henrybonzo Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 just had a daydream and i was thinking does anyone think that if the music press had been kinder to the band in the early days, would that have ruined Zep as we know it now? would they have become more likely to do more shows in the UK than the States and embrace everything about the business? like Jimmy giving in and letting atlantic press the Album covers as they saw fit, single releases? or was Jimmy just too determined to do things his way? i guess there is no real answer to this, im just bored Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 This is only my opinion, but I don't think the press reaction, negative or positive, had any effect on Led Zeppelin's musical path. The only thing I see that might have changed if Rolling Stone and others were more receptive to the band, is that there probably would have been more interviews, and possibly more tv/radio appearances...and Zeppelin would definitely been on the cover of Rolling Stone more than once, and before 1975. But whatever the band may of felt about the early reviews, I cannot fathom them allowing it to interfer with their music. Led Zeppelin II would have sounded the same even if Rolling Stone had praised the first album to the heavens. The same goes for Led Zeppelin III, and so on. For one thing, even if a few stuck-in-the-mud critics hated the band, the response from the fans on those first early tours was enough to show Led Zeppelin they were on the right path. For another, and most important, Led Zeppelin made the music and the albums THEY wanted and didn't release anything they weren't satisfied with. Led Zeppelin didn't pander to anyone...not to the fans and certainly not to the press. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadianeh! Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 One thing that would have changed would be the outer sleeve to the fourth album. Jimmy Page was so pissed off about the way they were being treated in the press especially the bad reviews for led zep III that he decided that their name would not be anywhere on the fourth album. The musical content would still have been the same but the look would have changed. He wanted to proved they were not just all hype as the press said and that their music would be accepted on its' own merit without their name attached to it. There probably would not have been a need for the 4 runes. So I guess it would have been different as he is equally known around the world for his ZoSo moniker. They certainly proved their point to which I and millions of other fans are grateful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Berlin Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 No.1 is the music of a group No.2 are the people they like No.3 it does not matter what the press says. Important that many people, this music is like. And though many people love this music, then it must be good. Roger from Berlin (Google Translate) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deborah J Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Great topic henrybonzo:-)...and Roger^^ Great translation IMHO, they would have been what they are because of the music. All the critics did was alienate us from buying their rags/magazines. Like Strider stated they made the music/albums they wanted.The music was/is just so great and the fans let the press know they were full of shit! We went to the concerts, we bought the albums....Like I have always said, IMHO there are two kind of people in life: Those that get it, and those that don't!! 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.