Is it just me or Led Zeppelin (or rather half of the band) were simply bad too many times LIVE? *

Of course anything that Page has done since Zeppelin would be considered a failure if you measure it against Zeppelin's accomplishments. I happen to like The Firm, Mean Business is an excellent under rated album & Coverdale Page rocks!! Even Outrider has it's merits. Jimmy should quit waiting on Plant & hit the road!!

 

All you have to do is listen to all the boots to evaluate.

 

I actually find it has a ton of power! I love it, in fact the extended Whole Lotta Love's from especially 71 through 73 are what I listen to first whenever I find a new bootleg

 

They lack backing vocals and that's a big weakness to have for a live band.

 

I'm amazed at how several posters on this thread can write so authoritatively about something they've never experienced. Just because you have the capability to Google "Led Zeppelin", or watch a bootleg of one of their live performances on YouTube, doesn't mean you should or could evaluate their capabilities as a live band.

 

You can't be serious lol, Pink Floyd just stood there lol!! The dynamic that Plant brought with his body language, appearance & stage presence ( no pun intended lol) is undeniable!! When Page & Plant rubbed bodies on stage a certain chemistry was unleashed, no other musicians that I know of had that. Even Daltrey permed his hair to resemble Plant lol!!

 

Who needs backing vocals lol, when you have Plant!! Jimmy actually sang on Battle Of Evermore during 77 I believe. Bonham liked to do the count in for The Ocean if that counts as vocals.

 

Floyd were playing instruments 100% of the time. Yeah, Plant’s real exciting in the clips above. I saw more passion on stage from The Who.

 

You must have "Googled" someone else. The Robert Plant never "just stood there", and was, if not the greatest frontman of all time.

 

Like Zep ok
Love/prefer live music generally
Zep live is unlistenable, IMHO

 

Coverdale/Page is very much underrated, I agree. And yes, I agree he should give up on Plant at this point...I sadly don't think Plant will ever be keen on a full reunion. And perhaps for the sake of Zep's legacy it's better that he isn't. I feel like Zeppelin's mystique would be ruined with a giant, Stones-esque stadium world tour. And given how legendary they are, I don't think they could get away with anything less. It would be a big production, full of publicity which is one thing Zep wasn't about. I mean look how few pro-shot live performances there are of them compared to their contemporaries. Look how few singles they issued. Look how few band photographs. This was a band that thrived mainly on word of mouth. Being another monster legacy act would sort of tarnish that, at least for me. But YMMV.

 

Are you thinking of another band? Zep hardly had any bvox on their records. Plant harmonizes with himself on a few songs, but that's it.

 

I am not saying that Plant is better than Daltrey, Jagger, Freddie Mercury etc etc, I am only saying that he is not boring & that he is indeed one of the greatest rock vocalists & frontmen of all time. It is all subjective.

 

Who is in to see Jimmy Page tour with Paul Rodgers &/ or David Coverdale?? I am!!

 

Their first two albums were game changers, the sound blowing in and demanding attention. Their next set of albums expanded their repertoire and were as progressive and exceptional as it gets. They were at the top. Toward the end, their albums grew even more progressive but got somewhat bloated and older sounding...somewhat drawn out.

The Beatles similarly were better in the studio than they were live.

Although early on, so exciting to see them on Ed Sullivan.

I think Led Zep's albums were very well produced.

I care much less about their live act.

Many live acts are a bit of a disappointment/let down.

Not all.

But many.

 

Yes to either; preferably Coverdale. They were a good match. Page is 70 something years old. Plant's just not gonna do it. I am sure Pagey has good riffs stored up sitting collecting dust that he's accumulated since 1980. Time to use them with someone else.

 

So let's see what we have so far:

Robert Plant just stands there
Jimmy Page was too sloppy
Songs were extended and too long and boring
Robert Plant couldn't hit the high vocal notes after 1973 like he did pre-1973
They lacked backing vocals
They lacked a second guitarist to play the overdubs



Whatever happened to just experiencing a live show or reviewing a live recording of a past show and just...enjoying it? Take it for what it is, realize that rock n' roll is about the moment, the experience, the passion, and to me when I take those things into account I find Led Zeppelin one of the all time greats and I would have killed to see any of the shows live in person that I have come to know so well through bootlegs

There seems to be a ton of nitpicking that is very un-rock n' roll

 

What are you trying to listen to??

 

The problem with Zeppelin live is you have 3, 4, sometimes as much as 10 guitar overdubs on a song. How could one man replicate that live and have it be totally satisfactory?

 

Try to get both DC & PR, each do an hour long set & then come out & do a couple of encores together!! That would be a dream come true for me!!

 

Exactly, I can't wait for the upcoming threads that will bash....
The Beatles
The Rolling Stones
The Who
and Pink Floyd

 

"The Beatles sucked live, they almost sounded like they couldn't even hear their own instruments over the crowd!"

 

Don't forget about Queen lol

 

For me a live act doesn't matter. If a band can play in the studio and it's obvious they're not faking it, I don't need a live performance. Most of my favorite acts (Elvis, Garcia-led Dead, The Doors, Zeppelin, Beatles, Janis) I'll never see live so a live show has, for myself, never been been of much importance. I actually wish bands didn't HAVE to tour.