ally Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 Band at their peak....what do ya think ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Klu Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 Sept '71 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 24, 2007 Author Share Posted December 24, 2007 Sept '71 Great tour ....My personal favorite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honeydripper Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 as individual performers I'd definitley say that was their peak, but IMO as a cohesive unit I'd venture well into the 73 tour as well. 70-72 they still had an objective to conquer the world....whereas by 73 they KNEW it was mission accomplished...... and the days of overplaying and stepping on each other musically had subsided. Like as if they each made an individual conscious decision to take a step back for the good of the songs themselves. If you like to play Zep that overwhelms w/ outstanding individual performances, stick to 70-72....if you like to play Zep that melts together making one giant beautiful portrait....keep venturing into 73. It would be the last of the tours before they comfortably sat in the king's throne and kind of took the whole ride for granted. IMO of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattmc1973 Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 If you want all 4 members at their peak, I'd say 71/72, since Plant's voice was still strong. 73 was when they were at their best instrumentally, though Plant's voice was having trouble. March 73, specifically, was when they were an absolute furious instrumental beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honeydripper Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 .....and as individual performers, I'd argue that Page was the only one that digressed.To me 72 was his peak. JPJ was always rock solid, but definitely got more refined with time as his parts mirrored Page's guitar lines less......Plant became a much better singer, but physical limitations restricted him......and Bonzo IMO was a much better drummer later in Zep's onstage career as well. If you look at the early vids he's pounding with full arm's force and every so often got a bit overboard and stumbled.... while by Knebworth he was getting the same thunderous production out of just his wrists. His playing was much more refined (not too sure he would have had the mental capacity to pull off Fool In The Rain in 69...and IMO that came with outside influences of listening to everybody from James Brown to Little Feat) His drumming in later years seemed to be effortless. I'd also say material of the time period and setlists play a major factor. I could do with much more than the short set of covers in 69......but I could do with alot less than the overblown showcases of 77. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Klu Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 '73 is the end IMHO cause thats when the pre-programmed jam elements strip the fun out of jamming on (whats left of) the tunes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 24, 2007 Author Share Posted December 24, 2007 .....and as individual performers, I'd argue that Page was the only one that digressed.To me 72 was his peak. JPJ was always rock solid, but definitely got more refined with time as his parts mirrored Page's guitar lines less......Plant became a much better singer, but physical limitations restricted him......and Bonzo IMO was a much better drummer later in Zep's onstage career as well. If you look at the early vids he's pounding with full arm's force and every so often got a bit overboard and stumbled.... while by Knebworth he was getting the same thunderous production out of just his wrists. His playing was much more refined (not too sure he would have had the mental capacity to pull off Fool In The Rain in 69...and IMO that came with outside influences of listening to everybody from James Brown to Little Feat) His drumming in later years seemed to be effortless. I'd also say material of the time period and setlists play a major factor. I could do with much more than the short set of covers in 69......but I could do with alot less than the overblown showcases of 77. Good points Honeydripper... Would have to agree with Page taking a step backwards {live playing wise} Jones and Bonham were alway's the main stay of every concert and they just got better and better as time went by.Totally agree about the set lists. 77 and even parts of 75 wre at times ..over the top..I guess having seen them so many times before those tours has jaded me . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Klu Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 77 and even parts of 75 wre at times ..over the top.. At times??? No Quarter turned into a boogiewoogie-fest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 24, 2007 Author Share Posted December 24, 2007 At times??? No Quarter turned into a boogiewoogie-fest! Yeah ,so true... Dazed and Confused as well. However most of the material from PG was awsome in 75. Loved IMTOD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenman Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 I wouldnt say there was any one peak, the way I look at it is that the band had a certain setlist/sound they were using over a period of months working towards a peak before changing things around and starting again. Something like... 68 - Second US 69 tour Third US 69 tour - First US 70 tour Second US 70 tour - First UK 71 tour US 71 tour - Second UK 71 tour Oz 72 tour - US 72 tour Japan 72 - Euro 73 etc Personally I think the spring 70 tour was better than the more famous summer one and maybe there best ever live setlist with killer new tracks like TY, BIOH, HB and SIBLY mixed with the likes of WS/BMS and HMMT that they'd been perfecting for a year and a half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solar Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 Entire year of 1970. From the earliest shows (1-9, London) to the latest (9-19, NYC). Varied setlists. Tons of covers in with the originals. Fierce playing. Unrivaled vocals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 25, 2007 Author Share Posted December 25, 2007 Entire year of 1970. From the earliest shows (1-9, London) to the latest (9-19, NYC). Varied setlists. Tons of covers in with the originals. Fierce playing. Unrivaled vocals. Yeah, Awsome stuff. I should have posted 70 -72. Your right ,both tours in 70 were amazing. Vancouver missed out on the 2nd tour due to our arena being booked.so i've had to rely on the boots for that one. Did see them Mar.70 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadScreamingGallery Posted December 25, 2007 Share Posted December 25, 2007 as individual performers I'd definitley say that was their peak, but IMO as a cohesive unit I'd venture well into the 73 tour as well. 70-72 they still had an objective to conquer the world....whereas by 73 they KNEW it was mission accomplished...... and the days of overplaying and stepping on each other musically had subsided. Like as if they each made an individual conscious decision to take a step back for the good of the songs themselves. If you like to play Zep that overwhelms w/ outstanding individual performances, stick to 70-72....if you like to play Zep that melts together making one giant beautiful portrait....keep venturing into 73. It would be the last of the tours before they comfortably sat in the king's throne and kind of took the whole ride for granted. IMO of course. IYO of course but I like it. Personally, beyond the incredible individual performances of '71-72, I liked the feeling of individuality and the somewhat "rough edge" it gave to the band during those years. None of that diminishes my love for the phenomenon that the band was in '73 but JMO there is something about a band coming together, as individuals, in a raw sort of way before it finds its "wholeness" and moves toward perfection that greatly appeals to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 27, 2007 Author Share Posted December 27, 2007 IYO of course but I like it. Personally, beyond the incredible individual performances of '71-72, I liked the feeling of individuality and the somewhat "rough edge" it gave to the band during those years. None of that diminishes my love for the phenomenon that the band was in '73 but JMO there is something about a band coming together, as individuals, in a raw sort of way before it finds its "wholeness" and moves toward perfection that greatly appeals to me. Yeah,so true. To me the 73 tour was a little too contrived. There seemed to be more of an interest in special effects and lighting which didn't sit well with me. If you had seen the band prior to 73 as you have, then you'd know what I mean. Don't get me wrong, there'a a place for a great light show etc. But to me Zeppelin's earlier tours were all about the MUSIC. 73,...well it just lacked soul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadScreamingGallery Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 Yeah,so true. To me the 73 tour was a little too contrived. There seemed to be more of an interest in special effects and lighting which didn't sit well with me. If you had seen the band prior to 73 as you have, then you'd know what I mean. Don't get me wrong, there'a a place for a great light show etc. But to me Zeppelin's earlier tours were all about the MUSIC. 73,...well it just lacked soul ally, I know exactly what you mean. My first Zep concert was in '71 but there are people who are members here who saw them in '69 and '70 and they have told me that those concerts were phenomenal. For me, there was definitely a feeling of soul in '71 and '72 that began to diminish with the later concerts. Part of it was probably due to the fact that things became a bit too contrived, as you say, but I also thought that the rise in drug use by the band and the increasingly frenetic pace of touring changed the concerts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 ally, I know exactly what you mean. My first Zep concert was in '71 but there are people who are members here who saw them in '69 and '70 and they have told me that those concerts were phenomenal. For me, there was definitely a feeling of soul in '71 and '72 that began to diminish with the later concerts. Part of it was probably due to the fact that things became a bit too contrived, as you say, but I also thought that the rise in drug use by the band and the increasingly frenetic pace of touring changed the concerts. Yep, and the "Stairway To Heaven" mob started to attend ie {Yeah man, I got the fourth album}.Oh well I probably shouldn't sound so negative about that. At least they recognized talent. However, everytime I think about the flames and explosions ..... I'm reminded of KISS....SSSHHEEEEEIT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordchaos Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 The European tour in early '73 was them at their "well-oiled machine" best. As far as the jamming and improv- it was all downhill after March 73. But I might be partial to the setlists in 71 and 72(before the 72 Japan shows). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 29, 2007 Author Share Posted December 29, 2007 The European tour in early '73 was them at their "well-oiled machine" best. As far as the jamming and improv- it was all downhill after March 73. But I might be partial to the setlists in 71 and 72(before the 72 Japan shows). Well I guess Japan 72 was the start of the change in direction. Please don't get the impression that I have a problem with change. I'm not one to resist. There were plenty of great performances in 73 and 75. However as stated by others' and yourself the improvs' got very boring. Personally I felt they had enough material to drop the 30min stuff. and I include Moby Dick in that statement. D&C ,No Quarter could and should have been much shorter. A long concert has to be exciting.... not just long for the sake of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 30, 2007 Author Share Posted December 30, 2007 PLease somebody call me an idiot. Doesn't somebody have a different opinion ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadScreamingGallery Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 Yep, and the "Stairway To Heaven" mob started to attend ie {Yeah man, I got the fourth album}.Oh well I probably shouldn't sound so negative about that. At least they recognized talent. However, everytime I think about the flames and explosions ..... I'm reminded of KISS....SSSHHEEEEEIT Yes, I know exactly what you mean. At the risk of being flamed, I will also admit that, after the '75 shows, I didn't attend another Zep concert. I know. I continued to purchase and listen to all of their new studio albums but the concert scene no longer appealed to me. That said, what I experienced at those earlier Zep concerts has stayed with me for decades and they still stand, hundreds of concerts and shows later, as the best I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 PLease somebody call me an idiot. Doesn't somebody have a different opinion ? If you were I might, but your not. The issue isn't did they have enough material to drop the improvisations, as clearly they did, it is did the audience enjoy those segments as much as the band? Jimmy has said they needed to retain the improvisational segments to keep things interesting for them musically night after night. I believe they made the right decision, even if it led to three hour shows! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 Yes, I know exactly what you mean. At the risk of being flamed, I will also admit that, after the '75 shows, I didn't attend another Zep concert. I know. I continued to purchase and listen to all of their new studio albums but the concert scene no longer appealed to me. That said, what I experienced at those earlier Zep concerts has stayed with me for decades and they still stand, hundreds of concerts and shows later, as the best I've ever seen. The concert (touring) scene didn't hold the same appeal for them either, which led to using specific hotels as hubs and what not. Audience behaviour also declined, hitting Jimmy with a firecracker as just one example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted December 30, 2007 Author Share Posted December 30, 2007 Yes, I know exactly what you mean. At the risk of being flamed, I will also admit that, after the '75 shows, I didn't attend another Zep concert. I know. I continued to purchase and listen to all of their new studio albums but the concert scene no longer appealed to me. That said, what I experienced at those earlier Zep concerts has stayed with me for decades and they still stand, hundreds of concerts and shows later, as the best I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Klu Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 PLease somebody call me an idiot. Doesn't somebody have a different opinion ? ...everything went downhill after Gladaxe Teen Club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.