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

Very well said PacificOceanBlue! from 1969-1973 they were one of the best live bands in the world. When I saw them on there first American tour at the Rose Palace in 5/69 it was the best they would ever be, so new and a very hungry band that was going to conquer the world.

 

I watched this many times. Only thing I liked was the Albert Hall part, as I have already mentioned.

 

Did

Did you ever see the band yourself live? Did you see the Beatles live? You might have seen Yes live. Listening to bootlegs is no measure (and why keep buying them if you think they peaked as a band?)

 

Yes, I do enjoy that. But I am talking at least about singing in tune. ))) or playing guitar without mistakes and obvious flubs. The solo on Stairway from Song Remains is very well. It is different from the original, rather well-executed...

 

well.. I saw half of Queen. Nils Petter Molvaer (twice), and Glenn Hughes... ah, and Elton John. I wish I would have seen Yes live.. with Anderson. Bootlegs aren't a measure, most often due to bad sound quality, but Song Remains the Same points out even more starkly their lack of virtuoso musicianship, evident in the studio.

 

You ask THAT question on THIS forum a week after the remasters came out?

Somebody's looking for a group ass-whupping.

 

If this is bad (from 1979), please show me something good:

 

Completely disagree with OP's sentiment.

I don't equate precision or perfection with greatness. Page has always been sloppy as hell (some nights more so than others), but his style works within the band. It's the combination of something precise (Jones) with something precise and lagging behind the beat (Bonham) and something slightly off-kilter and reckless (Page) that produces the band's magic. It's called rock n' roll.

A band like Dream Theater where everything is super-rehearsed and immaculate is just dead boring live (though I do enjoy a few of their early records).

 

Yes at their best didn't settle for that. Listen to "Yessongs"-- Lots of improv, lots of variation. Even the Trevor Rabin band stretched out quite a bit onstage.

 

A lot of bands were sloppy back in those days. A lot of Hendrix's live stuff was sloppy, he wasn't even tuned properly at Woodstock. Listen to the Stones' Love You Live, way sloppy compared to the slick sound they have today. Sloppy was almost fashionable back then. Personally, I like the sloppy Stones of Love You Live better than the slick sound of today.

 

If I understand you? You never saw them live? You are just basing your opinion on live recordings? Please set me straight on this.

 

It's not you, it's them, and there are recordings to substantiate that. And Page is so ridiculously overrated.

 

I was born in 1991 and did not get a chance to see 'em at that one-off concert at 02. I saw them through various media however, without crowd and other factors getting in the way of the music.

 

Agree except Page - overrated. I don't know why he never produced a remarkable solo album, but what he does on guitar in the studio and the fact that he produced Led Zeppelin - that mighty remarkable in my book. )))

 

1. I'd bet that all the people saying you can't judge a band through bootlegs have lots of said bands bootlegs!

2. Those same people always give a free pass to people who never saw a band live but judge their live output favorably through bootlegs!

3. I've never heard an atrocious sounding Zeppelin on a bootleg, but any Bonzo drum solo over 5 minutes is damn near a crime against humanity! Monster drummer, but I don't need him to try to prove it for 30 minutes!

4. Same thing for needlessly over extended versions of Dazed and Confused and Bored!

5. Someone said something about the band taking chances live and that's why they could be uneven. I've never found a whole lot of variety to any particular set of shows from any given tour. Even the songs where they did snippets of covers seemed to stick to a strict set of songs! Zeppelin remind me of Van Halen; a whole world of talent and ability and experience to really mix things up, and they go out for a hundred straight shows and play they same setlist!

 

Not looking for that. Just for some friendly discussion. )))

another thing - I don't buy into Plant's voice being tinkered with to sound better. that moment when he stretches "the sooong remaaains the saaaaaaaaaaaAAAaame.. ooooh" - that is incredibly high, powerful and sounds way too complicated to have been doctored with analogue means. What I have discovered though - "That's the Way" seemed to have been slowed down somewhat for the final version. But it was not only the vocals - but the entire recording.

 

ah, but to some constant experimentation and constant dissonance between precise and sloppy could be even more boring. XD It's where they are most precise that I like - Albert Hall, and they do different stuff from studio, but still doing that might fine. And Plant is trying, really trying to deliver the best possible listening experience.

 

I have every Zeppelin bootleg known to circulate. Judged that way (since I never saw them live), I think they were the best live rock band I've heard on recording during 69-73. 1972 was especially great. 80 percent of those shows are amazing.

75-77 was erratic at best. 79-80 were interesting, mainly because what they tried to do with some of the songs. However, I wouldn't really defend them with any vigor.

 

Well as I and other members have said between 1969-1973 they were one of the best live bands in the world. I don't think you can offer any opinion on there live performance because you never saw them live! Hearing a live recording and being in a concert hall are two completely different things. I saw them on there first American tour live and I can not express how good they were live in 1969! So I can't validate your opinion because you never experienced the real experience of a live concert.

 

I would not call it lots of improv, especially after the departure of Peter Banks. They had some extended parts, mostly in early numbers up to "The Yes Album", but the canonical output was usually played in very faithful arrangements and renditions. A lot of effort went into solo spots too, also meticulously arranged.

I actually like their much maligned stint with Patrick Moraz, who tried to breathe some life (or botch, like many Yesheads prefer to see it) into their standard repertory. Tormato tour was not bad in that aspect either, quite atypical for classic Yes live menu. I cannot say anything about any post-Drama incarnation (except for the short Keys to Ascension break from their new business), because I am not into that kind of music.

Anyway, Zeppelin's live proposal is for me much more exciting and their tapes like Fillmore Apr '69, Texas Festival '69, Royal Albert Hall '70 and Blueberry Hill '70 are in my opinion one of the most exciting hard-rock live documents ever. Yes stuff I have heard so far does not even enter into my top list of best live prog recordings, dominated by the improv monsters like Henry Cow, Soft Machine and King Crimson.

 

I'm not even that big of a Zeppelin fan, but when I got to this part of the post I had to stop reading, because I find it just such an unfounded claim that I couldn't take the rest of it seriously.

 

I saw them. And I know several people that saw them, and the story is they is mixed. Some saw great shows (mostly the early years) and some saw ok shows. The show I saw: disappointing.

 

ahem, I did say that I really like them around 69 and 70. And how about virtually being there? My experience will never rival yours. But I can still hear the music, and provided there is video, see how they move, how they look. Yes, being there sweetens everything up nicely. I enjoyed Queen + Lambert show, however when watching it again on TV, with the TV mix - I was underwhelmed. But I guess sound operators were to blame for no bass and tinny sound. Song Remains hardly has any sonic problems, but the fact remains: the playing is far from the stellar quality of studio releases.

 

Have a listen to shows from 1971, especially the Japan concert from 9/29.

 

I'm sorry but I really can't take you seriously. I don't know why you would start a thread about a world class band on there live status, but you never seen them live. It has absolutely no merit!