Jump to content

02 related question for the older fans that were'nt there


Honeydripper

Recommended Posts

I'm surprised there haven't been any contributions to those who'd adamantly oppose the points of view I read here. Unless I missed something.

I thought the reunion was very good. I was apprehensive about the performance quality before, for several reasons, but upon hearing it I was surprised. It's not flawless, the 'sound' has aged...but I still highly enjoy it for what it was, with Jason. He surprised me the most.

I saw Led Zeppelin twice in my youth, and I completely agree, there's no way that magic or experience could ever be relived in my life. I prefer the incendiary shows of their youth, mainly '69-'72 and to a lesser amount '73 -'80, excepting March '73. That was brilliant instrumentally if not Plant at 100%.

I know of one fan in particular who saw Led Zeppelin 12 times starting in January of '69. He actually said this O2 show was the best of his life ! And he not only saw LZ so many times, but just about everyone who played the old Fillmore and Winterland shows of SF !! So it is all relative and I have to respect his opinion because he can base it on so much experience and I know it's heartfelt from him....

I've seen a few concerts that would match the feelings I got from the early Zep shows, but my witnessing them in '71 has certainly spoiled me on ANY other shows I'd have ever seen them perform. And that includes the '69 show I was at. '71 had more impact for me as I was a couple years older and could appreciate it even more. So in ways maybe this O2 show did that to some too...maybe an appreciation of the band is more mature at age 50+ for those who also saw them in their heyday......who knows what floats one's boat....

I'm glad this thread hasn't gotten too heated in flame fest deluxe mode...hopefully it'll stay on even keel...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your friend was caught up in the emotion of seeing them again. There is no way that the O2 could have been the best of the 12 he has been to. Jimmy with a bum finger and they played far less timewise. I dont want to sound negative but that is not realistic. And I think you know it too. There is no way this concert was better than the one I was at in 77. Not even close

I'm just passing on HIS view. I never said I agree, but that I respect his view. It's not one of him not experiencing the 60s-70s Zep. As I said, who knows what floats one's boat in their feelings. I don't feel the '77 shows were that great, but those who saw them then, think it was the best of their lives.....I personally can think of many shows I've seen that I like better than the '77 Zep. Then again, I didn't witness those shows in person, so I go by the bootlegs I have.

It's all a matter of opinion....bottom line. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything ..just offering my 2 cents and a bit of what my friend passed on to me.....maybe he'll chime in here...I'll encourage him...I just hope he doesn't get lambasted by anyone who don't believe him. I believe him, but I don't agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just passing on HIS view. I never said I agree, but that I respect his view. It's not one of him not experiencing the 60s-70s Zep. As I said, who knows what floats one's boat in their feelings. I don't feel the '77 shows were that great, but those who saw them then, think it was the best of their lives.....I personally can think of many shows I've seen that I like better than the '77 Zep. Then again, I didn't witness those shows in person, so I go by the bootlegs I have.

As I said I think we have to differentiate between bootlegs and actually attending a concert when judging whether something is worthwhile. Really very few artists in rock history have had the combination of great talent, great material and fearlessness to reach the levels Zep did from 69-73(and occasionally afterwards IMHO). Pink Floyd in the early 70's and 77 are really the only other band that hold anywhere near the same fascination for me when it comes to collecting mutiple live recordings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I will add you to the list of negative 77 reviews? I dont know about the rest of the concerts but the one i was at (May30th 77-Memorial Day) was great. Maybe they took a night off of partying that night. Wish I could ask them. But I know one thing, Jimmy WAS trashed at Live Aid in 84-and Im sure he wouldnt deny it. Others on this site have stated that the problem with 77 was the partying. but I will say it had somthing the pre 77 concerts did not have and that is Physical Graffitti! Which is one of my favorites and in my opinion one of their best. Never mind Presence-though I like it-I dont think it is as good as Graffitti. So before 77 you had No Kashmir, No In MY Time of Dying, No Black Country Woman and on and on!

Negative toward '77 ? Well....less enthused would be better. I do have some from that year and enjoy them....I'm talking relativity here. I won't say I DON'T like that year, but I like it less.

And see for me, I prefer I-Houses as well. I wasn't stricken by PG as many are. I'll make the same analogy in Pink Floyd...I don't care much for The Wall, and many Floyd fans swear by it. Now don't misread me, I didn't say I DON'T like PG, it's just not the Holy Grail that others deem it to be, IMO.

I enjoy Presence more...and ITTOD less than PG.

And I agree greenman, there's an intangible element of elevated enthusiasm from attending a show in person vs. just hearing the boots. Well, really, it IS tangible, and I can relate for sure...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting question, and one I've been thinking about since the video clips started coming in. Let's do a comparison here:

Rock and Roll 1

Rock and Roll 2

Now, to my ears, Jimmy and Robert are both in better shape in the second video. And that's my general impression about all of the o2 concert- that Jimmy and Robert were doing better performances 1996-1998. I'm going to hold out until I see proper footage of the o2, but that's what all the video that's on YouTube (and I've watched most of it) tells me. On the other hand, I didn't get to go to the o2, and I did see Page and Plant four times. So I could be rationalizing.

What do you think? The best person to ask would be Brspled, she was at both shows (you'll note she is the YouTube poster of the second video) . What did you think, Celia? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's certainly only normal for people to have different opinions on this. I have been listening to a bootleg of the entire show, and I'm very pleased with in every way. I didn't see them back in the day for the obvious reasons (I was 15 when they quit, and had always lived in Iceland), and couldn't get tickets for the O2 show either. So I'm not basing my judgment on the actual experience of being there at a Led Zeppelin show. But as I said, I'm pleased with that concert - very much so, in fact.

There are a number of considerations here: First, I'm glad they opted to play rather 'safe' versions of the songs on their first gig in 27 years - deciding otherwise would have been, well, not wise! Secondly, Led Zeppelin certainly was always a band that had a lot of space for a lot of 'looseness', but this can be seen in different ways. Quite a few of the songs were usually performed in much the same way - mainly they kept things like 'Celebration Day', 'Rock and Roll', 'Immigrant Song', etc. short and didn't stray that far from the album versions. And even 'Dazed & Confused' wasn't that long in the early days - what's more, it is possible to actually prefer those versions to the 30 minute extravaganzas of latter day shows, as they are more focused, and the unity of the song is maintained throughout (there would still be space for altering all sorts of things, and the solos would be different).

Here's the main point: the magic of their 70's shows (and mainly of their shows up to 1975) to a very large extent came from the fact that they used to play together so much. With Jimmy for instance it's very noticeable how his playing suffers when he hasn't really been at it for a time. And with their famed and often noted telepathic ability, where they could anticipate what the other band-member would do next: these things they couldn't reproduce now - it would take many gigs to get all that going again.

Considering things realistically from this viewpoint, and also bearing in mind that the condensed versions of the songs also have a sense of purpose that could get lost sometimes in the old days, I was so glad to hear that O2 show. It was better than any 1977 show I have heard; it was powerful, extremely heavy, and always to the point. And Jason was simply amazing. Listening to it I've been thinking more on these notes: just who the fuck even comes close to even compare with this band? And I'm thinking about a period of 30 years here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not too sure of your use of the word evolution Steve as it's more often than not used to describe things that advance. I'd even be willing to swop the words "at best" and "at worst" in your post. <_<

And what I'd really like to know from you is the answer to my main first question. ;)

If they incorporate Jason as a full partner and explore new musical frontiers it would constitute an evolution. If they do so merely for the sake of having him "replicate" his father for a trip down nostalgia lane it would be an approximation.

I've held off on answering your main question as I don't believe it was directed to those like me who never saw them live in their original incarnation. Though I have followed them for 22 years, that is relatively young; I don't consider myself to be an "older fan".

Led Zeppelin was a phenomena, the likes of which we'll never see again. Page/Plant,

the solo projects, and the O2 reunion hint at what once was but inevitably fall short.

Having said that, I actually got into Jimmy Page originally thru his studio/performances

with The Firm, so anything is possible!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tough question.

I'll think about it while shopping and come back to this.

Having seen them since 69, It is hard to say. The total mind-blowing thrill they were Then, was so different from other bands of the day. Just the 02......................dunno.

I don't think I was ever blown away more than their first few tours. 69-73 being my fav's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Page and Plant might be techically a bit better in the 96 version but overall I'd say the o2 version has much more of the wild energy I associate with Zep.

A "bit"? I'd say they were considerably better in 1996. And technically counts for something. In fact, when it comes to Zep, it counts for a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again....this thread was not intended to bash the 02 gig....or to discuss which periods of their career w/ and w/o Zep were the best.....just simply

Based ONLY on the 02 show.......and NO OTHER live Zep......do you think you would dedicate years and years of your life to loving this band?

but....since comparisons of some yrs were made, I'll say that 96 Page was on fire! But P&P as a whole was not even close to Led Zeppelin as it desperately lacked the balls out power that JPJ adds to the mix. Charlie Jones does not play the songs the same way JPJ does. He does'nt play bass chords. JPJ does. And...this was one gig, Page played almost the whole show w/ 3 fingers and a thumb, and he's always needed several weeks of touring to warm his way into a groove.

What the 02 lacked for me was the key ingrediant that both spwned my love for Zep and kept the flame alive for 30 odd yrs. James Patrick Page suprising me (and probably himself :P ) with his unpredictable playing. His mistakes seem planed, his perfection seems accidental. He's one of a kind. Sure the addition of JPJ and Jason is what made this gig special to me, but if it's just balls out power I'm looking for, I can always put on some Rage Against The Machine or the first Audioslave album. Their rhythym section is practically a carbon copy of what Zep's brought to the table some 39 yrs ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I'm guilty of going off the topic onto a tangent...sorry...

If I'd only heard the O2 show.....NOW ?...would I devote a lifetime of loving to the band ?

I just can't say. I can't separate my lifelong love to that of being totally new to it now. I just know I was more than pleasantly surprised at the level of performance of this gig, and that IS comparing to what I know...I can't help it...I can't separate.

I'm not saying it matched the 70s band.....but it was as close as we'll get...and for that it was exceptional....I guess with further thought I might not be as excited with this and devote so much of my life's energies I already have...to the band as if they were just now starting or I'd never heard anything live by them....so I'll have to go with NO....after a bit of re-thought with this post....if I was a young teen when I was when I first heard them, and to hear them at this point, I'd probably not have the same enthusiasm that I did when THEY were young TOO !!

Is that clear ? It's fuzzy to me....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yo must understand that when somebody cuts down the 77 tour Im going to fight back! And you yourself did in fact say in so many words that it want in their top 150 right? But hey, Jimmy had a bad finger for Gods sake and if I were to draw any criticism it certainly wouldnt be on him. Nor JPJ, nor Jason. So do the math. Who does that leave? Thats all I will say. Still love the thread man!

I said the 02 was'nt in my top 150.(everyone's is different).......and btw, only 3-4 shows of the 77 tour are. :P Maybe 1-2 from 80.....several from 75, a lot from 73, a lot from 71-72, many from 70, a handful from 69. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mistyped. I meant to type wasnt. Anyway, I guess I was at one of the better ones, according to Ocean anyway, who was at the same one we were at on May 30th. I am a big Graffitti fan so that is why anything before 77 didnt include that album. I think that album is one of the best ever, Just my take.
the 75 tour was the breakout tour for Physical Graffiti. 77 was for Presence. There were additions/deletions...w/ the most obvious deletion of Dazed in 77 , it was a very similar setlist to 75.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you are correct about this but I wasnt fortunage to get tickets in 75. Had to "borrow, steal, kill" to get the ones I had. Just kidding. Actually they played alot of PG at the show we were at, which made my day. On another song, In My Time of Dying, off the subject for a minute. Someone today said Page plays it in open G. I always played it using a slide with "C" tuning. Tuned CGCGCE (actually tuning the B string up a half step). Can you solve this? What do you think?
IMTOD was played E A E A C# E (open E) At the 02 show is was dropped to open D. I forget, but I think this is also one of the tunes Page played in a different key live than on the studio track.

many songs at the 02 show were dropped a whole step......some making them even more "heavy" .....others taking away from the required brightness. For example, I was'nt thrilled with the lower key The Song Remains The Same was played in. It took the bright in your face hop right out of it and turned it into a song w/ a dreary quality IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

honestly I don't know how anyone who wasn't at the show can come to such a conclusion. I mean everyone's entitled to their opinion, and admittedly, I haven't read the entire thread......but i've seen a few people here commenting on lack of energy, passion , not the same thuunderous sound etc...... what are these concluisions based on? grainy clips taken from fan's cell phones posted on youtube? i mean I wasn't there or anything, so I definitely won't criticize their sound based on these types of sources........also, how the hell are they supposed to match what they played like in the 70's? it's 2007 now isn't it?........well to me the poor quality clips I've seen still sounded great, but perhaps I'm blindly loyal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

honestly I don't know how anyone who wasn't at the show can come to such a conclusion. I mean everyone's entitled to their opinion, and admittedly, I haven't read the entire thread......but i've seen a few people here commenting on lack of energy, passion , not the same thuunderous sound etc...... what are these concluisions based on? grainy clips taken from fan's cell phones posted on youtube? i mean I wasn't there or anything, so I definitely won't criticize their sound based on these types of sources........also, how the hell are they supposed to match what they played like in the 70's? it's 2007 now isn't it?........well to me the poor quality clips I've seen still sounded great, but perhaps I'm blindly loyal

Nope, no cell phone recordings/clips.....and certainly not compressed to death out of synce youtube clips. Many people recorded/filmed the complete show and several really good sounding sources of this concert are already available w/ more (and even better ones) to come. I had the whole thing on 2 cdr's by the wed morning after the show itself. Literally thousands of others have it by now as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just seeing the youtube videos gave me the sense that I was there, having seen them in 79. Speaking for myself, I felt a connection and a sense of elation. I was not there, but I was there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After many listens of the 02 gig....from multiple sources.....I asked myself this question.

Question: Would you have spent decades of your life dedicated to loving this band based only on the 02 performance?? I'm starting to lean towards no. :(

What say you??

Hey guys. This is my first post here, I just joined... I know from experience at the only other band forum I belong to that new members can't just barge in on discussions and expect their comments to carry the same weight as those of established members. I'm fine with that. But I couldn't help wanting to make an observation when I read this thread.

Honeydripper - hi, by the way :) - your question is interesting, but I think you're doing yourself and the band a disservice by phrasing it that way. There never was any single gig that captured the entire brilliance of the band. There were also plenty of subpar and even downright unimpressive performances at nearly every phase of the band's career. If you had to choose to ask that same question about a randomly selected Zep show from the old days, I think you'd run the risk of having to give the same answer. What if the only Zep gig you'd ever seen was the one where Page was coked out of his head and fumbled around on the Stairway solo for seven minutes before Plant came back on stage to put him out of his misery? What if you only caught them in '69, before most of their songs had been written? Or only in '80, when they were playing shorter versions of songs? Or on a night where things for whatever reason just didn't gel? Those shows may have been anomalies, but they were still Zeppelin - and the fact is, no one on this board has devoted twenty-five years of their life to listening to Zep because of one concert. I'm sure there are plenty of people who got into Zeppelin because of one concert, but that's not the same thing. Anyone who was lucky enough to be present at one magical gig could go out and buy the albums, and track down the boots, and go to more gigs, and fuel their initial enthusiasm.

Besides that, there's the question of the sheer impossibility of imagining what (I think) you're asking us to imagine. What if, prior to the O2 show, you'd never heard Kashmir, or In My Time of Dying, or D&C? And what if, furthermore, you'd never heard any of the songs by any of the bands who were influenced by those songs? If you can erase all those things from your memory, if you can imagine a world in which Zep had never existed, I think the O2 gig would blow your mind.

I was not there, but I have the boot - soon, I hope, to be replaced by a better boot, and then by a DVD - and I love the show. This was not Led Zep playing a tour concert - they deliberately chose to keep the songs (relatively) short, in order to allow for a wider selection of material, and to present only certain aspects of their genius. But I think even allowing for that there were plenty of people out there who actually will become huge Zeppelin fans just because of this one show. I hate to see any of us underestimate it just because we have, over the years, without realizing it, developed such a love for them that we are disappointed if every song, every night, is not the greatest thing we have ever heard.

Thanks for reading my long first post... cheers to you all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, no cell phone recordings/clips.....and certainly not compressed to death out of synce youtube clips. Many people recorded/filmed the complete show and several really good sounding sources of this concert are already available w/ more (and even better ones) to come. I had the whole thing on 2 cdr's by the wed morning after the show itself. Literally thousands of others have it by now as well.

really? hook me up ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys. This is my first post here, I just joined... I know from experience at the only other band forum I belong to that new members can't just barge in on discussions and expect their comments to carry the same weight as those of established members. I'm fine with that. But I couldn't help wanting to make an observation when I read this thread.

Honeydripper - hi, by the way :) - your question is interesting, but I think you're doing yourself and the band a disservice by phrasing it that way. There never was any single gig that captured the entire brilliance of the band. There were also plenty of subpar and even downright unimpressive performances at nearly every phase of the band's career. If you had to choose to ask that same question about a randomly selected Zep show from the old days, I think you'd run the risk of having to give the same answer. What if the only Zep gig you'd ever seen was the one where Page was coked out of his head and fumbled around on the Stairway solo for seven minutes before Plant came back on stage to put him out of his misery? What if you only caught them in '69, before most of their songs had been written? Or only in '80, when they were playing shorter versions of songs? Or on a night where things for whatever reason just didn't gel? Those shows may have been anomalies, but they were still Zeppelin - and the fact is, no one on this board has devoted twenty-five years of their life to listening to Zep because of one concert. I'm sure there are plenty of people who got into Zeppelin because of one concert, but that's not the same thing. Anyone who was lucky enough to be present at one magical gig could go out and buy the albums, and track down the boots, and go to more gigs, and fuel their initial enthusiasm.

Besides that, there's the question of the sheer impossibility of imagining what (I think) you're asking us to imagine. What if, prior to the O2 show, you'd never heard Kashmir, or In My Time of Dying, or D&C? And what if, furthermore, you'd never heard any of the songs by any of the bands who were influenced by those songs? If you can erase all those things from your memory, if you can imagine a world in which Zep had never existed, I think the O2 gig would blow your mind.

I was not there, but I have the boot - soon, I hope, to be replaced by a better boot, and then by a DVD - and I love the show. This was not Led Zep playing a tour concert - they deliberately chose to keep the songs (relatively) short, in order to allow for a wider selection of material, and to present only certain aspects of their genius. But I think even allowing for that there were plenty of people out there who actually will become huge Zeppelin fans just because of this one show. I hate to see any of us underestimate it just because we have, over the years, without realizing it, developed such a love for them that we are disappointed if every song, every night, is not the greatest thing we have ever heard.

Thanks for reading my long first post... cheers to you all.

good first post! agree entirely

sorry admins, I probably didn't have to quote the whole post to say that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys. This is my first post here, I just joined... I know from experience at the only other band forum I belong to that new members can't just barge in on discussions and expect their comments to carry the same weight as those of established members. I'm fine with that. But I couldn't help wanting to make an observation when I read this thread.

Honeydripper - hi, by the way :) - your question is interesting, but I think you're doing yourself and the band a disservice by phrasing it that way. There never was any single gig that captured the entire brilliance of the band. There were also plenty of subpar and even downright unimpressive performances at nearly every phase of the band's career. If you had to choose to ask that same question about a randomly selected Zep show from the old days, I think you'd run the risk of having to give the same answer. What if the only Zep gig you'd ever seen was the one where Page was coked out of his head and fumbled around on the Stairway solo for seven minutes before Plant came back on stage to put him out of his misery? What if you only caught them in '69, before most of their songs had been written? Or only in '80, when they were playing shorter versions of songs? Or on a night where things for whatever reason just didn't gel? Those shows may have been anomalies, but they were still Zeppelin - and the fact is, no one on this board has devoted twenty-five years of their life to listening to Zep because of one concert. I'm sure there are plenty of people who got into Zeppelin because of one concert, but that's not the same thing. Anyone who was lucky enough to be present at one magical gig could go out and buy the albums, and track down the boots, and go to more gigs, and fuel their initial enthusiasm.

Besides that, there's the question of the sheer impossibility of imagining what (I think) you're asking us to imagine. What if, prior to the O2 show, you'd never heard Kashmir, or In My Time of Dying, or D&C? And what if, furthermore, you'd never heard any of the songs by any of the bands who were influenced by those songs? If you can erase all those things from your memory, if you can imagine a world in which Zep had never existed, I think the O2 gig would blow your mind.

I was not there, but I have the boot - soon, I hope, to be replaced by a better boot, and then by a DVD - and I love the show. This was not Led Zep playing a tour concert - they deliberately chose to keep the songs (relatively) short, in order to allow for a wider selection of material, and to present only certain aspects of their genius. But I think even allowing for that there were plenty of people out there who actually will become huge Zeppelin fans just because of this one show. I hate to see any of us underestimate it just because we have, over the years, without realizing it, developed such a love for them that we are disappointed if every song, every night, is not the greatest thing we have ever heard.

Thanks for reading my long first post... cheers to you all.

I understand your point....and I though of all that...keep in mind, I do have a couple hundred Zep shows at my disposal ;) ,and i know all about their storied stage past. But IMO this is a different band froma different era. Age is the difference. To me ears it's P&P w/ balls. Take JPJ and Jason out of the picture and you have a semi decent 98 show. I was moved more by the spectacle of the thing than the actual performance. I don't care how many shows they do (if any at all) in 2008-9...whenever.....it's will never be what it once was. Not that I expect it to ever be. Sure it's great....but many are going on how this was one of their best shows ever etc.... I say no where close! I just wanted to see if any other of the older fans agreed or not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think another way to approach this topic, at least from what I understood your original question, is to get the opinion of those who attended O2 who had never listened to LZ before. There must have been a few of those 2nd-ticket holders who were just going along with their guest. Do you think the concert turned them into new fans? New fans of the new Zep only or are they now going back through the catalog and turning into new fans of the old Zep too. Has this question been asked/posted yet? Maybe a few of the several thousand newbies on this forum would fall in that category??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...