Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ledwallett

  1. To be fair there has also been tons of threads stating that Robert is the only relevant member of Led Zeppelin also. Since he is the only one who is working outside the frame of Zeppelin and is not trying to relive his past. I feel these types of replies and threads are just as annoying as a Plant basher. It's the internet, you can't curtail what you feel is disrespectful. Unless you want to go the highbob route as mrZ calls it highbob hysteria, and lose all sense of reality. Which to be honest seems like some of you would welcome. I for one don't.

  2. Yes, it was a big hit then - but I can't agree re the rest of what you say. People have expressly said here that they will boycott him and hate his stuff because he won't take Zeppelin beyond the 02. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the consequences of the 02 turned many people off his work with Alsion ( whilst obviously attracting a new audience also).

    OK I understand that, and it's true to an extent. But how many? A very few. We tend to blow things out of proportion. I am sure someone would boycott the project because they don't like facial hair. Either way you look at it, it in no way effected raising sands success.

  3. The crazy thing is Raising Sand is very Zeppelin-esque, every thing from the bombastic drumming, the ethereal guitar work, the roosty sound with a rock edge. All of that is right out of the LZ playbook. I've said this before and I'll say it again, if Jimmy Page had been a part of Raising Sand people would be shitting all over themselves, calling it a return to form.

    The real point of contention for many fans is Robert's decision to not particpate in Led Zep redux after the O2, that show raised the expectation that there could be hope for a long term reunion. If there was no O2 show more people would be embracing the Raising Sand project. I can't ever remember a post LZ RP album met with such derision.

    While I understand your reasoning, it's simply not true. They are not alike on any level, especially the ones you pointed out such as drumming and guitar work, and I think JPJ said it best when explaining the likings of both types of music. Raising Sand was a big hit before the 02 and there is no derision. Either you like it, or you don't.

  4. I wouldn't call it very active unless you consider all the mysterious rehearsals which have yet to bear fruit.

    it might get loud documentary. The Olympics, and a host of other projects including another Zeppelin release, and he has been working on with other artists on new matrial. not exactly watching football all day on tv is it.

  5. I can't think about it, I am touring right now.

    I may do something at sometime, you never know.

    I like playing with those guys once and a while.

    You never know what's around the corner.

    You have lovely eyes.

    I don't know that person anymore.

    I won't be touring with anyone for 2 years.

    Everyone has to eat.

    They won't be calling it Led Zeppelin
  6. This just reminds me of how hated Led Zeppelin was (and obviously still are)

    by just about all of the big English bands after Zeppelin exploded onto the scene and stole all of their thunder....how dare they.

    It must kill people like Jack Bruce to see all the fuss over the 02 reunion and the subsequent mass demand for a tour.

    I don't see anybody begging for a Cream tour, or even another reunion show for that matter.

    Yes, Jack. Led Zeppelin is still adored by millions of old and new fans, and yes,

    their music is as relevant today as it was when they created it .....how dare they.

    Ya' gotta love it.

    I think it's awesome. I mean at least Thownsend has come to grips with the fact that his band is not as big as Zeppelin. But guys like Bruce, Jagger, Richards, Stewart, Crapton, they all still have a major bug in there ass. I think it's fantastic.

  7. Robert said last year that Zep had no contemporaries in there time and no one could touch them. Something to that effect. It was a bold statement. Had to do with someone asking him about a Stones comparison I think. I agree with him.

  8. Robert is not recording in Kentucky. We do love him though! :rolleyes:

    I just went through the arrivals photos on the wire services and Myles Kennedy is there with his current band, Ronnie Wood is there with his son, Coverdale is there. There are no "arrivals" photos of RP or the Js.

    The whole world loves him...And like I said, it was just Jimmy in attendance far as Led Zeppelin is concerned.

  9. And he's right.

    Oh I wasn't discrediting him. When the guy makes a statement he sticks to it. And also when he knows something, he doesn't beat around the bush with the info. No whispers or hidden messages. So he has my respect for that. He is not afraid to put his rump on the line, and will answer a question directly. You have to admire that.

  10. Well, I've never heard Jimmy make any comment conferring "full partnership" to Jason.

    He knows to do so rewrites the history of the band (Led Zeppelin), and IMHO may well be among the factors which led Robert to decide he did not wish to take it any further.

    Could you elaborate a bit on this please? How so in your opinion would this effect Roberts decision?

  11. Well, I've never heard Jimmy make any comment conferring "full partnership" to Jason.

    He knows to do so rewrites the history of the band (Led Zeppelin), and IMHO may well be among the factors which led Robert to decide he did not wish to take it any further.

    John Bonham's surviving family was at the gig, and Jason did perform on drums, but

    none were in the original Led Zeppelin, so they cannot confer full band member status upon Jason (or he upon himself) any more than you or I could (and we can't).

    To infer by playing with them he's more than "in" is to say anyone who ever did so is also more than just "in". That would include Phil Collins, among others! I believe this

    is what Robert meant when he commented from the stage about them having brought Jason "in". If he (and they) were "Led Zeppelin" there would be no need to refer to having been brought in. It was a polite way of saying, as he also said offstage, "this is how it could be, is this what you really want?"

    So what was the band that performed that night? An approximation. It was 3/4 of

    Led Zeppelin - billed as Led Zeppelin - made possible by four brave souls, and

    established strictly for the purpose of paying tribute.

    Not really looking to change anyone's mind here, just offering my own viewpoint.

    You are hung up on this partnership thing so lets take it a step further with a few questions in regard to this matter. Maybe someone with some knowledge of this subject can chime in and we can solve this debate once and for all.

    Is John Bonham now an equal partner in the band or did his sudden death change that arrangement?

    If so, Who holds John bonhams interest? Anyone from his family? Or just the remaining 3 members? How does the Bonham estate collect on 1/4? Do you think John Bonhams family collects monies from the band, or do the 3 remaining do that also? Does John Bonham's family have a say in any Led Zeppelin related project that has taken place after his death?

  • Create New...