Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: iamblackmo Sep 8 2009, 02:40 AM

I listed to Zeppelin and I find a complex and wide depth of feel and culture.

How well did any of the members know composition and or theory?

Posted by: Emir Hot Sep 8 2009, 03:16 AM

Only John Paul Jones knew it Other guys' job was just to rock but they were the best in the world for it

Posted by: ZakkWylde Sep 8 2009, 11:09 AM

Yep John Paul Jones has the biggest musical knowledge being a piano, bass, mandolin and several other instruments-player. I don't think Jimmy Paige knows more than his pentatonic and a few chords...

Posted by: Jerry Arcidiacono Sep 8 2009, 11:59 AM

Probably But he did his job very well, especially about writing the riffs.

Posted by: Ivan Milenkovic Sep 8 2009, 01:01 PM

I would say I don't know if Jimmy Page knew...

Posted by: Sensible Jones Sep 8 2009, 01:17 PM

Jimmy is actually quite well-versed in parts of music theory. Especially within the realms of altered tunings.
I can say this with authority as I knew his Guitar Tech!

Posted by: Fingerspasm Sep 8 2009, 01:42 PM

There is a movie coming out this month or next month called It Might Get Loud. Its an in depth interview with Jack White, Jimmy Page and The Edge. I am sure this movie will have some insight on this subject. I am looking forward to being able to see the movie. If you google It Might Get Loud you will see some good Trailers for the Movie

Posted by: jafomatic Sep 8 2009, 02:18 PM

Page was a session guy for many years. I dunno if you can do that and still be a pentatonic hero, or a "let's jam on 5" kinda guy, y'know?

I heard this from Lynch: "You know how the most incredible guys didn't know music? It's lies. Hendrix knew his theory."

Lynch could be wrong, at least in some cases. I know B.B. King insists that he doesn't know anything, for example.

Posted by: JVM Sep 8 2009, 03:59 PM

I think because of the way that theory can be .. confusing and like a bunch of unconnected dots to people who haven't studied it enough to make sense of things, they could well know more than they're letting on, like knowing their chords really well or having ideas about how they play that, even if they don't know it, really are explained by theory.

Jaf, I agree that being a session musician must teach you a lot of stuff, at least the basics even if you don't delve in to studying it. Of course, some people just have great ears. My dad doesn't know a single scale but he knows his chords really well, and therefore his intervals too, and always knows what key to play in even in a pick up jam.

Posted by: jafomatic Sep 8 2009, 04:06 PM

I was thinking this in the other direction: you won't LAST long as a session guy if you can't keep up with whatever arrives in the studio that day. Anyway, George Lynch could have been wrong. He was willing to say what I quoted on TV and he was willing admit some things he wasn't able to do very well (there was a discussion about sweep picking and some youtube jokes) so it definitely seemed honest and credible.

Just thinking maybe we don't really know one way or the other without asking a guy. How would you ask Jimmy Page if he really knows music?

Posted by: JVM Sep 8 2009, 04:08 PM

Good points, I guess I was saying that if you know enough to get hired as a session guy and keep the job, you're still bound to learn a lot. I think I saw the George Lynch thing. Either way I did see him jam with Dave Navarro and they talked about a similar subject, that was an interesting video.

Posted by: jafomatic Sep 8 2009, 04:11 PM

That's the one I saw

I really didn't like Navarro until he earned some points in that very same episode, talking about being unable to sweep and "staying up late trying to learn it from youtube videos" and laughing at himself.

Maybe we can find interviews with Page. The wikipedia talks about his session work but no schooling in music is mentioned.

Posted by: JVM Sep 8 2009, 04:38 PM

I still don't like him, but I love his guitar playing

Here's a question:

We all learn at our own pace here at GMC (unless we're set up in the MTP) and we only get out what we put in. Are we still self taught? We're not formally instructed I think, at least, not any instruction that a music university would recognize.

Posted by: Sensible Jones Sep 8 2009, 04:51 PM

Do what I did. Firstly, live in the Village where he bought his Studio. Next get a job at age 18 working in a Pub just down the Road from his Studio. Then, wait until he's recording the first 'Firm' album with Jason Bonham, Tony Franklin and John Miles and then ask him one Lunchtime whilst they are enjoying a couple of Beers in an otherwise empty Bar.
Once you've done this (and played Pool with Tony and Jason and beaten them!!!) and not treated them as if they're not human then you can ask them anything you like. Especially when you get invited to go to the Studio and watch things happening!
After all of this befriend his Guitar Tech and stay friends with him for at least 20 years until he dies 2 years ago!!
Simple!!!

Posted by: Emir Hot Sep 8 2009, 04:54 PM

Jimmy didn't need to know any theory. He is for me no.1 player of all times, maybe even bigger face than Hendrix (which also didn't know any theory). Jimmy plays and composes what sounds good to him. Of course it is good if you know some theory but it worked for him without it. He surely does know which scale to play over which chord but might not know to name that scale. His solos are mainly based on licks but his rhythm structure and chords in different tunings sound like a true art. My ex. jazz teacher Shaun Baxter (maybe one of the best in the world) interviewed Van Halen for some guitar magazine. He told us that Halen doesn't have a clue of what he is playing. For Jimmy it doesn't surprise me but for Mr. Halen it does. All his notes are just what he hears, no way he could tell you which scale, which box etc... The thing here is that you can still play good without any theory but knowing it will only do you even better.

Posted by: sted Sep 8 2009, 07:05 PM

wow! how rock'n'roll is that mate?!? does make you sound like a bit of a stalker though !

Posted by: Sensible Jones Sep 8 2009, 07:44 PM

When you put it like that.....

Posted by: Bogdan Radovic Sep 8 2009, 08:01 PM

Hmm I guess this is hard to define. Are you still self taught if you took some lessons from private teacher? If not then I don't think you are completely self taught using GMC or some other online forms of learning too. (because its very similar or even better then real teacher). Technology really progressed a lot so you can learn from home lots of things you couldn't in past. There are colleges that offer online learning (regular schools, not music ones). They all work pretty much the same as GMC, collaborations , forum , lessons , assignments etc. Once you finish exams at that online school you get a diploma even though you learned at your own pace from home (self taught?). Formal education (recognized diploma is something else and I'm sure its in the future of GMC).

These are just some of my mumblings on the subject ehehhe

Posted by: Santiago Diaz Garces Sep 9 2009, 02:55 AM

I think that they were in the right situation, in the right time, doing the right thing to succeed. I think if Zep would be a band in these times, they wouldn't succeed. Just because of the fact that music has become once again into something really complex, like baroque times. (And, in my opinion, even more complex).

Posted by: Gary Sep 9 2009, 04:21 AM

Hmmm.. I grew up with Zep and I believe that if they were starting out today they would be popular.. here’s why.

Throughout the seventies they were the kings of heavy rock. Not because they were masters of complexity but because they wrote catchy hard rock songs, with a variety of sounds (Physical Graffiti as an example) and they possessed tremendous stage presence. Say what you want about Page.. but he was a creative guy. During the time there were plenty of guitar players with better technical skills (lets see.. Ritchie Blackmore, Steve Howe and Jeff Beck come to mind) however these guys never achieved the level of success that Zeppelin did. Look at U2 now.. is the Edge really that technical of a player? or how about Lady Gaga for that matter

That said I just watched a Jeff Beck concert on the Palladia channel that was taped in London in 2007.. That dude is a true guitar god.

Posted by: fkalich Sep 9 2009, 07:05 AM

Page's skill level was nothing to be ashamed of w.r.t. his peers at the time. And his ability to compose was head and shoulders above those guys (Page was a very intelligent guy). The previous post was making the mistake of looking at a past epoch and judging it as if it were occurring today. It is not like Page and the band had the past 40 years to pick from at the time, to support their play and style. That is like saying Einstein was a dummy because he did not understand String Theory. Much of what has occurred in the past 40 years, came from Zep. If they had been born a few decades later, with their talent they would be at the skill level as guitar gods of today, and probably coming up with 5 times as much creative composition as most guys today, same as they did in their day. And as you say, they were a great stage act, very charismatic.

Posted by: Gary Sep 10 2009, 04:19 AM

Amen brother.. your Einstein / string theory analogy is spot on. The guitarist who arrived later in no doubt received a huge benefit from the works of Page and co. Had Zep entered the fray later they would have had their inherent creativity + higher developed skills which likely would have yielded more creative and interesting compositions.

It does beg a question though that popped into my feeble mind last night.. In the day pretty much everyone between 12 and 35, male and female, was into Zeppelin..the release of a new album or announcement of a concert tour was HUGE. Make no mistake, they were the true definition of a "super group". In the end those who enjoy their music are probably lucky it happened when it did, with the skill set that was in place. If Page could play like Paul Gilbert zep would have likely "priced themselves out of the market" with complexity... It's likely that those in the know (musicians) would adore them but much of the music would likely "get lost in translation" with the general public. Food for thought..



Gary

Posted by: Staffy Sep 10 2009, 06:43 AM

I should'nt say "It was better in the old days....", but one thing that is obvious is that talented musicians with technical/musical skills was always on the top back then. There was no "hidden" scene with musicians just adored by musicians like today. I think that was because the musicians HAD to perform live in order to get recognized. The record companies didn't made records with bands that couldn't play. MTV came in the beginning of the 80'ths and turned everything up and down. (at least in my opinion) We also have a totally different flow of information, trends etc. today, and the music scene is so much bigger than it was then.

With this in mind, try to imagine a super-group like Zeppelin today. I would say that there is no market for super-groups anymore, no matter how good they are. The same goes for all artists, singers etc. No one will ever be as big as Elvis, Beatles etc. Why? Because the music industry is so huge today, and we are consuming music in a totally different way than before.

Well, the discussion was about Page and theory. I will say that he knew very well what he was playing, which is the only thing that really matters. What you call it in terms of standard music theory is one thing, theory is good for analyzing what other people play, but when it comes down to the bottom line - you play what you hear. My jazz teacher in the old days always said: "Learn theory - and then forget it".

//Staffay

Posted by: Fsgdjv Sep 17 2009, 09:42 PM

This is so true. And this is probably the main reason why the good old days aren't even half as good as it is now. Sure, I wasn't around back then, but it's what I think.