Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
zeppelincheetah

What do you call Led Zeppelin's 4th album?

Recommended Posts

Anything but LED ZEPPELIN IV.

I think that's one of my pet peeves, when someone calls it LED ZEPPELIN IV.

I recently saw a trivia game on TV where the question was:

What are the names of Led Zeppelin's first four albums?

The contestant answered:

Led Zeppelin I

Led Zeppelin II

Led Zeppelin III

Led Zeppelin IV

The contestant was then told; "That is correct!"

Of course the first and last answers were incorrect. The first album was simply called Led Zeppelin and the fourth.... need I say more.

Another pet peeve on mine is when someone refers to the Stones song "Honky Tonk Women" as "Honky Tonk Woman". Tina Turner is one of the biggest violators of this.

WOW....Honky Tonk Woman......I mean Women just came on.biggrin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes the untitled one: The White Album. But seriously...

In my circles, most everyone knows that I'm a Zep-aholic and understands when I just say "IV" as in 'should I put IV in?' and not as in 'get that freaking thing out of your veins'-though that would be good advice to anyone doing that sort of thing, illicitly, it's IV as in the number "4".

My friends tend to be my age and we all grew up with Led Zeppelin blasting away on our record players, eight track cassettes players, etc. etc. so we all speak the same language.

Edited by Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I call it "The first album I waited in line outside the record store for several hours on the first day of release to buy!"

Or "The one before Houses of the Holy".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If i'm talking about the first through fourth albums i say: Zeppelin I, Zeppelin II, Zeppelin III, Zeppelin IV, if i had to write the name of each of those albums, or answer that question on Jeopardy, i would call them Led Zeppelin I, II, III, IV. In younger days i also called it Zoso Zeppelin IV from time to time.

I think with "Honky Tonk Women" (off the Zeppelin path) anyone who calls it "Woman" has never owned it on album/tape/cd or doesn't read titles. For those, i can understand. I always correct someone who calls it the wrong name :)

Edited by ~tangerine~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I refer to it as Zep 4. For someone who doesn't know it, I say Led Zeppelin 4. And if someone doesn't know that either, I say - Stairway to Heaven is on that album.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If i'm talking about the first through fourth albums i say: Zeppelin I, Zeppelin II, Zeppelin III, Zeppelin IV, if i had to write the name of each of those albums, or answer that question on Jeopardy, i would call them Led Zeppelin I, II, III, IV. In younger days i also called it Zoso Zeppelin IV from time to time.

I think with "Honky Tonk Women" (off the Zeppelin path) anyone who calls it "Woman" has never owned it on album/tape/cd or doesn't read titles. For those, i can understand. I always correct someone who calls it the wrong name :)

Isn't Jeopardy the show where the answers have to be in the form of a question? That could be tricky. Can you say; "lawsuit"?

I suppose, depending on the answer, I'd say; "what was the Led Zeppelin album that, instead of a title, had four symbols".

There's also the question of what was Led Zeppelin's intent when titling the album.

Edited by Gospel Zone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW....Honky Tonk Woman......I mean Women just came on.biggrin.gif

Once, I saw a local band doing "Brown Sugar". Instead of singing "how come you taste so good" they sang "how come you dance so good". When I corrected the singer afterwords, he said; "I don't even like the song anyway". Touchy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my personal (but I feel logical) theory on the intent on the title of the album...

Personally, I've never found anything "boring" or "wrong" about simply calling it "Led Zeppelin IV" or "the fourth one". The band themselves don't. So I certainly don't (I've heard the members refer to it as "the fourth album" or "Led Zeppelin IV"). If it doesn't have a title specifically yet it's the fourth album in the catalogue, it seems perfectly practical, normal and logical to simply say it's the fourth album or Led Zeppelin IV. Much better than referring to it as Led Zeppelin VIII or IX at least wink.gif If it's the fourth album and it doesn't say otherwise then how is it not Led Zeppelin IV??? And while this may sound bizarre, just because they didn't specifically label the fourth installment in font as "Led Zeppelin IV" doesn't mean it isn't named that (especially when no other title was at all intentionally provided)...

Now I don't personally care what others call it. I think that's the point the band had - that the MUSIC is what matters, not the title. In fact, I get the idea that the intent of the band was just for it to be thought of as "the fourth album" because naming it anything else was exactly what they were avoiding! It wasn't meant to have a title in the first place so by default it's just kinda "Led Zeppelin IV or the fourth album. That's my thinking anyway.

I think getting too "deep" or creative with devising a "name" for the album simply because a specific one isn't on the cover (front or back) probably defeats the whole idea the band itself had when putting it out! I think it's a case of people trying to come up with a title when it's really just "the fourth album" and none is supposed to be given for it. That's my philosophy anyways and why I think any titles other than "Led Zeppelin IV or the fourth album" is contrary to what the band's intent was by not naming it in the first place. In other words, Led Zeppelin IV and the fourth album are not "names" for the album but just a logical and chronological way to describe a fourth released album that wasn't given a specific name to begin with. If that makes any sense? rolleyes.gif

I think leaving "Led Zeppelin IV" off the album in specific print terms (contrary to the first three) was done largely because the "Led Zeppelin" part of it is in there and the whole tongue in cheek idea was to NOT have the band's name anywhere on the jacket. So my belief is that it was "Led Zeppelin IV" yet it couldn't be noted as that or it would defeat the purpose of leaving off the band's name.. I don't think (if we believe the band) that it was as much about messing with the fans sense of chronological album order as much as it was meant as a jab to critics of the band's prior albums. I think the lone marketing (or, rather, NON-marketing) point behind it was "the music is what matters, not names, not titles. You don't like us? Fine. We'll just leave our name off of it. Here's the MUSIC of our fourth record! What are you going to say now???"

Having said that, I obviously think anyone is free to call it whatever you want. As just stated above, the MUSIC is what the "point" is. You can get as creative and look for all the deep hidden meanings and titles that might arise or is on the record label itself. Call it "Zoso", call it "side 1", call it "side 2", call it "Atlantic xxxx", call it by ANY of the song titles (they're listed), call it "Peanut Butter and Jelly" or "Pacific sunset". It doesn't matter as long as you ENJOY it. But it's my opinion that in practical/logical terms it's simply "a fourth album" that isn't supposed to have a specific/creative title. That's the whole point of it.

At least that's my take and opinion on this legendary, timeless and amusingly confusing album... wink.gif

Edited by The Love That I Found

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my personal (but I feel logical) theory on the intent on the title of the album...

Personally, I've never found anything "boring" or "wrong" about simply calling it "Led Zeppelin IV" or "the fourth one". The band themselves don't. So I certainly don't (I've heard the members refer to it as "the fourth album" or "Led Zeppelin IV"). If it doesn't have a title specifically yet it's the fourth album in the catalogue, it seems perfectly practical, normal and logical to simply say it's the fourth album or Led Zeppelin IV. Much better than referring to it as Led Zeppelin VIII or IX at least wink.gif If it's the fourth album and it doesn't say otherwise then how is it not Led Zeppelin IV??? And while this may sound bizarre, just because they didn't specifically label the fourth installment in font as "Led Zeppelin IV" doesn't mean it isn't named that (especially when no other title was at all intentionally provided)...

Now I don't personally care what others call it. I think that's the point the band had - that the MUSIC is what matters, not the title. In fact, I get the idea that the intent of the band was just for it to be thought of as "the fourth album" because naming it anything else was exactly what they were avoiding! It wasn't meant to have a title in the first place so by default it's just kinda "Led Zeppelin IV or the fourth album. That's my thinking anyway.

I think getting too "deep" or creative with devising a "name" for the album simply because a specific one isn't on the cover (front or back) probably defeats the whole idea the band itself had when putting it out! I think it's a case of people trying to come up with a title when it's really just "the fourth album" and none is supposed to be given for it. That's my philosophy anyways and why I think any titles other than "Led Zeppelin IV or the fourth album" is contrary to what the band's intent was by not naming it in the first place. In other words, Led Zeppelin IV and the fourth album are not "names" for the album but just a logical and chronological way to describe a fourth released album that wasn't given a specific name to begin with. If that makes any sense? rolleyes.gif

I think leaving "Led Zeppelin IV" off the album in specific print terms (contrary to the first three) was done largely because the "Led Zeppelin" part of it is in there and the whole tongue in cheek idea was to NOT have the band's name anywhere on the jacket. So my belief is that it was "Led Zeppelin IV" yet it couldn't be noted as that or it would defeat the purpose of leaving off the band's name.. I don't think (if we believe the band) that it was as much about messing with the fans sense of chronological album order as much as it was meant as a jab to critics of the band's prior albums. I think the lone marketing (or, rather, NON-marketing) point behind it was "the music is what matters, not names, not titles. You don't like us? Fine. We'll just leave our name off of it. Here's the MUSIC of our fourth record! What are you going to say now???"

Having said that, I obviously think anyone is free to call it whatever you want. As just stated above, the MUSIC is what the "point" is. You can get as creative and look for all the deep hidden meanings and titles that might arise or is on the record label itself. Call it "Zoso", call it "side 1", call it "side 2", call it "Atlantic xxxx", call it by ANY of the song titles (they're listed), call it "Peanut Butter and Jelly" or "Pacific sunset". It doesn't matter as long as you ENJOY it. But it's my opinion that in practical/logical terms it's simply "a fourth album" that isn't supposed to have a specific/creative title. That's the whole point of it.

At least that's my take and opinion on this legendary, timeless and amusingly confusing album... wink.gif

Calling it the 4th album seems more accurate, and more knowledgeable of Led Zeppelin, than calling it Zeppelin IV. I've seen in some listings of their albums, Houses Of The Holy listed as Led Zeppelin V.

And as far as what the band members now call it, I've heard members of the Stones refer to "Honky Tonk Women" as "Honky Tonk Woman". Maybe for similar reasons, sometimes none of these bands seem like the "coolest band ever".

There's just something about calling it Led Zeppelin IV that is not as hip as calling The Beatles- The White Album.

I have the ten cd box set of Led Zeppelin's studio albums and on my copies it says Zed Zeppelin (not Led Zeppelin I ) for the title of the first album and it has the four symbols for the title of the fourth album.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling it the 4th album seems more accurate, and more knowledgeable of Led Zeppelin, than calling it Zeppelin IV. I've seen in some listings of their albums, Houses Of The Holy listed as Led Zeppelin V.

And as far as what the band members now call it, I've heard members of the Stones refer to "Honky Tonk Women" as "Honky Tonk Woman". Maybe for similar reasons, sometimes none of these bands seem like the "coolest band ever".

There's just something about calling it Led Zeppelin IV that is not as hip as calling The Beatles- The White Album.

I have the ten cd box set of Led Zeppelin's studio albums and on my copies it says Zed Zeppelin (not Led Zeppelin I ) for the title of the first album and it has the four symbols for the title of the fourth album.

Yeah, the first album can often provide unique dilemmas as a title because of it's nature as being the first relative to the ones that followed.

I often will just say "the first album". I typically don't say "Led Zeppelin I" but there can be times when writing down the title in a post etc where the need to specifically state "Led Zeppelin I" can be beneficial because of the fact that people are simply trying to specify which Led Zeppelin album they're referring to. In other words, I think a lot of people know the title is technically "Led Zeppelin" (although surely some may not...). But sometimes if you say a sentence like, "I like the songs on Led Zeppelin", people will ask (or just wonder), "which Led Zeppelin are you talking about??? They had several albums..." So you end up having to say (or write) "Led Zeppelin I" to be specific...

So I agree that the first album as "Led Zeppelin I" is technically innacurate but I don't think people "mean harm" when they say it. I think they're just trying to be specific and to differentiate from II or III..

You could be right that calling the fourth album "Led Zeppelin IV" may not be as hip or "inventive" as a title but personally I just view Led Zeppelin IV as a practical if not a somewhat "classy" title (much as I view Led Zeppelin, Led Zeppelin II and Led Zeppelin III as vague yet kinda classy titles which fits the band and music within the covers ) and, to me, that fits truer with what Led Zeppelin truly is (classy) than another title that might be overly creative or too zany. In other words, I don't view "Led Zeppelin IV" (or II or III for that matter) as "unattractive" titles. I just view them in a light similair to how movies are named, presenting an allure of power, class and blockbuster magic that awaits within the contents. At least that's how I view the numeral titles of their albums. Maybe it's just a difference of opinion on what the title or term means to each person, which is okay...

Strangely enough, I do sometimes also refer to Houses Of the Holy as "the fifth album". I'm not certain why I do this sometimes. Maybe I subconciously find the real title a bit too unusual and feel "the fifth album" sounds more casual yet consistent, I don't know. However, I can't say I ever call it "Led Zeppelin V" really...

However, much like mentioned in the post above, ultimately it doesn't really matter just so much as the music is enjoyed...

Edited by The Love That I Found

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Led Zeppelin, Friend calls it "Runes" so 4th album.....There are no Runes on my copy? :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always liked calling it "Led Zeppelin IV", athough; I think people should call it whatever it was that John called it (respect for the R.I.P.ed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That one little untitled album they did that nobody really remembers anyway.

*kidding* of course

I like all the nicknames for it and use them interchangeably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always liked calling it "Led Zeppelin IV", athough; I think people should call it whatever it was that John called it (respect for the R.I.P.ed).

"We made four already and now were steady and they went,..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ AGREE :-)

I still call it Untitled. It made a statement to the press IMHO. Jimmy has his thoughts on it:-)...enjoy :peace:

Jimmy Page talks about Led Zeppelin IV [audio]

^^thanks to GriefTourist for the upload

Edit to add: Rebroadcast March 15th

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00vtz3m

Edited by Deborah J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I consider it as "Zeppelin´s 4th". :wizard: Quite a few people I know seem to call it "the stairway-album" :smileyquote:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Led Zeppelin Four". I mean, if you call your second album "Led Zeppelin 2" and your third "Led Zeppelin 3", then people are going to call the ones either side "one" and "four".

I love the po-faced liner notes on Celebration Day, where it's referred to repeatedly as "the group's untitled fourth album". It's like the Prince symbol - obviously it's their prerogative to call things what they like, but you can't expect the public to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×