Re: No Bonzo = Zeppelin

[HNEK@xxxxxxx]

>>Bullshit.  It is perfectly acceptable to replace a
deceased band member with a replacement.  That
replacement may not be as good as the original, but
considering the band in question, they should be
benefit to a very high quality pool of replacement
candidates.<<

"Considering the band in question" is the key phrase here.  We're talking 
Zeppelin here, 
not the Monkeys w/o Mike Nesmith.  No matter who they get the Zeppelin that 
tours 
won't...be...the...Zeppelin...we...love.  Why?  Cause Zeppelin was more than 
four guys 
playing rock-n-roll.  It was also a product of the times.  Those times are 
gone, those guys 
are no longer 25 and living for Zeppelin, Peter Grant and Bonzo are dead, etc. 
etc.  
Could they replace Bonzo and call it Zeppelin?  Sure, that's their prerogative. 
 
Would it be Led Zeppelin?  Almost, but not really, kind of like how Floyd w/o 
Waters is 
not Floyd.  Could they carry on and put on good shows?  Yep.  Would you go away 
saying, 
"Now just imagine what it would have been like if Bonzo were still alive."?  
Yep.  

>>That's your opinion.  Some would call Page/Plant/Jones
+ drummer replacement "Led Zeppelin."<<
Some wouldn't.  

>>The '95 and '98 tours were ESSENTIALLY "Led Zeppelin" reunion tours,and both 
>>didn't have JPJ.<<
But in reality it was just Page/Plant with a couple different musicians playing 
a bunch of 
Zeppelin songs and a little bit of non-Zep new material.  Great shows, but not 
Zeppelin.  

>>Imagine those tours with JPJ and a legit replacement on drums?<<
How bout Zeppelin without Robert Plant?  Or Zeppelin without Jimmy Page?  Still 
Zeppelin?  

>> That's because the drummer wasn't good ENOUGH, and
there was no JPJ, who was AVAILABLE.  Sheesh.<<
I thought they didn't need JPJ to be "ESSENTIALLY "Led Zeppelin", so why is it 
a big deal if 
he wasn't there?  Cause P/P didn't have the magic of a Led Zeppelin show?  Why 
is that important?  
Who cares what they sound like, they're Led Zeppelin with or without the rest 
of the band! 

For the hardcore fan, which is what FBO is for, Zeppelin was greater than the 
sum of its parts.  
When you look at how other bands have taken a hit by soldiering on without key 
members 
(like the Two, I mean the Who), it's nice to see a little bit of integrity 
coming from the Zep 
camp.  Or would you rather see them turn into showbiz reunion tour hacks like 
the Eagles?  
Anyway, you can't recapture the past, so what's the point in calling a 
Page/Plant/Jones/drummer 
tour Led Zeppelin if, as you say, everybody basically considers it to be 
Zeppelin already?  
What's wrong with keeping the dead buried? Why cheapen the memory?  What's to 
be gained?  
The ability to say "I saw Zeppelin"?  You won't have, you'll have just seen a 
shadow of the 
band that died almost 25 years ago.

Pete