leddy Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I can see for purists that playing under the banner Led Zeppelin is difficult to take without Bonzo, Robert would agree with this, but they were all worthy gigs to go and play at under the name without Bonzo. Live aid is questionably the most important gig of all time. 40th anniversary, being the biggest sellers on the label it made sense I guess. O2, the death of their friend and the guy who signed them and his wish to do a concert for his charity also made sense. Maybe also because the previous two had not gone as well as maybe they could of done, to do a full show for Ahmet they could at least put the other two gigs right and leave the legacy in tact. But on the other hand they could have just gone on as the three and friends, its a difficult one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetleron Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 yes.....but only with a drummer with the awe inspiring power of john bonham larry mullin junior comes to mind....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black-Dog Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I think it was the best way that they don't played after 1980. IMO it was better that all band members say that. Jimmy was totally skinny and half death from heroin. If he had played after 1980 with Zep he wouldn't live today, think. He was totally smacked out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 They did the right thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deborah J Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Ally, I gotta agree. It was the four of them that was Led Zeppelin. Can you imagine another singer, another guitarist or anyone else on bass and the keys!! I also think if the three of them would have went on even under another name people would have compared them to LZ. This is just my humble opinion. Edit: I do think the 02 was totally appropriate and with Jason there it was fitting. Wished I could have been there!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGDAN Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 They did the right thing Ally and Debs, gotta agree with you both. Regards, Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austrian_zeppelin Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 i said Atlantic & O2 for the simple reason that these were things they did as a favour to Ahmet and Atlantic, who were so instrumental in their career. Everybody knows that Live Aid was a cheeky one from Geldof in announcing them before they could talk to each other so there was little they could do. Other than that it's a clear NO. Led Zeppelin was/is the biggest band in the world because 4 genius musiciancs came together and became bigger than the parts. As soon as Bonzo was gone, that was it. They definitely made the right decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldengodNZ Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 No.....I wouldv'e loved to have been at the o2 for the Ahmet Tribute.....but to me it still wouldn't have been Led Zep...The day Bonzo died, Led Zeppelin died....R.I.P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazedcat Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 I think the O2 show was important for them to do. As to the other two gigs and maybe a "reunion" concert tour............sorry, absolutely not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted January 15, 2011 Author Share Posted January 15, 2011 I think the O2 show was important for them to do. As to the other two gigs and maybe a "reunion" concert tour............sorry, absolutely not. So do you think like some that it wasn't Led Zeppelin that played those 3 gigs like some on here do ?? or just another incarnation with Jason ?? how far can we take it, if we think it wasn't them, does that mean The Rolling Stones finished when Brian Jones died, the Who when Moonie, Deep Purple finished when MKI came to and end ? think of all those songs that have become classics if they had finished. There seem to have some sort of ideal that it wasn't Led Zeppelin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 They should have done what they wanted to do, the way they wanted to do it. One person doesn't make a band, no matter how important that one person may be to everyone else. Bonzo could never be replaced, and they didn't replace him. If they had wanted to do something as just the three of them, they would have been entitled to do so. They didn't want to, because they felt it wouldn't have been right. Fair enough. Had I been alive and a Zep fan at the time, I wouldn't have been upset if the three of them carried on, but that's me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Masson Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 From what little I know, the decision they made at the time seems to have been the only realistic one. They couldn't have gone on as a band after Bonzo died, both because he was hard or even impossible to replace, musically speaking; and on a personal level, as far as we know, some of them had their own problems at the time, but they were all in a shock, absolutely devastated. It had been 12 years by then, for Robert even longer. They seem to have been left in a state where going on wasn't really an option, and it was the start of a pretty long period of inactivity for all of them as individual musicians. So I think the decision to quit may have been a necessary one, in terms of the situation as it was. It wasn't a business decision, but a collective decision they made as artists and as human beings. They knew that as a band they had achieved something very unusual. After overcoming the initial shock and depression they all needed to go somewhere else, work with others, do something different - which is exactly what they did. People sometimes forget that in this era, after 1982, Jimmy was quite active. But the things he was doing weren't really a project that you could possibly compare with Led Zeppelin - it was just all kinds of different things, a movie soundtrack, the ARMS concerts, a temporary collaboration with Roy Harper, then with Paul Rodgers, etc. With Robert it was the same thing, except he started a solo career, which Jimmy never really did - Robert was trying to get away from it all a bit, because he needed to. Over time things change. By 1985 Live Aid was conceivable. I watched it on TV at the time and it was pretty horrible, but afterwards it became clear how alive the music still was, because it really came across to young people despite everything. I witnessed this even here in Iceland. So by 1986 they started contemplating a reunion, which then never happened for a few different reasons, apparently. That was no big deal. Robert just went on, and so did Jimmy and Jonesy. They did Atlantic in 1988, and it was even worse than Live Aid. There were reasons, of course, but I'd rather not weigh them here; basically, it just happened that way. However I think a real turning point came when Jimmy was preparing the 4CD remastered collection in 1990, because what that meant was not just quickly revisiting the music, but actually reliving it, a profound reconsideration of the whole thing from start to finish. Jimmy's wish to re-form the band can be traced back to this time. And here one should keep in mind that even if the members of Led Zeppelin shared the experiences, and all of them were really instrumental for the band's achievement, there still are important differences in what the whole thing means to them, not least because they played different roles within the band. They can do whatever they like - I hope they always do. I guess what I hoped for after O2 was that they would make an album and a handful of gigs, all dedicated to the memory of Bonzo, something like that. It's obvious to me that they can't really re-form the band as such, because for that to actually work, it would take relations between them to revert back to how they were in the early 1970's. Such a thing doesn't happen, because it can't. But I thought they could do a single project, and Robert's decision was disappointing for me as a fan, but hey I must have been wrong. Even if they sound better together than they ever can when they work as individuals with others, all of them have to really want to do it for it to work. If Robert doesn't want to, it won't work, simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rover Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 After Bonham's death, I think they should have billed themsleves as "Led Zeppelin" when the three remaining members were playing together. Less than three, no, that was not Led Zeppelin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott78 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I think they probably made the smart choice . Bonham was a one of a kind drummer , and could not be replaced . I think they all realized this . But i'am still glad Jimmy , Robert , and JPJ played some shows . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted January 24, 2011 Author Share Posted January 24, 2011 From what little I know, the decision they made at the time seems to have been the only realistic one. They couldn't have gone on as a band after Bonzo died, both because he was hard or even impossible to replace, musically speaking; and on a personal level, as far as we know, some of them had their own problems at the time, but they were all in a shock, absolutely devastated. It had been 12 years by then, for Robert even longer. They seem to have been left in a state where going on wasn't really an option, and it was the start of a pretty long period of inactivity for all of them as individual musicians. So I think the decision to quit may have been a necessary one, in terms of the situation as it was. It wasn't a business decision, but a collective decision they made as artists and as human beings. They knew that as a band they had achieved something very unusual. After overcoming the initial shock and depression they all needed to go somewhere else, work with others, do something different - which is exactly what they did. People sometimes forget that in this era, after 1982, Jimmy was quite active. But the things he was doing weren't really a project that you could possibly compare with Led Zeppelin - it was just all kinds of different things, a movie soundtrack, the ARMS concerts, a temporary collaboration with Roy Harper, then with Paul Rodgers, etc. With Robert it was the same thing, except he started a solo career, which Jimmy never really did - Robert was trying to get away from it all a bit, because he needed to. Over time things change. By 1985 Live Aid was conceivable. I watched it on TV at the time and it was pretty horrible, but afterwards it became clear how alive the music still was, because it really came across to young people despite everything. I witnessed this even here in Iceland. So by 1986 they started contemplating a reunion, which then never happened for a few different reasons, apparently. That was no big deal. Robert just went on, and so did Jimmy and Jonesy. They did Atlantic in 1988, and it was even worse than Live Aid. There were reasons, of course, but I'd rather not weigh them here; basically, it just happened that way. However I think a real turning point came when Jimmy was preparing the 4CD remastered collection in 1990, because what that meant was not just quickly revisiting the music, but actually reliving it, a profound reconsideration of the whole thing from start to finish. Jimmy's wish to re-form the band can be traced back to this time. And here one should keep in mind that even if the members of Led Zeppelin shared the experiences, and all of them were really instrumental for the band's achievement, there still are important differences in what the whole thing means to them, not least because they played different roles within the band. They can do whatever they like - I hope they always do. I guess what I hoped for after O2 was that they would make an album and a handful of gigs, all dedicated to the memory of Bonzo, something like that. It's obvious to me that they can't really re-form the band as such, because for that to actually work, it would take relations between them to revert back to how they were in the early 1970's. Such a thing doesn't happen, because it can't. But I thought they could do a single project, and Robert's decision was disappointing for me as a fan, but hey I must have been wrong. Even if they sound better together than they ever can when they work as individuals with others, all of them have to really want to do it for it to work. If Robert doesn't want to, it won't work, simple as that. [/ quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Masson Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Thanks Leddy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 Thanks Leddy! YW Otto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig_Paiste Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Atlantic and 02 Arena only. Anything else was not Led Zeppelin. The only possible drummer for Led Zeppelin is Jason. Rightly so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazedcat Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 So do you think like some that it wasn't Led Zeppelin that played those 3 gigs like some on here do ?? or just another incarnation with Jason ?? how far can we take it, if we think it wasn't them, does that mean The Rolling Stones finished when Brian Jones died, the Who when Moonie, Deep Purple finished when MKI came to and end ? think of all those songs that have become classics if they had finished. There seem to have some sort of ideal that it wasn't Led Zeppelin. The Stones, The Who and Deep Purple all continued making new music for better or for worse, that depends on your point of view. The Zeppelin reunions were just the three surviving members and a drummer re-creating classic tunes and that's not the same thing to me. As this is a Zeppelin web board I think it's safe to say a person would want their favorite band to aspire to a certain grace. The three remaining members did that by breaking up after Bonham passed. If any band that ever existed had a "free pass" to carry on with another guy it was them, but they didn't. Zeppelin ceased the day Bonham died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackDog71 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I think it was fine. They didn't start making new music and going on whirlwind tours. They did a few reunions and at the O2 they had Bonham's son playing the drums. I think it was fine. They have been pretty loyal to Bonham's memory i think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f2walsh Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 Bonham's death killed the spirit of Zeppelin! They could not continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walesdad Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 No,I don't think that they should.Hand on heart,no John Bonham,no Zep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Smith Posted April 16, 2011 Share Posted April 16, 2011 I think they should have! After all there`s only one Led Zep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PepsiCola Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 I can't really decide on that one. Zep did play with Jason and it was good from what I hear. I haven't seen Zeppelin in concert but only the tribute band, Zoso. It must've been a shame that a member had found Bonham dead. (John Paul Jones) Zeppelin may be dead in reality but inside of us, the good spirit of Zeppelin is flowing through our bodies at this very moment. Zeppelin won't be truly dead until we feel no care for them (Which I doubt will ever happen). It's likely people my age will pass Zeppelin on to their children (for those who know them). Bonzo would've wanted them to continue if you ask me. You can't let a death kill your spirit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mofostone Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Think about it, if you were in a band wouldn't you want your mates to keep the rock alive if you died? I know I would, so if any future bandmates read this after I'm gone please keep MoFo Stone makin fists pump & asses shake, there you go my will is complete Soundcloud.com/mofostone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.