Deep Purple vs Black Sabbath?

marker

Both are seminal, pioneering, and legendary hard rock/heavy metal bands. Two of the first songs most aspiring, new guitar players learn are Smoke On The Water and Iron Man, but who do you like better?

They both have had numerous line up changes over the years. Ronny James Dio once was Sabbath's singer. Purple once had David Coverdale of Whitesnake fame as their singer and Tommy Bolin as the guitarist. Hell, even Ian Gillian himself was actually the lead singer of Sabbath at one point and they even played Smoke On The Water live even though Tony Iommi said he was very uncomfortable with it. But lets keep it to their "classic" line ups of the original Sabbath with Ozzy on vocals and the 2nd version Purple line up with Ian Gillian as the singer and Roger Glover on bass.

I like 'em both a lot, Made In Japan is IMO one of the absolute very best live albums ever, but if forced to choose, I would have to go with Sabbath.

capecodder

I'm a "Purple" fan, although I never really liked Smoke on the Water. I've never been a Sabbath fan although I fully appreciate their mark on the industry.

Agree about Made in Japan as one of best live rock albums. My favorite live album however is Allman Bros. Live at Filmore East.

MrBuhl

I really dig them both too -

Black Sabbath, Black Sabbath is my favorite, followed by Paranoid... my problem with Sabbath is that I didn't dig them after Ozzy.

Deep Purple I have liked all the way pretty much - so DP gets my vote.

AUDIOSLAVE

The Original Black Sabbath!

dkg999

Is there a new law regulating the number of 70's hard rock bands I can listen to? Why would I try to pick between these two?

schwarcw

I liked the early Black Sabbath material more than the later stuff. Their self titled first album is seldom played but wonderful. My other favorites include Paranoid and Masters of Reality.

Deep Purple also had some good early stuff. The album which had the artwork of the "Garden of Earthly Delights" and "Machine Head" head of course were great.

BTW, I saw both these bands live in the early '70's. Black Sabbath was better hands down!

ND13

Sabbath(with OZZY) kicks DPs arse!!!!!

RJD was better solo and with Rainbow, imo.

NIB, War Pigs, Fairies Wear Boots, Sweetleaf, etc.....the list just goes on and on.

Don't get me wrong, though. Deep Purple still rocks, they just don't compare to one of the greatest hard rock bands of all time.

Zeppelin is the only band to best Sabbath.

*Seby*-Polk-

Vote For Deep Purple.

The great 70's with David Coverdale, Jon Lord, Ian Paice and Blackmore. Hits like Highway Star or Burn has great !!!! The keyboard solos of Lord are fantastic !!!!

i like Whitesnake and Rainbow too. Espeacially Whitesnake.

george daniel

The early purple with Blackmore (child in time ) ain't too shabby,,other than Zep, Blue Oyster Cult gave Sabbath a good run,so to speak:cool:

Micah Cohen

Why do I show back up right when something like this is on the forum? (Thanks, Josh, for making me curious again...)

There can be no real argument here: Both bands are superb. Both of these bands are pioneers of a certain sound and approach. But each of these bands is very different. You would choose to listen to them at different times; they each suit a different mood.

Sabbath is the very bedrock of earthy, honest hard rock. Without that first Sabbath LP, even Led Zeppelin would not have figured out how to be heavy. (Seriously, they were going off in a folk direction... And then along comes the first Sabbath LP, showing how you can be a folksy jazz band and still POWER the evil, and Zep skidded to halt and changed direction completely.) And there is no modern band that does not owe the original Sabbath a debt of riff-itude. Those first five or six Sabbath LPs are heavier, and contain more real evil, than any "modern speed death metal" band could ever muster. Compared to the original Sabbath, everyone's a fake.

Purple is a completely different thing. From the start, Blackmore was interested in a more spacey sound, less bombast and more jamming. While Sabbath came from a jazz band background, Purple is much more blues-based. And the early Purple LPs, Mach I with Rob Evans singing, were mostly limp overheated euro-blues. When Gillan joined, and Mach II really took off (culminating in the super spectacular "Made In Japan" live experience), Purple was less a hard rock band a la Sabbath and more an operatic space rock goliath.

You listen to Sabbath (on the newly remastered, finally, WB box set discs, of course) on rainy gray Sunday mornings when your girlfriend has left you and you have nothing to eat in the house.

You listen to Purple (at least, you listen to the newer, remastered 2-disc complete "Made In Japan" set, or the new remastered "In Concert" 2-disc set, which is like an intimate practice run for the Japan tour) when you're flying down the highway on a summer night, windows down and sound system cranked.

Now, of course, Sabbath ended when Ozzy left and Tony Iommi started leaning toward jesus. After that, it was just garbage. (No need to talk about The Blizzard of Oz band here. For me that's a whole new thing. And ultimately that band became the most successful WhiteSnake band anyway.)

But Purple -- after the true Purple ended and Coverdale took over Mach III -- lived on in WhiteSnake and (to a lesser extent) Rainbow. Coverdale turned the space ship around and headed back down to earth for a much more earthy, blues-based hard rock sound, since he wasn't an opera singer like Gillan.

So, which band is "better"? Both bands were made up of superior musicians from different backgrounds doing different things at top volume. One day, at least for me, "Volume 4" is the best, most evil **** album ever made. The next day, "In Concert" is the greatest, loudest most brain-shredding album ever made, at least for me.

For me, at least, there is no other hard rock beyond these two bands. After these two bands, everything, especially modern current **** hard rock, is fake and boring.

Micah

Tour2ma

I might have said Deep Purple once upon a time, but now when I listen to them I wonder how the talent has drained out of their recordings over the years. Must be a puddler of it somewhere on my floor, 'cause it ain't the music no more.

So for me it's Black Sabeth, but more than by default....

But c'mon, there's really only one "seminal, pioneering," hard rock band...

Micah Cohen

You're right. And it's Johnny Burnette, who pretty much invented the form in 1956.

Oh, no, maybe it's The Who, who scorch thru a "Live At Leeds" set in 1970 that changes the definition of "volume."

Oh wait, maybe it's Cream, whose one single shining glorious moment of re-blues (their live recording of "Crossroads" in 1968) combines the basic blues with overwhelming power and volume...

It ain't Led Zeppelin, who didn't actually change the paradigm till "Presence," the greatest rock album you've never heard, and by then it was too late.

but now when I listen to them I wonder...

You need to retool. You need to pick up the 2001 Spitfire label 2-disc remaster of "Deep Purple In Concert," which combines two sets (1970, 1972) in intimate BBC settings, which must have caused audience-wide deafness, and sounds so stunning that you will believe that they are playing in your living room. And your neighbors (three houses away) will also believe this.

It's a band that is overly talented, at the very peak of their performance power, prepping for the "Made In Japan" tour that would produce their greatest masterwork. It's a space blues metal band that starts and stops on a dime, that reads each others' minds, and that can shatter light bulbs with its intensity. I've seen Gillan sing "Child In Time," in person. There are no studio effects!

But hey, Sabbath is frigging amazing, too!

(Why oh why do I get involved in this nonsense here? Stop me before I kill again.)

MC

mrbigbluelight

1972.

San Diego.

Had recently graduated from Navy boot camp, and was attending "BEEP" school (Basic Electricity and Electronics Prep).

Saturday night. No car. Walked/hitched to the San Diego Civic Center (or whatever it was called).

Playing ? Opening band. "Electric Light Orchestra".

Main band ? BLACK SABBATH

Sweet mother of all that is holy, was that a concert !!!


Not your pre-fabbed, corporate sponsored, vacuum-packed-for-freshness concerts that you get now.

No, at the risk of sounding dated, it was.........well, it was a time when giants roamed the earth. Giants who carried the monicker:



B L A C K
S A B B A T H

I've been to Who concerts. Baba OReilley (sp?) live : awesome.
Loud to be sure.

Loudest concert I was ever at was at Phil Graham's Fillmore West in San Francisco about 1974. Mott the Hoople. Ears rang for 3 days literally. What a concert.

But the all-time best ? Black Sabbath. Loud, driving, gut twisting, growling, aticulate guitar riffs, yet could be ethereal, too.

"Planet Caravan" live ? Whew ! Better not have smoked too much before the concert or else they'd have to lasso you off the ceiling at the end of the song.

I agreee, Deep Purple kicked butt. But Black Sabbath ?

Ahhhhhhhhh ..........

capecodder

Great post mrbluelight. As I said above I preferred Purple's music but truly appreciate Black Sabbath. Maybe I should listen more to the original Sabbath to remember it at its roots. I really don't care for the tired replay of the Sabbath they currently keep playing.

Man I wish I had seen the concerts above. I liked ELO alot at that time frame. Bet they had a good show as well.