Michael Page Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Since everyone in rock radio is celebrating the 40th anniversary of WOODSTOCK. I heard that Led Zeppelin was invited to join but they turned down the offer. Just imagine how greater Woodstock would have been with the addition of Led Zeppelin. Talk about earth shattering. I believe that they might have been working on Led Zeppelin II at the time(i maybe wrong). But talk about a great line-up Joplin,Who,Hendrix and Zeppelin. Its too bad that they said no thanks cuz that would have been a great show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfman Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 This has been brought up before by others on here and most people seem to agree with Peter Grant's decision that LZ shouldn't have been just another act on the bill. Personally, I wish they had done it. I would have loved to see the hippies freak out during the bow solo of D&C. Zep would probably have blown everyone away too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taker328 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Since everyone in rock radio is celebrating the 40th anniversary of WOODSTOCK. I heard that Led Zeppelin was invited to join but they turned down the offer. Just imagine how greater Woodstock would have been with the addition of Led Zeppelin. Talk about earth shattering. I believe that they might have been working on Led Zeppelin II at the time(i maybe wrong). But talk about a great line-up Joplin,Who,Hendrix and Zeppelin. Its too bad that they said no thanks cuz that would have been a great show. Yeah, a part of me wishes that when I watch the Woodstock film, that I could've seen Zeppelin on there. but I am also glad that Zeppelin hasn't been trapped by the constant association with Woodstock like many other bands that played there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black_Dog_90 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Well with Led Zeppelin it would've been much better. They would've been the greatest act of the whole festival. But never mind I like Woodstock the way it was and the way it still is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperDave Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I don't think they would have been trapped by Woodstock and just associated with that. They went so far after that period that their performance there would have been most likely quite noteworthy and some but much better things after that. They would never have just had to live up to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Page Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 I still think that have Led Zep close the show would've been so great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I still think that have Led Zep close the show would've been so great. On Monday morning? No thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Page Posted August 22, 2009 Author Share Posted August 22, 2009 On Monday morning? No thanks! Monday morning wouldnt matter to me. I could listen to Led Zep anyday of the week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tadpole in a Jar Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I can imagine that part of the reason Grant would've turned it down was because The Who was there, and their styles were very similar at the time and maybe he didn't want direct comparisons when Zeppelin were still a new band and The Who had already been around a few years. The argument that they would've been "just another band on the bill" holds zero water because a month earlier they were at the Atlanta International Pop Festival which had just as many bands as Woodstock, and then two weeks after Woodstock they played the Texas International Pop Festival, another three-day event with a ton of bands. One noteworthy difference: the Who wasn't at either of those other fests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aen27 Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 (edited) I thought they didn't do it because they were going to do their first big gig in England, which was Bath. Edited August 23, 2009 by aen27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Page Posted August 24, 2009 Author Share Posted August 24, 2009 I thought they didn't do it because they were going to do their first big gig in England, which was Bath. I think ur right they did go to the bath festival. But nobody remembers the bath EVERYONE remembers WOODSTOCK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom kid Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I can imagine that part of the reason Grant would've turned it down was because The Who was there, and their styles were very similar at the time and maybe he didn't want direct comparisons when Zeppelin were still a new band and The Who had already been around a few years. The argument that they would've been "just another band on the bill" holds zero water because a month earlier they were at the Atlanta International Pop Festival which had just as many bands as Woodstock, and then two weeks after Woodstock they played the Texas International Pop Festival, another three-day event with a ton of bands. One noteworthy difference: the Who wasn't at either of those other fests. Yup I agree, I don't get it why people say Grant said they would have just been another band on the bill. They would have blown other bands off the stage! Just listen to the Texas International Pop Festival. Although the other bands are also smokin'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrios Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I think ur right they did go to the bath festival. But nobody remembers the bath EVERYONE remembers WOODSTOCK. it was brave for them not to do woodstock, a very clever and long term idea that has ultimately worked in their favour. people in the uk remember bath, people and the british press began to relise how good zeppelin were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninelives Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I think ur right they did go to the bath festival. But nobody remembers the bath EVERYONE remembers WOODSTOCK. That's not true and is there any need for you to type in such huge font size? It's like you're shouting at us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Monday morning wouldnt matter to me. I could listen to Led Zep anyday of the week. Obviously we all would listen to Zeppelin anytime/day of the week. But to be the show closer on Monday morning would have been completely anti-climatic compared to the rest of the show. Even though it would have meant for another great sounding soundboard show to listen to, I am still glad they didn't participate in the festival. Peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackDog71 Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 It would have been great just because any more footage of Zeppelin live is great, but not being at Woodstock did nothing to slow them down. Their legacy wasn't hurt and they went on to dominate the 70's. Them and The Who together on that grand stage would have been a treat though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Page Posted August 24, 2009 Author Share Posted August 24, 2009 That's not true and is there any need for you to type in such huge font size? It's like you're shouting at us lol sorry i want shouting. Just like to get noticed. Thanks for posting by the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I thought they didn't do it because they were going to do their first big gig in England, which was Bath. I don't mean to state the obvious, but, Bath was June 1970 and Woodstock was August of 1969. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikezep61 Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I don't mean to state the obvious, but, Bath was June 1970 and Woodstock was August of 1969. The first Bath Festival was actually held on 6/28/69. But it had absolutely nothing to do with why Zeppelin cancelled Woodstock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aen27 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 The first Bath Festival was actually held on 6/28/69. But it had absolutely nothing to do with why Zeppelin cancelled Woodstock. I do remember reading Peter Grant didn't want them to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.