caroselambra~ Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 As great as it would be to see this happen – I am really against this tour. You have to ask yourself why the guys are doing this. I am sure they all love playing live and enjoy touring which is fine - but why do it under the guise of Zeppelin? Couldn’t they just go on the road anonymously were the thrill of live playing would still fulfil their needs? Or , is it because they know there would only be half the public interest if they called themsleves something else. Was there this much interest during the Page & Plant era? It is the hallowed name of Led Zeppelin the draws people and even if they decide against using it, the seed has already been sown. I sympathize with Robert who may now find himself in the unenviable position of being compared to another lead vocalist in a band that was his flesh and blood. We have seen the reformation of all but a few successful bands throughout the ages. I admire the ones who seemingly turn down vast sums of money to cash in on a once great name. Although they seem to be in the minority. I don’t care for Queen with Paul Rodgers, The Who without Entwistle and Moon, whoever is in the Rolling Stones lineup thesedays, Pink Floyd without Roger Waters etc and I’m sure there’s lots more to add to the list. I am of the opinion that past glories can never be equalled as they are a condition of time & place as well as the coming together of people. I have been alifelong admirer (hate the word fan) of Led Zeppelin and they have played an extremely important part in my life. I want to remember them the way there were and see no reason why they should try to re-live the past. Btw this is not pro Robert - in fact Jimmy and John Paul Jones (and John Bonham for that matter) feature more in my mental appreciation of what Zeppelin were more than Mr Plant ever did. Caroselambra~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knebby Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 There has been no confirmation - ANYWHERE - that they will call themselves Led Zeppelin. Yes, I really, REALLY want to see Jimmy, Jonesy, and Jason back out on the stage - together, apart, upside-down, on a bus, playing Coverdale/Page (cringe!) songs if they have to - just get out there! Yes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cactus Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 There has been no confirmation - ANYWHERE - that they will call themselves Led Zeppelin. Just what I was going to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estofest Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Do I really want this? You have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIBLY Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Just what I was going to say. And me! Although, I think they will use the name. But, why should it matter what they are called? What ever they played or record now doesn't affect the past. Treasured memories of past concerts won't alter (Bridge ) and your collection of CDs will still sound the same. I'll reserve judgement untill I've heard/seen them and I look forward to that with the anticipation of a kid on Christmas Morning. A lot of people on this board have gone on (and on and on and on) about Plant's right to do whatever the hell he likes so surely that applies to JP, JPJ & JB Jr as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tara*rocks Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 ^ What I've read time and again on this site is that Robert CAN'T do what he wants but the others can. Yea I wanna see them! Yeah I want this to happen! But not as Led Zeppelin. I can't believe they would call themselves that though, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 And me! Although, I think they will use the name. But, why should it matter what they are called? What ever they played or record now doesn't affect the past. Treasured memories of past concerts won't alter (Bridge ) and your collection of CDs will still sound the same. I'll reserve judgement untill I've heard/seen them and I look forward to that with the anticipation of a kid on Christmas Morning. A lot of people on this board have gone on (and on and on and on) about Plant's right to do whatever the hell he likes so surely that applies to JP, JPJ & JB Jr as well. No argument here, bring it on. Who / what's holding them back? Certainly not Robert. As for the name don't count on Led Zeppelin, that airship has long since sailed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles77 Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 No argument here, bring it on. Who / what's holding them back? Certainly not Robert. As for the name don't count on Led Zeppelin, that airship has long since sailed. Half a zeppelin is better than no zeppelin at all, give em a chance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesky Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Can anybody tell me what the difference is between the 3 J's touring with a new singer (maybe) doing some new material (maybe) and led zeppelin songs... and Robert Plant touring with some new material and doing some Led Zeppelin songs? I for one don't and will be the first in line for tickets... bring it on. And oh 'caroselambra' I think you'll find the Rolling stones have had the same line up for 30 years or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maven2blue Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Yes, I really want this. I plan to be there rockin out, dancing and cheering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheZeppyWanderer Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I'll take whatever combination or project is served up, and be glad of it. that said, I DO NOT want to see the name LED ZEPPELIN used without Robert on board. I see no problem though with the name as 'Mothership' or even as simply 'Zeppelin', to name but a few of the many suggestions we have come up with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesky Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Can anybody tell me what the difference is between the 3 J's touring with a new singer (maybe) doing some new material (maybe) and led zeppelin songs... and Robert Plant touring with some new material and doing some Led Zeppelin songs? I for one don't and will be the first in line for tickets... bring it on. And oh 'caroselambra' I think you'll find the Rolling stones have had the same line up for 30 years or so. Sorry 'caroselambra' I totally forgot about 'Bill Wyman'. I wonder why. Apologies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kabbalahone Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I'll take whatever combination or project is served up, and be glad of it. that said, I DO NOT want to see the name LED ZEPPELIN used without Robert on board. I see no problem though with the name as 'Mothership' or even as simply 'Zeppelin', to name but a few of the many suggestions we have come up with. I really don't think anyone has a right to dictate what they should call themselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiina63 Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 :beer: I'll take whatever combination or project is served up, and be glad of it. that said, I DO NOT want to see the name LED ZEPPELIN used without Robert on board. I see no problem though with the name as 'Mothership' or even as simply 'Zeppelin', to name but a few of the many suggestions we have come up with. I agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheZeppyWanderer Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I really don't think anyone has a right to dictate what they should call themselves Agreed - and why would the band ALLOW themselves to be dictated to anyway. nothing wrong with fans offering their opinions though - please don't confuse the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LedJunkie Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I have been alifelong admirer (hate the word fan) of Led Zeppelin and they have played an extremely important part in my life. If I may ask, why do you hate the word fan? When I read that part of your post I couldn't help but wonder. To answer the question, yes I want this. As others have said, there is no confirmation of them using the name Led Zeppelin. It would make me personally feel better if they didn't use the name, but I guess I trust them to make the right call and not use the name for the sake of using it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidLed Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 IMHO.... The problem for Jimmy is that Zep was soooo huge, its almost impossible to hear Page without thinking about Plant, they are both so original and connected. This whole thing is NOT about money, THEY DONT NEED THE MONEY! This is Jimmy/JPJ/Jason's career?! Its what they do, and it is so intricately (sp?) connected to Zeppelin, its almost impossible to do anything else and not be compared or called Zeppelin. Why should Jimmy/JPJ have to hang up the band they love because Robert is a selfish ego maniac?(and any attacks wont change my opinion on that) The Who in the late 90's w/ Zak Starkey were phenomenal! Now that John e is gone its not The Who, but the Who 3 w/ Zak were as good as the original. Zeppelin w/ Jason at the 02 were phenomenal and could still be relevant w/ new material. Robert says he doesnt want to mess up the legacy of Zeppelin, thats a cop out. THERE IS NO WAY TO MESS UP THE LEGACY!!!! They should go out w/o Robert and they should call it something that references Zeppelin, but not exactly Zeppelin. My favorites: Silver Zeppelin. Zepplinesque. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knebby Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 THERE IS NO WAY TO MESS UP THE LEGACY!!!! *Live Aid* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidLed Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Oh Man, your killin me, LIVE AID was terrible!! I blame Phil Collins for being sooo useless, how could you not know how to play R&R and call yourself a rock drummer? however, they should have practiced a lot more than they did and jimmy was wasted. that being said they certainly redeeemed themselves at the 02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesky Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I totally disagreed with using any part of the 'Led Zeppelin' name ie Silver Zeppelin. Zepplinesque. It makes it sound like a bad tribute band. They need a new and different name if the tour goes ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroselambra~ Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 Sorry 'caroselambra' I totally forgot about 'Bill Wyman'. I wonder why. Apologies! No worries bluesky! But I would like to add that I have a sneaking suspicion that the O2 Arena gig and the need to perform live again was borne out of the Live Aid debacle. Zeppelin were the only band that day who didn't allow their performance to be used in the subsequent compilations and DVD's (videotapes in those days) that followed - because it was so bad. Their whole set was really poor and many people the world over who had never seen or heard anything by them must have wondered what all the fuss was about. Bring on O2 and all the hurt of that *final live aid gig* was firmly laid to rest. Even the hardest Zeppelin critics plied them with accolades. Superb, fantastic uncompromising and simply brilliant. I am sure there could be no finer Swansong than that gig. I am sure Robert Plant wants to be remembered for their perfomance that night. So should the others. Unless there is a real compelling reason to tour again - they simply shouldn't. This is, however, only my opinion caroselambra~ (purposefully misspelled) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyV Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 There has been no confirmation - ANYWHERE - that they will call themselves Led Zeppelin. I was thinking the same thing too. My guess is they don't as Jimmy has been such a fastidious keeper of the legacy all this time and appreciates it as well or better than anybody. I don't think they'll fall to any pressure to use the name "Led Zeppelin" to maximize selling potential, although I suspect many promoters (Harvey aside) and most venues would prefer it. Whatever name they choose works for me (I would prefer a new name personally), and for the sake of not having rounds of arguments about using the name I hope they choose sooner than later. Of course, I can understand them not wanting to put the cart before the horse just yet if they're not further along with this thing beyond rehearsals and an intention to play. As always, we'll just have to wait and see. I just want to see and hear them play! Can't wait- "LOUD" sounds great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Plant is a "selfish ego maniac"? At this point I have more admiration for him for following his own muse than I do for his bandmates who seemingly only want to repeat the past. Oh, and as for it not being Led Zeppelin without Plant it's also not "Led Zeppelin" with Jason Bonham. Led Zeppelin as we know it ceased to exist when John Bonham died. I do hope they'll go under another name and nothing close to Led Zeppelin ("The Dead" makes me cringe in comparison to the "Grateful Dead"). I am interested in the project but it all depends on who they choose as a lead singer and how much their live show will rely on new, original music and not that made famous by Led Zeppelin. As has already been noted, these type of projects are oftentimes failures and not successes. I do hope it's the latter if and when it ever gets off the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I posted this on another thread and it seems apt to post it here too. If it was Unledded without Jones, then it would be Misledded without Plant! Chronology of Led Zeppelin: 1968 Led Zeppelin formed. 1980 Led Zeppelin disbanded. 1985 They reappeared albeit briefly and minus Bonzo, at Live Aid. (To blame it solely on Phil Collins is a bit rich, weren't there TWO drummers playing?) 2007 To raise money for Ahmet's charity they reformed FOR ONE NIGHT ONLY in London. As for Robert being a selfish ego maniac, have I missed something? Skyhooks once sang, 'Ego is not a dirty word.....' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xorq Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Since I never got the option to see Led Zeppelin live in the 60's or 70's, I'm very very happy to hear that I might be able to see some of my favourite musicians live. I don't mind if they keep Led Zeppelin as their name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.