beatles were particular renowned for it

https://ultimateclassicrock.com/classic-rock-rip-offs/
I realise you're one of the biggest dipshits on here to bother conversing with, seems like in 2020 you'd never even heard of Led Zep famed theiving. But Zeppelin took a completed song, first recorded in the late 60s, the f**king late 60s! song title, lyrics and melody and passed it off as their own work. This is nowhere near inverting a riff to create a new song. They are out on their own with regards to stealing others work.

Take the time to research any other acclaimed band doing similar. Look forward to some examples from you.
I had and they did.

I am not denying this.

Don't be such a precious cock newbie

I just pointed out the example given wasn't and there are loads of other bands that did it including the Beatles.

Take a step of your pedestal for a moment.
I believe the sentence you're after is "who cares?".
User avatar
Dark
Posts: 6142
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 2:38 am
Location: NZ

Re: Led Zeppelin III...

Post by Dark »

Santa wrote:
Dark wrote:
mr bungle wrote:
Dark wrote:

It is hardly a thing one band is to be singled out for.

The Beatles were particular renowned for it

https://ultimateclassicrock.com/classic-rock-rip-offs/
I realise you're one of the biggest dipshits on here to bother conversing with, seems like in 2020 you'd never even heard of Led Zep famed theiving. But Zeppelin took a completed song, first recorded in the late 60s, the f**king late 60s! song title, lyrics and melody and passed it off as their own work. This is nowhere near inverting a riff to create a new song. They are out on their own with regards to stealing others work.

Take the time to research any other acclaimed band doing similar. Look forward to some examples from you.
I had and they did.

I am not denying this.

Don't be such a precious cock newbie

I just pointed out the example given wasn't and there are loads of other bands that did it including the Beatles.

Take a step of your pedestal for a moment.
I believe the sentence you're after is "who cares?".
:lol:

Pretty much
User avatar
Clive
Posts: 3216
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Led Zeppelin III...

Post by Clive »

Mick Mannock wrote:
Clive wrote:
mr bungle wrote:How many stolen song titles, melodies and lyrics on III?
Not that old chestnut, how many more times.
Blues chords from the 30's onwards have been used by most rock bands for millions of years, lyrics melodies rearranged endings middle bits and so on have been borrowed nicked by all the best bands in the world, I don't give a shit as long as it preformed well and sounds much better.
Which LZ failed to achieve.
Yes your right did nothing noteworthy, think you've been out on the tiles.
Post Reply