Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: AAJ Review: Led Zeppelin Remasters, The Second Batch (IV & Houses of the Holy)

  1. #1

    AAJ Review: Led Zeppelin Remasters, The Second Batch (IV & Houses of the Holy)



    My review of Led Zeppelin IV & Houses of the Holy, today at All About Jazz.

    Following the 1-2-3 punch of its first three albums--first released between January 1969 and 1970 and reissued in June, 2014 as the first batch of a year-long series of overdue (and expanded) remasters of its entire nine-album catalog--Led Zeppelin continued on an upward trajectory, touring extensively and beginning to introduce songs that would ultimately appear on the British rock band's fourth album, one that bucked all marketing conventions and contained neither the name of the band nor the name of the album beyond a series of symbols, one for each member of the group. At the time it was referred to, in various camps, as everything from The Fourth Album and Untitled Runes to The Hermit and ZoSo...but as the years have progressed it's ultimately become known simply--and, not unlike the numeric designations of group's first three recordings--as Led Zeppelin IV.

    Certified gold before release, IV remains a pinnacle amongst the group's many achievements, though in some ways its massive success has also led to continued overexposure of many of the album's superlative songs on Classic Rock radio stations, unfairly diminishing its status as the group's most truly eclectic album to date--surpassing, even, III's acoustic/electric mixed bag. For those who love this record irrespective of the countless times tracks like "Black Dog," "Rock and Roll" and "Stairway to Heaven" have been aired, Jimmy Page's remaster is, as was the case with Zeppelin's first three recordings, a significant upgrade on previous editions, revealing greater depth and breadth in the sound of the acoustic instruments and adding more punch and bite to the electric ones that dominate most of the album's eight tracks.

    Continue reading here...

  2. #2
    Member Oreb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    80
    Good reviews as always, but I don't think it's true to say that Houses was the first Led Zep album to be slammed by the critics. Their debut was dismissed pretty snidely, as was the follow-up.

    Audiences were much quicker than critics to recognise the band's quality.

    Does it matter that this waste of time is what makes a life for you?

  3. #3
    Member Jerjo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    small town in ND
    Posts
    6,432
    Yeah, the critics (especially Rolling Stone and most of the British music press) were hostile pretty much their whole career. The first somewhat positive RS gave was for Physical Graffiti and even then it seemed backhanded.

    I've heard some complaints about the sound on these two but I've played both in the dark with a dram of whiskey, sound pretty clear and solid to me.
    I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down.'- Bob Newhart

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Oreb View Post
    Good reviews as always, but I don't think it's true to say that Houses was the first Led Zep album to be slammed by the critics. Their debut was dismissed pretty snidely, as was the follow-up.

    Audiences were much quicker than critics to recognise the band's quality.
    Thanks, as always, for the kind words.
    Well, perhaps my memory fails; my impression, at the time, was that critics didn't so much drub the first record as ignore it. HotH, on the other hand, was pretty widely criticized...and while perhaps excessively so, it was the first to make any kind of misstep and was (and remains) the first that I didn't love from start to finish.

    But perhaps my memory is starting to fail me

  5. #5
    Member Oreb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    80
    It's funny: I got into the band via Houses. The overtly 'proggy' 'Rain Song' and 'No Quarter' combined with what at the time seemed a brilliant, creepy proggy cover hooked in my 16 year-old self (this was about 1976).

    It took me a lot longer to appreciate the blues-ier stuff. I was a Teenage Snob and thought blues and country were crap by definition ('so much older then - I'm younger than that now' as a wise man once wrote).

    Does it matter that this waste of time is what makes a life for you?

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by jkelman View Post


    My review of Led Zeppelin IV & Houses of the Holy, today at All About Jazz.

    Following the 1-2-3 punch of its first three albums--first released between January 1969 and 1970 and reissued in June, 2014 as the first batch of a year-long series of overdue (and expanded) remasters of its entire nine-album catalog--Led Zeppelin continued on an upward trajectory, touring extensively and beginning to introduce songs that would ultimately appear on the British rock band's fourth album, one that bucked all marketing conventions and contained neither the name of the band nor the name of the album beyond a series of symbols, one for each member of the group. At the time it was referred to, in various camps, as everything from The Fourth Album and Untitled Runes to The Hermit and ZoSo...but as the years have progressed it's ultimately become known simply--and, not unlike the numeric designations of group's first three recordings--as Led Zeppelin IV.

    Certified gold before release, IV remains a pinnacle amongst the group's many achievements, though in some ways its massive success has also led to continued overexposure of many of the album's superlative songs on Classic Rock radio stations, unfairly diminishing its status as the group's most truly eclectic album to date--surpassing, even, III's acoustic/electric mixed bag. For those who love this record irrespective of the countless times tracks like "Black Dog," "Rock and Roll" and "Stairway to Heaven" have been aired, Jimmy Page's remaster is, as was the case with Zeppelin's first three recordings, a significant upgrade on previous editions, revealing greater depth and breadth in the sound of the acoustic instruments and adding more punch and bite to the electric ones that dominate most of the album's eight tracks.

    Continue reading here...
    Aw shit; they've still got "D'Yer Mak'Er" on HotH...

  7. #7
    Dedicated one of our recent youtube shows to the LZ remasters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvOkJzsac30

  8. #8
    cunning linguist 3LockBox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    hiding out in treetops, shouting out rude names
    Posts
    3,655
    I'd think that LZ-4 and HotH bookend each rather well if it weren't for the terrible sound quality of LZ-4 (I don't hear much of an improvement on this latest reissue either). The songs The Crunge, Dancing Days and D'Yer Maker sort of relieve the languid broodiness of the preceding first three songs which I think was needed going into the heavier, ethereal No Quarter. If only they could have included the actual title track on the album... still, its a desert island disc for me (and I do think the reissue of TotH is an improvement in sound quality, if only slightly).
    Compact Disk brought high fidelity to the masses and audiophiles will never forgive it for that

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •