BlyZeppelinaren Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 I have to agree with Haywood, Plant gave us some incredible stuff in the early years, but it was at a pretty high cost to his voice. Honestly, as much as I love the earlier albums and live work, Physical Graffiti is the alter at which I bow. Plant's voice really hit a sweat spot on that album in my opinion. In the Light and Kashmir are probably the pinnacle for me. The power in his voice is amazing - not the register, or "high notes," but just that raw "Hammer of the Gods" power that makes Zeppelin not just a great band, but it makes them epic. Since PG was recorded primarily in 74' and Plant was sick for the start of the 75' tour, I don't know that there is a "show" that ever captured what ended up on vinyl. Plant sites PG as his favorite Zeppelin album, although I don't necessarily recall him attributing that to his own performance specifically. From 75' on Plant's voice took on what I like to call the "Elvis effect" You can hear a lot of this on Presence where the rockabilly influence really becomes noticeble. Presence is such an interesting album because for me there's no better place to see the change, not only for Plant, but the band as a whole. Achilles Last Stand and Tea For One sound like they could have been from the 74' era recordings, whereas the rest of the album has that rockabilly thing going on (For Your Life might be somewhere in between these two worlds). I never got to see them live. My parents wouldn't let me go when they last came to Seattle in 77' (I was 10 at the time). My cousin went and what she remembers was the firecrackers (and whatever else that was being lit off), being tossed from the 300' level of the Kingdome and Plant asking the crowd to stop (and the loooong drum solo). I did get to see Page for what ended up being the last ever Firm show in Seattle 86' I'm new here and just wanted to say how cool it is to have others who "get" what these four amazing musicians created together. Cheers! I like Plant's voice for the most part, both the early banshee howls and the more mature voice of the later years, the worst thing is the damn sickness, the 75 tours could have been so amazing if it wasn't for his sickness and flu and all that crap. I do also quite like his voice in 79-80, it's really consistent Oh and welcome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stairway is NOT stolen Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 It doesn't matter to me. Plant's best vocal work IMO, is when he isn't screaming e.g. The Rain Song, No Quarter, Stairway to Heaven etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deborah J Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 In hindsight, all of us bootleg nerds are keenly aware of the evolution of RP's voice. How from 69-72 he was hitting high notes like crazy, on albums and in concert. In late 72 he started struggling and it evolved from there. He sang in lower registers, was no longer a "screamer" like early on. But what did fans at the time think of it? Say you were a Zep fan in 75 and went to a concert. Maybe you'd seen them in 71 when his voice was in full force, or maybe it was your first time. As you sat there listening to the concert, did you think "man, what's up with his voice? LZ IV only came out 4 years ago and he totally can't sing like on the album. What happened?!" As they're sitting there listening to live versions of 'Rock and Roll', 'Stairway to Heaven', or 'Black Dog' being sung in much lower registers, were they keenly aware of it? Did they not care and were just pumped to be seeing Zep in concert, or did they all leave and in the parking lot have discussions about Plant's voice? Anyone here who saw them live, was it a topic of conversation, or did you not care? I saw them in 73 and 75 and both were amazing...was scheduled to see them in New Orleans in 77 but the worst tragedy happened to Robert. I went to the concert to see Led Zeppelin as a whole. Robert was only around 19 when they first started and with the constant touring, Roberts operation of course his voice was going to change. The thing about Led Zeppelin is they could go from Communication Breakdown to Babe I'm Gonna Leave you and they were magnificent . The range they all had were unlike other bands, constant change (even within an album). It's not at all like we didn't care, we left the concerts knowing we had just witnessed greatness from this unit. Oh the days were truly magical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pagefan55 Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 I saw them in 73 and 75 and both were amazing...was scheduled to see them in New Orleans in 77 but the worst tragedy happened to Robert. I went to the concert to see Led Zeppelin as a whole. Robert was only around 19 when they first started and with the constant touring, Roberts operation of course his voice was going to change. The thing about Led Zeppelin is they could go from Communication Breakdown to Babe I'm Gonna Leave you and they were magnificent . The range they all had were unlike other bands, constant change (even within an album). It's not at all like we didn't care, we left the concerts knowing we had just witnessed greatness from this unit. Oh the days were truly magical. This is a wonderfully descriptive post. I know a person in New Orleans who's still disappointed -- 37 years later -- that he didn't get to see Zep at the Superdome in '77. (From what I understand, about 80,000 tickets had been sold to the show.) I don't mean to derail this thread, but I've always wondered how many fans in '77 were disappointed by the banishment of D and C from the set. I wonder if fans discussed it's absence. (I realize a solo bow section replaced it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreww Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Led Zeps songs were so different in concert than they were on records so I don't imagine anyone would have noticed. I think the thing that a lot of young people don't realize is that sound systems in those days were nothing in comparison to what we have now. The sound was generally terrible and it would literally take ten or fifteen seconds before you could even recognize a song! Zeppelins penchant for playing at extreme volume wouldn't have helped either. So as to your original question, no I don't think anyone at all would have noticed a different register. In those days I think Plant chose to sing lower as a means to last for the tour, not because he couldn't hit the notes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azad Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Am I breaking the rules here because I didnt get into zepp until the 80's? Sorry if I am. IMO From listening to the albums and listening to some live shows I did notice the change but understood why the change. It's been mentioned by others about the hard long tours, singing while sick, smoking, drinking, drugs, partying, not enough sleep, no warming up his voice, pushing for some notes that were reachable but not comerfortably reachable and ofcourse his throat surgery. I'm suprised he can still sing to be honest. Ofcourse if he did have a shocker I'd prefer hearing him in better form. The band dropping some tuning for some songs to accomadate for his voice was done very smartly I think. Having said all that, those changes don't bother me. I love the way he sang through all transitions and I still love the way he sings now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Klu Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 when did he blow it? early 72 but after australia? i wonder which was the immigrant song that finally did him in .....hah cause it sounds like by the the LA shows [HTWWW] he's more 'whining' out the high register[?] than belting it. Rock &Roll and Over the Hills being examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlyZeppelinaren Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 when did he blow it? early 72 but after australia? i wonder which was the immigrant song that finally did him in .....hah cause it sounds like by the the LA shows [HTWWW] he's more 'whining' out the high register[?] than belting it. Rock &Roll and Over the Hills being examples. I wouldn't say he really lost it at all, his voice starts to crack somewhat consistently by the '72 tour of Japan, after that it's straight to the '73 voice(which I don't really have a problem with) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemea Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I've been singing for over 30 years and was luckily taught to take care of my voice from the beginning. It's a shame Plant did not warm up his voice before the concerts, he put his heart and his soul to his singing, many hours a night, many nights a week, doing slow damage to his voice. I've heard him saying in an interview, sadly can't remember which one was it since I've seen so many, that cocaine is the worst substance to damage voice, worse than cigarettes. Don't know how much he used cocaine, but watching the interview made it clear he knew what he was talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeroscott821 Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 I think, listening to the reunion show, Plants voice is great. He is singing with a little more economy than his younger days, but all aging singers do that. It can be just as powerful. He is still one of the worlds premier emotive singers. And at the reunion show, during Whole Lotta Love, he still managed to push right on up into a higher register during his big moment when the band has stopped and he launches into "LOOOOOOOOOOVVVVVVE"..... And honestly its refreshing to hear him sing the way he did on the reunion show. He still has a broad tonality to his voice. And that's what any good singer should have. Plant is a good singer, he doesn't need the banshee shriek to remain relevant and entertaining. I've seen him live a couple times solo, and I saw Page/Plant twice. He tends to save it for big moments, but he still hits pretty high notes on occasion. There's many a Zeppelin song where it's actually more pleasing to my ear to hear them transposed down a notch. It packs a little more punch all around. An example would be "For Your Life" performed at the reunion show. Aside from it being kick ass to hear it live... with it transposed down a step it gave it a whole new wallop compared to the album version. And I think Plant's vocal delivery on that song exceeded the album version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.