Slate Chocolate Marble
Slate Chocolate Marble

Led Zeppelin Official Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Strider

Jimmy Page Responds to Keith Richards

278 posts in this topic

4 minutes ago, jsj said:

it is a deviation and I apologise for that but I've just finished reading Dave Lewis' Knebworth book and in that we get several  references to each Knebworth date attracting up to 200000, and yet again the reference to Peter Grant hiring NASA to examine crowd photographs. The promoter reckons there was approx 140 - 150000 for the first date and maybe 40 -50000 for the second, half of the exaggerated claims freely circulated on forums and the like. maybe we'll never know for sure but ticket sales are a pretty good indicator of a crowd size

admittedly Dave says at the start of the book he has "rose tinted glasses" but that only applies to opinions, facts about crowd sizes are facts, not opinions

Grant (band manager) and Bannister (promoter) each had an agenda, and as such both claims are biased. Having said that, with the benefit of hindsight I'm inclined to believe the more accurate of the two figures is Bannister's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I think comparing the size of the venues the two bands played, or the attendance therein, or even the number of records they were selling, is a false distinction.   They weren't having contests where punters had to choose either one of the other, and the capacity of whatever stadium or festival where the acts appeared would have been incidental to more practical factors:  schedule, availability, promoters' fees, touring logistics, etc.  I can only imagine Richards and Page reading through these posts (very unlikely, but let's just speculate) and having a good laugh.  "Long way from the Birmingham Blues Fest in 1962, eh, mate?"  "You said it, gov'nor...And what was the name of that bird we both shagged in 1971?...Crikey, my arthritis is bad today..."

 

Cover July2015.jpg

LZFAQ.gif

Magus.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you George for the above post. That’s my point regarding criteria boundaries.  There’s so much to consider, and then it’s about an individual’s personal perception.

stanlove, you seem to concentrate on a math number of 80,000.  Is that your criteria cutoff point?  One can venture down all sorts of avenues if it is.  Is your criteria that the Stones drew bigger crowds?  Again, I am asking you what criteria are you setting?

To state again Zeppelin in 1977 were drawing the same crowds as the Stones.  Zeppelin sold over 80,000 tickets for the Superdome as well as 95,000 for the JFK stadium shows but didn’t play the shows due to tragic circumstances.

stanlove wrote: “You are honestly trying to say that listing the biggest concerts doesn't show who the bigger concert draw was. Really?”

Again what criteria are you going to utilize.  Zeppelin with the Tampa show and the Silverdome show set records.  One can debate that the Siverdome show for Zeppelin would’ve been bigger if people went to it.  There’s unused tickets for sale through various outlets such as Ebay from time to time.  The same can be said about Stones concerts, and unused tickets.  See where I am going?  There’s all sorts of avenues to expand on.

Does one include as a single artist on the bill or include opening acts?  Does one include Zeppelin playing at Bath in 1970 in front of 150,000 concertgoers?  How about multiple runs at concert venues such as MSG in New York, or the Forum in Los Angeles, or Chicago Stadium?

stanlove wrote: “You can look up where Zeppelin played in 1972 and where the Stones played. on their American tours. Little hint. The Stone drew 40 thousand to the Rubber bowl in Ohio and 45 thousand to  RFK stadium on that tour,  Zeppelin didn't even come close to out drawing the Stones on that tour.”

A year later Zeppelin drew in excess of 49,000 fans in Atlanta and 56,000 in Tampa, both larger numbers than what you typed above.  Again, there’s many factors to consider.  Interesting you keep mentioning Zep fans with their myths.  May I inquire why are Stone fans constantly mentioning the 1972 tour?  It was big, I get it.  As I stated earlier Zeppelin played less North American dates and were playing other global markets in 1972.

stanlove wrote: “The Stones obviously outdrew Zeppelin despite what Zeppelin claimed and there tickets were more expensive. “

See above.  To expand on your math numbers since you are concentrating on attendance numbers one can venture the argument that if the Stones were the biggest they would’ve played a concert to break the record by the year or in 1973 that Zep did but they didn’t.  The same thing could be said again by the year 1977 about Zep’s 1977 show at the Silverdome.

Steve, made an interesting point that the Stones were an established act for years before Zeppelin started.  One can argue that Zeppelin became just as big or even bigger than the Stones in a much shorter timeframe utilizing less commercial singles, but that’s a whole different avenue to venture down.

This thread either needs to be closed, gotten back on topic, or split to a new topic.

Robert

Edited by Sems Fir
Added a word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, SteveAJones said:

There's no question Led Zeppelin was THE biggest rock act of the 1970s. We can quibble over who was the bigger concert draw, but before we do I think it's worth pointing out that by 1970 The Stones already had eight years to build up a fan base. Led Zeppelin had 16 months.   

There is no really debate who the biggest touring act was. It was the Stones. I have proven that . As foe biggest band  it would depend on how you define who the bigger band is. In the 70s the Stones 60s work didn't go away and people were still listening to that plus they were a singles band and songs like Brown Sugar and Aingie  ect were all over the radio and people could buy the singles.  But Zeppelin was huge with the younger crowd no doubt. They were both massive. But you are changing the topic by bringing up how long Zeppelin was around to how long the Stones was around. My argument here is that when Zeppelin and their fans go around saying that Zeppelin was a much bigger touring band then the Stones in the 1970s they really can't make a case for that. I see them say it all the time all over the internet. You saw it here right on this thread. Its a constant.

Edited by stanlove

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

stanlove wrote: "There is no really debate who the biggest touring act was. It was the Stones. I have proven that".

So far I haven't seen any proof to it.

stanlove wrote: "As foe biggest band  it would depend on how you define who the bigger band is".

Now your stance is regarding criteria.  Interesting.  When it suites your point of view you'll make the above comment.  I've been stating it all along.

stanlove wrote: "In the 70s the Stones 60s work didn't go away and people were still listening to that plus they were a singles band and songs like Brown Sugar and Aingie  ect were all over the radio and people could buy the singles".

Through to the late 1960's it was considered a singles market for the North American market as it helped with album sales.  The market shifted to an album market in the late 1960's when album sales began to outsell singles.

stanlove wrote: "But you are changing the topic by bringing up how long Zeppelin was around to how long the Stones was around".

Steve isn't changing it.  He's looking at it from another perspective that makes a bigger picture to understand.

stanlove wrote: "My argument here is that when Zeppelin and their fans go around saying that Zeppelin was a much bigger touring band then the Stones in the 1970s they really can't make a case for that. I see them say it all the time all over the internet. You saw it here right on this thread. Its a constant".

You're a Stones fan on a Led Zeppelin forum doing what?  You're a Stones fan going around the internet finding this forum and arguing.  The very thing you are sick of seeing other individuals do.

Robert

 

 

 

 

Edited by Sems Fir
spell correction of one word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sems Fir said:

How about multiple runs at concert venues such as MSG in New York, or the Forum in Los Angeles, or Chicago Stadium?

This is a good point. The six sold out shows at the Forum in 1977 equates to aprox 108,000 tickets. The four shows at Chicago Stadium in '77 would be aprox 72,000 ticket, and likewise the four shows at Capital Centre in Landover another aprox 72,000, and the six shows at MSG in '77 would be aprox 115,000 tickets. And so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Balthazor said:

This is a good point. The six sold out shows at the Forum in 1977 equates to aprox 108,000 tickets. The four shows at Chicago Stadium in '77 would be aprox 72,000 ticket, and likewise the four shows at Capital Centre in Landover another aprox 72,000, and the six shows at MSG in '77 would be aprox 115,000 tickets. And so on.

You have to take into account fans that went to multiple shows, say 25% or more of the audience....Don't forget tickets were dirt cheap in those days, well they were here in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, JTM said:

You have to take into account fans that went to multiple shows, say 25% or more of the audience....Don't forget tickets were dirt cheap in those days, well they were here in the UK.

They were all sell-out shows. If some fans didn't attend multiple shows, it's almost certain their tickets would have been sold to someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom line is neither band played to many .. if any empty seats.

 This whole argument is kind of pointless. I prefer Zeppelin any day of the week, but also love and respect the Stones. They're two of the most important and best rock bands of the last 50 years. As if either one gives a shit about what we're arguing about. There was mutual respect between the two bands as well as a healthy rivalry.. The Stones gave studio time they had booked at Musicland to Zeppelin because they needed a few days to wrap up Presence.. They delayed the start of Black and Blue.. Hardly something a band would do for a band they didn't respect.

It was also stongly rumored that The Stones were going to ask Jimmy to sit in for Richards after the Toronto bust..if KR went to prison..  Page denied this, but in the same article mentioned how much he respected Keith.

Edited by the chase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, stanlove said:

My argument here is that when Zeppelin and their fans go around saying that Zeppelin was a much bigger touring band then the Stones in the 1970s they really can't make a case for that.

Well, they can if one bears in mind the impact of Robert's auto accident (August 1975) and Karac Plant's death (July 1977) essentially cost Led Zeppelin three years of touring.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SteveAJones said:

Well, they can if one bears in mind the impact of Robert's auto accident (August 1975) and Karac Plant's death (July 1977) essentially cost Led Zeppelin three years of touring.  

But still thats not the point. Zep and their fans constantly claim they did better on tour then the Stones. I have yet to see anyone show thats true.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, the chase said:

It was also stongly rumored that The Stones were going to ask Jimmy to sit in for Richards after the Toronto bust..if KR went to prison..  Page denied this, but in the same article mentioned how much he respected Keith.

The UK press also published rumors that Page was joining The Rolling Stones in 1975. Of course, the job went to Ronnie Wood instead, who, according to Ronnie's book, was actually the one who formed Led Zeppelin in 1968.

33 minutes ago, stanlove said:

But still thats not the point. Zep and their fans constantly claim they did better on tour then the Stones. I have yet to see anyone show thats true.  

Well, Led Zeppelin did "do better" than anyone insofar as they ultimately received an unprecedented 90% of the gate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, stanlove said:

But still thats not the point. Zep and their fans constantly claim they did better on tour then the Stones. I have yet to see anyone show thats true.  

Seems Fir showed that was indeed true. Zeppelin sold 95,000 tickets for the show at JFK stadium in Philly which was cancelled due to the death of Karak Plant. So even though they did not play the show, they still sold out the 95,000 tickets which the Stones never did in the 70's and the Stones had supporting acts. You claim the supporting acts did not add to the draw, I say that is completely wrong. One of my colleagues is a 68 year old gentleman who is also a drummer and a big Zeppelin fan. Found out today he saw them several times in the US during the 69' tour...he is also a huge Stones fan as well. I asked him the question about opening acts and the Stones ticket draws and this is what he told me. By 1972 the Stones were notorious for having top line opening acts, either established or the most popular up and comers such as Stevie Wonder & Billy Preston so everyone who bought a Stones ticket KNEW they were going to a multi-act gig with the Stones headlining after one or two very popular bands. He said if those opening bands were not part of the deal it would have indeed effected the ticket sales. He also told me when he saw the Stones in the summer of 72', they had indeed announced Stevie Wonder on the bill before the tickets went on sale, as they also did in 78' when Van Halen, Journey, Kansas, and Linda Ronstadt opened for them.

Funny thing is, according to Alan (my friend), most people who saw the Stones would also see Zeppelin when they came through. Lots of shared enthusiasm back in the day and neither band should be slighted. The both were / are amazing bands that both drew massive crowds. 

The fact is, when a 68 year old professional drummer who was actually there, at these gigs tells me what is was like, I would tend to believe it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, IpMan said:

Seems Fir showed that was indeed true. Zeppelin sold 95,000 tickets for the show at JFK stadium in Philly which was cancelled due to the death of Karak Plant. So even though they did not play the show, they still sold out the 95,000 tickets which the Stones never did in the 70's and the Stones had supporting acts. You claim the supporting acts did not add to the draw, I say that is completely wrong. One of my colleagues is a 68 year old gentleman who is also a drummer and a big Zeppelin fan. Found out today he saw them several times in the US during the 69' tour...he is also a huge Stones fan as well. I asked him the question about opening acts and the Stones ticket draws and this is what he told me. By 1972 the Stones were notorious for having top line opening acts, either established or the most popular up and comers such as Stevie Wonder & Billy Preston so everyone who bought a Stones ticket KNEW they were going to a multi-act gig with the Stones headlining after one or two very popular bands. He said if those opening bands were not part of the deal it would have indeed effected the ticket sales. He also told me when he saw the Stones in the summer of 72', they had indeed announced Stevie Wonder on the bill before the tickets went on sale, as they also did in 78' when Van Halen, Journey, Kansas, and Linda Ronstadt opened for them.

Funny thing is, according to Alan (my friend), most people who saw the Stones would also see Zeppelin when they came through. Lots of shared enthusiasm back in the day and neither band should be slighted. The both were / are amazing bands that both drew massive crowds. 

The fact is, when a 68 year old professional drummer who was actually there, at these gigs tells me what is was like, I would tend to believe it.

Like i said from the start I am fine with they are both massive bands with massive following. The thing that I have objected to is Zeppelin and its fans saying they dre bigger crowds then the Stones. Thats not true. And to your point again the Stones sold tickets often before even announcing who was opening for them.

 

Can i see proof that they sold 95 thousand for Phily? I know in 1981 the Stones sold out two niights in a row at 90 thousand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go stanlove.  I'll focus on the 1977 list that shows the 95,000.  It's from an article titled "Biggest of them all" facts and figures from the week Zeppelin broke the record with the Silverdome show.

Robert

 

facts1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith is that you up there?   Hehe having some fun :P 

Oh boy coming to the official L Z board and trying to convince their fans that the Stones were
the "bigger act of the 70s" is like a Yankee  fan going to the Red Sox  board saying "New York
has better fans and is the better franchise!" - Now everybody agree with me okay?!?"
  
:rant:
The other side is always going to disagree no matter what is presented.

I'm going to regret saying this I am sure,
:bagoverhead: maybe there's a tinge of jealousy for BOTH sides.
Zep became undoubtedly extremely popular in a short time frame, and they have managed
to not only keep their fanbase, but also expand on it,  despite not being a band since 1980 or
touring here in the U S A in close to 40 years.  The Stones are lucky because they have
managed to stay a band for 54  654 years. They have been able to tour and put out albums a lot
longer than Zep did.  I'm sure Jimmy at times wishes Zep was still out  there getting it done.
Apples to oranges yes since Zep lost a monumental member and circumstances brought the
band to its end.  Sigh Bonzo :( 

Off topic slighly, but somebody mentioned Zep perhaps being bigger attraction to the
younger crowd. I think that is so spot on.  I think the Zeppelin brand and 'mystery' is more
appealing to younger people.  Damn people still ask what ZoSo means despite it being
 answered to death
:beat: on the board.  This is also strictly my opinion of course, but
as a female I can tell you one guitarist definitely has a leg up on certain other guitarist. How do I
know this?  A lot comments on social media in unbiased places.


Now I'm going to quickly and quietly tip toe back out of this thread....
:run:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stanlove said:

Can i see proof that they sold 95 thousand for Phily? I know in 1981 the Stones sold out two niights in a row at 90 thousand

First of all, 1981 is not the 70s. You can't really prove that the Stones were a bigger concert draw in the 70s by pointing to a concert in the 80s.

Second of all, as was pointed out earlier by myself and others, in 1977 Zeppelin sold out 6 nights at the Forum, which is 100+ thousand, as well as 6 nights at MSG which is another 100+ thousand, and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify in case other readers have missed it about the multiple night runs at certain venues such as MSG, the L.A. Forum etc. I was referring to what type of criteria does one set (i.e. include) when attempting to determine who was the biggest.  One can research further into the cancelled JFK 1977 show and see attendance numbers flip in just a matter of days based on research and newspaper articles from local Philadelphia newspapers.  I thank the Led Zep reference site for the their research and posting the articles long ago, which are still available if anyone wishes to read them.

The articles were written in early August just after the announcement of the passing of Robert's son Karac.  One article dated August 3rd, 1977 titled" Will Zep Be Here?" lists a number of "80,000" tickets sold.  Another article written just three days later published August 6th 1977 titled "Zep Cancels at JFK; 1 Million Refund Due" states a number of "some 88,000 tickets".  In just a matter of days the number changed by quite a bit.

The article I posted above is from April 1977 and shows 95,000.  Was that article estimating?  Possibly, as one can see the numbers are rounded up or down as the bottom line is only a snap shot point in time and clearly doesn't add up, but I have spoken to someone who was up the food chain at Electric Factory and he confirmed for me the number in the 90's regarding the attendance.  I'm not a biased Zep fan.  If I was I would've just posted the high number, so I want to put that to rest with this post.

Also another older thread on this very site mentions that their was a radio interview in 1977 regarding the Superdome show, where the manager of the Superdome states ticket sales hit 98,500 plus up to that point when the interview was conducted.  If that interview could be located and proven true that spectacle would've been a massive show, as it was possible that even more tickets could've been sold by showtime.  Unfortunately, we will never know since the show was cancelled.  I'd have to research regarding the Superdome show.

Once again I will state there's too much to consider regarding which artist was the biggest.  Can a general idea be generated?  Sure, but it'll just be a matter of perspective and what criteria does one include to come to the final conclusion.  In my opinion I haven't seen any proof that the Stones were bigger than Zep.  I'm not blind or biased (in my opinion).  I openly admit I've collected Led Zeppelin memorabilia for years (and even have two items shown in the Super Deluxe books).  I'm uncredited, but that's for another day.  For the JFK show I'm only missing the rare t-shirt for memorabilia as far as I know at this point in time.  I also have a cancelled Superdome ticket.  Relics from a bygone era, that I'm happy to own.

Ever Onward.

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, stanlove said:

Like i said from the start I am fine with they are both massive bands with massive following. The thing that I have objected to is Zeppelin and its fans saying they dre bigger crowds then the Stones. Thats not true. And to your point again the Stones sold tickets often before even announcing who was opening for them.

 

Can i see proof that they sold 95 thousand for Phily? I know in 1981 the Stones sold out two niights in a row at 90 thousand

You keep stating that the Stones sold those tickets before announcing opening acts. What is your source for that? Are you old enough to have been around and seen them first hand in the 70's like myself and others here have? As I mentioned, I have a 68 year old friend, professional drummer who has been in the business and scene since the mid 60's and he claims that is not true. According to him the opening acts were indeed announced before the tickets went on sale.

At this point this is really splitting hairs but I am just curious as to what your source is for your info? If my codger friend is wrong, mea culpa, but I would like to know your source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief! Look at all the excitement I have missed. Oy vey! :rolleyes:

Stan Love, please take your bullshit somewhere else. Sorry if I come off rude, but if you were interested in a rational discussion I would treat you with respect.

But as I have read through the past week's posts, it is clear you are a Stones fan trolling for a fight. You are one of those "keep moving the cheese" type of guys.

You may be able to pull the wool over the younger people, but I was around in the 1970s going to both Stones and Zeppelin concerts, so you can't bullshit me with your selective statistics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 11:09 AM, stanlove said:

 

 

My only point on this thread is constantly running into Zep fans who claim that Zeppelin owned the Stones at the box office in the 1970s and thats just not true at all. The Stones have the better argument of being the biggest live band in the world in the 1970s.

Once again, where is your proof and real and actual statistics to actually prove this? 

I will say this once again:  In 1975 and 1977, Led Zeppelin played for up to 4 hours in different cities without an opening act/band. 

In the same time period, the Rolling Stones played a gig of, at the most, 2 hours with Billy Preston or whoever else was slated to warm up the Stones crowd, and sometimes Keith was too smacked out to play for the paltry 1 and a half hours that the Stones were required to do. 

That brings up two questions:  Keith was a Junkie who could not even play a concert that was not even 120 minutes in length, and if the Rolling Stones could not fulfill a contract that required them to play a 2 hour concert, I am sure that the Rolling Stones were quietly sued or the promoter expected some kind of legal recourse so that he would be paid what must have been written down in contract. 

Keith Richard may be the biggest Heroin Junkie in the History of Rock and Roll.  And that is probably the truest statement that I have ever made. 

The Rolling Stones bigger than Led Zeppelin?  Are you really serious are you really joking? 

Edited to add:

While Keef was searching for a vein, Mick was probably searching for a partner, male or female.  It is a natural fact that Mick Jagger was a known Bi-Sexual in the 1970's and beyond, probably still to this very day.  I would also think the same of Keef.  When you shoot enough Smack that could kill a normal person, I would think that Keef shot enough Horse that He probably fucked a lot of men when he thought that were women. 

Edited by kingzoso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kingzoso said:

Once again, where is your proof and real and actual statistics to actually prove this? 

I will say this once again:  In 1975 and 1977, Led Zeppelin played for up to 4 hours in different cities without an opening act/band. 

In the same time period, the Rolling Stones played a gig of, at the most, 2 hours with Billy Preston or whoever else was slated to warm up the Stones crowd, and sometimes Keith was too smacked out to play for the paltry 1 and a half hours that the Stones were required to do. 

That brings up two questions:  Keith was a Junkie who could not even play a concert that was not even 120 minutes in length, and if the Rolling Stones could not fulfill a contract that required them to play a 2 hour concert, I am sure that the Rolling Stones were quietly sued or the promoter expected some kind of legal recourse so that he would be paid what must have been written down in contract. 

Keith Richard may be the biggest Heroin Junkie in the History of Rock and Roll.  And that is probably the truest statement that I have ever made. 

The Rolling Stones bigger than Led Zeppelin?  Are you really serious are you really joking? 

Edited to add:

While Keef was searching for a vein, Mick was probably searching for a partner, male or female.  It is a natural fact that Mick Jagger was a known Bi-Sexual in the 1970's and beyond, probably still to this very day.  I would also think the same of Keef.  When you shoot enough Smack that could kill a normal person, I would think that Keef shot enough Horse that He probably fucked a lot of men when he thought that were women. 

Do us all a favor king of the zoso's.. Don't help.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, the chase said:

Do us all a favor king of the zoso's.. Don't help.. 

What help, KZ only ever posts opinion, His....

Edited by JTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JTM said:

What help, KZ only ever posts opinion, His....

Great. You're right .. But Character assassination is character assassination.. Nothing to do with the whole attendance discussion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FACT= Page was actually on the stones payroll for quite someX , page played what kieth could NOT on MANY more songs than anyone would begin to know! 

i dont think he can even play anymore LOOK @ his hands!!

thats my input!  feel free to correct me if im wrong!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now