Oh sorry.... you wanted something I DON'T like ? JPJ's jacket in TSRTS, looking like Christmastree baubles hanging off it .. And the hair is a serious problem at that point. Trivial objections, huh? More seriously I agree with the point about the very limited filming of Led Zep. Limiting interviews ( to foster mystique) was a strategy which can be easily understood . Limiting controlled filming seems tragically wrong. Documentaries have emerged featuring the Stones ( Gimme Shelter, lots of backstage footage) and David Bowie. In each case, controls were clearly put in place over the material at the time, and hence there are tight rules over their use. But they exist. Someone at the time had the vision to see what access might enable .. and also to retain control over it. I think that is Led Zeppelin's failing. I wouldn't entirely blame Peter Grant : I rather think Jimmy was the one who felt cameras would steal his soul ( indeed perhaps he still does ) . What a huge reflection of their legacy has been missed as a result. As years go by that feels like more of an omission.

Just to add: kiwi led zep fan/porgie66/valeriesunshine ... without meaning to sound lewd I do not have a problem with "push push push" and the great virtue of that and all other such moaning allusions was that YES, IT WAS SUPER-EMBARRASSING FOR YOUR PARENTS TO HEAR WITH YOU ! I guess I didn't have the problem ( or the pleasure ) of a parent who wanted at all to listen to Led Zeppelin . I lost out on bonding .. but all of that helps you carve out a bit of teenage territory.

OH ! I have only just come across this thread and am almost speechless . But sorry guys, actually not speechless. So from this thread, on balance, the Led Zeppelin fandom is expressing the view that the problem with the band is TOO MUCH SEX ?!?! WTF ?? The sex IS Led Zeppelin and when you talk about the musicality, certainly of early Led Zeppelin, you are talking about the use of (technically brilliant) music as an expression of sex. It is lemonsqueezingcrotchgrippinghandwavinggirlsblousewearingposturingmoaninggroaningscreamingoh.my.god.allaboutsex. Kellygirl is thoughtful and forgiving enough to think that LZ's sexuality is just a female thing. But that can't be right : how does that expression of red-blooded raw male sexuality - matched totally to their music - NOT work for their male audience ? Apart from Kellygirl I am relieved to read the posts of Mithril46, Walter and Blindwillie .. thank you, so I'm not going mad. But I'm still reeling a little from some of these comments. I'm actually really questioning my appreciation of that music... of course some of their songs are not overtly sexual, but I can't imagine not seeing their music through that prism . Yes, it's quality music. But if I COULD see it in a more neutered form, I don't think I could love it so much. As Philip Larkin said " Sexual Intercourse began in 1963 .. between the end of the Chatterley ban and the Beatles' first LP" . What happened next ? Did it END again after thirty years or so ? Some of these comments make me wonder ...

Leader column from The Guardian . http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/the-guardian-view-on-stairway-to-heaven-its-on-another-page They're careful to refer to British courts and not to second-guess US ones. Let's hope that caution is unnecessary.

Great that he's won! It strikes a blow against all the unthinking redevelopment which is happening in London at the moment . And is utterly to Jimmy's credit as far as the Tower House is concerned. However this victory is due to the plans being withdrawn : had the council been allowed to judge in Jimmy's favour, it might have set a stronger precedent. What will Robbie do next ? Give up and sell up ? Or was this a strategic withdrawal: will he be back with new proposals ? I have a feeling this one will run and run ...

Jimmy fights on. The public link below is the latest submission. Evidently Jimmy has sought expert advice and has built a compelling case. Good luck to him. http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc/Objection%20Comment-1418970.pdf?extension=.pdf&id=1418970&location=volume2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=12

More news on the Stairway lawsuit. Only, not much news : they're still debating where the hearing should take place ... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-04/jimmy-page-at-center-of-lawsuit-over-zeppelin-s-stairway-riff?cmpid=yhoo

Great post, Scylla! Never knew about Bishop's Avenue and kind of glad I didn't!

Hi yellowrose, I believe the photo was taken at Cardiff Castle itself, though annoyingly I can't find where I read it. I also visited Cardiff Castle many years ago and the photo you posted looks like that. But I did find this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/3730777.stm Good luck to Jimmy, and huge credit to him for taking on the great mantle of responsibility involved in caring for the Tower House.

I'm not doubting your sources at all but that seems very premature: it appears at the moment they can't even agree where to hold the hearing .... Unless they simply want to avoid it and would rather settle out of court ( now IV has been re released? )

Indi, thanks for all the detail in that post. Looking at the floor plans, I'd love to know what Jimmy keeps in the Armoury ... presumably all his guitars???

Thanks Zepcollect. That is SUCH a Jeff Buckley statement. Not hard to imagine Jimmy picking up on it, but better to know that it came from Jeff, just seems right.

The news coverage is drawn from this link ( if it works ) which is publicly available on the council's website. http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc/Objection%20Comment-1388010.pdf?extension=.pdf&id=1388010&location=volume2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=2

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909687/Robbie-Williams-angers-neighbour-Jimmy-Page-mansion-plans.html Here is the Mail Online's version complete with architect's drawings ! I predict a lot of coverage in UK print newspapers tomorrow : most of them love a planning row between neighbours and the fact that these two protagonists are so well known will only add fuel to the argument. It's a pretty interesting story in terms of London's architectural heritage: in the east, the City of London and much of the Thames has seen major and controversial development, there's an ongoing row about how development is destroying Soho's character with the closure of old bars, music venues and a threat also to the musician's haven of Denmark Street ... and in Kensington, not far from Jimmy's Tower House, the unique Commonwealth building has been knocked down in favour of a huge tower block which is pretty inconsistent with the area. I'm no expert in planning laws but in spite of the fate of the Commonwealth building, I'd have thought that Kensington and Chelsea council is more conservative and more sympathetic to issues of heritage than some other areas. Plus the immediate area of the Tower House is valued for its Arts and Crafts connections, and includes other architectural gems. The heritage status of those roads is an issue which may well have crossed their path before now.. Obviously no one is threatening to demolish the Tower House, far from it, but they may be inclined to sympathise with Mr Page's complaint ...

Hi Scarlet, Plenty of versions on Youtube: try this one Jimmy is certainly aware of the comparison and made it himself ( no doubt deliberately!) during several of his recent promotional interviews i.e. this one And if anyone doubts his familiarity with Bach's Bourree back in the day, he's heard to play a couple of phrases from it during the Heartbreaker solo on How the West Was Won. Perhaps on other occasions too, if anyone's heard it ..?