Zeppelin without Plant???
Moderator: SMLCHNG
-
momsrule27
- Fruitcake
- Posts: 936
- Joined: July 13, 2006 3:16 pm
- Favorite Buffett Song: One Particular Harbor
- Number of Concerts: 7
- Favorite Boat Drink: Margarita!
- Location: In the mountains of New Jersey
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
Even if Plant were to agree I just can't see it, nor would I want to. I want to hang on to my memories of them when they were at the top. I am afraid that this would just be sad to see because there is no way they will be as good, or even close to as good, as they once were. Plant is the only smart one to realize that. I think Plant that is why he has been performing songs with Krause because he knows what his voice can handle.
Ciao!
Char
--------------------
MOTM 2011, 2009, 2008, 2005
Char
--------------------
MOTM 2011, 2009, 2008, 2005
-
Tiki Torches
- At the Bama Breeze
- Posts: 4374
- Joined: October 23, 2006 5:15 pm
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
To the contrary, the 02 concert showed they still have it beyond a shadow of a doubt but the only way forward is by creating new music rather than banking on nostalgia as far too many bands are already doing. As far as Plant working with Krauss, it has nothing whatsoever to do with his voice. They first met at a Leadbelly tribute and expressed an interest in working with each other afterwards which led to Raising Sand. He can still rock with the best of them, the 02 concert and his most recent album, The Mighty Rearranger are prime evidence of that. Can he still hit the notes he once did in his 20s with Zeppelin? Of course not but he's still one of the best rock vocalists out there.momsrule27 wrote:Even if Plant were to agree I just can't see it, nor would I want to. I want to hang on to my memories of them when they were at the top. I am afraid that this would just be sad to see because there is no way they will be as good, or even close to as good, as they once were. Plant is the only smart one to realize that. I think Plant that is why he has been performing songs with Krause because he knows what his voice can handle.
-
MonumentBeach
- License to Chill
- Posts: 1213
- Joined: May 18, 2005 9:46 pm
- Number of Concerts: 0
- Location: Buzzards Bay!
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
Sorry...just linking the article. None of my personal thoughts on the issue. Figured some people would find it interesting.Tiki Torches wrote:There's not a single quote in that article from Jimmy Page saying that, the only quotes are from Jimmy Page's manager. Not to mention, there was never going to be a Led Zeppelin tour without Plant anyway. As I mentioned in my previous post Page said they had no plans to use the Led Zeppelin name. The plan was to record new material with a new singer and then tour behind it but it would not be called Led Zeppelin.MonumentBeach wrote:Sounds like Jimmy Page has decided against doing a reunion without Robert Plant...
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/i ... -declares/
Ashes of laughter
The ghost is clear
Why do the best things always disappear?
The ghost is clear
Why do the best things always disappear?
-
C-Dawg
- On a Salty Piece of Land
- Posts: 11080
- Joined: September 2, 2007 9:40 am
- Favorite Buffett Song: The list is long...
- Number of Concerts: 10
- Favorite Boat Drink: my next one....this one's empty
- Location: Colchester, VT
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
love the Steve Martin quote. I love Jimmy Page as a guitarist, but wouldn't pay to see this without all 3 living band members...without Plant it would seem like a tribute band.
-
Tiki Torches
- At the Bama Breeze
- Posts: 4374
- Joined: October 23, 2006 5:15 pm
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
Fair enough but it's right there in the headline that accompanies the article:MonumentBeach wrote:Sorry...just linking the article. None of my personal thoughts on the issue. Figured some people would find it interesting.Tiki Torches wrote:There's not a single quote in that article from Jimmy Page saying that, the only quotes are from Jimmy Page's manager. Not to mention, there was never going to be a Led Zeppelin tour without Plant anyway. As I mentioned in my previous post Page said they had no plans to use the Led Zeppelin name. The plan was to record new material with a new singer and then tour behind it but it would not be called Led Zeppelin.MonumentBeach wrote:Sounds like Jimmy Page has decided against doing a reunion without Robert Plant...
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/i ... -declares/
“Led Zeppelin Are Over,” Jimmy Page’s Manager Declares
-
MonumentBeach
- License to Chill
- Posts: 1213
- Joined: May 18, 2005 9:46 pm
- Number of Concerts: 0
- Location: Buzzards Bay!
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
Regardless of whether its direct from Page or his manager, its still noteworthy.Tiki Torches wrote:Fair enough but it's right there in the headline that accompanies the article:MonumentBeach wrote:Sorry...just linking the article. None of my personal thoughts on the issue. Figured some people would find it interesting.Tiki Torches wrote:There's not a single quote in that article from Jimmy Page saying that, the only quotes are from Jimmy Page's manager. Not to mention, there was never going to be a Led Zeppelin tour without Plant anyway. As I mentioned in my previous post Page said they had no plans to use the Led Zeppelin name. The plan was to record new material with a new singer and then tour behind it but it would not be called Led Zeppelin.MonumentBeach wrote:Sounds like Jimmy Page has decided against doing a reunion without Robert Plant...
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/i ... -declares/
“Led Zeppelin Are Over,” Jimmy Page’s Manager Declares
The more interesting question is, if Page decides to do a project with Jones and Bonham with another singer, what would the response be? Would people shell out big bucks for tickets? Small venues, large venues?
Ashes of laughter
The ghost is clear
Why do the best things always disappear?
The ghost is clear
Why do the best things always disappear?
-
Tiki Torches
- At the Bama Breeze
- Posts: 4374
- Joined: October 23, 2006 5:15 pm
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
Yes, it is noteworthy but my point is, Page never said anything about Led Zeppelin being over, the quote came from his manager. There's a huge difference. Not to mention, this project was never going to be called "Led Zeppelin" anyway.MonumentBeach wrote:Regardless of whether its direct from Page or his manager, its still noteworthy.Tiki Torches wrote:Fair enough but it's right there in the headline that accompanies the article:MonumentBeach wrote:Sorry...just linking the article. None of my personal thoughts on the issue. Figured some people would find it interesting.Tiki Torches wrote:There's not a single quote in that article from Jimmy Page saying that, the only quotes are from Jimmy Page's manager. Not to mention, there was never going to be a Led Zeppelin tour without Plant anyway. As I mentioned in my previous post Page said they had no plans to use the Led Zeppelin name. The plan was to record new material with a new singer and then tour behind it but it would not be called Led Zeppelin.MonumentBeach wrote:Sounds like Jimmy Page has decided against doing a reunion without Robert Plant...
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/i ... -declares/
“Led Zeppelin Are Over,” Jimmy Page’s Manager Declares
The more interesting question is, if Page decides to do a project with Jones and Bonham with another singer, what would the response be? Would people shell out big bucks for tickets? Small venues, large venues?
I'm not sure if you've been paying attention or not (I'm guessing the latter considering your response) but this whole project was (or possibly could still be) Page, Jones and Jason Bonham with a new singer. It was never going to be called "Led Zeppelin". Their intentions were to find a lead vocalist (who wasn't a Plant soundalike), record a new record and then tour behind it. This could still happen. Judging by the response over the last several months from Led Zeppelin's online community it was a project that was welcomed with open arms. Would it draw as huge as something under the Led Zeppelin banner with Plant included? Probably not but since it's the next closest thing I'm thinking it would still bring in pretty big crowds.
-
MonumentBeach
- License to Chill
- Posts: 1213
- Joined: May 18, 2005 9:46 pm
- Number of Concerts: 0
- Location: Buzzards Bay!
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
I have been paying attention. Maybe the way I worded something wasn't clear. In any event, I didn't mean to upset you and I apologize if I did. Truth be told, I like Zeppelin but I'm not a huge fan. I was simply linking an article relating to the Zeppelin camp that I thought some here might like to read. Lets get back to the music.Tiki Torches wrote:Yes, it is noteworthy but my point is, Page never said anything about Led Zeppelin being over, the quote came from his manager. There's a huge difference. Not to mention, this project was never going to be called "Led Zeppelin" anyway.MonumentBeach wrote:Regardless of whether its direct from Page or his manager, its still noteworthy.Tiki Torches wrote:Fair enough but it's right there in the headline that accompanies the article:MonumentBeach wrote:Sorry...just linking the article. None of my personal thoughts on the issue. Figured some people would find it interesting.Tiki Torches wrote:There's not a single quote in that article from Jimmy Page saying that, the only quotes are from Jimmy Page's manager. Not to mention, there was never going to be a Led Zeppelin tour without Plant anyway. As I mentioned in my previous post Page said they had no plans to use the Led Zeppelin name. The plan was to record new material with a new singer and then tour behind it but it would not be called Led Zeppelin.MonumentBeach wrote:Sounds like Jimmy Page has decided against doing a reunion without Robert Plant...
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/i ... -declares/
“Led Zeppelin Are Over,” Jimmy Page’s Manager Declares
The more interesting question is, if Page decides to do a project with Jones and Bonham with another singer, what would the response be? Would people shell out big bucks for tickets? Small venues, large venues?
I'm not sure if you've been paying attention or not (I'm guessing the latter considering your response) but this whole project was (or possibly could still be) Page, Jones and Jason Bonham with a new singer. It was never going to be called "Led Zeppelin". Their intentions were to find a lead vocalist (who wasn't a Plant soundalike), record a new record and then tour behind it. This could still happen. Judging by the response over the last several months from Led Zeppelin's online community it was a project that was welcomed with open arms. Would it draw as huge as something under the Led Zeppelin banner with Plant included? Probably not but since it's the next closest thing I'm thinking it would still bring in pretty big crowds.
Ashes of laughter
The ghost is clear
Why do the best things always disappear?
The ghost is clear
Why do the best things always disappear?
-
Tiki Torches
- At the Bama Breeze
- Posts: 4374
- Joined: October 23, 2006 5:15 pm
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
I'm not sure what the "music" has to do with anything, I was just saying I found the post misleading since Jimmy Page didn't say Led Zeppelin was over, that was a direct quote from his manager. There's a huge difference there, one well worth noting. Regardless, the future of the project with John Paul Jones and Jason Bonham remains up in the air.MonumentBeach wrote:I have been paying attention. Maybe the way I worded something wasn't clear. In any event, I didn't mean to upset you and I apologize if I did. Truth be told, I like Zeppelin but I'm not a huge fan. I was simply linking an article relating to the Zeppelin camp that I thought some here might like to read. Lets get back to the music.
-
luvinlife
- I Love the Now!
- Posts: 1506
- Joined: November 15, 2008 8:44 pm
- Favorite Buffett Song: That's what living is to me.
- Number of Concerts: 31
- Favorite Boat Drink: Cold Sam Summer
- Location: Waiting for the sox and Jimmy to come north again.
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
Jason Can Pound Em.......Just like papa... not that far off... BONZO would be proud.
I'm growing older but not up!
Destination Fenway 18

Destination Fenway 18
-
PIA
- Here We Are
- Posts: 9527
- Joined: April 3, 2006 3:50 pm
- Favorite Buffett Song: Tampico Trauma
- Number of Concerts: 12
- Favorite Boat Drink: Capt n Coke
- Location: Standing on a hill in my mountain of dreams, telling myself it's not as hard as it seems.
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
No Plant = No Zeppelin= Why would you even want to see that reunion tour?
count me out
count me out

-
citcat
- On a Salty Piece of Land
- Posts: 10210
- Joined: December 6, 2001 7:00 pm
- Favorite Buffett Song: Pirate Looks at 40
- Number of Concerts: 10
- Favorite Boat Drink: margarita
- Location: Northwest Tennessee
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
They could call themselves the Heavy Hindenburg.
Or the Silver Balloon.
nah, I ain't got a whole lotta love for those choices.

Or the Silver Balloon.
nah, I ain't got a whole lotta love for those choices.
-
Tiki Torches
- At the Bama Breeze
- Posts: 4374
- Joined: October 23, 2006 5:15 pm
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
They were never planning on touring using the Zeppelin name or finding a singer that sounded like Plant. It's the press that has drilled that notion into people's heads, same thing with referring to the upcoming tour by "The Dead" as "the Grateful Dead" and by calling it a "reunion" tour even though they've toured before under that very same name. Page, Jones and Jason Bonham had planned to record a new album of new original material (something which was apparently already underway) and then tour to support it. It was never going to be called "Led Zeppelin".PIA wrote:No Plant = No Zeppelin= Why would you even want to see that reunion tour?
count me out
-
Lightning Bolt
- Party at the End of the World
- Posts: 8495
- Joined: September 26, 2003 6:02 pm
- Favorite Buffett Song: Tryin To Reason...
- Number of Concerts: 17
- Location: Mt. Helix looking east to the future, west to this sunset
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
So what makes you so certain that they wouldn't be using the Zep name if there was a Page, Plant , Jones & Bonham together.Tiki Torches wrote:They were never planning on touring using the Zeppelin name or finding a singer that sounded like Plant....PIA wrote:No Plant = No Zeppelin= Why would you even want to see that reunion tour?
count me out
... It was never going to be called "Led Zeppelin".
I don't see how you can be so insistent that a re-constituted outfit could not be Led Zeppelin.
I've certainly seen other bands do it with far less than the original line-up...
Are you an insider?
$#@&...only Vegas again?? Padres ...gotta start believin'!Bring on '14 Spring Training!


-
Tiki Torches
- At the Bama Breeze
- Posts: 4374
- Joined: October 23, 2006 5:15 pm
Re: Zeppelin without Plant???
I wasn't referring to a lineup of Page, Plant, Jones and Jason Bonham. I was referring to plans Page, Jones and Jason Bonham had of recording new material and touring behind it. Both Page and Jones have been quoted as saying they wouldn't be using the Zeppelin name and they wouldn't be using a singer that was merely a Plant "soundalike".Lightning Bolt wrote:So what makes you so certain that they wouldn't be using the Zep name if there was a Page, Plant , Jones & Bonham together.Tiki Torches wrote:They were never planning on touring using the Zeppelin name or finding a singer that sounded like Plant....PIA wrote:No Plant = No Zeppelin= Why would you even want to see that reunion tour?
count me out
... It was never going to be called "Led Zeppelin".


