ledrim Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 As more classic rock bands continuously release vintage concert films/videos, I find it amazing that Zeppelin really missed the boat on documenting their live performances. We all know what's been released and can guess at what hasn't been released but it's a crime that every tour wasn't properly filmed. So who should be held accountable for this. I would have to say that Peter Grant should have done much more to make sure that his amazing band was filmed at least once per tour. He was the "fifth" member of the band and this should have been a huge priority to him. When you consider how competitive they felt with the Stones, you would have thought that they would have documented their supperior talents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 As more classic rock bands continuously release vintage concert films/videos, I find it amazing that Zeppelin really missed the boat on documenting their live performances. We all know what's been released and can guess at what hasn't been released but it's a crime that every tour wasn't properly filmed. So who should be held accountable for this. I would have to say that Peter Grant should have done much more to make sure that his amazing band was filmed at least once per tour. He was the "fifth" member of the band and this should have been a huge priority to him. When you consider how competitive they felt with the Stones, you would have thought that they would have documented their superior talents. Well, they didn't know if it would last beyond the first tour, let alone the twelve years it did. Compact discs and dvds didn't even exist so who knew people would even care to have it forty years after the fact? Obviously there were plenty of soundboard recordings done. I see a rivalry if you like between The Beatles and The Stones but not between The Stones and Led Zeppelin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledrim Posted October 1, 2009 Author Share Posted October 1, 2009 Well, they didn't know if it would last beyond the first tour, let alone the twelve years it did. Compact discs and dvds didn't even exist so who knew people would even care to have it forty years after the fact? Obviously there were plenty of soundboard recordings done. I see a rivalry if you like between The Beatles and The Stones but not between The Stones and Led Zeppelin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledrim Posted October 1, 2009 Author Share Posted October 1, 2009 Well given that their ascention to the top of the rock world was so quick, it wouldn't have been too hard for Grant to see after the first few tours in '69 that he was in control of the "next" big band. At that point, he should be thinking about documenting some of these historical shows. Certainly by '71 he should have had more control over this. On a few occasions he handed off the responsibility to other people who screwed it up which went against his management principles in which he liked to control everything. In terms of the Stones, I don't know if there was a rivalry but they did hire a PR firm in '73 to let the rest of the world know what the Rock world already knew...Zep was #1. The Stones proclaimed that they were the Greatest, but the numbers suggested that they weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pagemccartney95 Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Well, they didn't know if it would last beyond the first tour, let alone the twelve years it did. Compact discs and dvds didn't even exist so who knew people would even care to have it forty years after the fact? Obviously there were plenty of soundboard recordings done. I see a rivalry if you like between The Beatles and The Stones but not between The Stones and Led Zeppelin. I agree: Beatles and Stones had a huge rivalry(in the media, at least)but not Stones and Zep. Oh, and the band themselves are responsible for as few official vids coming out. They have to "ok" these things; the company can't just release them. Does that make sense? , Jo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledrim Posted October 1, 2009 Author Share Posted October 1, 2009 Grant was considered a member of the band, who should have had enough insight into at least suggesting that they start filming the concerts. Maybe he did and Jimmy turned him down, but I don't know if these discussions have ever been documented. As for the Stones, maybe rivals is the wrong term, but I'm sure the bands felt competitive with each other....which anybody who has an ego should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snapper Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 As more classic rock bands continuously release vintage concert films/videos, I find it amazing that Zeppelin really missed the boat on documenting their live performances. We all know what's been released and can guess at what hasn't been released but it's a crime that every tour wasn't properly filmed. So who should be held accountable for this. I would have to say that Peter Grant should have done much more to make sure that his amazing band was filmed at least once per tour. He was the "fifth" member of the band and this should have been a huge priority to him. When you consider how competitive they felt with the Stones, you would have thought that they would have documented their supperior talents. Actually, they did film quite a bit, not every tour but we know they pro-filmed 70'(RAH) 73'(MSG) 75'(Earls Court) 77' (Seattle, Michigan, Maryland...at least) & 79'(knebworth). Out of these 7 concerts only 4 have been officially released. Both Earls Court & Knebworth were partial, only 6 songs from Earls Court out of 3 nights of filming and 7 songs culled from 2 concerts at Knebworth made the DVD. Personally, I believe that Pittsburgh 73' was also filmed and multitracked. What bothers me is that (so far) it appears that neither the 75' & 77' North American tours were multitrack recorded. We could have loads of video of this band, but without a multitrack recording to go along with it these visual documents of Zeppelin will never see the light of day, except as a bootleg....if we're lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djzoso Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 would be awesome to have more live stuff (albums or DVD's) than what i have now but hey it's better than nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgeholder Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Well, who knew about the '72 multi-tracks until HTWWW came out. Southampton. You never know, there could be multi-track stuff from '77. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Grant was considered a member of the band, who should have had enough insight into at least suggesting that they start filming the concerts. I don't mean to sound flip, but what for? It's very costly to film concerts properly and they weren't into film releases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledrim Posted October 1, 2009 Author Share Posted October 1, 2009 I don't mean to sound flip, but what for? It's very costly to film concerts properly and they weren't into film releases. If nothing else, after seeing what the movie "Woodstock" did for that concert, a little forsight would have seen the potential of film as a historical and commercial vehicle for the band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katuschka Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 If nothing else, after seeing what the movie "Woodstock" did for that concert, a little forsight would have seen the potential of film as a historical and commercial vehicle for the band. Historical? Maybe. But considering the band philosophy, it's not hard to see why they probably failed (or maybe rather didn't care) to see the potential of film as a commercial vehicle. And considering the whole story behind TSRTS, why should we think they should have been more enthusiastic about filming their performance? Just a little bit too painful to be considered a good investment into band's "future"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricoplug Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 The fact that their every move isn't documented makes me think that they're even more awesome and mysterious . What has been released is awesome, and what hasn't can be left to the over-active, pot-filled imagination of any true Zep fan =] =] =] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarmy Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 As more classic rock bands continuously release vintage concert films/videos, I find it amazing that Zeppelin really missed the boat on documenting their live performances. We all know what's been released and can guess at what hasn't been released but it's a crime that every tour wasn't properly filmed. So who should be held accountable for this. I would have to say that Peter Grant should have done much more to make sure that his amazing band was filmed at least once per tour. He was the "fifth" member of the band and this should have been a huge priority to him. When you consider how competitive they felt with the Stones, you would have thought that they would have documented their superior talents. This is similar to Steve's point about CDs/VHS/DVDs. There probably wasn't much of an audience for such videos "back then", believe it or not. Or maybe I should say that if there was an audience, there just wasn't an effective delivery method. Today, bands have official videos that are not even movies, just short taped performances on a website. But in the 70s if you wanted to distribute video to people, you had to make it into a motion picture. Why film a lot of shows if you don't plan on doing more than 1 or 2 movies? In fact, Led Zeppelin only did one movie (The Song Remains The Same). Correct me if I'm wrong, as although TSRTS may have been very cool for Led Zeppelin fans, it didn't sweep the nation like say Star Wars did, so maybe there just wasn't a wide appeal. Therefore, you wouldn't film more and more content because it costs money to do so. If no one is going to see the movie then how do you sell that? In our current world, we tend to take for granted the fact that the internet did not exist "back in the day". Now that we have this tool to distribute such official videos to the masses, we are so very much dependent on the release of content in this manner. That dependence did not exist then, so I think Peter Grant understood plenty. ... Hey look at "It Might Get Loud", a rock movie from today that was only playing in select theaters! I don't these music/concert movies have a wide enough appeal...yet...or ever will? The only ones that work are the Hannah Montana concert-movies and those just defy nature. Hey how many motion pictures did the Rolling Stones release? I really don't know but did they release any? I'm not talking about VHS or DVDs....how many were released in theaters? If none, I think their so called "superiority" is documented fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledrim Posted October 1, 2009 Author Share Posted October 1, 2009 Whether you like it or not, the TSRTS has gone a long way to creating and maintaining Zeppelin's popularity over the years. Just one read about all those posters who experienced the movie in the 70's and 80's at midnight showings around the country proves how it helped establish Zeppelin with a new generation of fans. Simple fact is that if we polled Zeppelin fans if they wish that there was more available footage of the band, everyone would certainly want to see more. A band of their stature should have documented many more of their shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glicine Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Should have? Only they know. Of course, more official release will be awesome. But what can they or the fans do now to change that? We don't have the time machine yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janet Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 The fact that their every move isn't documented makes me think that they're even more awesome and mysterious . What has been released is awesome, and what hasn't can be left to the over-active, pot-filled imagination of any true Zep fan =] =] =] Great post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
croquet'n'cocaine Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 This is similar to Steve's point about CDs/VHS/DVDs. There probably wasn't much of an audience for such videos "back then", believe it or not. Or maybe I should say that if there was an audience, there just wasn't an effective delivery method. Also, a lot of the footage of older bands which is turning up now and being put out on DVD comes from television shows, which Led Zeppelin didn't used to bother with because of the poor quality. The other bands presumably just grabbed at every opportunity for publicity, and that has worked very much to their advantage as it turns out, and to their fans' advantage. The mystery worked really well for Led Zep for many years though, and I guess it still does really. I'd love to see more, myself, but I must admit that some of those 1970s TV shows you see other bands on really wouldn't have suited the Zep image and style and power at all. Hey how many motion pictures did the Rolling Stones release? I really don't know but did they release any? I'm not talking about VHS or DVDs....how many were released in theaters? If none, I think their so called "superiority" is documented fine. The Stones are actually very well documented in theatre releases or custom-made (i.e. non-TV production) films, some of which are quite famous/notorious (Gimme Shelter, Rock'n'Roll Circus, One Plus One, Stones In The Park etc). Probably more than any other band really, they always went in for that kind of thing. They were even the first major band to play live over the Internet (in 1992 according to this month's Mojo magazine). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr E Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I understand Led Zeppelin liked to create a sense of mystique about the band which worked brilliantly, but still it's a shame there's not a little more pro-shot footage out there. What I find really annoying is that every year has some form of professionally shot footage apart from 71 and 72! 72 has a bit from Australia and that's it. I would have thought in 1971 with the release of their fourth and most popular album and the band at its peak live they would have thought of filming some of the concerts and documenting this glorious moment in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledrim Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 You can even add the lack of studio footage to the equation. If anyone has seen the programs "Classic Rock Albums" on VHI Classic, many of the bands featured (even Pink Floyd) have great footage of them in the studio recording these fantastic albums. How cool would it be to see Zeppelin in the studio...oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I have to admit, that when I first saw this thread I was going to skip over it, but now that I've read some of the point's and counter points I think I should shovel in my .02$. First of all, this is their music and their band so what they want to, and not to release is there prerogative and I respect how they wish to run the show. Now on to the topic, I myself think that, "The Song Remains The Same" was not only a cult (and now mainstream) classic but, it is by far one of the best made/performed music movies of it's day/type. I can't think of to many others that can stack up to it! There are a few groups out there that have truly put together some great film and Video but if you look at the song's and the performances on this film, you have to put it on the top shelf! Like some of you have already said Led Zeppelin was/is a privet bunch of guy's with a definite way about doing business! I do believe that they love there public but they also are deep individuals with so much creative insight that they some times come off a bit separative in nature. And to pile on top of it all they became so big in a short time frame, imagine living out of the back of a van, and then playing packed houses and then a short bit later having a hit like "Stairway To Heaven"! It would be enough to make the strongest man say ..."How the hell did all this happen"? The Beatles did do a lot of movies (I've seen them all and like them) and the "Stones Circus" shows where good too but, that was not the kind of thing that Led Zeppelin was doing, like Bonzo said, "The POP groups like the Beatles where some one that people went to go see for there personalities and people come to our shows to hear the music". I just don't see this group doing thing's like a POP group would normally do, that was one of the things that set them apart from the rest of the heard. Then there is the technical thing behind it, I can say from my knowings and experiences in the recording/live production world that this is not just something that you do on a whim. Even today with the easy and higher end gear we have that can give you so much more of a better sound and vision there is still a lot of things to do to get it done right! Yeah, it would be great to see some more new footage of the show's I never got to see, but it needs to be of quality and not just any old thing that they slap together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
namregoob Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 We are lucky to have what we have,all things considered. Life on the road in band in the '70s was nuts to say the least:been there,done that,very few photos were taken. We were just so busy. I did manage to record us almost every time we performed though. I used it as a pitch referance at the time, to determin weather I was singing on key. I still have a couple of the tapes,and recently put them on cd for my old band mates. We were a hot group in '78 locally. We had original material,but never managed to get it on anything but the referance tapes. No time,no money. Some regrets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slave to zep Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 You can even add the lack of studio footage to the equation. If anyone has seen the programs "Classic Rock Albums" on VHI Classic, many of the bands featured (even Pink Floyd) have great footage of them in the studio recording these fantastic albums. How cool would it be to see Zeppelin in the studio...oh well. it would be beyond amazing to see footage of the band in the studio. and i have been waiting for a classic album type of dvd to be released too. i would love to see/hear the guys talking about how they got different sounds and the different techniques used while recording, ala the dark side of the moon classic album show. i would love to hear them talking about the time of the band in general, too, anecdotes and stories from the 70's. thelittle piece on it might get loud where jimmy goes to headley grange is just mesmerizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackDog71 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Just enjoy what we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 We are lucky to have what we have,all things considered. Life on the road in band in the '70s was nuts to say the least:been there,done that,very few photos were taken. We were just so busy. I did manage to record us almost every time we performed though. I used it as a pitch referance at the time, to determin weather I was singing on key. I still have a couple of the tapes,and recently put them on cd for my old band mates. We were a hot group in '78 locally. We had original material,but never managed to get it on anything but the referance tapes. No time,no money. Some regrets. Yeah, I remember this to! And my band's where just part time! It was enough to just lean my part's much less make any crude recording's. I do have a lot of my own song's that I recorded on my own converted to Digital (from old cassette 4-track's) but very little from the bands I was in back in the 1980's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.