Queen I vs Led Zep I

"The way I see it there are two kinds of people in the world: those that are willing to chat up a guy on the same page he's posting about some woman's bleeding c**t, and those that aren't.  Lostman, PrimeJive, you're apparently in the former category. Anybody else?  If so, in my eyes you're as guilty of polluting our forum as he is."

See it's not something I entirely disagree with - people really ought to speak up in the face of certain kinds of behaviour.  But in application, this simply doesn't always work.  Daniel Nester used to chase me around this forum because of my (alleged) rampant homophobia, but it achieved nothing - other than making a couple of really long and boring threads where he made himself look utterly ridiculous.  At the end of the day, if I want to post puns and wordplay that relate to topics that upset him, I'll do it.  

Now I have no idea if jpf is only trolling the same as I was back in the day, but even if he is deadly serious about these bitches and faggots he keeps on about, there isn't much you can do to 'fix' him as a human being...   and if the aim is to spare us his bullshit, then that can't really be done by anyone but the people who run the site; continually engaging him just keeps him on the front page.

Now, I'm not an advocate of "don't feed the trolls" at all, because half of the time these arguments are more entertaining than another "Freddie C5 at x gig during y song" post.  It's an unfortunate fact that a band has been dead for 20 years simply doesn't generate that much new information; perhaps it's my lower expectations talking, but until we really have something new and interesting to discuss, I don't much care if the kids treat the place like a bit of a sandpit.

Zebonka12 wrote: "The way I see it there are two kinds of people in the world: those that are willing to chat up a guy on the same page he's posting about some woman's bleeding c**t, and those that aren't.  Lostman, PrimeJive, you're apparently in the former category. Anybody else?  If so, in my eyes you're as guilty of polluting our forum as he is."

See it's not something I entirely disagree with - people really ought to speak up in the face of certain kinds of behaviour.  But in application, this simply doesn't always work.  Daniel Nester used to chase me around this forum because of my (alleged) rampant homophobia, but it achieved nothing - other than making a couple of really long and boring threads where he made himself look utterly ridiculous.  At the end of the day, if I want to post puns and wordplay that relate to topics that upset him, I'll do it.  

Now I have no idea if jpf is only trolling the same as I was back in the day, but even if he is deadly serious about these bitches and faggots he keeps on about, there isn't much you can do to 'fix' him as a human being...   and if the aim is to spare us his bullshit, then that can't really be done by anyone but the people who run the site; continually engaging him just keeps him on the front page.

Now, I'm not an advocate of "don't feed the trolls" at all, because half of the time these arguments are more entertaining than another "Freddie C5 at x gig during y song" post.  It's an unfortunate fact that a band has been dead for 20 years simply doesn't generate that much new information; perhaps it's my lower expectations talking, but until we really have something new and interesting to discuss, I don't much care if the kids treat the place like a bit of a sandpit.
===========

Freddie hit a C5 during Newcastle's Bohemian Rhapsody. It's in the rock section :)

I love Zebonka!

When all is said and done, jpf is a knobber and kiss suck.

Oh yeah.

"I love Zebonka!"

Put it this way - you know you're on your way when you can be impersonated by other QZers!  I did a cracking good Sebastian in his birthday thread, but I won't sully it by trying to recreate it.  :S

Zebonka12 wrote: "I love Zebonka!"

Put it this way - you know you're on your way when you can be impersonated by other QZers!  I did a cracking good Sebastian in his birthday thread, but I won't sully it by trying to recreate it.  :S
Er - at the risk of dragging this slightly back on topic - really enjoyed your "Wearing and Tearing" cover Zebonka :-)

Haa!  That's nice, although I liked doing it a lot more than I liked the end result.

Am going to throw in my 2 pence worth of thought over Led Zep

Not haivng gone through umpteen pages of comments i cant say what anybody has said

but i cant say that i care too much for them and just having had a look at their discography and the only song i recognise is Stairway to heaven, perhaps if i had been a fan of them i would recognise their worth and talent, i know they have sold albums on a par with Queen but Queen have also had double their album sales in the UK  8.5 LZ compared to Queen 18.7 but LZ have sold pretty well in the US for a british rock band so they must be doing something right but i am not really keen on them

Queen for me are the better band in my opinion they have much better songs and more charisma than LZ

It is surprising that some continue to dwell upon baseless claims and comparisons in order to reignite some meaningful hope of seriousness or similarities much aligned to a preconceived inferred complex.  Whilst perhaps at times it probably could have been originally media backed, orientated, created or concocted as a fallacy. There could also be external element of vested interest by commercial parties/sources.  In hindsight it is quite ironic that this example and fascination continues to be exercised even though much considerable time has since elapsed. Nevertheless it remains a lurid comparison which seems to be forevermore cast into virtual suspended animation while precariously holding or clinging to an overzealous legacy. Eventually the elitist invariably has to accept they were left behind and things moved on. Almost to gaze into nostalgia as Queen started to re-write the record books. Whilst in short, as in any competition, it can be difficult to accept that something is more superior.
Queen were refreshing not only with progressive sounds but they had more depth and variety and of course were a much better Live band. They also became noted for often pioneering firsts in many fields and with risk taking, with hindsight and ambivalence at times some of the ideas and changes were not always to everyone’s liking initially.  But the band was also all-round better and polished. For example just imagine when you try to compare the background and thought process of a group of highly qualified, well read universities graduates that also had specialised skills and a variety of trades, it opens up many doors with endless possibilities and there’s really no limits or comparison as regards the quality that was to be produced.
The major crux of the matter and fundamentally are the vocals, this is not even close; it would be woefully embarrassing to compare the two in that department (especially live gigs). Further with and importantly the quality and depth in song writing, lyrics and composition, since Queen is the only band that has had number ones by songs written by all four members. Should you wish to base arguments in terms of record sales and popularity Queen is about the 4th or 5th best selling artists of all time that is almost 100 million more in terms of sales, way ahead of Zeppelin even though they had started much earlier too. Technically Queen are the best selling rock band of all time since The Beatles were most averse to the pop genre. Keep in view that this is despite Queen being continuously politically blacklisted and often facing heavy media censorship/control within the United States, hence why Queen Albums rather strangely do not appear or have been spuriously omitted from the American charts. (An exceptional note should also be considered that sales were not even independently verified till the late 1990’s despite certification. Therefore many historic items have anomalies and the figures do not add up).  The Wikipedia figures for Zeppelin have been alter and exaggerated numerous times in the last 4 years to evaluate their position. None of the figures are true no reflect genuine sales from verified or authentic sources. In terms of rock history they leave a in print but are not role defining.
Led Zeppelin in short stuck to the same comfort zones for the past many years, since the vocals were rather limited. The height of Zeppelin’s success was from 1969 to 1973 before Queen appeared. Zeppelin never achieved a single number one hit in either the key markets in the US or UK. Even the over pre hyped Stairway to Heaven could only manage number 37 in the UK charts when it was subsequently re-released. Their best seller remains Whole Lotta Love which got to number 4 in the US charts in 1969, but was never originally released in the UK, although in 1993 it was re-released in the UK and only managed to get to 21. Historically Zeppelin’s track hits or success do not measure up to the hype.
If you wish to attain or revert to the top independent market polls and surveys that are available which provide International global worldwide statistics, trends and information, there is again little doubt which performs better.
Comparisons should not be made between Queen and Led Zeppelin they are two different animals
It would be better or more favourable to compare Led Zeppelin to Black Sabbath, but Queen is another level, you cannot “regress”, retrograde or divulge such comparative propositions. Even with bias or constraints or pending egotistical aspirations they would struggle to demonstrate any legitimate warrant or claim with action or conversantly even within speculative scenarios.  
Also a mention to the high level faction of multi clone troll Gods together with the fan boys/girls and the misguided that regularly keep trying to raise Zeppelin’s profile polluting intransigent and counterproductive notions.
It could well be just a case for resolve or recognition but reconciliation would require acknowledgement of closure much as a historic ultimate acceptance. That being said Zeppelin could not cope with The Rolling Stones during their prime and a comparison to Queen who were the elite during their reign would be short of embarrassing and comical.

freddiefan91 wrote: Am going to throw in my 2 pence worth of thought over Led Zep

Not haivng gone through umpteen pages of comments i cant say what anybody has said

but i cant say that i care too much for them and just having had a look at their discography and the only song i recognise is Stairway to heaven, perhaps if i had been a fan of them i would recognise their worth and talent, i know they have sold albums on a par with Queen but Queen have also had double their album sales in the UK  8.5 LZ compared to Queen 18.7 but LZ have sold pretty well in the US for a british rock band so they must be doing something right but i am not really keen on them

Queen for me are the better band in my opinion they have much better songs and more charisma than LZ
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

i don't think that was even worthy of being a two-pence-worth!!!! you openly admit that you have only ever heard one Led Zep track "stairway..." then go on about who is the better band....even the thread title tells you it's about the BOTH bands' debut albums.....you are not qualified to make ANY  comment on this thread unless you have listened to Lez Zep 1 AND Queen 1 all the way thru

and as for your comment about "better band"...how can you say that based on hearing most queen songs vs ONE fekkin Led Zep song?  what kind of fair constructive appraisal is that?

honestly, your comparison wuld be hilarious if it wasn't so bad.....it's like saying "i love films cos i've seen hundreds, but i hate books cos i read one once and i didnt like it"

^ I approve of this post.

The Thinker wrote:

That being said Zeppelin could not cope with The Rolling Stones during their prime and a comparison to Queen who were the elite during their reign would be short of embarrassing and comical.

=========

Perhaps that was the case in the UK, but in the US it was no contest - Zeppelin were the bigger band.  Concert attendence (aka choices of venues) are a great indication.  Queen are hailed as stadium rockers, but they didn't play a single stadium in the US.  Theatres and arenas, yes.. but no stadiums.  Zeppelin sold out the stadiums in hours.  But this is, of course, not an indication of quality of music.  It's simply a statistic illustrating how one of the bands connected with the common man more than the other.

PrimeJiveUSA wrote: Grateful Fan...I'm guilty of "polluting this forum"?   Did you not see my exchange that went on for days with jpf?

It's funny how you don't include "bREnsk" who berated me on several occaisions when I was in "disagreement" about LZ1 "blowing away Queen 1" with jpf to "get the f***" over it, and that he found jpf's views "refreshing".

I've always been respectful to veryone I come I intertact with on these forums and just want to talk to others that share my love for Queen.  Jpf has called me all kinds of horrible names.  Did I demand you stick up for me?

The only "pollution" between the two of us happens to be coming from you.
=====================================

Nobody has to 'stick up' for anybody, and you're free to debase yourself any time by prostrating before the guy that called you all kinds of horrible names right at the moment he's retched out vicious crudity that's notable even for a sewer dweller like him.  Knock yourself out.  Of course you risk looking like a complete idiot, but at least you now know that he gives Creature Feature or whatever the hell a 6 out of 10.  It's not like it was for nothing.

brENsKi wrote:

honestly, your comparison wuld be hilarious if it wasn't so bad.....it's like saying "i love films cos i've seen hundreds, but i hate books cos i read one once and i didnt like it"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But what if that book was ... THE BIBLE! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGC6VOP7ZAo

Sir GH wrote: The Thinker wrote:

That being said Zeppelin could not cope with The Rolling Stones during their prime and a comparison to Queen who were the elite during their reign would be short of embarrassing and comical.

=========

Perhaps that was the case in the UK, but in the US it was no contest - Zeppelin were the bigger band.  Concert attendence (aka choices of venues) are a great indication.  Queen are hailed as stadium rockers, but they didn't play a single stadium in the US.  Theatres and arenas, yes.. but no stadiums.  Zeppelin sold out the stadiums in hours.  But this is, of course, not an indication of quality of music.  It's simply a statistic illustrating how one of the bands connected with the common man more than the other.

what's the big deal guys?.....Zeppelin are considered a top 3 band of all time and Queen are in the top ten.  Zep is widely considered a slightly bigger, and overall better, more influencial band, but queen are pretty close.   doesn't mean you have to like zep better. I'm not a huge fan of zep, but realize most rock fans, and famous musicians put them ahead of my favorite band, but not by much.   It also depends where one's from.  In America no contest, Zep wins hands down.  The rest of the world it's pretty close popularity wise.

Grateful...why do you even care whether I talk to JPF or not?

As far as you thinking I look like an "idiot" by doing so...why do you bother noting it?  I understand how people can be on the internet and I simply don't let GET TO ME.  I told him he was obnoxious and rude, but do you think he cares?

He's a big Kiss fan so I wanted to get his opinion about those albums.  In the future, when you see my posts...SKIP OVER THEM.