Led Zeppelin to record new album, tour in 09 -- but no Robert Plant

[YankeePride1967]

http://www.spinner.com/2008/10/28/le...ur-sans-plant/

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.spinner.c...npauljones.jpgTen months after rocking a London crowd with their first show in nearly two decades, Led Zeppelin are itching to do it all over again with a tour and new album, bassist John Paul Jones confirmed on British radio this week.

Here's the kicker: Robert Plant will not be involved but instead, replaced by a new frontman.

[YankeePride1967]

Without Plant, why even bother?

[RhodeyYankee2638]

uhhhhhhhhh............

[JavyVazquezIsSick]

So then Led Zeppelin is not touring.

[JDPNYY]

In other news, The Beatles are also getting together. Paul and Ringo declined to be involved.

[4bronxbombers]

Without Plant, why even bother?

Agree.

[johnnyyankee]

Without Plant, why even bother?

Obviously Plant was an integral part of the band. I'd go see Page play with anyone, especially if he's going to be playing Zep.

[Hitman23]

Imo, when a band changes a singer, they gotta change the band. I know it's made up of all parts but usually the vocals is what defines it. I don't care if this guy is a clone, it's still not the same.

[johnnyyankee]

Imo, when a band changes a singer, they gotta change the band. I know it's made up of all parts but usually the vocals is what defines it. I don't care if this guy is a clone, it's still not the same.

You think Van Halen should have changed their name?

[Hitman23]

You think Van Halen should have changed their name?

Yes. And and before anyone brings it up, Sabbath should have as well.

[jeterdaman]

Yes. And and before anyone brings it up, Sabbath should have as well.

Genesis too

[JL25and3]

Personally, I might actually like Led Zeppelin without Robert Plant.

[SoCal Pinstriper]

Personally, I might actually like Led Zeppelin without Robert Plant.

I was thinking the same thing.

[bobbymagee]

In other news, The Beatles are also getting together. Paul and Ringo declined to be involved.

I would be in favor of Julian Lennon, Dhane Harrison and Zack Starkey, or Sean Lennon playing with Paul and Ringo as some sort of occasion.

Led Zepplin without Robert isn't anything but a new band.

John Robert Jimmy and John Paul Jones are the real deal.

[JfromJersey]

Imo, when a band changes a singer, they gotta change the band. I know it's made up of all parts but usually the vocals is what defines it. I don't care if this guy is a clone, it's still not the same.

http://geeksofdoom.com/2008/09/12/10...r-lead-singer/

[YankeePride1967]

Obviously Plant was an integral part of the band. I'd go see Page play with anyone, especially if he's going to be playing Zep.

maybe it's me, but when a singer is that integral to the band, they shouldn't still call it that band. If Paul and Ringo decided to play and called themselves the Beatles, I wouldn't go.

[DEADSOX]

This is either Led or Zeppelin, this is not Led Zeppelin.

[YankeePride1967]

This is either Led or Zeppelin, this is not Led Zeppelin.

Or a Led Zeppelin tribute band. I know someone brought up Van Halen. When DLR left, people did not accept Sammy and many still don't. But Sammy was given the recognition AFTER putting in more time as a lead singer and having success with the band as DLR. Without looking it up, how many people can even name the singer that temporarily replaced Sammy in the late 90's? I saw VH with him and I'd have to look it up. If whomever replaces Plant with "Led Zeppelin" puts in even remotely comparable success as Plant, then we'll see.

[DEADSOX]

Van Halen I'd give a pass to since the name of the band is after Eddie and Alex. Black Sabbath, that should have been a name change. It's like Metallica, they will always be Metallica regardless of their bassist because it's Kirk, James, and Lars that have made that band. Robert Plant is the face of Led Zeppelin though.

[YankeePride1967]

Van Halen I'd give a pass to since the name of the band is after Eddie and Alex. Black Sabbath, that should have been a name change. It's like Metallica, they will always be Metallica regardless of their bassist because it's Kirk, James, and Lars that have made that band. Robert Plant is the face of Led Zeppelin though.

Another good point. I do think it's interesting that some years back, Plant and Page toured together, played Zeppelin songs but did not refer to themselves as Led Zeppelin.

[johnnyyankee]

maybe it's me, but when a singer is that integral to the band, they shouldn't still call it that band. If Paul and Ringo decided to play and called themselves the Beatles, I wouldn't go.

I don't think they should call themselves Led Zeppelin either. All I said was I'd go see Page play with anyone.

[johnnyyankee]

Van Halen I'd give a pass to since the name of the band is after Eddie and Alex. Black Sabbath, that should have been a name change. It's like Metallica, they will always be Metallica regardless of their bassist because it's Kirk, James, and Lars that have made that band. Robert Plant is the face of Led Zeppelin though.

I disagree with this. I think Page was far more influential within the group and the member most fans wanted to see.

[YankeePride1967]

I don't think they should call themselves Led Zeppelin either. All I said was I'd go see Page play with anyone.

That is fair, although me personally, it's the singer that for the most part makes or breraks it for me. I would actually go see Plant solo before I'd see the rest without, but that's me.

[YankeePride1967]

I disagree with this. I think Page was far more influential within the group and the member most fans wanted to see.

I view Plant and Page about even, just like I do with Daltrey/Townshend with the Who, Jagger and Richards with the Stones and Lennon and McCartney with the Beatles. I am only speaking for my own preference so this is just my opinion but with any of the names I just listed, if any of them aren't there, it isn't the same or to me as good.

[YankeePride1967]

I will be curious though as to the price of the tickets. If they are charging Led Zeppelin prices as if everyone was there, then I don't know how many full arenas they'll have.

[jlw1980]

So then Led Zeppelin is not touring.

Exactly.

[TinoFan84]

One of the singers they're looking at is Myles Kennedy of Alter Bridge, formerly of The Mayfield Four. If anyone cares.

[JL25and3]

I will be curious though as to the price of the tickets. If they are charging Led Zeppelin prices as if everyone was there, then I don't know how many full arenas they'll have.

They'll have plenty of full arenas, and that's the whole point. People aren't going to turn out to see Jimmy Page the way they will to see Led Zep.

People are discussing it as if it's an ethical question, when it's strictly business. It's exactly the same as any other brand name: whoever owns it gets to use it. Plenty of brand names get sold and trade off that reputation even as they compromise the quality of the product.

[Hitman23]

I disagree with this. I think Page was far more influential within the group and the member most fans wanted to see.

To me it really has no bearing on who is the genius behind the music. A voice is usually the most recognizable aspect of a band. No matter how good anyone else is at their instrument, you change the entire sound of a band when you change the vocals. Nearly all bands are identified by their singer. And Zeppelin is certainly not any different, and is IMO one of the best examples of a band that shouldn't do it considering Plant's voice.

[Hitman23]

http://geeksofdoom.com/2008/09/12/10...r-lead-singer/

Wow, no mention of AC/DC? Probably cuz they sucked both ways. hehehehehe

I'm not completely sold on the new Alice In Chains singer. This is another prime example of a band that should change. Jerry was the man behind most of the music but Layne Staley has one of the most amazing voices I've ever heard. He made that band as amazing as they were. This new singer, even if he's a clone of Layne, just isn't sitting well with me. I hear they're good live, and I'll probably see them eventually but I'll always be in favor of just starting up a new band entirely. If they wanna throw a few covers in their shows so be it.

[YankeePride1967]

They'll have plenty of full arenas, and that's the whole point. People aren't going to turn out to see Jimmy Page the way they will to see Led Zep.

People are discussing it as if it's an ethical question, when it's strictly business. It's exactly the same as any other brand name: whoever owns it gets to use it. Plenty of brand names get sold and trade off that reputation even as they compromise the quality of the product.

Even if the tickets are in the $150-250 range like it likely would be with Plant? If so people are lying to us about it being a bad economy. Do I think there is an audience for a "Zeppelin" without Plant? Yes, do I think that they will sell as many tickets if they set the price as if Plant was with them? Nope and that was my point.

[JL25and3]

To me it really has no bearing on who is the genius behind the music. A voice is usually the most recognizable aspect of a band. No matter how good anyone else is at their instrument, you change the entire sound of a band when you change the vocals. Nearly all bands are identified by their singer. And Zeppelin is certainly not any different, and is IMO one of the best examples of a band that shouldn't do it considering Plant's voice.

One exception is Santana. They've had a number of different singers, and it doesn't matter because Carlos Santana's guitar is their defining (and instantly recognizable) sound.

[JL25and3]

Even if the tickets are in the $150-250 range like it likely would be with Plant? If so people are lying to us about it being a bad economy. Do I think there is an audience for a "Zeppelin" without Plant? Yes, do I think that they will sell as many tickets if they set the price as if Plant was with them? Nope and that was my point.

Maybe not. But they'll make much, much more as Led Zeppelin than as Jimmy Page and the Not-Robert-Plant Band.

[YankeePride1967]

Maybe not. But they'll make much, much more as Led Zeppelin than as Jimmy Page and the Not-Robert-Plant Band.

Call them whatever they want, but I don't think they'll be able to fool the public into believing Plant will be there. If they can find suckers to pay the same as if Plant was there, kudos to them and people are dumber than I give them credit for. Whatever they call themselves, it'll be the same act, same songs. I would have rather gone to the Plant/Page tour when they toured than this one, but that's me.

[JL25and3]

Call them whatever they want, but I don't think they'll be able to fool the public into believing Plant will be there. If they can find suckers to pay the same as if Plant was there, kudos to them and people are dumber than I give them credit for. Whatever they call themselves, it'll be the same act, same songs. I would have rather gone to the Plant/Page tour when they toured than this one, but that's me.

No, they won't fool people. But whatever the circumstances, they'll still make more money with the Led Zeppelin name than without.

[YankeePride1967]

No, they won't fool people. But whatever the circumstances, they'll still make more money with the Led Zeppelin name than without.

The sad thing is, you are probably right.