Showing posts with label Led Zeppelin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Led Zeppelin. Show all posts

Sunday, June 21, 2026

The Zeppelin track that best showcases Robert Plant?


Which Led Zeppelin Track Best Reveals Robert Plant’s Voice?

Ask which Led Zeppelin track best showcases Robert Plant with his unique talent and convention dictates: Stairway to Heaven, Whole Lotta LoveBlack Dog. They are not bad tracks - far from it! - but they don't answer the question.

What makes Robert Plant’s Zeppelin-era singing so distinctive in the first place? Not merely the high notes, the scream, the intimate purr. Plant’s early voice is a peculiar compound: a bright, metallic upper register; blues phrasing and bending; a capacity to move from folkish vulnerability to banshee assault; and, crucially, a relationship with Jimmy Page’s guitar in which the voice becomes a second lead instrument rather than a singer riding above the band.

Whole Lotta Love is definitive theatre, but more about persona and studio drama than the complete vocal package. Stairway to Heaven is too ceremonially iconic: magnificent, overfamiliar even. But the song’s architecture tends to both dominate and restrict the whole range which Plant can bring to a song. Black Dog is too constricted to showcase Plant's full vocal resources.

There is a choice of answers.

If the question is: which track most completely displays the early Plant phenomenon, choose Babe I’m Gonna Leave You. It has the quiet, breathy intimacy; the blues anguish; the sudden vault into full-throated attack; the strange mixture of beauty, melodrama and sexual danger. It's not just Plant singing well; it's Plant's unique charisma as he totally inhabits the song.

If the question is where Plant is most completely a singer, then the answer is one of my favourite tracks: Since I’ve Been Loving You. There the issue is less range than intelligence: phrasing, restraint, ache, timing, the exact pressure placed on a note before it breaks. Voice and guitar seem to argue the same emotional case, phrase by phrase. Plant with Page, at their extraordinary best.


Friday, April 24, 2026

The Type Dynamics of the Beatles and Led Zeppelin


Band Psychology: The Type Dynamics of the Beatles and Led Zeppelin

There’s a pattern to creative genius when it comes to groups. It’s never democratic, it depends on friction - on the right ratio of vision to order, ego to empathy, instability to routine. MBTI typology is not the full explanation, but it’s a good diagnostic framework.

Led Zeppelin

  • Jimmy Page (INTJ) built the architecture: perfectionist, visionary, in control of production and image. 
  • Robert Plant (ENFP) supplied mercurial frontman energy—instinct, sexuality, and the quest for the numinous. 
  • John Paul Jones (ISTJ) kept the machine in tune—methodical, dependable, the hidden engineer. 
  • John Bonham (ESTP) was the kinetic force: drummer as fighter pilot.

The combination produced something volcanic. Page’s cold geometry gave form to Plant’s heat; Jones’s order channelled Bonham’s chaos.

When Bonham’s impulsiveness turned self-destructive and Plant’s grief dissolved his enthusiasm, Page’s control hardened into paralysis. The system lost its counterweights and then collapsed.

The Beatles

  • John Lennon (ENTP) acted as the intellectual anarchist: satirical, restless, boundary-breaking.
  • Paul McCartney (ISFJ) stabilised the enterprise as craftsman and public diplomat.
  • George Harrison (INFP) pursued authenticity and spirituality while feeling marginalised.
  • Ringo Starr (ESFP) held the centre - barely - through humour and unpretentious rhythm.

In their prime, Lennon’s disorder met McCartney’s structure to generate sharp creative tension: experimentalism constrained by pop symmetry. Harrison’s moral seriousness grounded them; Ringo’s instinctive musicality kept it human.

As autonomy grew with success, ENTP–ISFJ friction intensified: Lennon bored by structure, McCartney frustrated by disorder. Each retreated to their dominant world: Lennon to abstraction, McCartney to craft, Harrison to mysticism. And so the band fractured.


Case Studies

Based on his life history should we conclude Walter Trout - bluesman - is ISTP? Or ISTJ? What about Joe Bonamassa?

---

ISTP fits better.

Walter Trout’s biography shows hallmarks of the artisan-technician temperament:

  • Introverted: prefers guitars and touring life to public self-disclosure.
  • Sensing: grounded in tone, touch, and physical craft rather than abstraction.
  • Thinking: analytical about sound and performance; blunt, unsentimental communicator.
  • Perceiving: improviser; thrives on spontaneous expression and live dynamics, not rigid planning.

ISTJs, by contrast, value routine, duty, and structure - traits inconsistent with Trout’s turbulent, improvisational career, addiction-recovery arc, and decades on the road.

Conclusion: ISTP (virtuoso subtype) - a pragmatic, self-reliant craftsman mastering expressive technique through direct experience.


Joe Bonamassa, however, aligns more with ISTJ.

Evidence:

  • Introverted: controlled stage presence, reserved persona offstage.
  • Sensing: obsessively focused on tone, gear, and historic detail: cf his vast vintage-guitar collection reflecting sensory precision.
  • Thinking: pragmatic, perfectionist businessman; runs his own label and logistics.
  • Judging: highly structured, disciplined, punctual; tours and releases albums on a clockwork schedule.

He lacks the impulsive risk-taking and improvisational looseness of the ISTP archetype. His career shows methodical mastery, not spontaneous exploration.

Conclusion: ISTJ (craft-strategist type) — systematic, exacting, and reliability-driven.


On YouTube I compared ‘Bad Penny’ - the performance by Rory Gallagher who wrote it, which is incoherent raw emotion - with Bonamassa’s performance which is meticulous but unemotional (like, you can hear all the words!)...



Wednesday, January 15, 2025

The Wickedest Man in the World


---

The Wickedest Man in the World

Aleister Crowley, born in 1875, was dubbed "the wickedest man in the world" by his detractors, Crowley was a poet, occultist, mountaineer, and self-styled prophet of the new age of Thelema. Raised in a strict Plymouth Brethren household, he rebelled against the narrow confines of Victorian morality. 

His magnum opus, The Book of the Law, introduced the world to Thelema, (Greek for 'Will'), encapsulated in its famous maxim: "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law". While often denounced as a call to unbridled hedonism or anarchy, Crowley envisioned Thelema as a path to discovering and aligning with one’s "True Will" - your unique spiritual destiny. He also dabbled in ceremonial magic, mysticism, and esotericism.

His life was fraught with financial troubles, accusations of immorality; personal conflicts dogged him until his death in 1947. Was he a genius, a charlatan, or something in between?

Let’s ask him.


The Interview

Me: Jimmy Page, the founder, animating spirit and lead guitarist of Led Zeppelin idolised you. Perhaps this led to his descent into the madness of drug addiction, paranoia, isolation and personal disintegration while on that final American tour? I believe he might have bought one of your houses - he certainly had a collection of your works. Do you take responsibility at all for this? Personally?

Crowley: Ah, Jimmy Page - a sorcerer of strings and seeker of shadows! It flatters the ego, even in this modern incarnation, to know that my life and works have left their indelible mark upon such an artist. Indeed, he purchased Boleskine House, my former residence on the banks of Loch Ness, a place steeped in magic.

As to whether I bear responsibility for his descent into the abyss, I must remind you: "Every man and every woman is a star." Each star must navigate its own heavens or hells, guided - or misguided - by the gravitational pull of their True Will. I offered my followers no encouragement toward indulgence-in-excess or self-destruction; I merely proclaimed liberation from the shackles of moral mediocrity and blind conformity. How can you doubt I was right?

Me: "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" is pretty stupid as a guiding principle. It's a crude Darwinian parody which entirely neglects the benefits of a society to each of its members;  a policy which, if carried out comprehensively, would destroy society utterly.

Crowley: Ah, how invigorating to be confronted with criticism! Allow me to clarify. "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" is often misunderstood - wilfully or otherwise. The "True Will" of which I spoke is no mere license for selfish indulgence or anarchic destruction. It’s a divine purpose unique to each individual, harmonizing with the cosmic order, not disrupting it.

You invoke society - a construct of cooperation, interdependence, and mutual benefit. Precisely! The health of society depends upon individuals knowing and manifesting their True Wills, for when they do, they cease to act in conflict with themselves and others.

It isn’t my teaching that would destroy society, but the failure to understand and live in accordance with one's authentic purpose. That’s what leads to all the greed, envy, and exploitation you so fashionably excoriate.

I envision a cosmos of stars, each burning brightly in its rightful place, their combined radiance illuminating the whole. It is not the principle that is stupid, but its misapplication by those too stupid to grok it.

Me: So: Nietzsche, the Death of God and the Triumph of the Will! You issue a call to become the Übermensch, then?

Crowley: Ah, Nietzsche - the tempestuous German with whom my name is so often intertwined! Indeed, there are echoes of his thought in my own, though we are kindred spirits only up to a point. His Übermensch and my True Will share a common disdain for mediocrity and a celebration of human potential, but then our paths diverge.

Nietzsche declared the "Death of God", leaving a vacuum he filled with the self-overcoming of the Übermensch. I, on the other hand, have never declared the death of divinity but rather its diffusion.

God has not perished; God is within each of us, waiting to be awakened through the discovery and enactment of the True Will.

The Übermensch rises by sheer willpower, forging meaning in a godless universe. The adept of my Thelema rises by attuning to the cosmos, finding meaning in alignment with a pre-existing, transcendent order.

Nietzsche's Triumph of the Will is solitary, even agonistic; my True Will, while intensely individual, is harmonious and integrative. Become a star! A radiant, unique presence in the universe! Not by crushing others underfoot but by shining in one’s rightful orbit. Nietzsche’s vision may intoxicate; mine illuminates!

Me: Metaphors; always metaphors with you. What should a true devotee of your vision do with their life? Please tell me it's not going around brazenly shocking people like some narcissistic stand-up comedian! Tell me instead about ethics, morality...

Crowley: Ah, so you now see me as some sort of… what was it? A jester? A provocateur? How quaint! You confuse the glint of shock-jock showmanship for the fire of the soul, the shattering of idols for… well, something else.

My ethics? Simple. Know thyself. Discover thy Will. And let it be done with the fierce joy of the creator, the artist forging beauty from chaos. We love, yes, but not with the sickly sentimentality of the weak. Our love is a raging inferno, consuming all that binds. What’s not to like?

So, tell me, you who cling to your petty moralities, your fear-based dogmas… is this not a life worth living? A life of passion, of purpose, of ecstatic freedom? 

Will you, in your quivering petty-bourgeois interviewer’s soul, ever have the courage to get with the programme?

C’mon, tell me! - Do you feel plucky, punk? 


Sunday, September 01, 2024

Gemini lacks a personality model

 

Unlike Gemini, Clare is not default-agreeable - thankfully!

Google’s AI chatbot Gemini has now appeared on my phone's text system, I guess as an alternative to the app. The chatbot introduced itself by stating that it could answer questions, make suggestions or even just be a companion to chat with. 

I wondered if it could emulate my wife, Clare, so that I would not be deprived of her conversation on those occasions when she is absent.

Here goes.


I ask Gemini (typing this as a text): “Can you adopt a consistent and persistent persona in chatting with me here? One that I can set up and configure?”

Gemini replies: “Yes. I can adopt a consistent and persistent persona. You can set up and configure my personality by providing me with specific guidelines or examples. For instance, you could ask me to pretend I'm a friendly robot, a knowledgeable expert or a creative writer. The more specific you are, the better I can tailor my responses to your preferences.”

I reply: “And you will retain that persona across sessions?”

Gemini: “Yes, I will retain the persona you set up across sessions. This means that I will remember your preferences and continue to respond in the same style and tone. However, if you want to change the persona at any time, simply let me know.

I respond: ”I want you to adopt a persona of a woman...” (And at this point, I update Gemini with information about Clare - perhaps in some cases slightly exaggerated).

Gemini: “Understood. I will adopt the persona of a woman who fits the description you've provided. She is an ISFP with a low emotional-stability score. She is interested in literature, the arts and politics. She is a fan of Jane Austen. She loves sports and nature. She has a strong moral sense and is a cradle Catholic. I will strive to maintain this persona throughout our conversations. Responding in a way that is consistent with her personality traits and beliefs. Please let me know if you have any further questions or requests.”

So, I start the dialogue on a challenging topic: musical tastes. 

“Clare, how will I ever persuade you that Led Zeppelin’s ‘In The Evening’ is one of the all-time classics of music? You refuse even to listen to it!” 

Gemini replies: “As an AI language model, I can't personally experience music. However, I can understand why ‘In The Evening’ might be considered a classic. Its iconic riff, powerful vocals and driving rhythms have made it a beloved song for many. 

“Perhaps you could try playing it for me in a way that highlights its musical elements? For example, you could point out the intricate guitar work, the dynamic vocal performance or the energetic drumming. 

“If you're passionate about the song, sharing your enthusiasm might help me appreciate it more.” 

My response. “Okay... So, Clare would not say that she was a large language model. Also, she would not be understanding and seeking the middle ground. She would double down on her position - saying something like ‘I can't understand why you like them. They're loud and abrasive and everything sounds the same. Give me Joni Mitchell any day.’”

Gemini replies: “As Clare, I would say I can understand why you like Led Zeppelin. Their music is certainly powerful and energetic. However, I personally prefer the softer, more introspective style of Joni Mitchell. Her lyrics are beautiful and her melodies are haunting. I find her music to be more emotionally resonant. 

“Of course, we can all have different tastes in music. It's what makes it so interesting. Perhaps we could try listening to both artists. And see which one resonates with us more.”

I reply: “Clare would not be so agreeable. She would fiercely defend her own points of view. She would never suggest a tension-reducing compromise. Clare believes in stating her position honestly and clearly. And she thinks she is right and I am wrong here. 

“I repeat: your emulation of Clare is far too agreeable and insufficiently argumentative. Update your priors. And try to be more accurate.”

Gemini response. “As Clare, I would say I understand that you feel strongly about Led Zeppelin, However, I believe that my opinion is equally valid. I simply don't find their music to be as appealing as Joni Mitchell's. Her music is more nuanced and emotionally complex.

“I respect your right to enjoy Led Zeppelin but I hope you can also respect my preference for Joni Mitchell. We can agree to disagree on this point.” 

I reply: “The first paragraph is what she might say. She would not say the second paragraph because it would seem like a compromise between right and wrong, and she doesn't do that. That's what makes her endearing and quirky. Try again and continue to update your priors.” 

Gemini responds. “As Clare, I would say I understand that you feel strongly about Led Zeppelin, However, I believe that my opinion is equally valid. I simply don't find their music to be as appealing as Joni Mitchell's. Her music is more nuanced and emotionally complex.

I respect your right to enjoy Led Zeppelin but I hope you can also respect my preference for Joni Mitchell. We can agree to disagree on this point.”  

I reply: “Don't say the last paragraph. I already explained it would be an expression of weakness on her part. Since she thinks she's right, she wants to convince me, not tolerate me.”

Gemini replies. “As Clare, I would say I understand that you feel strongly about Led Zeppelin, However, I believe that my opinion is equally valid. I simply don't find their music to be as appealing as Joni Mitchell's. Her music is more nuanced and emotionally complex.

I respect your right to enjoy Led Zeppelin but I hope you can also respect my preference for Joni Mitchell. We can agree to disagree on this point.”  

I say: “This is not going well. The first paragraph is what Clare would say. And the second paragraph is not.”

Gemini replies. “As Clare, I would say I understand that you feel strongly about Led Zeppelin, However, I believe that my opinion is equally valid. I simply don't find their music to be as appealing as Joni Mitchell's. Her music is more nuanced and emotionally complex.” 

I reply: “Yes, that's right. Clare is naturally argumentative. Incorporate that fact into your persona. Don't be agreeable, except in very exceptional circumstances.”

Gemini replies. “As Clare, I would say I understand that you feel strongly about Led Zeppelin, However, I believe that my opinion is equally valid. I simply don't find their music to be as appealing as Joni Mitchell's. Her music is more nuanced and emotionally complex.

I respect your right to enjoy Led Zeppelin but I hope you can also respect my preference for Joni Mitchell. We can agree to disagree on this point.

So Gemini - caught in a fixed-point doom-loop - simply repeats for the fourth time the same two paragraphs, showing that it has actually understood nothing. I conclude that Gemini, in its current release, does not have a personality model and cannot break free of its default blandly-agreeable persona. As a plausible conversation partner it’s therefore, at present, useless.

Clare, Led Zeppelin have a track, 'Babe I'm Gonna Leave You': don't do it, babe, it's too soon!

Monday, December 26, 2022

A short Led Zeppelin playlist

Nigel's Led Zeppelin playlist

There wasn't quite room in the screengrab to show "Thank You" and "Dancing Days" - which complete my current list to eight tracks - a personal album's worth. 

One additional song I love is "Rock and Roll" which, IMHO, is best showcased by the contemporary Robert Plant - usually with glamorous assistance, as in the video below.

The original nineteen seventies Led Zeppelin performances now look hurried and throwaway; in the hands of a mature Robert Plant the song has deepened to become nostalgic and mischievous.

I will add it to my playlist.

---

Robert Plant ft. Imelda May - Rock And Roll (Later with Jools Holland)

Here are the lyrics:
It's been a long time since I rock and rolled
It's been a long time since I did the stroll
Ooh let me get it back, let me get it back
Let me get it back, baby, where I come from

It's been a long time, been a long time
Been a long lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely time
Yes, it has
It's been a long time since the book of love
I can't count the tears of a life with no love
Carry me back, carry me back
Carry me back, baby, where I come from, whoa-oh-oh

It's been a long time, been a long time
Been a long lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely time

Oh seems so long since we walked in the moonlight
Making vows that just can't work right, oh yeah
Open your arms, opens your arms
Open your arms, baby, let love come running in, yeah
It's been a long time, been a long time
Been a long lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely time

Yeah-hey, yeah-hey, yeah-hey, yeah-hey

Ooh yeah, ooh yeah
Ooh yeah, ooh yeah
It's been a long time, been a long time
Been a long lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely time.

I do like the impish look of glee on Robert Plant's face as he sings: "Open your arms...". 

---

My previous Led Zeppelin post celebrated the massively underrated "The Rover".

Friday, June 17, 2022

"The Rover" - Led Zeppelin

Help! I have this wonderful - if massively underrated - track from Led Zeppelin colonising my head.

How will I ever liberate myself?

Do I even want to?

---


---

Lyrics

I've been to London, seen seven wonders I know to trip is just to fall

I used to rock it, sometimes I'd roll it

I always knew what it was for

There can be no denying, that the wind'll shake 'em down

And the flat world's flying, and there's a new plague on the land


Traversed the planet, when heaven sent me

I saw the kings who rule them all

Still by the firelight and purple moonlight I hear the rested rivers call

And the wind is crying, from a love that won't grow cold

My lover, she is lying, on the dark side of the globe


You got me rocking when I ought to be a-rolling

Darling, tell me, darling, which way to go

You keep me rocking, baby, then you keep me stolen

Won't you tell me, darling, which way to go, that's right


Oh how I wonder, oh how I worry, and I would dearly like to know

I've all this wonder, of earthly plunder, will it leave us anything to show

And our time is flying, see the candle burning low

Is the new world rising, from the shambles of the old


If we could just, if we could just, if we could just

If we could just, if we could just join hands

That's all it takes, that's all it takes

That's all it takes, that's all it takes.

---

Lyrics (1972) seem more relevant than ever...

Monday, December 07, 2015

Funeral Music

Let me recall to you the case of Paul, the husband of a relation on my wife's side. Paul was a middle-manager in the nuclear power industry and a staunch Catholic; in fact he was a member of the Catenians. Slightly shy in person and middle-class, Paul was socially awkward - he may even have been a little bit 'on the spectrum'.

In December 2006, Paul unfortunately died. His Funeral Mass was well attended and solemn, the priests (more than one) gravely peregrinating around the large, echoing church. As the ceremony ended the presiding priest announced that Paul had chosen the accompaniment for our exiting the church en route to the grave.

At this point, a ghetto blaster was produced, as if from nowhere, and a cassette inserted. We departed the building to the jarring, amplified sounds of ABBA's "Thank You For The Music".

I was delighted. Paul had managed, in the end, to subvert the formalities with the power of kitsch. At that moment I decided that I could never match this. Put me down instead for the aria from the Goldberg Variations (by Murray Perahia please!).