Jimmy Page´s injured fingers in the 70ies

[bluecongo]

It's a shame about 1975, so many tragedies.  But really, Jimmys playing was really coming back into shape.  The end of the USA tour had some outstanding very fluid performances from Jimmy in Seattle, Vancouver and LA.  

Then in the Earls Court shows, Jimmy again was very very good.  Had they been able to do the a planned World Tour, I really think Jimmy would've recovered that fluidity from 73.

but we all know what happened...........

[Crimson Avenger]

 

On 12/06/2016 at 9:02 AM, Mercurious said:

This is an awful thing to say for some people, perhaps, but the broken finger served to make Jimmy Page an even more interesting guitar player than he was before.   He became more of a noise artist, and that, to me, was a beautiful thing.  The fact that he then seemed to stick with those alterations well after his hand was repaired cements him as the most interesting guitar player I've ever heard.  He's Miles Davis in my book.

 

2 hours ago, pluribus said:

Page's broken finger in 1975 lasted all of 2-3 weeks before he was playing normally again. His playing was already in decline before that. 

 

I think there's a lot of merit in both these points. For the avoidance of doubt, I'm sure Jimmy did hurt his finger. Quite when that happened is one of those annoying little Zep mysteries. But regardless of that, he played well right from the start of 1975... those January shows have a focus and brevity in the guitar playing which I actually prefer to the over-long (IMO) stuff later on. I'm not sure how far I'd defend the comparison, but there's a lot about Jan 75 Jimmy that reminds me of 69 Jimmy.

I'm not sure about decline, but his playing by 75 had mutated quite a bit, and that shows up more as the tour goes on and the songs get longer. Often more complex, more jazzy and less reliant on the rock/blues style of the earlier years. The older style is still there when needed; OTHAFA for example is largely a rework of his Immigrant Song solo from 70-72, and it's invariably a joy to listen to in 75. But he was clearly a player trying to move on from where he had been in 73. That worked in 75, less so afterwards.

 

[blindwillie127]

8 hours ago, pluribus said:

Page's broken finger in 1975 lasted all of 2-3 weeks before he was playing normally again. His playing was already in decline before that. 

Page's playing was "in decline" before 1975? Sorry, but I could not disagree more. '73 was epic Jimmy Page the whole way through in my opinion. Also, you say that "Page's broken finger in 1975 lasted all of "2-3 weeks before he was playing normally again". You ever break your finger? I have, about 10 years ago and it still hurts, when it rains, when its cold, and if over exerted. I've been playing guitar for 30 years and luckily the broken finger was on my pick hand and not the frets. From my count, Page has broken/damaged fingers on his fretting hand at least 3 times, the thought of that makes me cringe. 

Edited June 13, 2016 by blindwillie127

[Mercurious]

8 hours ago, Crimson Avenger said:

OTHAFA for example is largely a rework of his Immigrant Song solo from 70-72, and it's invariably a joy to listen to in 75. But he was clearly a player trying to move on from where he had been in 73. That worked in 75, less so afterwards.

It sure is, and those are two of my favorite Page solos, so similar and both great examples of what one might call "playing backwards" against the rhythm.  I think with Page's "mutation" as a player you have a combination of three things: 

1) the injuries to his fret fingers that forced him to rethink his approach. 

2)  A change in style to a more expressive, sometimes "backward" playing that relied on nasty string bends instead of fast playing. If you hear the live recordings from 1970-72, he's just blowing through that extended jam on "Thank You", for exampe, and it's (to me) not that interesting, more like the kind of thing Ritchie Blackmore was doing, and Blackmore was actively competing with Page in those days, despite the fact that Page wasn't competing with anyone. Page -- and this is amazing, really, considering that this is occurring at the height of Led Zep in the mid-1970s-- actively sought a more expressive style and phrasing.  The new style can be heard all over Presence, which he has often cited as his favorite Zep album.

3) The heroin.  On the bootlegs that are now so available we can hear him searching for those phrases mentioned in #2, sometimes not finding them, relying on tones and bends and noise to get where he wants to go. Sometimes getting lost, then triumphantly finding his way, or not.  The element of experimentation and creation is there all the time, very jazz-like in the truest sense of be-bop and Miles and Coltrane, who were also hooked on the junk.  Beautiful statements, sometimes failing, but always courageous.  

[Strider]

I'll take Jimmy's 1975-77 OTHAFA solos and "Trampled Under Foot" Berlin 1980 over everything Richie Blackmore has ever done.

[pluribus]

On 6/13/2016 at 10:13 AM, blindwillie127 said:

Page's playing was "in decline" before 1975? Sorry, but I could not disagree more. 

No, I meant, by 1975 Page's playing was in decline. The January Brussels show (pre finger break) proves that. We can theorize about why his playing changed (tendon problems, less concern for his technique), but the Brussels audio proves that by January 1975 Page wasn't at the same level of technical proficiency as he was in July 1973.  

[JohnOsbourne]

4 hours ago, pluribus said:

No, I meant, by 1975 Page's playing was in decline. The January Brussels show (pre finger break) proves that. We can theorize about why his playing changed (tendon problems, less concern for his technique), but the Brussels audio proves that by January 1975 Page wasn't at the same level of technical proficiency as he was in July 1973.  

Are you sure about the timeline?  The setlist on the Brussels bootleg is pretty much the same as the January US shows, i.e. no D&C, which I thought was dropped because of the broken finger.  If he broke the finger post-Brussels, why was D&C not played at that show? 

[pluribus]

I thought it was established that Page broke his finger at Victoria station in London, prior to leaving for the US tour.

[JohnOsbourne]

1 hour ago, pluribus said:

I thought it was established that Page broke his finger at Victoria station in London, prior to leaving for the US tour.

Agreed, but do we know the actual date?  They flew out to the US on the 15th, I believe, and Brussels was on the 12th.  Could the finger have been broken prior to the continental warm-ups?  Maybe it was broken on the 13th or 14th, but it seems strange, even allowing for rust (they hadn't played in 18 months), that they'd drop D&C from the warm-up shows (well, I guess we don't know the setlist for Rotterdam, but likely it was the same).

[IpMan]

Page broke his finger before any of the 1975 tour dates. I believe he broke it in early December 74'. The fact is if you break a finger, you do not play guitar for a good few weeks period. This explains why he was rusty at the beginning of the tour. Broken finger + no practice for at least three weeks prior as well. In fact I would argue, taking both facts into consideration, that he played god damn well in the beginning of the tour under the circumstance. By mid-February he was sounding pretty good and by the west coast run in March he was incredible and at 73' level capabilities. After that though, bombs away. By 77' heroin corn holed his technique for a good number of shows but what I really notice is his meandering and repetitive measures (again, heroin) in many solos. This is a great benchmark to really highlight how high  Jimmy was on a particular night. If he was kinda high his solos would often meander and repeat measures until he could pull it together. The nights he was really high he is just a mess, a meandering repetitive mess at that.

The fact that on several nights he not only could pull it together but deliver some of his best live work is testament that the drugs were the primary culprit. Though, I do believe the multiple finger fractures throughout the years has made his ability to play those 30 min D&C and other marathons impossible. If you youtube his performances from the 98' tour, there is proof enough that Jimmy was not only as good as he was in 73', but in my opinion considerably better. The 96' - 2000 were Jimmy's peak live, though he may not have been as blindingly fast as he was in the 70's, he was much more emotive, his bends were just beautiful, and his phrasing took on a whole new dimension. Plus, his technique was greatly improved from any of his performances in the 1970's. 

[Crimson Avenger]

5 hours ago, JohnOsbourne said:

Agreed, but do we know the actual date?  They flew out to the US on the 15th, I believe, and Brussels was on the 12th.  Could the finger have been broken prior to the continental warm-ups?  Maybe it was broken on the 13th or 14th, but it seems strange, even allowing for rust (they hadn't played in 18 months), that they'd drop D&C from the warm-up shows (well, I guess we don't know the setlist for Rotterdam, but likely it was the same).

This one is maddeningly difficult to pin down, because if you take all the 'known facts' together, they don't make sense. If you ask why didn't they play D&C - surely a key song to play in a warm up gig - in Brussels if Jimmy hadn't hurt his finger then, it does make a lot of sense to say it must have happened a few weeks earlier.

But there are a few nagging doubts about that. Firstly, it does go against the written testimony. Fair enough, might be a bit out. Also, Robert makes no mention of fingers at the Brussels gig, when he does mention it at ( I think) every gig in the US in January. Again, it's not conclusive. But what I can't get out of my head is, if the damage was done a month or so before the tour, why didn't they just reschedule the early dates? Wouldn't have been the first occasion, and they'd have had plenty of time. The reason given for going ahead as they did was lack of time to reschedule.

The other thing that occurs is, is the Brussels tape complete? Could songs be missing? Airy and probably naughty speculation on my part, but that show does seem very short. Be nice to have Rotterdam too, to compare.

An alternative view could be that they never intended to play D&C or SIBLY at the outset and later changed their minds re the former when they thought US audiences wanted a longer show. I like this because it allows the finger incident to move back post-Brussels. Then again I've never understood how it's easier on the finger to play 15 minutes of HMMT rather than D&C. But they didn't play HMMT at Brussels either as far as we know, so the confusion is complete on my part.

 

 

 

[IpMan]

4 hours ago, Crimson Avenger said:

This one is maddeningly difficult to pin down, because if you take all the 'known facts' together, they don't make sense. If you ask why didn't they play D&C - surely a key song to play in a warm up gig - in Brussels if Jimmy hadn't hurt his finger then, it does make a lot of sense to say it must have happened a few weeks earlier.

But there are a few nagging doubts about that. Firstly, it does go against the written testimony. Fair enough, might be a bit out. Also, Robert makes no mention of fingers at the Brussels gig, when he does mention it at ( I think) every gig in the US in January. Again, it's not conclusive. But what I can't get out of my head is, if the damage was done a month or so before the tour, why didn't they just reschedule the early dates? Wouldn't have been the first occasion, and they'd have had plenty of time. The reason given for going ahead as they did was lack of time to reschedule.

The other thing that occurs is, is the Brussels tape complete? Could songs be missing? Airy and probably naughty speculation on my part, but that show does seem very short. Be nice to have Rotterdam too, to compare.

An alternative view could be that they never intended to play D&C or SIBLY at the outset and later changed their minds re the former when they thought US audiences wanted a longer show. I like this because it allows the finger incident to move back post-Brussels. Then again I've never understood how it's easier on the finger to play 15 minutes of HMMT rather than D&C. But they didn't play HMMT at Brussels either as far as we know, so the confusion is complete on my part.

 

 

 

From what I have read, Grant thought about rescheduling the tour but Jimmy insisted the few weeks down time would be enough. However, when Robert came down with the flu at the beginning of the tour, again, they went ahead with no cancellations. I don't know why they had this damn the torpedoes attitude, they should have postponed the tour a good month when Jimmy broke the finger, or once Robert came down with the flu. That was a real bad idea to have your singer rip his throat out every night, potentially causing serious damage, plus giving the fans a poor performance as well.

[blindwillie127]

1 hour ago, IpMan said:

From what I have read, Grant thought about rescheduling the tour but Jimmy insisted the few weeks down time would be enough. However, when Robert came down with the flu at the beginning of the tour, again, they went ahead with no cancellations. I don't know why they had this damn the torpedoes attitude, they should have postponed the tour a good month when Jimmy broke the finger, or once Robert came down with the flu. That was a real bad idea to have your singer rip his throat out every night, potentially causing serious damage, plus giving the fans a poor performance as well.

Personally, I don't think Plant had the flu, I think that was just the sate of his voice at that time following throat surgery. What kind of flu lasts 3 months? Notice that in 1977 they 'did' postpone the tour for a month due to Plant's flu, probably because he really did have it. I would love to hear rehearsal's for the '75 tour, that right that there would tell you what kind of shape Plants voice was in, and I'm willing to bet it's no different from the bulk of the '75 performances. This is just my opinion....

 

Edited June 15, 2016 by blindwillie127

[JohnOsbourne]

6 hours ago, Crimson Avenger said:

This one is maddeningly difficult to pin down, because if you take all the 'known facts' together, they don't make sense. If you ask why didn't they play D&C - surely a key song to play in a warm up gig - in Brussels if Jimmy hadn't hurt his finger then, it does make a lot of sense to say it must have happened a few weeks earlier.

But there are a few nagging doubts about that. Firstly, it does go against the written testimony. Fair enough, might be a bit out. Also, Robert makes no mention of fingers at the Brussels gig, when he does mention it at ( I think) every gig in the US in January. Again, it's not conclusive. But what I can't get out of my head is, if the damage was done a month or so before the tour, why didn't they just reschedule the early dates? Wouldn't have been the first occasion, and they'd have had plenty of time. The reason given for going ahead as they did was lack of time to reschedule.

The other thing that occurs is, is the Brussels tape complete? Could songs be missing? Airy and probably naughty speculation on my part, but that show does seem very short. Be nice to have Rotterdam too, to compare.

An alternative view could be that they never intended to play D&C or SIBLY at the outset and later changed their minds re the former when they thought US audiences wanted a longer show. I like this because it allows the finger incident to move back post-Brussels. Then again I've never understood how it's easier on the finger to play 15 minutes of HMMT rather than D&C. But they didn't play HMMT at Brussels either as far as we know, so the confusion is complete on my part.

 

 

 

Good point about the possibility of the Brussels show being incomplete, I was wrong to say it was the same setlist as the early US shows, How Many More Times is missing from the Brussels tape (as you say).  That would have been a sure give-away that the finger was already broken.  (I'm guessing Plant was more loquacious with American audiences because of the common language?)  So indeed, the continental shows may have been intended to just get in and out quick, so 1/2 hour of the show was cut (i.e. D&C could have been played if so inclined).  Strange, though, that they wouldn't rehearse (essentially) a centerpiece of their act if they intended to play in America in a few days.  I'm inclined to believe that the finger was broken pre-Brussels (as noted elsewhere, it takes longer than a few days to heal, unlikely they would risk a potential disaster for a huge US tour if they weren't already confident [based on the warm-ups] that Page could withstand the strain).  Definitely a mystery, though.   

[Crimson Avenger]

2 hours ago, IpMan said:

From what I have read, Grant thought about rescheduling the tour but Jimmy insisted the few weeks down time would be enough. However, when Robert came down with the flu at the beginning of the tour, again, they went ahead with no cancellations. I don't know why they had this damn the torpedoes attitude, they should have postponed the tour a good month when Jimmy broke the finger, or once Robert came down with the flu. That was a real bad idea to have your singer rip his throat out every night, potentially causing serious damage, plus giving the fans a poor performance as well.

Where did you read that? Not saying it's wrong, but it doesn't really tally with what Jimmy himself said about it at the time.

 

1 hour ago, blindwillie127 said:

Personally, I don't think Plant had the flu, I think that was just the sate of his voice at that time following throat surgery. What kind of flu lasts 3 months? Notice that in 1977 they 'did' postpone the tour for a month due to Plant's flu, probably because he really did have it. I would love to hear rehearsal's for the '75 tour, that right that there would tell you what kind of shape Plants voice was in, and I'm willing to bet it's no different from the bulk of the '75 performances. This is just my opinion....

 

 

He did have flu, or something like it. Check out 25th Jan, he barely makes it to the end. Sure, his voice wasn't at a peak anyway, but he's far stronger in Brussels or even Chicago than even a few days later. The flu kicks in once the tour has started (airplane air, or the cold weather, or both), which is why they keep on going for a few days before rescheduling the St Louis gig.

 

 

 

[Crimson Avenger]

29 minutes ago, JohnOsbourne said:

Good point about the possibility of the Brussels show being incomplete, I was wrong to say it was the same setlist as the early US shows, How Many More Times is missing from the Brussels tape (as you say).  That would have been a sure give-away that the finger was already broken.  (I'm guessing Plant was more loquacious with American audiences because of the common language?)  So indeed, the continental shows may have been intended to just get in and out quick, so 1/2 hour of the show was cut (i.e. D&C could have been played if so inclined).  Strange, though, that they wouldn't rehearse (essentially) a centerpiece of their act if they intended to play in America in a few days.  I'm inclined to believe that the finger was broken pre-Brussels (as noted elsewhere, it takes longer than a few days to heal, unlikely they would risk a potential disaster for a huge US tour if they weren't already confident [based on the warm-ups] that Page could withstand the strain).  Definitely a mystery, though.   

He does talk to the audience in Brussels, and actually seems pretty pleased with how it went off, at the end. But you are right, it's no firm evidence of anything. Wiser heads than mine may be able to offer a view on the likelihood of Brussels being incomplete, but it would solve a lot of problems if it were!

 

 

[Mercurious]

18 hours ago, JohnOsbourne said:

Agreed, but do we know the actual date?  They flew out to the US on the 15th, I believe, and Brussels was on the 12th.  Could the finger have been broken prior to the continental warm-ups?  Maybe it was broken on the 13th or 14th, but it seems strange, even allowing for rust (they hadn't played in 18 months), that they'd drop D&C from the warm-up shows (well, I guess we don't know the setlist for Rotterdam, but likely it was the same).

 

12 hours ago, Crimson Avenger said:

This one is maddeningly difficult to pin down, because if you take all the 'known facts' together, they don't make sense. If you ask why didn't they play D&C - surely a key song to play in a warm up gig - in Brussels if Jimmy hadn't hurt his finger then, it does make a lot of sense to say it must have happened a few weeks earlier.

But there are a few nagging doubts about that. Firstly, it does go against the written testimony. Fair enough, might be a bit out. Also, Robert makes no mention of fingers at the Brussels gig, when he does mention it at ( I think) every gig in the US in January. Again, it's not conclusive. But what I can't get out of my head is, if the damage was done a month or so before the tour, why didn't they just reschedule the early dates? Wouldn't have been the first occasion, and they'd have had plenty of time. The reason given for going ahead as they did was lack of time to reschedule.

The other thing that occurs is, is the Brussels tape complete? Could songs be missing? Airy and probably naughty speculation on my part, but that show does seem very short. Be nice to have Rotterdam too, to compare.

An alternative view could be that they never intended to play D&C or SIBLY at the outset and later changed their minds re the former when they thought US audiences wanted a longer show. I like this because it allows the finger incident to move back post-Brussels. Then again I've never understood how it's easier on the finger to play 15 minutes of HMMT rather than D&C. But they didn't play HMMT at Brussels either as far as we know, so the confusion is complete on my part.

The best source for the timing of the injury was Cameron Crowe's Rolling Stone cover story published March 13, 1975.  Based on that story, the timing of the injury is Jan. 13-15, most likely the 14th as they had played in Brussells on the 12th, take a day, then he's commuting around by train for final pre-tour business on the 14th, and flying out on the 15th.  They have one rehearsal the 17th in Minneapolis at the venue, then the show on the 18th.  Here's Crowe:

It has been a long time since Zeppelin last rock & rolled. After 18 months spent laboring over their new double album, Physical Graffiti, the band has some warming up to do. "It's unfortunate there's got to be anybody there," Plant said. "But we've got to feel our way. There's a lot of energy here this tour. Much more than the last one." The tour's official opening night, January 18th at the Minneapolis Sports Center, went surprisingly well considering the circumstances. Only a week before, Jimmy Page broke the tip of his left ring finger when it was caught in a slamming train door. With only one rehearsal to perfect what Page calls his "three-and-a-half-finger technique," the classic Zeppelin live pieces, "Dazed and Confused" and "Since I've Been Loving You," were indefinitely retired. Codeine tablets and Jack Daniel's deadened the pain enough for Page to struggle through the band's demanding three-hour set.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/the-durable-led-zeppelin-19750313#ixzz4BgL1vSGR 
 

However it now seems possible that they jived Crowe with the exact timing of the hand injury or that he simply got it wrong.  The set list from Rotterdam on the 11th of Jan.  does not include "Since I've Been Loving You" or "Dazed", according to LedZeppelin.com.  Those bootleg recordings, then, didn't miss a beat.  They didn't play either song in Brussels the next night.  

Another possibility is that Crowe did get it right, yet Zep (and Page) were so rusty after 18-months of not playing live that it was decided they should skip those songs until they got warmed up.  It doesn't take long -- Page on Feb. 3 at Madison Square Garden is feeling good enough to forget "How Many More Times" and go for "Dazed" (one of their best shows ever, according to Crowe).  In that scenario, the Rotterdam and Brussels shows are just warm-ups best left forgotten and the finger injury in London on the 14th compounds the rust problem, and provides some fodder for the press as a much-needed pr "rustoleum" so to speak.  A heavily medicated Page decides the show must go on, and that some interesting things might happen as he experiments his way through the mists.  

The finger, though, is definitely injured.  The photos from the rehearsal Jan. 17 clearly show Page managing to keep the ring finger out of a few chord clusters where one would normally use it.  There are a bunch of those posted in another thread on this forum.

Edited June 15, 2016 by Mercurious

[IpMan]

8 minutes ago, Mercurious said:

 

The best source for the timing of the injury was Cameron Crowe's Rolling Stone cover story published March 13, 1975.  Based on that story, the timing of the injury is Jan. 13-15, most likely the 14th as they had played in Brussells on the 12th, take a day, then he's commuting around by train for final pre-tour business on the 14th, and flying out on the 15th.  They have one rehearsal the 17th in Minneapolis at the venue, then the show on the 18th.  Here's Crowe:

It has been a long time since Zeppelin last rock & rolled. After 18 months spent laboring over their new double album, Physical Graffiti, the band has some warming up to do. "It's unfortunate there's got to be anybody there," Plant said. "But we've got to feel our way. There's a lot of energy here this tour. Much more than the last one." The tour's official opening night, January 18th at the Minneapolis Sports Center, went surprisingly well considering the circumstances. Only a week before, Jimmy Page broke the tip of his left ring finger when it was caught in a slamming train door. With only one rehearsal to perfect what Page calls his "three-and-a-half-finger technique," the classic Zeppelin live pieces, "Dazed and Confused" and "Since I've Been Loving You," were indefinitely retired. Codeine tablets and Jack Daniel's deadened the pain enough for Page to struggle through the band's demanding three-hour set.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/the-durable-led-zeppelin-19750313#ixzz4BgL1vSGR 
 

However it now seems possible that they jived Crowe with the exact timing of the hand injury or that he simply got it wrong.  The set list from Rotterdam on the 11th of Jan.  does not include "Since I've Been Loving You" or "Dazed", according to LedZeppelin.com.  Those bootleg recordings, then, didn't miss a beat.  They didn't play either song in Brussels the next night.  

Another possibility is that Crowe did get it right, yet Zep (and Page) were so rusty after 18-months of not playing live that it was decided they should skip those songs until they got warmed up.  It doesn't take long -- Page on Feb. 3 at Madison Square Garden is feeling good enough to forget "How Many More Times" and go for "Dazed" (one of their best shows ever, according to Crowe).  In that scenario, the Rotterdam and Brussels shows are just warm-ups best left forgotten and the finger injury in London on the 14th compounds the rust problem, and provides some fodder for the press as a much-needed pr "rustoleum" so to speak.  A heavily medicated Page decides the show must go on, and that some interesting things might happen as he experiments his way through the mists.  

The finger, though, is definitely injured.  The photos from the rehearsal Jan. 17 clearly show Page managing to keep the ring finger out of a few chord clusters where one would normally use it.  There are a bunch of those posted in another thread on this forum.

I don't buy it.  You don't break the tip of a finger and then go and play guitar for three hours for three months. What guitarist would do such a thing? That would be like a boxer breaking part of his hand and going into the ring the next night and fight every night for a month.

[Mercurious]

16 minutes ago, IpMan said:

I don't buy it.  You don't break the tip of a finger and then go and play guitar for three hours for three months. What guitarist would do such a thing? That would be like a boxer breaking part of his hand and going into the ring the next night and fight every night for a month.

It was just a fracture, most likely, not a clean break.  Train doors don't close like a slamming car door. Had it been a full break, they would have had to cancel some things - he'd be in a splint for weeks, with a mini-cast for his finger.  It's quite possible the broken finger story was exaggerated for effect - he had already messed up his hand 18 months prior (May 29-30, 1973 at LA Airport), and rust never sleeps.  Meanwhile, Page was being drawn into his heroin affair. 

The shows are quite a bit different from how they sounded in 1973, and a lot of it was the change in Page's playing, and are maybe a little more interesting for reasons stated previously.

Edited June 15, 2016 by Mercurious

[IpMan]

6 hours ago, Mercurious said:

It was just a fracture, most likely, not a clean break.  Train doors don't close like a slamming car door. Had it been a full break, they would have had to cancel some things - he'd be in a splint for weeks, with a mini-cast for his finger.  It's quite possible the broken finger story was exaggerated for effect - he had already messed up his hand 18 months prior (May 29-30, 1973 at LA Airport), and rust never sleeps.  Meanwhile, Page was being drawn into his heroin affair. 

The shows are quite a bit different from how they sounded in 1973, and a lot of it was the change in Page's playing, and are maybe a little more interesting for reasons stated previously.

Yes, that would make more sense. I could never figure out how anyone could play with a broken finger, even if it healed for a few weeks due to the dexterity needed. I have a doctor friend (surgeon) who broke one of his index fingers, the distal phalanx (essentially the tip or topmost bone) which is likely the same bone Jimmy may have fractured (but on his ring finger). He was not allowed to perform surgery for six weeks, and then had to perform exercises and skill tests in front of a board to prove he had full capacity before he would be allowed near a patient. That was a full break however, not a fracture. That was more than 10 years ago and the bone is now arthritic which means he no longer practices in a surgical capacity. He still could if he wanted to but he was afraid of having to reschedule to many operations due to pain and lack of dexterity during arthritic false ups. I can just imagine how bad it could be for a professional guitarist.

[pluribus]

Remember too that Page's playing was already showing signs of wear in 73, as was mentioned by the earlier posted quote about needing injections after LA 73. But I really think the problem started earlier than that. Listen to New Orleans, May 1973.  What was going on there? After years of such fluid playing, Page's fingers were starting to get really sticky, really quick. Dallas 73 too. He may have injured his finger around the LA Forum shows, but it definitely sounds like he was already suffering from something earlier in that month. This is why I've never bought that story about Page spraining his hand before those LA shows. In New Orleans his playing was more affected than the LA shows.  

Page's comments about needing injections afterwards make sense. Listen to shows from July 73, and Page was playing better than he ever had. Speed, fluidity, etc.  I just googled injections for guitarists, and cortisone came up. Maybe something to ease the strain on his hand tendons?  According to google, those types of injections provide temporary relief lasting a few weeks, but dedicated physical therapy is needed to get the tendons healthy again.

After years of playing 3 hour shows, I'd wager that Page's hands were finally showing some fatigue and tendon injury. He had the problem fixed with injections, but then took a prolonged lay-off, likely with no physical therapy. They started touring again in 1975 and Page's hands had changed by then.

[JohnOsbourne]

9 hours ago, pluribus said:

Remember too that Page's playing was already showing signs of wear in 73, as was mentioned by the earlier posted quote about needing injections after LA 73. But I really think the problem started earlier than that. Listen to New Orleans, May 1973.  What was going on there? After years of such fluid playing, Page's fingers were starting to get really sticky, really quick. Dallas 73 too. He may have injured his finger around the LA Forum shows, but it definitely sounds like he was already suffering from something earlier in that month. This is why I've never bought that story about Page spraining his hand before those LA shows. In New Orleans his playing was more affected than the LA shows.  

Page's comments about needing injections afterwards make sense. Listen to shows from July 73, and Page was playing better than he ever had. Speed, fluidity, etc.  I just googled injections for guitarists, and cortisone came up. Maybe something to ease the strain on his hand tendons?  According to google, those types of injections provide temporary relief lasting a few weeks, but dedicated physical therapy is needed to get the tendons healthy again.

After years of playing 3 hour shows, I'd wager that Page's hands were finally showing some fatigue and tendon injury. He had the problem fixed with injections, but then took a prolonged lay-off, likely with no physical therapy. They started touring again in 1975 and Page's hands had changed by then.

Interesting, definitely plausible.  There's a noticeable difference between May 73, and March 73/July 73.  Not huge by any means (like say compared with January 75), but definitely there.  Do you think perhaps the "hand caught in train door" story is just that, a story, meant to obscure the physical decline that was clearly noticed in Brussels?

[JohnOsbourne]

9 hours ago, pluribus said:

Remember too that Page's playing was already showing signs of wear in 73, as was mentioned by the earlier posted quote about needing injections after LA 73. But I really think the problem started earlier than that. Listen to New Orleans, May 1973.  What was going on there? After years of such fluid playing, Page's fingers were starting to get really sticky, really quick. Dallas 73 too. He may have injured his finger around the LA Forum shows, but it definitely sounds like he was already suffering from something earlier in that month. This is why I've never bought that story about Page spraining his hand before those LA shows. In New Orleans his playing was more affected than the LA shows.  

Page's comments about needing injections afterwards make sense. Listen to shows from July 73, and Page was playing better than he ever had. Speed, fluidity, etc.  I just googled injections for guitarists, and cortisone came up. Maybe something to ease the strain on his hand tendons?  According to google, those types of injections provide temporary relief lasting a few weeks, but dedicated physical therapy is needed to get the tendons healthy again.

After years of playing 3 hour shows, I'd wager that Page's hands were finally showing some fatigue and tendon injury. He had the problem fixed with injections, but then took a prolonged lay-off, likely with no physical therapy. They started touring again in 1975 and Page's hands had changed by then.

BTW, what explains the mixture of flawless shows like Mobile and Ft Worth sandwiching relatively sloppy shows like NO and Dallas?

[pluribus]

1 hour ago, JohnOsbourne said:

Interesting, definitely plausible.  There's a noticeable difference between May 73, and March 73/July 73.  Not huge by any means (like say compared with January 75), but definitely there.  Do you think perhaps the "hand caught in train door" story is just that, a story, meant to obscure the physical decline that was clearly noticed in Brussels?

I think Page did injure his hand in 1975, but I think he just bruised it bad. Those photos show a bloodied nail. Like the other poster mentioned, a finger break would be really hard to play through and recover that quickly from. I think he was really back in the game by early February show, wasn't he?. 

What I do think is a story is the LA Forum 73 injury. That photo of Page with the bizarre looking cast? What is that about? That looks more like something to treat a broken wrist, maybe. It didn't even have any support on it for his fingers. Yet the supposedly strained a finger.

I'd agree with the conspiracy theorists who think that Page was faking the LA injury to mask whatever was really going on. 

[pluribus]

1 hour ago, JohnOsbourne said:

BTW, what explains the mixture of flawless shows like Mobile and Ft Worth sandwiching relatively sloppy shows like NO and Dallas?

That's why I think the problem was injury-related. Some days his symptoms affected him worse than others. Like a sports injury can plague a player off and on during the whole season.