Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epXeC40P80o

Pretty cool to think of what a future he had ahead of him.

Thanks Greg,

That was very interesting to watch. James Page indeed. He wanted to do research? Well I for one am glad he missed that mark.

An interesting article that examines just where Jimmy got some of his songs from:

Jimmy Page's Dubious Recording Legacy

By Will Shade (January 2001)

Led Zeppelin: innovators or plagiarists? Jimmy Page: genius or charlatan? Perhaps the question itself is moot. After all, the band no longer exists, having broken up after John Bonham's death in 1980.

Further, Led Zeppelin is safely enshrined in the hearts of their fans and in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame itself. Is an article examining their appropriation of material an exercise in futility?

It's preaching to the choir and the heathens at the same time. The detractors have already made up their minds and the camp followers don't care one iota. If nothing else, though, this piece will give readers an opportunity to track down the recordings that Led Zeppelin "borrowed" from.

Led Zeppelin has long had an unsavory reputation for taking music and lyrics from lesser-known artists. Many times the songs were never credited to the rightful owners. Consequently, royalties lined the pockets of the millionaire British musicians.

Further, their American heroes, often poor and black, never saw a dime from songs they had written before their heirs ever picked up an instrument. Led Zeppelin has been taken to court over the matter on numerous occasions. For an in-depth study of Led Zeppelin's penchant for stealing others’ work, music fans must turn to Page's first band, the Yardbirds.

The rest of the article:

http://www.furious.com/perfect/jimmypage.html}

It's amazing what a path YouTube can lead you through.

I started with the new Yes link that was posted here yesterday, and the YouTube poster of that video had the 14-year old Page vid on his favorites list, which led to some great Page jam vids, which led to the Yardbirds, and finally to a good performance of 'Tulsa Time' with Clapton/Page/Beck.

Alot of time went by through all of that!

The great thing is that right now, new videos of really cool old music just keep streaming in. It'a amazing how much is out there!

That is interesting Glenn. I have never seen anything about this before. Thanks

IMO almost every song can be traced back to another that is similar. Guitar riffs and lyrical content are routinely "borrowed" and altered to fit the context of the music they are placed in. LZ did a lot of "borrowing" there is no question in my mind.

I still love the end result, more especially on their early albums.

Brian, like the article says, both camps are well defined when it comes to Page.

The question in any such case is, where is the line drawn? I think the article is well informed. And I know the thing with Page is, it's not a one time only kind of deal (like Harrison with My Sweet Lord.)

And it's not a question of recycling riffs or a series of chords or some words. It's the taking of an entire song, words and music, and re-recording of it while leaving the original writer's name off of the label and putting your name on it.

With Page it's happened time and time again (see the article but it really needs a film doc. so you can hear for yourself.)

When I heard Willie Dixon's You Need Love, I fell off of my chair. Whole Lotta Love is the same song, same words, same tune, same arrangement. But Page says he wrote it, with no trace of Dixon's name anywhere on the Zep release. The guy got caught red handed and sued for millions (I think on later releases Dixon's name was added as well.)

And that's but one example of Page taking a song (and from perhaps the most famous blues writers of all time) and re-recording it while putting his own name on it as 100% writer of it (with no credit to Dixon.) He apparently did it with Dazed and Confused and the music to Stairway, though the sorces of those aren't nearly as well known. But they apparently were ripped just the same. They even know the date Page first heard Dazed.

And Page/Zep's versions of these songs are far similar to the originals than, for instance, Cream's version of Crossroads is to Robert Johnsons. It's light years away from the original version yet Cream did the right thing, put Robert Johnson's name on the record.)

Anyway, I'd read the article. I think Page is shameless. I mean, I knew he was basically a studio guy, not a songwriter, and what passes for lyrics on a lot of Zeppelin tunes it is known that they did write is just dribble. All I had to hear was that one instance. I believe the other examples are probably true as well.

As far as the Zep freaks believing what they want to believe, ignorance is bliss. But this would all make a great documentary. Either way, an article can't do the subject justice.

Yes I agree Glenn. Like I said, they did a lot of "borrowing".

Ethics aside (pretty shoddy ones I must add) the music is great.

In rock, there's a fine line between borrowing and stealing. It's about a foot wide.

A thing can only be considered 'borrowed' if there's a chance it could be given back...in the case of lifting an entire song, lyrics and all, without giving any credit, I'd have to call that swiping...

That having been said, some people will get irate over what seems to them to be an unethical appropriation of a 'riff', a chord progression or any given sequence of notes...I think that sort of thing gets a little absurd. Trying to maintain ownership of such things is like trying to copyright the set of prime numbers. There are only so many ways to get from here to there on a guitar neck, after all, and nobody can be said to 'own' any of those ways.

If it were otherwise, John D. Rockefeller could have sued all the early Blues players for copying the sounds of his railroad trains...

I thought in rock the fine line was between clever & stupid.

I was trying to be nice. But you're 100% right Glenn.

Dane you are bang on too. No one owns the way you get there. I play the blues. I don't really want to be unfairly criticized because I sound like this guy or that guy.

Back to Glenns point. The lack of ethics is inexcusable. LZ should have listed the real writers in the credits and they (or their heirs) should have received royalties on that basis.

I kinda wonder how it came to be. I mean, those guys (save Plant) spent a lot of time in the music biz, backing guys like Donovan, who became rich and famous and friends with the Beatles.

And or spending time in bands that were materially challenged (as Jeff Beck said, the Yardbirds have tons of talent but, compared to many of their peers, few original songs and no member who could come up with them regularly.)

By the time Zep came around, Page, Jones and Bonham were vets, but still not prolific in original material and what they had was never lyrically crafted (and being a blues related group, well, there's a lot of covering there.)

Yet Page had to know the money was in having your name on the tunes. And they had a deal, so they were expected to crank out albums.

What amazes me is how long they got away with it. Dixon was still alive when he sued them, but it wasn't until the 80s I think, and it was only because Dixon's daughter heard the tune.

I guess since then they've been sued numerous times. I think they've kept it remarkably quiet, though, considering the seriousness and number of charges and popularity of that band and and wealth of its members.

Anyway, I still think it'd make an awesome doc. Jimmy might sue you, though. Or Atlantic.

>>I thought in rock the fine line was between clever & stupid<<

'tis for Spinal Tap.

wow this is real interesting stuff...I've never heard anything about this 'till now. I'm a huge zep fan...I can't believe they were just a bunch of scamers...that is inexcusable.