TheStairwayRemainsTheSame Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I believe the first album didn't really set Led Zeppelin on the map like the second did and the play of Whole Lotta Love got the second album to be as popular because think of it like this LZ II would never have reached the charts like it did without it. Therefore not making Led Zeppelin have so a big name after 1969 so my question is do you think this is the song that actually got Led Zeppelin to the heights they reached? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zafreth Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 It's difficult to know, but without WLL maybe HB and Living Lovin' LZ would have delay the succes, that will came with BD, RR and STH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheStairwayRemainsTheSame Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 It's difficult to know, but without WLL maybe HB and Living Lovin' LZ would have delay the succes, that will came with BD, RR and STH. But would the delayed success get them into a position where they would have been to record LZ IV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixpense Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 A little song called Stairway to Heaven pretty much insured everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zafreth Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 But would the delayed success get them into a position where they would have been to record LZ IV? Maybe but in those years the toured hard, and if you check the dates and setlist, you see that WLL was included in only one date in the Fillmore (24 april 69), and the rest of 69, they did not played until 1970. And now when i think this, i doubt that, because the inspiration was there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zafreth Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 A little song called Stairway to Heaven pretty much insured everything. Agree!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jabe Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I believe the first album didn't really set Led Zeppelin on the map like the second did and the play of Whole Lotta Love got the second album to be as popular because think of it like this LZ II would never have reached the charts like it did without it. Therefore not making Led Zeppelin have so a big name after 1969 so my question is do you think this is the song that actually got Led Zeppelin to the heights they reached? I agree that LZII, the album in its entirety, opened the floodgates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheStairwayRemainsTheSame Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 Stairway yes but if Whole Lotta Love wasn't released as a single (even against the band's wishes) and got no airplay it could have turnt bad I believe anyway, . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zafreth Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Stairway yes but if Whole Lotta Love wasn't released as a single (even against the band's wishes) and got no airplay it could have turnt bad I believe anyway, . Not quite agree THAT bad, as previous as said LZ III and IV would have do the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheStairwayRemainsTheSame Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 Yes but my point is would Zeppelin without the commercial success of the song and second album they have been in a financial or any popularity wise a situation where they could produce III and IV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyBgoode Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I really think so, even though I know that Atlantic absolutely loved the success of WLL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquamarine Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I was around in those days, and all I can say is that everybody I knew (literally) had the album, but I don't think I knew anybody who had the single. And the single version was truncated (without the middle section) for radio, anyway. It was the album as a whole that was so popular. Short answer, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Not sure if there would have been any change in their success. They premiered Whole Lotta Love when I first saw them in concert in 1969, so that night would have been a little different than it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starbreaker Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Led Zeppelin's popularity was and is still based around entire albums, not songs. Would II have been different without it, maybe. But even if II didn't to so well, I, IV, Houses of the Holy, and Physical Graffiti all have gone Diamond. And and III, Presence, and In through the Out Door are all multiplatinum. You take Whole Lotta Love off of II, then Led Zeppelin would have had one less Diamond Record, and one more platinum record. So Led Zeppelin would maybe have sold three or four million records less, which is chump change considering that they've sold somewhere between 200 to 300 million albums worldwide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotplant Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidersandsnakes Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I believe Black Dog made Zep the big success they ARE:):)!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mstork Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 As great as that song is, Zeppelin's success was not a house of cards (apologies to Robert) based on one song. They're not Right Said Fred! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidersandsnakes Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Of course there are many songs that made Zep's success...unlike other overrated bands out there :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackDog71 Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I believe the first album didn't really set Led Zeppelin on the map like the second did and the play of Whole Lotta Love got the second album to be as popular because think of it like this LZ II would never have reached the charts like it did without it. Therefore not making Led Zeppelin have so a big name after 1969 so my question is do you think this is the song that actually got Led Zeppelin to the heights they reached? I think a band with the talent of Zeppelin was bound to be successful no matter what they did or didn't do. Their musical ability got them to where they were and how they are remembered now. I wouldn't attribute it to just one song doing well. I see where you're coming from with your question, though. WLL helped I'm sure, airplay never really "hurts" a band. But overall, they would have broken through with something else or some other way. They were too good not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperDave Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 It wasn't just one song that made Zep what they are. They're were so many elements involved. From their concerts, different musical styles, influences, mystique of the band, musicianship and plenty of other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidersandsnakes Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 It wasn't just one song that made Zep what they are. They're were so many elements involved. From their concerts, different musical styles, influences, mystique of the band, musicianship and plenty of other things. I agree:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazedcat Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Maybe in the history of Zeppelin singles didn't matter. Whole Lotta Love did though, it reached 4 on the U.S. singles charts and stayed there for 15 weeks. That was a big single for them and gained them enormous exposure that Led I never did. Would they have made it without Whole Lotta Love? Probably but it sure didn't hurt that it was a huge radio hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betteremily Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 That's like asking if toast would have been successful without butter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidersandsnakes Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Zep would have been successful in any case....because UNlike many other artists out there......ESPECIALLY TODAY.....who state they take after LZ and don't try to be really influenced by them......LZ had TALENT!!!!!!.......top of the hit parade or not!!!! Don't people know how ro recognize true talent instead of seeing if the song(s) hit the top or not and judge them by that parameter???! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Yes, of course Zep would. They had tons of talent and stood the test of time. We will see if other current successful artists can do the same and be judged upon that and not just personal opinions - as crazy as some are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.