So What Is the Reason for Led Zeppelin's Enduring Popularity?

[chipmcdonald]

 

Originally posted by Kiwiburger It's easy to be flippant when you are ignorant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_images_on_the_cover_of_Sgt._Pepper%27s_Lonely_Hearts_Club_Band Aleister Crowley is Top row, second only to a guru.

 

 

Wow, he's on the cover!!!! WOW!!!

 

So is Marilyn Monroe and Fred Astaire. I guess this means Sgt. Pepper has influenced us all to want to sing "Happy Birthday" in a breathy voice while dancing on the ceiling?

 

 

It's equally well known that Crowley was a huge influence on Zepps music. This is not speculation, it's solid fact.

 

 

No it's not a "fact", you're smushing things together with a lack of semantic reasoning. Just because Jimmy Page was reading Crowley, and doing "whatever" relative to that, doesn't mean that somehow Crowley had a musicial influence on him to do something like decide to make the F in _Stairway_ a maj7 or some such. Page & Co. were great musicians as humans, that's why they made great music, it had nothing to do with Crowley.

 

 

 

- I strongly believe they had no idea what was going on (other than their occultic practices). But I believe they were as surprised as anyone else to find these messages in there.

 

 

I find mysticism in the true weirdness that happens in quantum physics

, or evil in mass manipulation of humans to do war. You're absolutely sure Satan or whatever wants you to decide to smoke marijuana by hearing those words backwards - that's weak chi to me.

 

 

It was probably the Beatles experiments with backwards tapes and deliberate backwards messages that caused

 

 

... *people* to want to do their own take on it.

 

 

Crowely probably never thought of running tapes backwards, his philosophy was to reverse everything,

 

 

Crowley was just a human with wacked out ideas that was apparently good at the ego-cult of personality thing. Do you fear Crowley?

 

 

 

But it does seem to disturb some people and cause them to go into denial and avoid facing it.

 

 

Again, backwards sound is obviously unnatural and something most people are unaccustomed to. It doesn't mean something spiritual is going because it gives someone the creeps; it just means it sounds weird.

[awfulcase]

I've found a clip of Stairway backwards, along with others , so judge for yourself. Listen to it (backwards) first, then listen again and read along the lyrics. I couldn't make out anything. Then, when reading along, the 'satanic message' seems clear. Listen to the other songs on that site.

Take ANY song, reverse it, and you'll come up with something.

[awfulcase]

Actually, come to think of it, the backwards chord progression and melody of STH DOES sound very nice. I may have discovered the ultimate songwriting method. Play great songs in reverse and see if you'll end up with something good. Don't try to decipher lyrics, the chords and melody is where the musical potential is in this, along with the unusual phrasing .

[awfulcase]

My favourite: Another one bites the dust becomes 'it's fun to smoke marijuana':D

[panthalassa]

"Led Zep and Deep Purple pulled from the blues more so than The Who. Almost anything that is blues derived which attains commercial popularity will have a more timeless quality to it."

 

The appropriation of African-American music by white musicians always, for me at least, yielded mixed results when compared to the original. Yet Zeppelin tried really, really hard and succeeded in creating a new type of sound that helped propel hip hop and rock/metal to the next level, arguably more so than the Rolling Stones, who themselves are laudable in their appreciation for this art form. Their skin color doesn't matter in this case, but what comes out of the speakers does.

[Rabid]

My opinion, John Bonham's drumming and the quality of the old blues riffs they ripped off to incorporate into their music.

[Timothy Scags]

You can discuss how Led Zeppelin took from other styles, the look, the engineering, the production, management, the different members of the band and all that until you are blue in the face, but for me I feel they had staying power because they were just plain different.

 

What I mean by that is that nobody else sounded like that at the time, strictly an original sound. Nobody really sounds like them now, although they are copied ad nauseum. Every song was an experiment in different sounds, albeit that not all the time did it work.

 

They were part of a generation that cared more about trying new and innovative things. Getting commercial success was easier because radio stations had way more pull than you have now. I can remember hearing music on the radio that I "had" to have...not so much now. Good radio died a slow painful death.

 

Originality is not rewarded anymore, it has been replaced by greed, apathy and the lack of the general listening audience getting behind their favorite bands and insisting to support something new and fresh.

 

There are so many bands out there that certainly deserve the chance because they have what we want to hear, but truthfully I'm sorry to say we'll never get to hear it unless we search for ourselves.

[coyote-1]

A correction (I think): Deep Purple apparently have over 130 million in worldwide album sales!

 

Does anyone have an official Web source for album sales? There are a few other bands I'm curious about....

[madenizen]

"Good radio died a long painfull death"

Free airwaves for sure. Now we like the Sirious Radio Outlaw Country channel.

Anyone else ever do pirate radio?

[js1]

Cause nothing sounds better when you're 14 years old.

 

js

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Anderton So what's the deal? I think one of the reasons they've remained mythical is because they ceased to exist after John Bonham died. You had the best of both worlds: A finite lifespan a la Buddy Holly, but a trickle of new product to keep interest up.

 

Gee, that seems like an unlikely reason. I mean, the Beatles broke up and the former members put out some less than great solo stuff and it didn't diminish the Beatles' work any... lots of people keep going past their so called creative peak and it doesn't diminish the status of their best work. Had Zeppelin tried to keep going after Bonham died, it might have sucked, but people would still worship the Bonham-era stuff.

 

It seems to me pretty obvious why Zeppelin's stuff continues to endure: because it's good. Duh. It has depth. You can listen to it over and over and hear stuff you never heard before and probably even hear stuff that isn't really there. It's rich; it makes your imagination work - in the songwriting and the playing and the arranging and the sounds/production. Most music being made now, they might pile on 197 tracks of everything including the kitchen sink but it somehow sounds like less than the sum of the parts; all you hear is what's there and nothing more.

[timman6127]

 

Originally posted by coyote-1 A correction (I think): Deep Purple apparently have over 130 million in worldwide album sales! Does anyone have an official Web source for album sales? There are a few other bands I'm curious about....

 

 

I found this wikipedia entry for acts and total sales.

 

LINK

 

It doesn't give definitive numbers but it is intersting that both The Who and Deep Purple are in the "over 100 million albums sold grouping."

[Anderton]

>

 

I said ONE of the reasons. Obviously the music itself would have to be the major reason, but that can be modified in hindsight (the "what was I thinking?!?" effect). I think LZ had the class not to wear out their welcome, and the good sense to stop when it was clear one of the major components of the band wasn't there any more.

 

If Zeppelin had tried to keep going after Bonham died, I think it would have cheapened what Led Zeppelin was about, and that would have reflected back on what they did before. Sure, in reality, it wouldn't have changed one note of their previous work. But perception is reality, and if they were perceived as a bunch of has-beens cashing in on glory days, you wouldn't have been able to hear Plant and Page in quite the same way.

 

It took until Cadillac before they licensed their music for commercials (and I'm not sure what the backstory was on that). They've been very protective of their legacy and I think that has definitely helped maintain the mythical status.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Anderton I think LZ had the class not to wear out their welcome, and the good sense to stop when it was clear one of the major components of the band wasn't there any more.

 

Oh, I agree that it was cool that they did that, and I think counts for some "extra cool factor" with fans, no doubt.

 

If Zeppelin had tried to keep going after Bonham died, I think it would have cheapened what Led Zeppelin was about, and that would have reflected back on what they did before. Sure, in reality, it wouldn't have changed one note of their previous work. But perception is reality, and if they were perceived as a bunch of has-beens cashing in on glory days, you wouldn't have been able to hear Plant and Page in quite the same way.

 

Yeah, see there's where I don't agree. Lots of people think the Stones and/or the Who should've hung it up a long time ago for instance, but if they know the best work of either band it doesn't seem to diminish anybody's opinion of those records. And obviously, they both still sell out concerts so somebody doesn't think they've lost it.

 

I think Zeppelin's "mythical" qualities already existed, in the minds of their actual fans, while they were still together. But it took music critics a long time to warm up to them; a lot of people don't realize that most of Zep's records were almost universally critically panned when they were released. Now all of a sudden the critics "get it" and are lavishing praise all over them after the fact, so that probably has something to do with their continued mythical status. The Stones' Exile On Main Street has had a similar history - it was panned all around when it came out and then the same critics (plus a few new ones) fell all over themselves praising it years later. So now everybody regards that as this "mythical" album. Not that it doesn't deserve it; just saying some of the delayed hype might be "critics' remorse."

[Bob Keelan]

This is where I'm pulling my numbers from:

 

http://www.riaa.com/gp/bestsellers/topartists.asp

 

I should clarify that this is U.S.-only sales.

[Ernest Buckley]

Besides their great songs, they were great players. Thats obvious. They were the real thing. There was no pretense about it. They were authentic. It was all about the music. A real SuperGroup. So many bands have tried to mimic them and its impossible. Truly one of music greatest gifts. Like the Stones, Beatles, U2, GNR.

 

So many bands today are contrived. They are trying to hard to look a certain way, to sound a certain way (Nickleback comes to mind first).

 

EB

[RockViolin]

Um...one time I played the song "Rock And Roll" backwards while driving in reverse.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My car turned into a Cadillac!

[Ernest Buckley]

People who listen to records backwards also look for UFOs. `nuf said...

 

EB

[Kiwiburger]

People who are too scared to check out a fairly well known phenomena are wussies.

 

Playing tapes backwards is a standard studio proceedure, done for many reasons. I forget that i'm not in a recording forum, and not everyone has good ears and powers of observation.

[RockViolin]

Well, I somehow managed the courage to listen to the clip. My response...SO WHAT? The price of tea and a slice. Sometimes a backwards cigar is still just a backwards cigar. Even if they did go out of their way to contrive a backwards message, or it happened by "magic", big deal. I could probably play a Pat Boone record backwards and find some Satanic molehill to make a mountain of. There are backwaters and eddys in the river of life that have no more significance than that which we attache to them. And there are real mysteries to be pondered and scrutinized.

 

The Song Remains The Same was the very first album in my collection. "Whole Lotta Love" was the first song I attempted to make up violin parts to....and I agree, after the music, *cough* it was the pants. Had to have the pants!

 

We could ask the recording forum...but they're all busy listening to music backwards with Kiwi.

[Meatball Fulton]

A better question is why did LZ succeed when others who were doing the same thing before them (i.e Jeff Beck) failed?

 

It's no secret that Page was watching Beck carefully, he and JPJ even played on some of Beck's early solo stuff (Beck's Bolero, etc.).

 

But Beck's manager/producer Mickey Most saw it as a pop act so the album production wasn't right, the marketing direction at the record label wasn't right.

 

Oh yeah, Jeff didn't get along with his bandmates very well either. And who did he have in his band? Rod Stewart, Ron Wood, Ansley Dunbar, Nicky Hopkins all of whom went on to bigger and better things after leaving Jeff.

 

So Page comes along with a really similar approach (check out Beck's version of "You Shook Me" vs. Zeppelin's) but adds some studio savvy (he and JPJ having been long time studio rats) and the management make all the right decisions including signing to a label that really knew how to sell the music.

[Ara Ajizian]

I'm sure all the usual suspects have been covered in this thread--the riffs, leads, amazing bass lines and drums, etc. I just wanted to mention Jimmy Page's outstanding production...it's often overlooked that he was a studio wizard who produced every LZ album.

[alfonso]

Originally posted by Timothy Scags I feel they had staying power because they were just plain different. What I mean by that is that nobody else sounded like that at the time, strictly an original sound.

 

Absolutely, if you think, at that time the great bands where recognizable after half bar of whatever part of the song, for sounds used, groove, chemistry....each one was different.

 

 

Originally posted by Kiwiburger Playing tapes backwards is a standard studio proceedure, done for many reasons. I forget that i'm not in a recording forum, and not everyone has good ears and powers of observation.

 

Talking about Deep Purple, the organ solo in the last song of Fireball has been recorded backwards, and as the solo was finished, they kept listening to the tape backwards, with the recording mode engaged. This explain why on the previous track, "Fools", at a certain moment the sound of the drums is a bit different....what was an empty track in the end of the tape contained some drum parts on the previous song....and they erased part of it, fascinated by the backwards sound.... obviously the drum set had been removed...

[dparr]

Don't get me wrong! I like a lot of what Led Zeppelin did and saw them live three times.

I think a lot of Led Zeppelin's appeal is they are a very trendy band to like.

I've seen many young people sporting Led Zeppelin T-shirts and try to strike up a

conversation about the band and they know absolutely nothing about them.

Also the three times I saw them all I could think about was "damn they sure sound better on record".

[RockViolin]

 

Originally posted by Kiwiburger Playing tapes backwards is a standard studio proceedure, done for many reasons. I forget that i'm not in a recording forum, and not everyone has good ears and powers of observation.

 

 

Mmm Hmm. When on thin ice, obfuscate the context of the original tenuous claim. Thats understandable. I'm not so sure about the rest.

Backwards recording techniques to achieve an effect are one thing. Attributing the enduring success of Led Zep, even in part, to some little curio about the occult is another.

 

They did it right and classic. Powerful riffs that rarely overstay their welcome, sex appeal and charissma. The usual suspects indeed! The latter two qualities they arguably had in spades over The Who and Deep Purple.