I'm not so sure that Page is "far better" when It comes to technical ability, if he is even better at all. Many of his solos were pretty simple, and didn't sound very original; but they still sounded good. A lot of his guitar work was pretty simple, but not all of it. He was definitely capable of playing with pretty good speed, though.
And as you said, Iommi takes the cake when it comes to originality and innovativeness. So, overall, id definitely go with Iommi. |
Tommy Page:-
|
Quote:
|
I'm really surprised by the results of this poll.
|
Personally, I'd take Sabbath over a lot of bands from their era or this one based on instrumentation. Their jazzy approach to such heavy material just sounds great, never contrived, but still fairly remarkable in technical terms.
|
I agree. I've always respected how they're heavy, but they don't limit themselves to just thrashing away at their instruments as hard as they can.
|
I don`t even think it`s close.
For me, Page is a far better all round player-but then he was playing in a far better band. |
A far overrated band is what you really mean. :laughing:
Just messing with you. |
Sabbath were a reasonable HM band, IMO.
I`ve no quarrel with them-liked a couple of their albums, no more no less. But Led Zep were a great band-great front man, bass player, drummer and guitarist. |
Lots of people tend to think so. I can't stand Robert plant. Not a big Ozzy fan either, but he works with sabbath. As for the other members of the two bands, I don't think Zeppelin is Any better. Bill ward was a great drummer. I think bonham is a little overrated. He was great, just gets a little too much credit. Whereas someone like Mitch mitchell is better in my opinion, but doesnt get as much credit. John Paul and Geezer are pretty equal, I think. And then of course there Tony and Jimmy.
I think Sabbath were much more innovative. Zeppelin is probably a little more versatile. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:06 PM. |
© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.