Jump to content

sixpense

Members
  • Posts

    812
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sixpense

  1. On 9/10/2016 at 1:32 AM, IpMan said:

    One of the aspects of Jimmy which is often overlooked is the herculean feat he performed in the Firm. Like them or hate them, Jimmy essentially completely re-invented his playing style in 1983 using the B-Bender in ways no rock guitarist (to my humble knowledge) had ever done before. Jimmy receives no credit for this and I just don't understand why. This phase is just as important as him picking up the bow and drawing it against the strings for the first time. Plus, playing a B-Bender in the fashion Jimmy did in the Firm is god damn difficult as hell. Those phrasings and progressions in conjunction with the B-Bender are very, very difficult yet little to no credit is given. I would have loved to see a fusion of his B-Bender style with his C/P style as I think it would have completely re-invented rock guitar.

    Sadly, an opportunity missed.

    Jimmy was using the B-Bender back with Zep during the 77 tour on Ten Years Gone, then on ITTOD with tracks like South Bound Suarez, Hot Dog and All My Love. I believe Jimmy selecting a very different type of rhythm section for the Firm as compared to Bonham and Jones was a conscious effort  for a radically different sound. (Jimmy was trying to get Pino Palladino (The Who and John Mayer) on bass instead of Franklin) He was trying to avoid the Zeppelin comparisons.

    Jimmy has stated in interviews of the past that his playing style would change or evolve every year. I believe a significant part of that evolution was based on the players he was playing with.

     

  2. On 8/11/2016 at 6:48 AM, JTM said:

    No, I don't get what you are getting at.....

    The WLL edits being   "Truckin' Little Mama"  "For What it's Worth"  " Honey Bee"  "The Lemon Song" , therefore as these titles have been edited out of WLL no royalties are payable, if they had remained Page would have to cough up............Back to you...

    Not only THAT but the solo to No Quarter from The Song Remains the Same and others from that release as well. So he edits his own music.

    Ever think that the edits you mention above he couldn't get clearance from the publisher to put them out?

     

    No you still don't get it.

     

     

  3. On 8/6/2016 at 10:52 AM, JTM said:

    The Led Wallet in him not wanting to shell out to much money in royalties, if you have the complete BBC sessions bootleg why the gripe....

    Royalties are based on sales, airplay and/or performance, not based on how long or short a track is.

    My comments were self explanatory. The contradiction is Page's protecting the Led Zeppelin Legacy vs. releasing edited material. He has no control over bootlegs but has control over official releases. 

  4. 17 hours ago, Balthazor said:

    I know, it just burns me that the 2007 release could have been awesome, but was denied awesome by those strange and awful edits.

    Now, if I were the cynical type, I'd suggest that maybe Page made those edits so that he could sell us a "fixed" version sometime down the road. :)

    The contradiction I don't understand with Jimmy Page is that he treasures the legacy of Led Zeppelin (and rightfully he should), but the live releases of are edited. (BBC - Whole Lotta Love mid-section and The Song Remains The Same - No Quarter etc)

  5. 7 hours ago, pujols05 said:

    I've been enjoying the DTS version of HTWWW this week, which prompts this question: If JP is doing a super deluxe of the BBC Sessions, dare we hope for a revisit to HTWWW with the Long Beach AND LA Forum shows in their entirety? 

    Would be very groovy...but it's probably wishful thinking...

    I have How The West Was Won as originally released on DVD audio. It sounds really good and I don't see Jimmy reworking this.  Also, he didn't include The Song Remains the Same in the recent reissues either. One could only hope he would go back to that original chronological live package that he talked about back in the seventies.

  6. 1 hour ago, Tea41 said:

    Probably, as it was such a weak case. Any lawyer in his right mind who isn't hearing impaired and not suffering from brain damage would not have taken this case about 2 seconds after listening to the 2 songs and seeing how dissimilar they are.

    Money talks. Many lawyers will take a weak case as long as their fees are paid.

  7. 10 minutes ago, Tea41 said:

    Maybe this whole silly lawsuit was Wolfe's family trying to sell some Spirit records, we all know how those fly off the shelves...I think Taurus went cardboard. Zeppelin sold 300 million records, while Spirit sold about 12 records, 11 of which were bought by his immediate family, the other one being bought by Helen Keller. I think it's safe to say any sales they get are because of this whole phony unfounded association with Stairway...so I would say Spirit owes Zeppelin some royalties...not the other way around. That would amount to $26 total in sales. Taurus is so forgettable and uninspiring, comparing it to Stairway is like comparing horseshit to filet mignon. If they keep appealing they will go broke quick, Zep has unlimited resources to defend themselves. It's done.

    The trustee said at the press conference that two "new" Spirit records were being released soon.

  8. 7 hours ago, blindwillie127 said:

    Anybody out there have a ball park figure on how much money might have spent by the plaintiff's to lose this case? Just wondering.

    It would be a fair guess that the lawyer was charging about $400-$500 an hour plus a second lawyer probably at a slightly lesser rate plus fees for filing, research, depositions etc. The question is how many hours in total was spent on the case. (This case was going on for two years)

    Ca-CHING!

  9. The attorney for the plaintiff was just on a CNN program called Smerconish (he is a lawyer) . He says that he had to fight the case with both hands behind his back and that the trial wasn't about money but credit, He insinuated that he would appeal the case on reversible error. The error being that they could not use the actual  Taurus recording to compare to Stairway To Heaven.

    The host of the show thought that the songs sounded alike. I think that he needs to clean the wax out of his ears.

    As you can see that an attorney is never going to turn down the chance for more billable hours. He is going to milk this for as long as he can. I find it interesting that he stated (outside the courthouse) that one of the reasons that Randy California didn't sue was because of the cost. Apparently there is an abundance of money available now?  

  10. 12 hours ago, Balthazor said:

    No kidding. Like Skidmore and the Wolfe estate is really going to appeal. Even if they did appeal, I doubt they'd hire him as their lawyer again. They'd be total idiots if they did.

    The best is this line from Skidmore:  Speaking outside court, Mr Skidmore said: "Money has triumphed over common sense."

    Seriously? He's got that exactly backwards. Common sense triumphed over money.

    Their complaint was that the jury wasn't allowed to hear the actual recording. Interesting, since the jury asked to hear both tracks on guitar (prepared for the trial) and decided that they were not alike.

    Good luck with that appeal!

    Also, If you listen to the brief press conference by the sisters of Randy California, all they talked about was money. 

  11. 3 hours ago, Mercurious said:

    Same thing we've been discussing since last week -  access via their use of the killer "Fresh Garbage" baseline in the "As Long As I Have You" medley.  A lengthy deliberation is definitely not good for Led Zep.   There were three issues when the trial started, right?  Proximity, Access and Similarity. Now there is only one -- Access, but one would have to make a speculative leap to get there because "Fresh Garbage", while on the same side of the record as "Taurus", is not "Taurus".   From a jury perspective I think it's worth discussing for at least a little while before make a decision, yes?  -- though after an hour or so, I can't imagine that being good for Zep. 

    On another note:  Doesn't the name Malofiy mean "bad seed" or "bad spirit" or something like that?

    Per Robert Plant's testimony: "Alternately regal and earthy, his voice maintaining its trademark sonorous burr, Plant revealed that he first brought Spirit's work to the rest of his band-mates, having discovered their song "Fresh-Garbage" on a 1968 Columbia Records compilation and then incorporating a cover of it into Zeppelin's early live sets."

    http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/robert-plant-on-spirit-song-in-stairway-trial-i-dont-remember-it-20160621

     

  12. 2 hours ago, AnotherNewMember said:

    Recent interview clip with Jay about the lawsuit:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nimD1T7VDdI

    He doesn't say much.

    Jay played keyboards with Joe Walsh during the late seventies, and Joe played on many of Jays solo-albums. Alice Cooper recently covered Spirits 'I Got A Line On You', Walsh played on it.

    According to Jay, Led Zeppelin recorded Fresh Garbage but didn't release it it. Really? Get your facts straight Jay.

     

  13. 38 minutes ago, Strider said:

     

    There are a lot of things I am finding puzzling about this case...i.e. "Taurus" is an instrumental and the beef is about Page's opening acoustic part, which Robert Plant was not the creator of, so why is he even part of the lawsuit? Malofiy seems to be just throwing shit everywhere at everyone and hoping something sticks.

    What a colossal waste of everyone's time and money. The sad thing is even when Led Zeppelin win, most people will just remember that they were sued and not whether they were exonerated. The stigma of being thieves is already attached to them in a lot of haters' eyes. I see it in the comment sections of the articles and YouTube.

    Plant is included because he is listed as co-writer. The plaintiff can try to pick two pockets instead of one!

    If you look at Whole Lotta Love, it was more on the lyrics side vs the music where the issue was regarding writing credits; but all the writers of that song paid for it.

    The ones who make out in all of this are the lawyers. The judges and lawyers are involved in this perpetual cycle where one feeds the other.

     

  14. 3 hours ago, IpMan said:

    Judges have enormous power, they are not just a legal referee but also determine if a case itself is valid and may rule as such beforehand regardless of jury input. Also, a judge can set aside a jury verdict if the judge believes the jury rendered an improper verdict. When jury nullification happened in the OJ case, many legal scholars were initially puzzled as to why Judge Ito did not set aside the non-guilty verdict and either, change their verdict to guilty based on presented evidence or, more likely, dismiss the jury and declare a mistrial. The final opinion was that Ito was afraid of doing either action and as a result cause mass rioting so he let the verdict stand.

    I know. 

    In this case this Judge determined that the case should go to trial.

    But the jury decides the case. A Judge can set aside the verdict but that is very rare. More likely, if the Plaintiff continues the shenanigans, a mistrial could be declared and everything would start all over again.  

    In regards to O.J., well that would be a whole other thread............

  15. 1 hour ago, IpMan said:

    Yep, this is the same strategy which is gonna get Mr. Trump in serious trouble very soon. Rule #1 in court...never, ever piss off the judge; Rule#2 in court...refer to rule #1.

    You would be right if the trial was by judge instead of jury. Remember O.J.

×
×
  • Create New...