Machine Head is one of the best rock albums of all time, imho. I enjoy Deep Purple, but for me, while their catalog is deep it’s not quite as strong as other favorites such as Zeppelin and Floyd. They don’t really take me to that next level consistently.

I don't think they marketed themselves in the US as much as the other bands you listed.

I agree that Zep and Floyd do have a stronger overall catalog, and shorter as well, but their highest points are pretty much on the same level as these other bands highest points too. DP was pretty much a "1 album a year" band, which I think led to some albums having some filler that shouldn't be there.

Also, maybe another point to why their live albums sold so well too. You could just get all the singles in a single packaging. See: Made In japan

Personally i never think hey i want to listen to a entire DP album, i want to hear the songs i like and the songs i do not like, i skip. Led zep and pink floyd, i can sit and listen to their entire albums and never think about skipping a song. Zep had a 5 album run and floyd had a 4 album run and 3 of the greatest albums ever. DP just did not have that consistency for me.

Just a way smaller catalog of quality. Those other bands plus Rush had longevity

I think it might have something to do with the personnel changes. Personally I prefer the Machine Head lineup with Ian Gillan, and other permutations just haven't stuck like that one for me- though the brief lineup with Tommy Bolin was pretty amazing. Led Zep was always the same, imo kept getting better and more interesting, then called it quits when Bonzo died, so all their material, while not interchangable, is on the table to enjoy. DP has changed over time and a random DP album just doesn't have the same appeal as their best (even if each does have something to recommend it).

[deleted]

I think Longevity might not be the best word here: They had at least one amazing album for the 70/80/90s: Machine Head, Perfect Strangers, Purpendicular.

Maybe consistency is a better word, specially if you are throwing Rush into the mix

From 69-73 they put out some very good albums. They were kind of the leaders of hard rock. IMO the others you mention are not Hard Rock stars, they're rock stars with a wide range of sound. I guess those who followed hard rock, Deep Purple was kind of the original band. I never became a hard rock fan. To me Tull, Zepplin, The Who, The Stones continued to break new ground and grow. While I love Machine Head, I don't think it compares with Zep II, Thick as a Brick, or Who's Next which came out around the same time. Machine Head is the only CD I have of theirs and it is on a very limited play schedule because I only like about 1/2 of it. I need to get Live in Japan at some point, but that would also be in pretty limited play schedule. If I want to listen to heavy rock I listen to Tull, Who, or Zep usually. Those who would turn to AC/DC, Black Sabbath, Aerosmith, etc would probably prefer Deep Purple as that is what their sound sort of became. Hard driving guitar jams.

Yes, I believe that the lineup changes had a lot to do with their drop in popularity

Sadly, I think a lot of rock history is dependent on journalists, critics and newer stars carrying their banner. During the 80s and 90s there weren't really any champions reminding people about them.

An example of this is Pearl Jam with Neil Young.

I was a fan, but it seems to me that their legacy now reflects their stature in the 70s. They were (and still are) in a slightly lower tier than the bands you cite.

I believe the problem lies in Deep Purple being a band that was manufactured. They weren’t a bunch of guys who decided one day to put together a band, but rather a record company decided to put together a band.

With that being said I’m glad they created this band.

The constant member of the band was Jon Lord. Despite him being the most talented member in the band, it is not the easiest for record companies to market a band with a keyboard rock and roller. When Gillan and Blackmore went their separate ways at different times things would never be the same. Much like Queen, Deep Purple has great songs but never had as many solid albums.

Deep Purple is a great band…all tunes are legendary

Because their biggest hit is too easy to play and less interesting than Stairway and the like. If Highway Star got as much attention, I bet they’d have a significantly larger fan base.

Jon Lord on FIRE

I also don't hear that much about Jethro Tull or Foghat lately.

True about consistency, but In Rock, Fireball and Machine Head is a mighty 3 album run, and espescially In Rock and Machine Head can be considered all time Greats on par with best Led Zeppelins and Pink Floyd albums.

Queen didn’t have any solid albums!?!?!?! Literally every one of the records they made up until probably the 80s were phenomenal. A Day at the Races is one of the most perfectly crafted records of all time

Tbf Ian Paice was the real constant, he is still there while Lord left on 2002. But definately, the fact they changed their lineups so often certainly didnt help

READ what he actually writes!!!

I did, and u/phantalien clearly has never listened to Queen.

[removed]

Oh really? I didn't know Paice lasted longer. Thanks for the info.

They are not in deep rotations on classic rock radio or streaming so it my be the people or machines that program the list. They are more of the personal playlist sharing type of hype where people will play the deeper cuts

Nah.

>Much like Queen, Deep Purple has great songs but never had as many solid albums.

You mean like this? He is literally stating that Queen had great songs but not as many solid albums.

One of my favourite drummers of all time.

... and Ian Paice. FTFY

Space Truckin'. YEH, YEH, YEH, SPACE TRUCKIN'!!!

Part of the issue is Blackmore himself. The guy distances himself so far from rock music into the 90's that their media presence was significantly reduced. Even though he wasn't in the band anymore a lot of these other artists thrived through the 90s doing interviews and touring as legacy artists. As a young first player during this time I loved Blackmore but rarely read an interview with him in guitar world or rolling Stone after the mid nineties. The rest of the band you barely heard about because they're elder statesman weren't there to push them as much. Unless you wanted to read about Blackmore's medieval music move they faded into more obscurity through the last couple decades.

All this being said absolutely loved seeing them at Live 8!

MC5, Cream, and Sabbath along with The Who, and Jimi were the original heavy bands IMO. Deep Purple is legit tho!

This is the answer. Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd and The Beatles all had at least 5 or 6 stellar albums.

I have often asked myself this question.

Although I take heart from the fact that my GCSE English oral exam was about Deep Purple so I educated a group of teenagers back in 1998 about the might of the Purple!

Sorry, my reaction should have been on his reply. not yours.

He responds as if you wrote Queen never had any solid albums, but actually, you did not write that.

You state that Deep Purple and Queen had more great songs than they had solid albums. And i agree with that. Even In Rock and Machine Head had less good tracks on them. Some even very average.

I think it is simple. The better the music, the better the band ages. It makes perfect sense. The relevance of old music is directly related to the quality of the music.

I think you bring up a lot of good points and it's probably some combination of all of that. I love DP, and they totally deserve the recognition that Zeppelin and Sabbath get for influencing hard rock and metal.

Someone else pointed out a lot of it has to do with the consistency of their albums. Zeppelin released 7 consecutive albums that were absolutely fucking incredible, and their last album is still probably as good as much of DP's work too. Same with Sabbath, their first 6 albums are all complete bangers. Deep Purple took a while to find their stride, their sound evolved a lot, and they had significant lineup changes that altered said sound through different periods.

While they have excellent work that spans several decades, I would say their best run of albums includes In Rock, Fireball, Machine Head and Burn. Note that Who Do We Think We Are came out during this time but I did not include it because I don't think it's as good, save for the song Woman From Tokyo which is a classic. Zeppelin and Sabbath did not have any clunkers during their peak runs. I think that's the difference.

The sound quality of a lot of old DP albums is rough to me. Outside of SOTW, they didn’t put out many radio friendly hits, and by the time they got popular, they started replacing members

Their sound is too diverse. ‘Hush’ and ‘Highway Star’ sound like two completely different bands.

I think rainbow's music with Dio has aged a lot better tbh

It isn't as easy as you think. Richie Blackmore demonstrates people play it this way, which is not correct. It's played in fourths, not power chords.

It's an interesting one, they definitely deserve a similar status imo, although you named some bands that were basically torchbearers for a whole movement, Zeppelin, Sabbath, Pink Floyd, The Who to perhaps a lesser extent, but happy to be corrected.

There's no doubt about Blackmore's ability and he should be in the conversation but the more mainstream names are always going to be mentioned more as years go by and new people discover the old bands, thdy usually start with the names they recognise.

Saying that though, never mind Smoke on the water, Highway Star and Black Knight should be essential listening for any budding rock fan!

I feel ya. But, all those beginning guitar players can’t tell/don’t know the difference.

LOL, one of my old boses loved DP

at one point in time every kid that wanted to learn rock guitar first thing they learned was the basic chords of smoke in the water

also DP spawned into Rainbow with Blackmore and Whitesnake with David Coverdale and Ian Guillan amazing work in Black Sabbat

They also did one if not the first rock bands orchertal colaborations with the royal philarmonic orchesta with a John Lord composition

amazing amount of talent in that band history

They pretty much were two different bands. Like Syd Floyd then Waters/Gilmore fFloyd

It likely has less to do with the music, the musicians capabilities, or their creative decisions and more with marketing and business strategy over the last 40 years by the band and their labels.

Ian Gillan gets around being in the PF production of Jesus Christ Superstar in addition to joining Sabbath. I actually think ‘Born Again’ has some great tracks on it.

I think the revolving door of members had a lot to do with it, They were basically three bands, and the famous lineup only was together for four (plus one live) albums,

My favorite Led Zeppelin song is Achilles Last Stand but I don’t recall ever hearing it on the radio, probably because it’s an 8 min epic story song. Not suitable for radio format. Is it possible that DP music falls into this trap? Long songs that don’t encapsulate nicely for radio play?

There simply isn't a consistent lineup over an entire era like some of those other bands have. As DP changed lineups, they also changed their sound. In just the space of a decade, you have four lineups playing psychedelic rock, hard rock, and funk/jazz fusion.

Queen II, A Night At the Opera, Sheer Heart Attack...

I feel like this is the hardest hitting point on this thread.

Deep Purple hasn’t aged well because they were not that good to begin with. Their lyrics are horrible and the vocals are mid, anyway. The overall technical ability isn’t bad, but the end product is mediocre at best.

TLDR, they don’t deserve acclaim.

The correct way, which is all I've ever learned, is even easier than the wrong way. Simple isn't bad (Satisfaction?), but Smoke on the Water is pretty easy.

Most people just 0 3 5. A lot of beginners have no concept of fretting hand economy. Most of the time, playing it right means finding the easiest way.

This was my thought. They were 3 different bands across 4 line ups.

In Jr. High and high school I would hear Machine Head and other hits from the Gillan era. I'd hear Hush and Kentucky Woman but somehow never heard it was the same band that did Smoke On The Water.

They reunited when I was a senior and that's when I found out about the other line ups. I liked the other line ups, but never listened to them as much as the Mark II line up. Building a legacy with line up changes can be tough enough, but building it with conflicting sounds is even harder.