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.

Brigante

Members
  • Content count

    196
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Brigante

  • Rank
    Zep Head

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Yorkshire
  1. It goes against what most of us would see as 'natural justice', but the harsh reality of it is that 'arranging' isn't 'writing' and doesn't get you into the writing credits. Mick Ronson lost out on literally millions of bucks cos his massive contributions to Bowie's music weren't classed as co-writes but as 'arrangements' of Bowie's ideas/music/melodies. According to Tony Visconti, Bowie often handed Ronson a couple of chords and a sketch of a melody and Ronson did the rest - but the credits said 'Written by Bowie, arranged by Ronson' because Bowie had come up with the basic ideas/tune/melody and Ronson had 'merely' embellished them. Similarly, no one doubts that JPJ's string arrangement hugely enhances Kashmir - but the original music for Kashmir came from Jimmy's riff, not Jonesy's strings, so it doesn't qualify as actual 'songwriting'. I know it sucks - but that's the reason and it's that simple. People usually go 'But Jimmy gave Bonzo a share of the Kashmir credits for his drum part!' and yeh, it does seem harsh to do that, while spurning JPJ's contribution. According to Jimmy, however, he gave Bonzo the co-credit because the drums helped him to shape the riff in the first place, so he thought they were crucial to the actual writing of Kashmir, whereas Jonesy's strings were a later embellishment. Again - that sucks for JPJ, but that's why the credits read the way they do. Ere - do you reckon Jimmy told Jonesy himself or do you think he got Peter Grant to explain it to him...?
  2. Apparently, the older stuff was remixed so that it sounded 'of a piece' with the new songs. Makes sense, but I can't remember the source so I could just be repeating some guy's speculation, here!
  3. Absolutely and genuinely brilliant, Strider. Many, many thanks for these posts - I've really loved them. You conveyed everything so clearly and vividly, I could almost see it through your eyes! Brilliant stuff, mate.
  4. That's a really good interview - it rings true, too. And, again, I didn't know that it wasn't just Robert who sold his publishing in the 80s. Great that new information can come out all these years later.
  5. That's Robbie Williams in a nutshell. Ipman's right, though - Williams couldn't have done any of it if the council hadn't been 'flexible' with the planning legislation...
  6. Yeah, that'll be it...
  7. You were, though! Good one.
  8. Sounds like Williams has had a threat of legal action and his lawyers have told him that seeing as he actually did say that stuff, Jimmy's got him bang to rights, so grovel and retract. Either that or Choronzon's had a word...
  9. That just makes it even funnier, though, eh!
  10. As the Manics' Nicky Wire said from the stage at Glastonbury in 1994: 'It's full of jugglers and cunts on stilts - build a by-pass over this shithole!'
  11. I always thought this line was just saying it's ok to enjoy the fruits of your labours, so long as you don't do anything to fuck up the thing that produced the fruit in the first place. Or there'll be no more fruit. Obviously relating to Robert and Jimmy's relationship and maybe contrasting the earlier hedonism of Zeppelin with Jimmy's heroin use, etc. Really interesting to read some of the more detailed, specific interpretations on here, though.
  12. This - absolutely.
  13. Led Zeppelin are one of those bands where it's the precise combination of those particular people that produced the magic. You can't bring on a sub and have the same thing, no matter how talented or creative that person may be. Page, Plant, Bonham, Jones - you can't plan chemistry like that and you can't bottle it, quantify it or reproduce it. Take away any one element and the spell won't work. You might not end up with a complete travesty (eg. Jane's Addiction without Eric), you could actually get something that was good in its own right (eg. Sabbath with Dio). But when the chemistry between particular people is the issue, it doesn't matter either way. Even if you have three-quarters of the thing in place, you still don't have the actual thing itself. I remember the announcement being made in 1980 and even then I thought it was the right thing to do. I still think that.
  14. John Paul Jones is one of the greatest rock bassplayers there's ever been. We all know this. Out there, they do underestimate him, presumably due to his relatively low profile compared to the others. But most people would have had a lower profile compared to Page, Plant and Bonham! I thought Diamanda Galas made a very incisive comment when she said that JPJ's bassplaying 'propelled the music' - that's so true and it does so in a way few other rock bassplayers have managed. Could be his Motown influences, I dunno. Diamanda also said that she and Jonesy got along so well because 'we're both bastards'! That reminded me of when Jason was asked if JPJ 'really was a lovely man' - 'Bonham looks baffled' was the response. So I'm sure Jonesy can be as tetchy as Jimmy and have as much tude as Robert - and so he should, he's earned the right. He can do what he likes - he's John Paul Jones FFS!