Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
osoz

Did Led Zeppelin make the right decision to break up?

Recommended Posts

Well here's my grand statement, but as great as Jimmy is/was I would place Bonzo as the greatest

rock'n'roll musician ever, just ahead slightly of Hendrix. Page's greatness has grown enormously,

but Bonzo has had his impact and ability grow exponentiontially. Just listen to ALS, 5/22/77', it is 

a chaotic and sloppy version....but Bonzo seems intent on replicating the sounds of some ancient

Roman or Greek battlefield, with battle shields colliding and chariots blasting thru battalions.Thrash

metal ?? HA HA. Bonzo could also play as subtle as a whisper, invented on the spot. This is why Zep

never truly reformed, and a big problem for Jimmy post-Zep, he was quite reliant on Bonzo to create

a huge sound. This realization probably gave Page a lot of .headaches. Nothing even close to a

suitable replacement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an interview video somewhere in the mid '70's where Plant says if they lost a member of the band it would be impossible to continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. No other decision would have been right IMO. Besides an epic, mind-blowing, one-off in 2007 with the legendary drummer's son. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is interesting is there was a CREEM Jimmy Page interview in 75' not long after Robert's accident.

Somehow or another either the interviewer or Page get into,"why doesn't the band go out as a three

piece, just playing instrumentals??" Sounds like a potentially amazing idea, but surely out of respect

for Robert this wasn't a consideration for long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they made the right decision, no founding member can be replaced. Just look at the laughing stock Black Sabbath became after Ozzy's departure with the revolving door of musicians, all under the name Black Sabbath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well actually the first album with Dio is considered a minor classic, and Mob Rules isn't too bad

either. But beyond that I agree that Sabbath under Iommi's wing became mediocre and worse.

True, a lot of those 80's-90's albums stink from the first track to the last. Maybe Iommi was

totally out of it , or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well actually the first album with Dio is considered a minor classic, and Mob Rules isn't too bad

either. But beyond that I agree that Sabbath under Iommi's wing became mediocre and worse.

True, a lot of those 80's-90's albums stink from the first track to the last. Maybe Iommi was

totally out of it , or something.

The Dio albums were and are great, but they weren't Sabbath, they were Black Rainbow and the Ian Gillian album Born Again was Purple Sabbath, the rest of the albums I don't know what to call them. Black Sabbath always was and will be Ozzy, Tony, Geezer and Bill, no more no less.

I think Zeppelin made the right decision in not continuing after John Bonham's untimely death, at least under the name Led Zeppelin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the question of this thread by the OP:

Not all decisions are meant to be for the public, sometimes decisions are made based only on the people who need to make them.  Sort of like when someone decides that another go at the all you can eat buffet after having had two plate fulls already is probably not a difficult decision for most people.

Yeah, it's like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True that the post-Ozzy albums aren't "trad-Sabbath", but Tecnical Ecstasy and Never Say Die IMO

are totally out there, much, much further out than when Zep released ITTOD. Zep's decision was

IMO entirely internal, so I don't quite understand  that post unless a different band in the same

situation considered the public as to whether or not to replace a deceased member. Perhaps

I read the post wrong, it's possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Led Zeppelin's did the right thing in my honest opinion, you gotta respect them for not whoring the Zeppelin name and not dragging it through the mud with any Tom, Dick and Harry that walked through the revolving musical door.

Who could they have replaced John Bonham with anyhows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I disagree. 

With what precisely, you think Zeppelin should have continued after Bonzo drank himself to an early grave?  Whom should they have replaced him with, and more pertinently... why?  They didn't just make the right decision, they made the only decision they could have made... for themselves, for the band, for their legacy, but most importantly, for Bonzo and his memory.

Zeppelin without Bonzo wouldn't have been Zeppelin; it would have been the three surviving members and some new guy... just like the 2007 gig, and that concert - however honorable the reasons behind it (and Jason's poignant participation in it) - just didn't feel like Led Zeppelin to me, and still doesn't.

I've said it here before and I'll say it again once more for emphasis... thank God for Robert Plant stopping any reunion tour in it's tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With what precisely, you think Zeppelin should have continued after Bonzo drank himself to an early grave?  Whom should they have replaced him with, and more pertinently... why?  They didn't just make the right decision, they made the only decision they could have made... for themselves, for the band, for their legacy, but most importantly, for Bonzo and his memory.

Zeppelin without Bonzo wouldn't have been Zeppelin; it would have been the three surviving members and some new guy... just like the 2007 gig, and that concert - however honorable the reasons behind it (and Jason's poignant participation in it) - just didn't feel like Led Zeppelin to me, and still doesn't.

I've said it here before and I'll say it again once more for emphasis... thank God for Robert Plant stopping any reunion tour in it's tracks.

I agree completely, I have no idea of any drummer who could even come close to Bonham in respect to the Zeppelin material. Jason was very good but I concur, it did not really sound like a Zeppelin show wothout the amazing Bonzo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a

With what precisely, you think Zeppelin should have continued after Bonzo drank himself to an early grave?  Whom should they have replaced him with, and more pertinently... why?  They didn't just make the right decision, they made the only decision they could have made... for themselves, for the band, for their legacy, but most importantly, for Bonzo and his memory.

Zeppelin without Bonzo wouldn't have been Zeppelin; it would have been the three surviving members and some new guy... just like the 2007 gig, and that concert - however honorable the reasons behind it (and Jason's poignant participation in it) - just didn't feel like Led Zeppelin to me, and still doesn't.

I've said it here before and I'll say it again once more for emphasis... thank God for Robert Plant stopping any reunion tour in it's tracks.

Agreed..... No one could replace Bonzo, they made the right decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With what precisely, you think Zeppelin should have continued after Bonzo drank himself to an early grave?  Whom should they have replaced him with, and more pertinently... why?  They didn't just make the right decision, they made the only decision they could have made... for themselves, for the band, for their legacy, but most importantly, for Bonzo and his memory.

Zeppelin without Bonzo wouldn't have been Zeppelin; it would have been the three surviving members and some new guy... just like the 2007 gig, and that concert - however honorable the reasons behind it (and Jason's poignant participation in it) - just didn't feel like Led Zeppelin to me, and still doesn't.

I've said it here before and I'll say it again once more for emphasis... thank God for Robert Plant stopping any reunion tour in it's tracks.

Ya, in case I wasn't clear, I don't agree. As I said, I would like for them to have carried on. Get it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya, in case I wasn't clear, I don't agree. As I said, I would like for them to have carried on. Get it?

I can respect that, however who would you think would have made a good replacement for Bonzo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With what precisely, you think Zeppelin should have continued after Bonzo drank himself to an early grave?  Whom should they have replaced him with, and more pertinently... why?  They didn't just make the right decision, they made the only decision they could have made... for themselves, for the band, for their legacy, but most importantly, for Bonzo and his memory.

Zeppelin without Bonzo wouldn't have been Zeppelin; it would have been the three surviving members and some new guy... just like the 2007 gig, and that concert - however honorable the reasons behind it (and Jason's poignant participation in it) - just didn't feel like Led Zeppelin to me, and still doesn't.

I've said it here before and I'll say it again once more for emphasis... thank God for Robert Plant stopping any reunion tour in it's tracks.

I, too, agree completely even though your response seems to have fallen on a deaf heart. You know what's weird, though? In one of the Live Zep threads, I think it was pluribus who provided a link to the bootlegger trial that Jimmy testified at and in it he referred to P&P as another manifestation of Zep. This was not verbatim, although that word was in quotes, but it's very telling about his perspective. (Once again, poor Jonesy, though there was some consolation that it took an entire orchestra to do his parts). All of this is a round about way of supporting your last sentence. Thank God, indeed, especially what must have been tremendous pressure on Robert after the O2 show. Seems like with P&P he got a reminder of what route this gilded carriage would take and he managed to get out of it one last time. If the P&P tour refreshed an insight and strengthened his resolve to keep forging his own path, then it's a good thing it happened.

'Reunion' has always been a misnomer - you can't reunite what isn't there. No Bonzo, no Zep.

It frankly strains the bounds of courtesy and a sort of decency that surrounds the decision to keep second guessing it with requests to play together again. Things are as they should be for the sake of Zep's legacy and for the right ways and reasons for making music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

'Reunion' has always been a misnomer - you can't reunite what isn't there. No Bonzo, no Zep.

 

Exactly my feelings, no Bonzo, no Zep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, as a musician also not just for sentimental reasons it would be impossible to replace Bonzo. For

some strange reason Jimmy totally accepted this fact at the time but unfortunately later with the P/P

reunions was simply unable to move on. I saw the P/P shows(07')on dvd and the drumming was fine

but I regard Bonzo as possibly the best rock musician period. It is sad that Jimmy can't put something

together on his own and in a way, why can't Robert work with Jimmy ?? Well partially because P/P

basically turned into a Zep reunion tour. Other reasons as well, all well known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO the better the band, the harder it is to keep going under the same name without the original members. Sh**ty bands have no problem continuing on, replacing a member and touring a few months later. Just look at Widespread Panic. What they have is more of a following, though, and in my experience there is a big difference between followings and true fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the question of this thread by the OP:

Not all decisions are meant to be for the public, sometimes decisions are made based only on the people who need to make them. 

Good point.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup.Unless someone can point out another example, Zep is the only band Iv'e ever known so famous

that stopped on a dime with a members death. At the same time I don't damn the Who to hell for how

they carried on. Moon was also irreplaceable, but don't forget that Plant and Page were really headed

for a head-on collision. In fact I think Grant, Page, even Bonham who normally was Plant's pal, had

irreconcilable differences with Plant, and that would have been that anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 1980 when the band released statement, I thought for some reason that at least they have told the fans that they would not be a New Zeppelin mk2, even in the 1980's there were groups who were getting together and reforming and splitting up and what not.

They stood by that statement,  watching some live video now (not available in 1980's) you can see how close to each they were musically.

So I do think they did the right thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least Led Zeppelin didn't become a laughing stock like Black Sabbath did, look how they screwed over Bill Ward this last reunion, people keep praising Brad Wilk on how good of a job he did, Bill would've mopped the floor with him as old as he is.

I respect Zeppelin and their decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...