Jump to content

Led Zeppelin Woodstock '69


Recommended Posts

Take a grain of salt with this, but here's a Wikipedia list of those who refused an invitation to play at Woodstock:

---

Refused invitations

Bob Dylan was in negotiations to play, but pulled out when his son became ill. He also was unhappy about the number of hippies piling up outside his house near the originally planned site. [12] He would go on to perform at the Isle of Wight Festival two weeks later. At his June 30, 2007 concert at Bethel Woods, the original site of the Woodstock festival, Dylan joked (just before he performed 'All Along the Watchtower)': "Great to be back here-- I remember being here, playing at six in the morning, and it was pouring rain, too... a big field of mud!" [13]

From what I understand, Dylan was supposed to be the headliner of the original Woodstock but, as mentioned, pulled out. He did play at Woodstock '94, which was awesome. Woodstock '94 was a good mix of old and new bands whereas the notorious Woodstock '99, which I missed, was mostly new bands.

In any event, since Zeppelin used to incorporate Joni Mitchell's Woodstock into their set and Robert Plant wrote Tye-dye on the Highway about the concert, I think their absence may have been a source of regret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least Hendrix was there to represent the heavier side of rock.

...and the who! not only were the former Detours tripping balls (dosed backstage), but they came out and did the heaviest version of tommy ever, kicked (supposedly) abbie hoffman offstage (steal this ticket!), and then pete, looking plainative in his 'clockwork orange' boilermaker suit and doc martens bashed a brand new gibson SG like a posthole digger several times onto the stage and tossed it into the 'ocean' right at sunset. keith moon was not amused (hated hippies-tried to run them over whenever he was driving).

zep would have fit it nice, i think. a three way battle of the bands....although to exclude santana (who gave a quintessential performance) might be sacrilege.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never really dug the Who... they seem like all show and no go.

I've heard quite a few of their live performances, and it just doesn't do it for me. Sort of "blah" with not enough guitar and/or improv.

Feel free to attack me via forum for this, but its just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never really dug the Who... they seem like all show and no go.

I've heard quite a few of their live performances, and it just doesn't do it for me. Sort of "blah" with not enough guitar and/or improv.

Feel free to attack me via forum for this, but its just my opinion.

no attack-that's cool.

let me ask you: have you seen their woodstock performance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, Woodstock didn't fucking need Zep. And there was only room for one half-naked, poofy-haired, micro-phone spinning, screaming blonde anyways, and Roger Daltrey filled the role nicely. You know, the guy who did all that shit before Percy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, Woodstock didn't fucking need Zep. And there was only room for one half-naked, poofy-haired, micro-phone spinning, screaming blonde anyways, and Roger Daltrey filled the role nicely. You know, the guy who did all that shit before Percy?

Actually, Daltry didn't grow his hair out fully until '69 either. In '68, he had the same type of poofy, curly, permed 'do that Robert had on the back of Zep I's album cover. Go check Rock and Roll Circus, from '68, if you don't believe me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodstock ended up being a great concert but financially it was a disaster.

Kind of a misconception. Long-term, the venture became financially successful with the movie, soundtrack, merchandise and subsequent Woodstock revivals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Jimmy Page would have welcomed the opportunity to share the stage with Jimi Hendrix because it would have allowed him to get to see how he played his guitar. Jimmy Page was curious to see exactly what Hendrix did.

Jimmy never saw Jimi?

That's hard to believe since Hendrix spent time before superstardom playing haunts in London.

You would have thought Page had checked him out sometime.

Like gunslingers in the Old West.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kind of a misconception. Long-term, the venture became financially successful with the movie, soundtrack, merchandise and subsequent Woodstock revivals.

The guy that ran Woodstock didn't break even till the 1990s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know one reason was that they felt they were to big saying they could put on a bigger show in a parking lot because the total attendance of Woodstock was expected to abot 300-600 people not 400,000. And they definatley were asked to perform as well as The Doors, The Beatles, and Iron Butterfly was slated to perform but got caught in blizzard or something like that and The Jeff Beck group was also slated to play but dropped out a week before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jimmy never saw Jimi?

That's hard to believe since Hendrix spent time before superstardom playing haunts in London.

You would have thought Page had checked him out sometime.

Like gunslingers in the Old West.

I don't know. So far I've seen only an interview where Jimmy Page had commented that he wanted to see how Jimi Hendrix played the guitar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jimmy never saw Jimi?

That's hard to believe since Hendrix spent time before superstardom playing haunts in London.

You would have thought Page had checked him out sometime.

Like gunslingers in the Old West.

I remember reading an interview where Jimmy said he was sorry he never got to see Hendrix play, it was something he always intended to do but because of Hendrix's tragic early death, he missed the opportunity. Don't forget, Jimmy was kind of busy at the same time period as Hendrix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could have been a big change for them, with that kind of exposure in that show. As it was, they were the biggest underground group of the 70s, in a way. Yet, if they played woodstock, they'd be linked in overview, to that particular time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could have been a big change for them, with that kind of exposure in that show. As it was, they were the biggest underground group of the 70s, in a way. Yet, if they played woodstock, they'd be linked in overview, to that particular time.

Very interesting thought, one I've never heard expressed. It does seem that almost every band that played Woodstock, even The Who, has been generalized more as a '60s band despite what they did in the 70s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, Daltry didn't grow his hair out fully until '69 either. In '68, he had the same type of poofy, curly, permed 'do that Robert had on the back of Zep I's album cover. Go check Rock and Roll Circus, from '68, if you don't believe me.

Is right and Robert Plant had REALLY long hair before Daltrey did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could have been a big change for them, with that kind of exposure in that show. As it was, they were the biggest underground group of the 70s, in a way. Yet, if they played woodstock, they'd be linked in overview, to that particular time.

i'm with ya on this. zep at woodstock would have clumped them as a sixties band (like santana, even though the bands emerged roughly the same time). without woodstock, zeppelin was free to be adopted by a generation that was sick of flowers and mud and wanted their band to sound like a panzer attack.

good call...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The iconic nature of some of the bands in the Woodstock movie wasn't really deserved. Sha Na Na was a novelty act, and they certainly benefitted. Led Zeppelin didn't need that boost. They earned it by just playing their balls out every show. Hardly any advertising or video, just blue collar workmanship. I'm not saying many of the Woodstock bands didn't deserve the attention they gained, but in hindsight as others have said here, they may have been lumped in a different light than they achieved on their own.

Woodstock is one of my favorite music documentaries and really, I don't miss Led Zeppelin in it. Had the Texas Pop Festival '69 film footage had been released, that would have been Zep's 'Woodstock'. Who knows how it could have changed history.

Has anyone here seen the bootleg footage of LZ's Texas Pop performance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jimmy never saw Jimi?

That's hard to believe since Hendrix spent time before superstardom playing haunts in London.

You would have thought Page had checked him out sometime.

Like gunslingers in the Old West.

I recall an interview with Jimmy in which he said he never got the chance to see Hendrix in concert, nor meet him in person. Their paths never crossed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The iconic nature of some of the bands in the Woodstock movie wasn't really deserved. Sha Na Na was a novelty act, and they certainly benefitted. Led Zeppelin didn't need that boost. They earned it by just playing their balls out every show. Hardly any advertising or video, just blue collar workmanship. I'm not saying many of the Woodstock bands didn't deserve the attention they gained, but in hindsight as others have said here, they may have been lumped in a different light than they achieved on their own.

Woodstock is one of my favorite music documentaries and really, I don't miss Led Zeppelin in it. Had the Texas Pop Festival '69 film footage had been released, that would have been Zep's 'Woodstock'. Who knows how it could have changed history.

Has anyone here seen the bootleg footage of LZ's Texas Pop performance?

I don't think you can compare the bootleg footage from the Dallas show -- even as tremendous a show it was and how lucky we are to have such a great audio recording preserved -- to what a profesionally filmed, multi-camera show from Woodstock would have meant to Zeppelin fans and the annals of history. And who's to tell what the energy of 300,000-plus people would have brought out in the band. It could have been the Texas Pop Festival times Bath '70 for all we know.

Truth be told, if Peter Grant had known how big a festival Woodstock would become, both in attendance and cultural status, Led Zeppelin would have been on that bill. No question in my mind. Instead, he just dismissed it as another festival.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...