|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 27, 2020 14:40:25 GMT
Robert Johnson seems to be the American version of Faust. Me, I'd still like to get a book published and maybe produce/direct, but not enough to give up my soul for it. Jonesy1 and Eva Yojimbo , if you have never seen the movie "Shock 'em Dead," I recommend it highly. It's about a nerd who sells his soul to become the greatest rock guitarist in the world. There's a song in it called I'm in Love with a Slut, and although it's a parody of a rock song I think it could have been a hit in real life. I'm not convinced that either John Bonham or Robert Johnson sold their souls, in Johnson's case most of the stories came about almost 20 years after his death, in Bonham's case most rock stars have been accused of devil worship or satanic dealings but there's nothing really conclusive. It's more likely that the reason they were both accomplished is down to determination, dedication and lots of practice. Not heard of Shock 'Em Dead but the write up looks similar to Oh God, You Devil. I started to watch "Oh God, You Devil" once and never got back to it, but it looked really good. Must watch it all someday.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 27, 2020 21:25:49 GMT
The "sold his soul to be a virtuoso" is a pretty common myth in music at this point. Perhaps the most legendary example being the blues guitarist Robert Johnson. I remember the TV show Supernatural actually did an episode on the legend and I still remember this scene from it: Edit: Jonesy1 ninja'd me! ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) Crossroads (1986) is a good film with the Robert Johnson myth at its core... I saw that one back in my teens when I first got into guitar playing. An old joke among guitar players is that movie proved how great a guitarist Steve Vai was because he had to pretend to lose!
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 27, 2020 21:26:09 GMT
Robert Johnson seems to be the American version of Faust. Me, I'd still like to get a book published and maybe produce/direct, but not enough to give up my soul for it. Jonesy1 and Eva Yojimbo , if you have never seen the movie "Shock 'em Dead," I recommend it highly. It's about a nerd who sells his soul to become the greatest rock guitarist in the world. There's a song in it called I'm in Love with a Slut, and although it's a parody of a rock song I think it could have been a hit in real life. I haven't seen it, but I'll add it to my list.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 27, 2020 22:00:14 GMT
This song may be the most analyzed song ever. I mean the one by Led Zeppelin, not the one by the O'Jays, in case that needs saying. I intend that this thread should go on for twenty pages, even if I have to do all twenty pages myself. And if it gets bumped to the Music board I shall be very, very angry. Heaven. A stairway to Heaven. That alone makes it religious. And spiritual too. Is it a Satanic song? Yes, I think it is, at least in part, but I'll explore that aspect later. For now let's kick it off with this. It's hilarious that this is Led Zeppelins most famous song, it is pretty much unlike any other song they did.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 27, 2020 22:32:13 GMT
This song may be the most analyzed song ever. I mean the one by Led Zeppelin, not the one by the O'Jays, in case that needs saying. I intend that this thread should go on for twenty pages, even if I have to do all twenty pages myself. And if it gets bumped to the Music board I shall be very, very angry. Heaven. A stairway to Heaven. That alone makes it religious. And spiritual too. Is it a Satanic song? Yes, I think it is, at least in part, but I'll explore that aspect later. For now let's kick it off with this. It's hilarious that this is Led Zeppelins most famous song, it is pretty much unlike any other song they did. Zeppelin were pretty diverse, so they have quite a few unique songs that are unlike anything else they did.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 27, 2020 22:36:10 GMT
It's hilarious that this is Led Zeppelins most famous song, it is pretty much unlike any other song they did. Zeppelin were pretty diverse, so they have quite a few unique songs that are unlike anything else they did. Yeah fair call, it's just one would think that a band's most famous song was more representative of the band ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png)
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 27, 2020 22:46:16 GMT
Zeppelin were pretty diverse, so they have quite a few unique songs that are unlike anything else they did. Yeah fair call, it's just one would think that a band's most famous song was more representative of the band ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) I'm struggling to think of any single song that would "represent" everything Zeppelin was. They started out as a heavy blues band on their first album, developed into hard rock on their second (still with blues elements, but ramped up), got into folk on their third album, combined all those elements on their fourth, started experimenting with a variety of sounds/styles on their fifth, threw in everything but the kitchen sink on their six, and kept experimenting on their final few albums. To represent Zeppelin you'd probably have to select a few songs that represented all these different periods and styles they went through.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 27, 2020 22:52:52 GMT
Yeah fair call, it's just one would think that a band's most famous song was more representative of the band ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) I'm struggling to think of any single song that would "represent" everything Zeppelin was. They started out as a heavy blues band on their first album, developed into hard rock on their second (still with blues elements, but ramped up), got into folk on their third album, combined all those elements on their fourth, started experimenting with a variety of sounds/styles on their fifth, threw in everything but the kitchen sink on their six, and kept experimenting on their final few albums. To represent Zeppelin you'd probably have to select a few songs that represented all these different periods and styles they went through. Again that is a very good point. Yeah I would struggle to find one song, it seems Kashmir gets used a lot, I personally am more of a fan of the more folky bluesy stuff they do. I guess they are not Dread Zeppelin.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 27, 2020 22:56:40 GMT
I'm struggling to think of any single song that would "represent" everything Zeppelin was. They started out as a heavy blues band on their first album, developed into hard rock on their second (still with blues elements, but ramped up), got into folk on their third album, combined all those elements on their fourth, started experimenting with a variety of sounds/styles on their fifth, threw in everything but the kitchen sink on their six, and kept experimenting on their final few albums. To represent Zeppelin you'd probably have to select a few songs that represented all these different periods and styles they went through. Again that is a very good point. Yeah I would struggle to find one song, it seems Kashmir gets used a lot, I personally am more of a fan of the more folky bluesy stuff they do. I guess they are not Dread Zeppelin. Kashmir is also a song that doesn't really sound like anything else they did. If I was going to select one, I might pick something like In My Time of Dying. Even though it's a cover, I think it shows a good amount of their breadth. It has the blues element, it has the rock/jamming element, but it also has the experimental/progressive element in how long it is and how patiently it builds, and finally its shows off what virtuoso musicians they all were:
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jan 28, 2020 3:53:41 GMT
Eva Yojimbo
Try this version. You have probably heard this.
Hossam Ramzy on Darbolla (large doumbek) is the BEST. I love the organic sound of an Egyptian orchestra.
Jimmy Page stop making those faces.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jan 29, 2020 16:43:32 GMT
I don't think the song is "religious", neither pro God nor pro Satan. My take on the song is that it's about a person's values, and I think the song indicates the woman has deluded ideology. As poetry, it's kind of lame, and trite even back in the day. The motif of the song is thousands of years old, and an overplayed motif. Even when it came out, it was like "oh, brother, another money doesn't buy you Heaven song". When done as a simple grass roots idea, it might work, because it isn't pretentious poetry, but when it's written in an attempt to be profound, it sounds goofy.
I am a bit neutral on Led Zeppelin. I kind of like the music, but think all their songs are three times longer than they should be. Their songs just don't have enough pizzaz or emotion or theatrics. They're more like steady repetitious melodic sounds that go on much too long. Even the changes during the songs don't sound like changes. So I'm more partial to their grass roots songs that just present either rock or softness (Black Dog or All of My Love) than when they try to be poetic. Same problem I have with the Eagles. I much prefer grass roots Eagles songs like Take it Easy over their pathetic attempts to be profound poets, because they're lame poets.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 29, 2020 17:49:21 GMT
I don't think the song is "religious", neither pro God nor pro Satan. My take on the song is that it's about a person's values, and I think the song indicates the woman has deluded ideology. As poetry, it's kind of lame, and trite even back in the day. The motif of the song is thousands of years old, and an overplayed motif. Even when it came out, it was like "oh, brother, another money doesn't buy you Heaven song". When done as a simple grass roots idea, it might work, because it isn't pretentious poetry, but when it's written in an attempt to be profound, it sounds goofy. I am a bit neutral on Led Zeppelin. I kind of like the music, but think all their songs are three times longer than they should be. Their songs just don't have enough pizzaz or emotion or theatrics. They're more like steady repetitious melodic sounds that go on much too long. Even the changes during the songs don't sound like changes. So I'm more partial to their grass roots songs that just present either rock or softness (Black Dog or All of My Love) than when they try to be poetic. Same problem I have with the Eagles. I much prefer grass roots Eagles songs like Take it Easy over their pathetic attempts to be profound poets, because they're lame poets. Well okay, but let's not forget. Sometimes words have two meanings. Agreed with you on the Eagles.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 29, 2020 19:21:38 GMT
I know next to nothing about music, but there are people on YouTube who are very knowledgeable, and we'll hear from them later in the thread. I am rather good with words, however, and I can discuss the lyrics of the song much better than I can with the music.
Here's a video that delves into both the music and the lyrics. Not sure I agree with this guy, but it's interesting nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by Jonesy1 on Jan 29, 2020 20:14:10 GMT
I know next to nothing about music If you know what you like then that's all you need to know.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 29, 2020 23:57:41 GMT
I don't think the song is "religious", neither pro God nor pro Satan. My take on the song is that it's about a person's values, and I think the song indicates the woman has deluded ideology. As poetry, it's kind of lame, and trite even back in the day. The motif of the song is thousands of years old, and an overplayed motif. Even when it came out, it was like "oh, brother, another money doesn't buy you Heaven song". When done as a simple grass roots idea, it might work, because it isn't pretentious poetry, but when it's written in an attempt to be profound, it sounds goofy. I am a bit neutral on Led Zeppelin. I kind of like the music, but think all their songs are three times longer than they should be. Their songs just don't have enough pizzaz or emotion or theatrics. They're more like steady repetitious melodic sounds that go on much too long. Even the changes during the songs don't sound like changes. So I'm more partial to their grass roots songs that just present either rock or softness (Black Dog or All of My Love) than when they try to be poetic. Same problem I have with the Eagles. I much prefer grass roots Eagles songs like Take it Easy over their pathetic attempts to be profound poets, because they're lame poets. What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Every literary theme is old and the vast majority dates back to the earliest written history. To look for original themes in art is a fool's errand. Originality is found not in the themes but in their expression. It's never "oh, I've never heard this said before," and always "oh, I've never heard this said this way before." That was Zeppelin's originality; not in what was said, but in how. The ability to take old ideas and make them feel new and profound because of the originality of expression is the power of the best art. However silly/nonsensical I think the lyrics to Stairway are, I understand why people interpret it as being profound because the music makes you feel it. Break down the plots to Mozart and Wagner's operas and they're mostly silly too, but combine those silly plots with the brilliant music of their genius composrs and suddenly simple stories of a serial philanderer who gets his comeuppance (Don Giovanni), or two forbidden lovers yearning for each other (Tristan & Isolde), seem earth-shatteringly profound. Zeppelin had plenty of short songs, as I'm sure you know. I just don't understand the notion of them not having enough pizzaz or emotion or theatrics, all very much things they're notable for; nor the notion that they were repetitious or that their changes didn't sound like changes. Zeppelin were one of the most dynamic bands of all time who melded the heaviness of blues rock with the burgeoning 70s prog rock movement, which was utterly unique in that time period; most bands either stuck with the blues/rock basics (punk) or became ever more compositionally and instrumentally elaborate (prog). Zep were the only band (until Rush came along) that did both, and did both incredibly well.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 30, 2020 8:43:44 GMT
I know next to nothing about music If you know what you like then that's all you need to know. I know what I like, but I hardly know anything about the notes and the chords and the rhythm and all that stuff. In order to compose a song I'd have to hum it and have someone who reads music write it down for me.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jan 30, 2020 16:14:12 GMT
If you know what you like then that's all you need to know. I know what I like, but I hardly know anything about the notes and the chords and the rhythm and all that stuff. In order to compose a song I'd have to hum it and have someone who reads music write it down for me. You're in the good company of the Beatles and Irving Berlin, all of whom never learned to read sheet music.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 31, 2020 1:50:38 GMT
If you know what you like then that's all you need to know. I know what I like, but I hardly know anything about the notes and the chords and the rhythm and all that stuff. In order to compose a song I'd have to hum it and have someone who reads music write it down for me. Music theory's not that hard to learn as far as the basics go, and the basics take you 90% of the way unless you're trying to understand or play/perform jazz or classical. Easiest way to learn is to get a cheap keyboard, learn the notes, learn the basic chords, learn the basic chord progressions/scales, and after a while you have all that's necessary for understanding the vast majority of pop/rock music. Cool thing about music theory is that everything builds from a few very basic ideas. Of course, all that's really unnecessary for just listening. It's more just a way to talk about, describe, and appreciate what we hear and to theorize about why/how certain things work. EG, pretty much all pop/rock music (and all western music prior to 1900) used the diatonic scale, which is just a fancy way of saying "the 7 notes that belong in each key." In the early 20th century composers started experimenting with atonal music, or music that used all 12 notes. Yet, you really don't need to know all that to realize that this: Sounds very different than most music, just to describe WHY it sounds different.
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Jan 31, 2020 14:57:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jan 31, 2020 16:27:18 GMT
I don't think the song is "religious", neither pro God nor pro Satan. My take on the song is that it's about a person's values, and I think the song indicates the woman has deluded ideology. As poetry, it's kind of lame, and trite even back in the day. The motif of the song is thousands of years old, and an overplayed motif. Even when it came out, it was like "oh, brother, another money doesn't buy you Heaven song". When done as a simple grass roots idea, it might work, because it isn't pretentious poetry, but when it's written in an attempt to be profound, it sounds goofy. I am a bit neutral on Led Zeppelin. I kind of like the music, but think all their songs are three times longer than they should be. Their songs just don't have enough pizzaz or emotion or theatrics. They're more like steady repetitious melodic sounds that go on much too long. Even the changes during the songs don't sound like changes. So I'm more partial to their grass roots songs that just present either rock or softness (Black Dog or All of My Love) than when they try to be poetic. Same problem I have with the Eagles. I much prefer grass roots Eagles songs like Take it Easy over their pathetic attempts to be profound poets, because they're lame poets. What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Every literary theme is old and the vast majority dates back to the earliest written history. To look for original themes in art is a fool's errand. Originality is found not in the themes but in their expression. It's never "oh, I've never heard this said before," and always "oh, I've never heard this said this way before." That was Zeppelin's originality; not in what was said, but in how. The ability to take old ideas and make them feel new and profound because of the originality of expression is the power of the best art. However silly/nonsensical I think the lyrics to Stairway are, I understand why people interpret it as being profound because the music makes you feel it. Break down the plots to Mozart and Wagner's operas and they're mostly silly too, but combine those silly plots with the brilliant music of their genius composrs and suddenly simple stories of a serial philanderer who gets his comeuppance (Don Giovanni), or two forbidden lovers yearning for each other (Tristan & Isolde), seem earth-shatteringly profound. Zeppelin had plenty of short songs, as I'm sure you know. I just don't understand the notion of them not having enough pizzaz or emotion or theatrics, all very much things they're notable for; nor the notion that they were repetitious or that their changes didn't sound like changes. Zeppelin were one of the most dynamic bands of all time who melded the heaviness of blues rock with the burgeoning 70s prog rock movement, which was utterly unique in that time period; most bands either stuck with the blues/rock basics (punk) or became ever more compositionally and instrumentally elaborate (prog). Zep were the only band (until Rush came along) that did both, and did both incredibly well. Wrong. Obviously incorrect. What person could possibly say that Zeppelin is profound, or that the music makes you feel it? Sure, Rush did succeed in this. Peart was a true poet in every sense. But like Led, their music didn't match the poetry. However, Rush is an oxymoron because while they're among the best poets, they're also the very best hard rock power trio I ever saw on stage. I saw them do the power trio act when they came out with 2112, before they started doing the laser light show. When they started going to laser light, it just didn't match the music. Zeppelin just had poor, trite poetry, even for the time. I was alive at the time. I know. It was trite even then. And, what's worse, the music made you feel nothing. It was musical enough to listen to, but it didn't match the lyrics one iota. Rush had the same problem, but at least their lyrics and music was not nearly as annoying as Led Zeppelin's.
|
|