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

Oh how I wish to have gotten the experience treatment.. *sigh. Born in the wrong times.

 

It sounds like you're listening without the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia.

 

He has a specific amount of information but no experience to defend his premise.

 

Zeppelin, especially post-73 had some moments live that were not the best just based on Plant's vocals cracking and Page being sloppy. But I wouldn't say that is anywhere near 90 percent of the time. When Zeppelin, in any given year from 1969-1980 were on form, they were unbeatable IMO.



And the whole "you are too young to assess these bands" argument is a load of crap IMO

 

No disagreement there ...

 

It's you, buddy.

 

I saw Zep live(1977), and they were fantastic.

 

And, again, ignorance.. Oh my. XD fool in the rain, nonetheless.

 

What I see that there is a number of people showing approval of my posts if by "likes" alone. Means I am onto smth here albeit in minority perhaps.

And if not having experience is smth you gonna throw at my face... Ok. Whatever.

 

You can't judge them unless you saw them yourself? Bootlegs don't count! But if you saw them two or three times that counts? How many shows did Zeppelin play in their career? 500?

 

In discussions on live LZ, people always defend the sloppiness by citing that the band "took a lot of chances" and played "improv". This always puzzles me. The "improv" bits are almost always generic twelve bar boogies where Plant tosses out whatever blues lyrics he can think of, or overly long solos that don't really go anywhere. The actual songs played don't differ much from the album versions, except maybe the fact that Page had to choose a single guitar part to play (which often worked out very awkwardly - the harmony part in Black Dog, or a good portion of The Song Remains the Same).

I love the albums, but live Zeppelin pales in comparison. If you drink a shot every time Plant says "ooh baby baby" during any given show though, it's a great drinking game.

 

With fans like you who needs enemies? It's just you.

 

I like how you attack people for saying they played "improv" then you criticize them for playing long solos. The solos ARE improv in case you didn't know, same with implementing blues lyrics

They did take a lot of chances live, and even though Plant's voice post 1973 was not as great and Page from 1975 onward could be sloppy when they were on they were ON!

 

I saw them in 2007 and they were good.

 

Seems to me that there is a difference between the "experience" of Led Zeppelin live and listening to recordings after the fact.
I think we could agree that many venues have/had poor sound and then there is the reality of where one sat in the arena and how many chemicals were in their blood stream. All of this contributes to the experience.
I envy those of you who were able to see them in their prime.

Having listened to about every recording of LZ live I would concur with the opinion that after 1973 they get really uneven. Some exceptions for me: 1975 Uniondale, 1975 Seattle, 1975 Earls Court, 1977 LA Forum.
Just pull up Seattle 1977 on YouTube to see a really bad night.

Listening to these recordings is all those of us who missed them can get.

 

I wonder what the OP thinks of that concert?

 

My 3 favorite bands are: The Who, Emerson Lake & Palmer and The Doors.
I like live Zep very much from 1969 thru 1971, and agree with others that that was their hungry period.
You can have live Zep later on, not that great to my ears.
I like live Stones from the Get Yer Ya Ya's Out period and very little else.
Other great live acts are: 1971 Allman Brothers, 1976-77 Little Feat, 1975 Frampton like many know, and
1973 thru '75 / '76 by The Band...

And, we're a family of music lovers out here with many different tastes, and the original OP can
post whatever he very well chooses. If it weren't for all original posters out here then this great
site wouldn't be sustained what-so-ever...

 

Hold on - first off, I don't attack people's posts. I simply mentioned something that comes up in every Zeppelin discussion I've ever read, & cited why I disagree.

Secondly, "improv" requires more than soloing. The instrumentalists of LZ often trotted out the same licks and phrases over and over for their 20 minute solos. That's not really improvising. I love Neil Young & Crazy Horse, but their longer songs are the same type of story. Extending a song in a repetitive nature is not "improv" to me. If it works for you, I'm happy for you.

 

Unfortunately I never saw Zeppelin live. When I was a teenager I bought all the LZ albums, saw TSRTS, etc...I remember at one point in the late 70's some of the rock magazines, who normally ate up LZ, had articles about how poorly Page was playing in concert. Management made excuses, 'he was exhausted on that night, had the flu, or had eaten some bad food' you get the picture. I remember that a doctor who accompanied the band accused Page of stealing some drugs from his bag. I think they got off their game in the late 70's. That's not to say they couldn't still be brilliant at times.

 

Agreed. Not sure what some people think "improv" means. And while Zeppelin weren't on par with the best jazz musicians, their live shows did have a significant amount of improvisation within certain numbers. "Dazed and Confused" could sound quite different on various points of a tour. I quite like the weird improvisations in "Whole Lotta Love" during the 1980 tour.

 

Personally I pretty much only really take the time to rate bands by how good they were in their prime. The Who could have sucked (or not sucked) for a number of decades of shows after Keith Moon died but who cares? To me The Who were still one of the best live bands ever (and again that is a hypothecial example, I really don't know how good The Who were live post prime)

90% is way to high regardless taking Zeppelin's whole career into account.

 

This is exactly how I feel, and if you think 20 minutes is tedious, try 30 for Dazed and 25 for Moby Dick.

 

The improve on ' Dazed And Confused' from The Song Remains The Same' is far from twelve bar boogies. It is one of the more rousing guitar adventures in the Led Zeppelin live repertoire.

 

Recording in the studio?

 

I wish *I* was that bad 90% of the time.