The band were unique, even in the 60's, in that they (at Tommy Hall's urging) played most of their live shows and recorded their albums while on LSD.
They were UNIQUE in that sense
I know what you're thinkin' "Here comes Old Gregg, he's a scaly man-fish!"

This message has been deleted.

Nobody writes music while their tripping, noob.
Tried to please her
She only played one night stands

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

Stairway TO Heaven and I'm pretty sure that Morrison didn't really care for Zepp. I've read it in various places, but I don't think he ever despised them. And I'm not so sure he would have like them had he lived through the 70s. He was definitely into more subdued, experimental music, not saying that Zepp didn't have their fair share

http://messageboard.thedoors.com/index.php?showtopic=31030&st=30
They say it's a rumor.
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.-
Spinal Tap

This message has been deleted.

You know that the Doors did break up before "Stairway of Heaven" was realeased by Led Zeppelin, but also the band got back111c together after Morrison's death, and did a cover of "Stairway of Heaven", so maybe The Doors had their respect for led zep, but who knows about Jim, maybe he liked them, maybe he hated them

This message has been deleted.

You all are so beep pathetic. Fighting on a message board like you're children. Grow Up.

This message has been deleted.

and I don't give a sh-t about what people think either.

This message has been deleted.

I was responding to a comment by you
"Fagstar, you're not welcome here! Go away! You're an idiot. Calling me a fag for the music I listen to. If you think The Beatles did the same thing, you are such a retard. Now GTFO of this board, beep "
Anyway I butt heads with people becuase I have good arguements about Rock music, that's all, and I'm stubborn enough to argue with people when I think I'm right.

This message has been deleted.

Also, how am I condeming "drug bands" when I love the Doors and Pink Floyd, they were drugged out of their minds and they had better musics and lyrics than the Beatles.
P.S.
Qotsafan, who the f-ck died and made you King sh-t on turd island for the message boards.

Wow, saying Paul is dead means your brillant, the low threshold for talent some people have. I amdit I like a few early Beatles tracks like "ticket to ride" "Don't let me down". "A day in the life" was good up until the "trumphet" music started. Morrison is a much better song-writer, see the reason why everybody loved the Beatles in the 60's becuase the band wrote their music while dropping acid, and the music refelects the5b4ir bieng on LSD,
and while Jim Morrison dropped acid, the Doors music doesn't sound like a bunch of drugged-out dudes wrote it. The Beatles physcadelic sound apealed to the masses in the 60's, becuase the fans usaully had impaired judgements, therefore appreciateing the spaced-out sounds of the Beatles rather the genius that was the Doors. Same for Woodstock, most of the musicians sucked except for the Who and Crosby, Stills, and Nash, becuase impaired judgement allowed people to invite sub-par bands, why werent the Doors at Woodstock? Simple the genius of the Doors was under-appreciated. By 1967, The Beatles tryed to follow the San Francisco (Acid Rock) scene yet be original, yet The Doors bieng from los Angeles (Folk Rock scene) they didn't follow anybody's rules of current rock n' roll and did everything in their power to sound diffrent (Except for the Soft Parade album, every band has it's flaws) the beatles stuck by the rules and tryed to have the freedom of self-expression at the same time, making for one jumbled up mess. I just don't care for over-rated bands and musicians, becuase when bands or musicians are over-rated. a great band like The Doors or the Who or The Rolling Stones or musicians like Stevie Ray Vaughan or David Bowie go very un-appreciated.I'm sorry, Qotsafan, but when you assume a guy who has a diffrent opinion than you, likes Green Day or Linkin Park, two bands I f-cking hate, I'm gonna lash back, and you 2000should atleast spell my name right if you're gonna sh-t on me.

This message has been deleted.

Just for clarification long drag on cigarette. The Beatles song you were referring to, amaster, is "A Day in the Life" and no one kills themselves in that song. I assume you're too straight edge or simply too young to understand that the phrase "he blew his mind out in a car" is about Paul blowing his brain out with LSD and then driving. Driving on acid isn't too tough, but it's distracting he didn't notice that the lights had changed. The song is about how Paul died, it was one of the great, outside-of-the-box ideas engineered by Lennon and the others. That said, that "weird stuff" at the end is not just supposed to be noise; that bit, when played backwards, repeated the phrase "Paul Is Dead". The Beatles were brilliant, and you've taken them out of context to explain the reasons you don't like them. An opinion is fine, but you need to learn more about the music and put it into some kind of context for yourself so that you might understand. They were going for light hearted, good feeling, peaceful music. They use simple chord progressions, yes, but there is a beauty in simplicity. Most great songs are not over complicated at all. Even Ringo, who essentially lacked musical talent, worked very well for what the band needed from their percussionist. There's a reason, bro, that the Beatles are, to this day, one of the number one greatest bands. Zeppelin is a good band, they were amazing rockers, but they aren't necessarily any better than the bands that influenced them. Sometimes psychedelics can inspire some of the most amazing art, so don't unjustly condemn the "drug bands" of the era.
RIP - Roger Keith "Syd" Barrett
Shine On.

This message has been deleted.

shut up, Morrison was drugged out all the time, I know that but the Doors music wasn't all silly and childish like the Beatles' music, I mean come on, a 10 year old kid could write better songs than the Beatles, and yeah they did do the same thing over and again, even if a song was good they would screw it up by bieng all silly, they had a song and they we're singig about a guy kiling himself in his car, and the song was all dark and cool sounding, than bam, the end of the song was silly and pointless. Led Zeppelin had a few good songs, but they had a lot of crap, I heard alot of their "other" stuff on the radio, and it sucked. you're right, the beatles didn't start sucking in '67 it was '66, after the yellow submarine bullsh-t,You'd be brain-dead to think "The Walrus" "Lucy in the sky with diamonds" or "Yellow submarine" or "sixty-four" were masterpieces. And hey fag, I don't listen to new rock, I leave the
a-shole of rock music for fags like you, so enjoy fagging out to gibberish brought to you by the Beatles.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.