The sticker is just easier for the manufacturer. They don't have to pay a guy to hand paint it. They just have a computer print a bunch out. The entire ordeal in that regard is messed up and reflects one reason as to why modern guitars don't compare to those made in the past in terms of tone and even appearance (but I guess appearance is subjective).

I've grown to really dislike Jimmy's suits from 73 onward. I liked his style previous to that far more. I especially liked what he wore at bath. The suits were too cartoon-ish, almost like something Kiss would've came up with. I also think In Through the Out Door is terrible and that Darlene and Ozone Baby would've been the best tracks on the album next to fool in the rain. Led Zeppelin is the most timeless rock band because of their diversity. But I feel that ITTOD is the total opposite of that as a whole.

I've listened to tons of far more technical and more technically proficient drummers. Many of which are actually stiffer than Bonham. I guess it depends what your definition of stiff is. Stiff to me is unchanging and predictable. Bonham was the literal opposite of that early on from 68-72. All drummers are influenced by drum beats from one another. They can only be applied within a framework of a song, they don't have melody or the kind of instrumental characteristics of other instruments. The majority of rock drummers all sound the same to me and in my opinion Bonham, Keith Moon and Bill Ward are the only ones that really do anything unusual, unique or unpredictable (generally speaking within a mainstream rock/metal context). Technicality is overrated. You have to have a balance of feel,groove and technicality when the song calls for it. It also depends what you mean by technical. I think Bonham is perfectly technical for Led Zeppelin, he just has an unorthodox feel and approach that no other rock drummer has. Maybe if you tried playing his drum parts you'd have a greater understanding or appreciation for what he did? What I mean is maybe you wouldn't get so annoyed by peoples love for him. Bonham makes really hard things sound extremely simple. I've played a lot of death metal songs on drums (which are very intricate) and I still think that generally speaking it's harder to nail what Bonham is doing on numerous tracks. You know who I do think is an overrated rock drummer? Dave Grohl. Certainly good but he is not that great. His approach is not on the same level as Bonham, Ward, or Moon. That goes without mentioning other drummers I love like Martin Axenrot of Opeth. I definitely know what you're saying, I just think that you're directing your annoyance at the wrong rock drummer. He is hailed for legitimate reasons unlike many other rock drummers who really aren't impressive or unique and tend to use very generic fills. Most of them are just biological timekeepers.

I definitely agree that it needs a remix as well. Ideally I'd of course prefer Zeppelin live releases and releases of unheard material by Jimmy Page, but I'd be happy if they reworked WIC as there is good material on there. I'd also be happy if they released a live show from Page and Plant as well. Personally I'd prefer a show from 1998 but whatever they'd release would be welcomed by me

I definitely think Walking in to Clarksdale could use a serious remastering. It's good that it's honest sounding but Page's guitar tracks tend to sound a little too distant. Just my opinion of course

Personally I'd have to guess that if Steven Tyler tells you there are no hits and you feel confident or passionate in your material, then you're probably on to something really good. Especially if you're John Paul Jones and Jimmy Page. Steven Tyler has transferred his drug addictions to "hit single" addiction and essentially the addiction to constant attention . The last thing you should do as a songwriter is try to make hit singles. That's the complete opposite of what Led Zeppelin did (and many others). You're not going to manifest music that is creative, unique, genuine or soulful by pandering to the mainstream audience or worrying about what others want to hear.

Definitely. They had one of the biggest names in the pop music industry discover them.There truly is nothing organic about them for me whatsoever as well.

You're welcome. Exactly, there are so many nuisances. They really fill in the song, it truly is an epic performance. It's one that the casual listener wouldn't pick up. Bonzo and Jones really make the song what it is.

My most recent performance. It's an acoustic set of my material which is very much influenced by celtic, english and arabic folk; as well as players like Bert Jansch, John Renbourn, among others including Jimmy Page.

You do an unbelievable job on all of these tracks. You have a great ear and have everything down to the last detail. I think Bring it on Home is one of Bonham's most under appreciated drum tracks. It's one of my favorites though.

HAha, You know it could be an old vest of Gilbert's. The thing is from the late 60's/early 70's haha. Thanks a lot though for the kind words. I'm happy to hear that you enjoyed it!

Hey everyone, not a picture of myself but instead a video. Maybe some of you will like it? It's a video of a recent performance of mine. I think some of you who like the acoustic side of led zeppelin, along with artists such as Roy Harper, Bert Jansch and John Renbourn might like my material.

I agree. I'm not saying it to knock them as no one else is truly anything like Led Zeppelin, but they are nowhere near the comprehensive style of Led Zeppelin. I truly hear more ACDC and other 70's bands than Led Zeppelin in their music. The feel, the styles and the approaches are all quite different from Led Zeppelin for the most part. Greta is pretty much a straight forward rock band with very little influence from any styles outside of the blues. I obviously don't think it's Greta. They didn't market themselves as the next LZ. I think it's more so the media and everyone else who hears a guy sound like Robert Plant in a song or two, sees them dressing like their from the 60's and then brands a band with headlines such as "Are ________ the next led zeppelin?" How many times has that happened? Wolfmother comes to mind after their first album. Good album, actually I love the album but still nothing like Led Zeppelin. I actually think that musically their first album was more like Zeppelin than anything I've heard from Greta outside of one of their covers of a zeppelin song. Although I think that technically speaking the guitarist for Greta is a better player than Andrew from Wolfmother. Didn't Robert Plant recently say something along the lines that he doesn't think most of their fans actually understand Led Zeppelin's music? I definitely agree with that when everyone talks about how much a band like GVF sounds just like Led Zeppelin.

I agree with you. Likewise it is a legitimate concern, such intense vibrations truly can harm the foundation on any house especially one that is older. Thus it becomes a contentious property rights issue on both sides. But with all that aside, I also feel that if Robbie wanted a modern home with an overproduced flashy property that he should've went out and bought that home opposed to following the new trend of ruining historic homes by going "vintage-modern" or "modern with old world charm" which really means destroying the internal character of a timeless property and thus stripping it of its essence by replacing it with sterile looking overpriced modern crap. You basically just turn it into a facade. But that's just my personal taste and opinion. With that said I'm assuming Robbie bought an older home as it is right next to Jimmy's.

I agree. He seems to be at his best when he is just giving input on the songwriting process but not really steering it too much. His lyrics are still very good as well, I just dislike some of the musical direction and primarily the production. But I dislike the production on most records that are released these days. I just feel like pro tools sucks a lot of the essence, spirit and sound out of performances. Then you have to try and compensate during the mastering process and you can just tell it's overly produced and computerized. I'm really not too knowledgeable of how his band creates songs though. For instance, does he just assemble a group of like-minded musicians and let them create songs freely or does he sequentially dictate what sound they're going to go for? It's something i've always wondered. It seems to me that he might not dictate but he does kind of strongly urge them to go in certain directions. It's understandable because those bands are a manifestation of his visions and desires. That's also similar to what I imagine when it comes to the creation of walking into clarksdale as well. I can imagine that Jimmy probably had some other ideas around that time that Robert wasn't too enthusiastic about for that particular project based off of what his vision was. I'm just speculating, but when you listen to a track like Domino it's more similar to a track off of John Paul Jones solo album opposed to what they were going for on Walking into Clarksdale.

I'd agree with this haha. I don't think Carry Fire is really all that great. The reality is that if it wasn't created partially by Robert I'd probably have a harsher critique. I actually like their previous album a lot better. There's something about signed pick guards I really dislike. Unless it's on a guitar I'd never plan on using, one that is only for show.

Yeah I agree with that. I mean especially the point of it was almost like Jimmy was just playing guitar for Robert's latest (rock focused) solo album. Shining in the light really is a great song, and most high is really good as well but outside of that the album just doesn't impact me. It's interesting to hear the contrast between what came out on Walking into Clarksdale with that of Jimmy's song Domino which almost sounded like something that could've been a song on one of John Paul Jones solo album. I imagine that if Jimmy and John Paul Jones had wrote together at the time period it would've came out fantastic and not something that would've been disappointing.

I agree with those stating their love for the 1977 setlist, it really is great and I really like how they brought back the acoustic section because those songs are a huge part of what sets them apart from basically every other rock, folk or metal band. I just feel (like many) that the magic wasn't quite there as consistently as it was in previous tours and that has a lot to do with the state that Jimmy was in. Still has great moments though and I'm not saying those shows are bad, they're just not on the level that they set for themselves from 1968 to 1975. But there really hasn't been any band to achieve what they did during that time period (in my opinion).

I agree with you two. I really have tried getting into them. I love finding new inspiration and I have so much love for all different kinds of music but but they just don't have the magic, the energy, the soul, the depth in influences or originality (in terms of talent and feel) and thus they are quite generic. More along the lines of your insignificant 70's or 80's rock band. They are better than most out there in regards to modern mainstream releases but that isn't saying much. If they weren't hailed as "possibly the next Zeppelin" I truly wouldn't even make these negative remarks. Don't get me wrong, they're not bad at all but they remind of a typical band that tries to emulate Zeppelin but just can't because they frankly don't understand what the band was truly about, nor do they have the depth in terms of influences. They're a straight forward rock band, or certainly something more similar to The Black Crowes with a touch of 80's/90's AC/DC. I have trouble even classifying Zeppelin as a rock band at all because of the depth in their music, when it comes to the mixture of various folk, jazz, blues and rock and roll influences. Even if Greta does have a large range of influences they love it's just not exemplified in their music. Personally I feel that the first Wolfmother album had more of that Led Zeppelin magical vibe than Greta's release, of course that ceased to exist after that first album, and they weren't nearly as talented musically or technically (as Zeppelin) but that particular album had a lot more depth and soul than anything I've heard from van fleet.

Wow, I've never seen that performance in such great quality. I'd be absolutely shocked if this performance wasn't recorded on video in its entirety. That was great footage. I'd certainly buy it if it was released.

In regards to lack of light show and effects, I really wish bands would cut the extravagant light shows during concerts these days and get rid of the giant screens as well. I love how Zeppelin shows seemed to have a very ambient lighting, not overly bright and definitely not excessive or extravagant. It gives a much better vibe and adds to the mystique of the performance. Imagine Royal Albert Hall with a modern light show? It just wouldn't be the same. Look at Opeth's concert release from their show at the Royal Albert Hall, good band but their light show is way too excessive, I don't need to be mesmerized by a giant screen and pulsating or constantly changing lights.

I feel that they made the perfect decision. 80's production quality and the "new innovative recording technology of the 80's" would've tarnished the legacy of led zeppelin even if John lived on. Even outrider doesn't sound right, I mean it's good. It is definitely much better production wise than most 80's albums but it doesn't have the organic, honest, soulful, mystical and complimentary feel of the first six led zeppelin albums. The 80's was the epitome of everything Jimmy and the band disliked about the music scene The Yardbirds were involved in. Everything was about gimmicky popularity, more than ever before. This was due to the onset of MTV. Every band had to focus on the formula which would get them seen on MTV. It truly killed mainstream music, everything became about trends and throughout the years it has become increasingly more difficult to make a living as a trendsetter or influential and unique band. Literally the entire industry is As a result everything has become canned, bands no longer record as a unit. Everything is micro-analyzed and is done to a click and it must always follow the click. You're literally just turning yourself in to a machine, in a way. I mean it's a totally efficient way to record, helps your timing, and assists with production; but if you're a tight band then wouldn't you want the energy of your life performance to be carried over to the representation of the band on your album? What I think would be interesting is if John Paul Jones was able to take some of those great song from zooma and the thunderthief and combine them with some of the ideas Page and Plant had on walking in to clarksdale. It would've produced am exceptional album or two for sure.

For me it's numerous things but to be quick.... It's not just how they changed the face of music. It's also the way so many bands have tried to emulate them but just fail to do so, the music is just too pure to themselves. The best bet you have is to incorporate some things in to your own style, but I must emphasize that I feel not one band did this right (IMO) until much later. I think it took a lot of people many years to truly understand just how great Led Zeppelin were, and truly understand what each member brought to the table stylistically, which is hard to replicate but so many mistake as easy, simplistic or Sloppy (in the case of Jimmy). That always sounds melodramatic to say as they've been so popular for decades but I hope some will understand what i mean. I actually think the internet (bootlegs/videors) has brought more understanding of their greatness, as well as the DVD release in 2003 followed by how the west was won. Even a song like the most notorious "Still of the night" might have a zeppelin quality but to me it's nothing like led zeppelin, the only strong similarity is maybe Coverdale's voice and the octave riff within the song. Their best attribute is how timeless they are and it's due to very honest, organic production, as well as unparalleled energy and chemistry emitted while playing together which was captures through the aforementioned production (especially 1968-1975). The diversity in their style is just as important, but also arguably what is most key. The way they blended various forms of folk and did it with an energetic, enthralling feel unlike anyone else is the biggest thing that set them apart from other hard rock bands before and after them. It also helped that their heavier songs had a feel and experimentation unlike any other due to each members style, and this was most certainly emphasized or solidified by John Bonham and John Paul Jones. At times I feel Zeppelin is truly genre-less. That it's almost a disservice calling them just a rock band because they're really much more than just a rock band, as everyone on here knows. One more quick thought, I feel that Led Zeppelin along with Sabbath were some of the first significant bands to really not care about mass popularity, singles, record sales or any music trends. It was all about connecting with their souls to create something honest and unique to themselves as artists which they could feel proud of. How many good or even great bands are pushed in to this mindset either by their record companies and or from personal insecurities? If it wasn't for this trait then we wouldn't be discussing them, nor would this forum exist.