How do we know for certain that the two first nights weren't recorded? You may well be right, but I've read contradictory things about that.

At Jimmy's house, with all the others! But never mind that, there's multitrack - we think - of all five nights. I'd love to hear Jimmy's strat NQ sound in 75. From what we can hear it doesn't seem thin, unlike his 79 or 1990s strat tone. The second, more recent AUD source for 18th is pretty listenable.

No debating at all, the man's a genius. But - I think - JPJ hadn't ever really been in a band at that point in 68. Leaving aside how hip his string arrangements might or might not have been, Keef etc would have wondered what was going on. It would have been more like, oh, Atlantic have bought a top session man to play bass. The Yardbirds did most of their touring in the US in 66-68, and Little Games was never released in the UK, so it would have been harder for swinging London to hear what Page was starting to get up to with them. No Youtube back then. Hence all the rock establishment saw was a cynical ploy to make some cash. The USA had heard all that, which may account for the better reception from the beginning. One of the striking things about the Mick Wall book is the revelation that Grant had trouble getting Zep gigs in the UK in the early days. I'm not agreeing with Richards et al... for the record I think he and the Stones are wildly overrated in pretty much every department. I'm just trying to see where those opinions, which look daft to us looking back now, come from.

As a pretty unhip session man perhaps! Point is, trendy London, then as now, was a bubble. Zep were never in that bubble. I suspect much of whatever kudos they had was down to their guitarists. I hesitate to cite Pete Townsend, but he's definitely on record as being rude about their abilities, guitarists aside!

Take your pick! Keith Relf perhaps... Greer always writes well, and usually comes up with a viewpoint you weren't expecting. You might assume she wouldn't be a fan, but nothing so predictable. I quoted her to show that Richards' views were the norm back then, not an aberration.

They are the blue strat versions aren't they? Quite a different vibe. I'd love to see proper footage of Jimmy playing that at Earls Court.

Not Clapton I think, he and Page fell out pretty badly in the late 60s. As an aside, I'd love to hear them collaborate again. I'm Your Witchdoctor was a pretty special track. You hit the nail on the head re Crowley IMO. Page went pretty far down that path in the 70s... shame he's unlikely to ever talk about any of it.

Interesting that Blackmore started out as a session man; maybe it gave him a similar appreciation/understanding to Page. Many of Zep's early critics such as the Stones, Cream, the Who, were from that tightly drawn area of London/Surrey. Quite cliquey. They spent all their time playing with each other in pubs and clubs in that area. Inasmuch as they thought of Page at all by 68/69, he would have been a former session man who dropped out and then took a wage as the bass player in the Yardbirds, not a rated band at all by all the grandees. They wouldn't have heard Page play much if at all, and the other three members would have been wholly unknown to them. So they viewed Zep a bit like we might view One Direction now. It was a widely-shared view at the start, not just in the music business, see Germaine Greer's article here from a while back: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/rockandjazzmusic/3669830/Germaine-Greer-The-night-Led-Zeppelin-blew-my-mind.html She soon changed her mind!

Cheers! I had a feeling he might be more of a fan.

None of Zeppelin's peers rated them in the early days, so Keef's in good company there. I think you'd actually be hard pushed to name anyone from back then who was enthusiastic about them in the early days, in the UK, at least. Later on, their reputation (both positive and negative) was off-putting I guess. Zep really didn't mix with other bands who weren't on the Swansong payroll. I'd love to know what John Lennon thought of them. Did he ever proffer a public opinion?

Heartbreaker from 1975.03.20. Seems like Jimmy started playing it by mistake. The first couple of minutes are really badly played.

This is a great show and recording. I cut it up and made a 'proper' album out of it. Where and how these guys have got it from I don't know, but they are the real deal, and could be huge. The 'hits' on here are arguably better played than the EP versions, and there are a couple of fun covers. Evil is excellent, as is the closer, That's All Right Mama. Listening to the latter, I think we can conclude they own a copy of TSRTS Any Zep or indeed real music fan needs to hear this lot. I'm cheered up by them, music may not be dead after all.

woo hoo! Early 73 I think he's just immensely 'match fit'. He'd been playing and honing that stuff for years with regular touring. I'm not dissing it, it's brilliant. But he moves away from it. Before 75 actually; the US 73 tour starts to drop some of the rock and roll/ blues stuff.

I think Page was very well prepared for the 1975 tour. The finger business forced him 'back to basics' for a while. In his book he refers to a 'spirited' rehearsal as soon as they got off the plane in the US. I'd take that to mean 'panic-stricken', lol. Early 75 could have been awful due to Plant's worsening voice. But the other three members are all on it and able to cover for him. Compare with 77, where Page starts the tour seemingly with no idea how to do the leadwork for ALS or TYG.

Yup! I think the official TSRTS spoils us. Seemingly at random, we get arguably the best Stairway solo he ever played, and - in the original 1976 format at least - the best NQ. I'd maybe put it like this. In 73 we get the 'finished product' from him on stage, carefully worked out. In 75 he's more interested in exploring ideas with the guitar, the more so as the tour goes on. I agree, early 75 he's far more focussed and succinct. Nothing wrong at all in preferring that as a listener. Uncharitably, you might say that in 73 he has it all worked out. In 75 he plays until he runs out of ideas. In 77 he does that then adds a couple of minutes on the end

Yup, Page's natural lead style is unique, and very hard to emulate. Pointless, probably. His picking and phrasing is all over the place, but it works once your ear is attuned to it. I once knew a fellow guitar player who insisted Page was literally useless, simply because you can't count his playing off on a metronome. Briefly knew, lol. I contend your point also holds true for much of his 1975 lead work, which is where that complexity peaks. Whether that is natural or carefully worked out, I'm not sure, and I'm not sure it matters. Would be great if a proper music journalist could one day get him to go into detail about all this, and make him answer properly! From 77-80, he was equally capable at times, but fell off the high wire quite often.

I just listened to 3/17/75 OTHAFA... no 77-80 era stickiness at all, although he misses a note or two here and there. I'll concede the early part of that show isn't the best of 75. But that one is actually one of his more thoughtful solos, almost every phrase has a different idea in it, and I think I can hear something like Hots On For Nowhere in there around the 5 minute mark, for example. Hugely articulate; while some passages work better than others, there are no fuck ups in that one. There are 'many, many' great shows, lol. How about Chicago 1/22/75? A very nice early 75 show, pretty clear and listenable AUD, and Jimmy plays great. Check NQ, CB etc. Control, fluency, vibrato, it's all there. Off topic but Plant's not shabby there either; his voice troubles only really start after this gig. Page's phrasing has always been weird compared to other players, and I'd contend that peaks in 75, in terms of being sucessfully carried off. Where you hear sloppy and disjointed, I hear invention and a desire to be different and move on. His soloing gets longer as the tour goes on, but that's not an accident. Sounds like it's his 75 tone that you object to most. That's a fair point, it is a bit thinner than 73, on the boards at least. But it's not particularly different to pre 73 (that year spoils us tone-wise, I'd contend), and doesn't bother me personally anyway Ho hum. The 'hard picking' point is interesting. I think you can argue that for 77, where he is pretty brutal, but not 75. Maybe it's the board tape sound again. Each to his own. We're never going to agree here, but it's all good! 20 years ago this kind of discussion wasn't possible, as almost nobody could hear this stuff then.

I'd be interested if you could give a concrete example of stickiness in 1975... we may be talking at cross purposes! Sure he doesn't hit every note exact and some solos he struggles with (Rock and Roll springs to mind), but that applies equally to pre 75. But it's interesting that I can listen to 1975 (soapbox time: I've listened to every note of every show) and draw the opposite conclusion. I find it remarkably unsticky from Jimmy throughout. I'm pretty sure heroin wasn't an issue in 75. Stephen Davis insinuates it, but as with so much in his books there's nothing to back up the assertion. 1976 and beyond, sure. Books actually are maybe another reason why people have a poor view of 1975. Luis Rey's initial book was quite down on 75, which is understandable because he was writing before a lot of the good recordings came out. I don't have the more recent version, so can't comment on that. Davis in both his books makes a lot of disparaging comments about 1975 which are either unprovable or demonstrably false.

I think Dazed is probably the culprit for many people's poor assessment of 1975. I for one hate - hate - the way he starts the first guitar solo, using a phrase which worked well towards the end of one of the solos in 73, but sounds hackneyed in 75. But he does it every night, so he's doing what he wants to, and executing it properly. It's not like ALS in early 77, where he's not worked out what to do with the lead and is clearly winging it. The best playing in Dazed 75 is usually in the second half, when many people will have switched off. As for the rest of 75, he's usually on it throughout and has done his homework for the tour. Just take almost any OTHAFA or TU, for example. I'm listening to TU from 18th May as I type, and it's great. He's good from the beginning too... I'm sceptical about the effect we hear 40 years on from the broken finger; it's hard to spot a difference between Brussels and Chicago. The early shows are shorter, but he plays well in January too. A decent board tape from Jan 75 would be most welcome. 1977, sure, he's down a notch or two, for whatever reason. But not 1975.

1975 for me. That's when he peaks in terms of ambition and complexity as a player, and he invariably pulls off what he's trying to do. I don't understand why people say he's sticky in 75... I just don't hear that. March 75 (although he was no slouch in Jan/Feb either) and then again in May at Earls Court are his peak as a player. Watch a few songs of the unedited Earls Court footage; he's utterly in command of the band and the instrument. It's a fair point to say that 73 and earlier he was more fun to listen to; he was doing more of the blues/rock and roll/Scotty Moore stuff then, which he largely cuts in 75. He hints at it in some of the Heartbreakers in 75, but never takes it very far.

Any of those Chicago shows really. I picked 22nd because the AUD tape isn't too bad and seems like a great show. Isn't 21st the one there's almost no recording of? Now I think about it, WTLB doesn't bother me too much anyway, because I'm pretty sure it would sound awful. They canned it for a reason. Dropping Wanton Song and then HMMT was a real shame though. Point taken re 77 boards, but my point is that they are not unimprovable. They can be tweaked to make the experience more fun. 4/27 is the obvious case, but sue donim/pseudonym of this parish has been going some good things with other 77 tapes recently, for example.

We do, and they are all great. 21st is still my fave Zep boot and probably always will be. Looking ahead, who knows. It's been a very long time since there was a SBD that wasn't from this 'Revolution', and even that well might be drying up now they are releasing 21st March 75; saving the best until last?? 28th Sept 71 is intriguing in that respect; things have gone very quiet on that front. We had one song out of the blue, then nothing. I doubt we'll ever see anything that's in Jimmy's sole possession.

If they exist then Jimmy has them, so that's probably that. Isn't there a bit of 23rd that escaped semi-officially a while back? I think I'm right in saying there's never been a Forum LZ SBD tape in the public arena, other than the 73 ones which were 'liberated'. Nothing from any other year.

Agreed about 77 boards, they sound very unbalanced out of the box. But they can be tweaked. What do you make of the Winson 04/27 remaster? I reckon that sounds great, much better than the raw board, and shows that gig in a better light. It's odd that some venues simply don't seem to leak when it comes to soundboards. We've had nothing from Chicago or the Forum as part of the 'Revolution', despite lots of shows there. So looks like we're safe in not getting anything from the LA 77 run!

January 1975. I'd love to get a full board of Brussels/Rotterdam, just to see what state the band were really in, and what they played. Then 01/22 in Chicago for HMMT and Wanton Song.