black sabbath was good for the changes in song structure, and the fact that tony iommi had a couple of his finger tips chopped off! and i loved how after hendrix he used 2 or more guitar tracks in his solos, a lot of people never notice that. i give black sabbath a
4. (ironic i just said something about sabbath in another thread)
queens of the stone age really isn't that good of a band. their riffs, structure, and lyrics are all very basic, and sometimes boring. i give them a
1.
led zeppelin was great. i don't have to say anything, you should talk to will, ledbassest. (if he's still around) give them a
4 as well.
queen, i never really liked. but they were different, and they were good.
3. (great guitar player!)
muse...
they have disgustingly basic structure, and stick to 1 key and don't use any tempo changes. their bassist thinks he's good because he does constant hammer ons. simple 4/4 same crap over and over.
this band is so bad, i have no idea how they got a record contract.
people compare them to radiohead, saying they're the "harder version of radiohead" which disgusts me again because radiohead is progressive and extremely creative. those 2 bands don't even compare.
muse=
0
all of those bands are rock. i'm not making any assumptions but you should broaden your horizons, listen to different types of music. have an open mind, of course. but hey, maybe you do already! who knows. nice thread.
Which is the better band? 
3D Championship Golf Champion!
)
Re: Which is the better band? 
