Re: The Beatles Cream and Led Zeppelin

When Led Zeppelin appeared on the scene, Jimmy Page was already somewhat of
a star, being one of the three hot guitarists who came out of the Yardbirds.
He had somehow purchased the contract of the yardbirds remaining dates and
constructed Led Zeppelin to fill them, originally billed as the 'New
Yardbirds". So they didn't exactly start at the bottom as a group, but
individually all paid their dues in separate bands, or as in the case of
Page and Jonesy, session musicians.

Cream began as a conglomeration of superstars out of other bands, so started
out immediately wit a contract and public interest.

the Beatles started out from scratch, and surpassed them all.


"Slip Kid" <G-2@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:G3e3g.39314$az4.38361@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Runnnerr wrote:
Slip Kid wrote:

Zeppelin came out of a lab in the first place. They didn't start at the
bottom (together) and shared none of the misery of a band that worked
there way up, did. Page could have/should have taken it like Beck and
moved on.

If you don't think that Zeppelin started at the bottom with tons of
misery then you need to do some reading about the band. I suggest that
you concentrate on the almost constant negative reviews that the band
recieved both professionally as well as personally in their early days.

I wrote earlier from memory...I checked some facts & we might define
"started at the bottom with tons of misery" differently.

See if I'm close:
1. The three were barely jelling as a band (not named Led Zeppelin) in the
summer of '68.
2. By September, they cut L
3. The name is 'official' around October (still '68)
4. Atlantic signs them before the end of...'68.
5. They have a US tour and a Top 10 (first release) in less than a year.

So, from not playing together to a Top Ten, first release in less than a
year?

Wherever they started (call it the bottom, they weren't a band?) they got
from there to "somewhere close to the top" faster than all but how many
bands?

Regarding reviews...Google...I saw plenty of ga-ga.

My memory from the time served me well. They were hot, fast.
You will generally see them referred to as an "Immediate success" - - and
by any standard, they were.

Michael


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Led Zeppelin review
    ... Led Zeppelin live in 1975, ... Led Zeppelin were unequivocally the biggest band in the ... That cynical voice might belong to singer Robert Plant, ... most famous and overblown song and having a stab at Stairway to ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)
  • Voices of a Generation
    ... decade since the 1950s was preposterous: Music is entirely subjective, album ... It's hard to believe that before the 1950s, rock and roll as we know it ... No band in history has ever done that so effortlessly and so ... If Jimi Hendrix was the first guitar god, the members of Led Zeppelin were ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Re: Swaggart yer Zepplin?
    ... Sean Baker wrote: ... NEW YORK -- Four women rockers who took on the music of Led Zeppelin are driving club audiences to a frenzy and, offstage, whipping up speculation over their sexual tastes with the name of the band: ... "We have sort of a 'don't ask, don't tell' policy," says Steph Paynes, lead guitar player and the "Jimmy Page" of the group. ...
    (rec.music.gdead)
  • Re: The Beatles Cream and Led Zeppelin
    ... other big name band, none of them had a revolving door of band members ... have not had many new members. ... it was essentially a Led Zeppelin show, ... Keith Moon was the drummer of the band. ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
  • Re: The Beatles Cream and Led Zeppelin
    ... bottom and shared none of the misery of a band that worked ... misery then you need to do some reading about the band. ... I did enough reading about Zeppelin to know their road to the Led Zeppelin I does not compare to the road to the first Stones, Beatles, Who, Kinks,,,release. ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
Loading