Talk:Led Zeppelin (album)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Led Zeppelin (album) article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

This article is part of the Led Zeppelin WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Led Zeppelin. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. Any questions pertaining to Led Zeppelin-related articles should be directed to the project's talk page. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the assessment scale This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit · refresh) Assessed as a Class B article. The article still has some sections that may need cleanup and contains WP:OR. These might get in the way for it to become a Good Article.  UzEE  13:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I've moved Led Zeppelin I to Led Zeppelin (album). The album was never called Led Zeppelin I, it simply had Led Zeppelin as a title, no I afterwards. Iam 22:52, Jan 28, 2004 (UTC)

A massive day in rock history. --Spirit2112 21:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Songs 2 Paranoid 3 Good Times Bad Times 4 White Summer 5 Controversial album cover? 6 "Blueprint"? 7 UK Charts 8 Heavy Metal? 9 Alright people! 10 4 track tape machine? 11 Concerning the 'Black Beauty' 12 no 5 stars from rolling stone magazine 13 Fair use rationale for Image:Hindenburg.gif

[edit] Songs

The articles on the various songs (most of which were just one or two paragraphs) have been merged into this article, unless they were covers, or actually notable on their own (like Dazed and Confused). Proto||type 09:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Why just the songs on this album? If we leave the pages, they will grow over time. The goal here is to encapsulate the sum of all human knowledge. Surely there's enough that could be written about each of these songs to fill out an article. I intend, over time, to restore the original song pages. I don't understand the crusade against song articles. If people have enough interest in a song to write about it, that constitutes sufficient notability to me. Alcuin 13:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paranoid

Dazed and Confused seems to have a little brother or sister, Black Sabbath's Paranoid. LIllIi 23:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

How do you figure? --Bentonia School 09:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Times Bad Times

I've changed this section to state the song was hardly ever played live. This is claimed by the book "Led Zeppelin - A Celebration" by Dave Lewis, and backed up by the fact that if the song was regularly played live, it's surprising not to appear on the BBC sessions CD, not to mention any number of bootlegs from that era. --Ritchie333 17:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] White Summer

why does The Yardbirds' White Summer redirect here?

[edit] Controversial album cover?

The caption of the Hindenburg disaster, both on this page and the main Led Zeppelin album, both say how it was famous and controversial. How? Neither article explains. Ninetigerr 01:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)ninetigerr

Is it only me seeing this, or is the album cover one of the largest (even in scale) phallic symbols ever shown on any rock album? I would call it the No.11 "Smell the Glove". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.210.144.214 (talk) 21:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Blueprint"?

This line "the album was the blueprint Led Zeppelin continued to follow for the rest of their career" is misleading. There is a graded difference between Zep 1 and In Through the Out Door. In fact, there is a graded difference between Zep 1 and Zep 2. The group became progressively more pop oriented and by the end had almost completely moved away from their Blues roots. The only song in their later career that even resembles a Blues tune, and loosely at that, is "Tea For One". --Bentonia School 10:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Since no one is responding, I'm going to remove the line "the album was the blueprint Led Zeppelin continued to follow for the rest of their career" from the article. It simply isn't true, and the citation is in the music itself. --Bentonia School 11:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UK Charts

The article doesn't say what position the album reached in the UK. ---Revolver66, 10:21 19/02/07. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.183.205 (talk) 10:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Heavy Metal?

Although Led Zeppelin's brand of hard rock ushered the heavy metal genre immensely, why are they considered a heavy metal band?
Could someone clarify this for me?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zepboyo (talk • contribs) 02:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Their connection to the genre is well referenced. Only young people who don't have any musical history/knowledge don't include them as part of the genre.similarly for other early 70's HM acts like Deep Purple, Alice Cooper...etc). Their labels are cited and verifiable. In order to disconnect them from the genre it would would take 20-30 refs just to back it up. And teen blogs don't count as references. 156.34.211.162 02:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alright people!

We need a consensus. Does this count as psychedelic rock or acid rock? Let's get some opinions here damnit! Leodmacleod 06:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

It's neither of those as no RS labels them in that way. 156.34.226.99 08:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Works for me. I looked over the talk page for the ip address that made that modification and it seems that they've been doing this for some time. I've given them another warning, their final me thinks.

Leodmacleod 08:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 4 track tape machine?

I have an article from a magazine, (AudioTechnology, Issue 56) which has an interview with the then studio assistant at Olympic Studios, Roger Quested. He appears to indirectly say that Olympic Studios actually had a 3M 8-track tape machine at the time (he mentions recording the Rolling Stones in 1968 onto an 8-track), and this appears to match with the technical restraints of the time: I don't think you could have recorded multiple guitar overdubs on a 4 track, while having a mono submix of the drums, a channel for bass and another for vocals. There is also more information about the techniques employed in the recording of the album, such as the fact that it was 4 mics on the drumkit. Would this be worthy of consideration? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.139.21.152 (talk) 06:11, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Four mics on a drumkit doesn't necessarily mean four tracks on the tape. It's not uncommon to run several microphones into a mixer before recording onto one or two tracks. Refer to the recording of Sgt. Pepper for endless examples of getting more than four signals onto a four track machine. Dave b kc (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

That's true, but surely an interview of the Studio Assistant at the time is a reliable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.139.23.185 (talk) 08:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning the 'Black Beauty'

His Gibson Les Paul Black Beauty, with 3 pickups, was stolen in 1969 on tour. This gave him the distinct sound of him and John Bonham on Led Zeppelin II.

He can clearly be seen playing this guitar on DVD, January 9, 1970. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamfaust (talk • contribs) 10:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

It was stolen on the Led Zeppelin North American Tour Spring 1970 Edelmand (talk) 11:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] no 5 stars from rolling stone magazine

Rolling Stone Magazine didn't rate them ... they just wrote about them. It seems like they got rated because there is a rating given by members of the website, not from the magazine. This mistake is made a lot because rolling stone does this so much, be sure to always check rolling stone reviews for that mistake on albums. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 03:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Hindenburg.gif

Image:Hindenburg.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)