Why Led Zeppelin Wasn’t In The Same League As The Beatles And Rolling Stones, John Paul Jones Explained

Led Zeppelin emerged as a timeless force in the realm of rock during the 1970s, enchanting audiences with their intricate and captivating compositions that breathed new life into the musical landscape of the era. The quartet, consisting of supremely talented individuals, each hailed as a virtuoso in their respective fields, collectively engaged in a highly creative collaboration, actively shaping the band’s iconic works.

Their distinctive sonic tapestry, a fusion of individual virtuosity and a shared passion for crafting exceptional music, swiftly captivated the masses. Led Zeppelin’s legendary status, however, wasn’t solely attributed to musical prowess. Bassist John Paul Jones harbored a unique perspective that set them apart from their illustrious peers, notably the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.

Comparisons with other prominent acts of the time were inevitable, with Led Zeppelin often finding themselves measured against the likes of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, both dominating the music scene contemporaneously. In a 2003 interview with Elsewhere, John Paul Jones shed light on what distinguished Led Zeppelin from their counterparts, particularly addressing the prevailing comparisons with the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.

Jones acknowledged that during their zenith, Led Zeppelin garnered a significant following, leading to perceptions of them being on par with the Beatles and the Stones in terms of their impact on the music world. However, he emphasized a crucial distinction – Led Zeppelin’s focus was primarily on creating exceptional music, steering clear of pursuits beyond the realm of music, such as film, television, or advertising, unlike their iconic counterparts.

The bassist elucidated on Led Zeppelin’s distinct approach:

“Maybe they saw the band as a bit of a phenomenon. We were beginning to get quite a big following and the only other band we were comparable to, for them, was something like the Beatles, which wasn’t true because they were a household name and had television and films.

We didn’t do any of that. The question, ‘Will you be making a film?’ took me by surprise because we were just a band that made music; it wasn’t that type of operation. We had a big following, but it wasn’t a ‘popular’ band like the Rolling Stones. We didn’t appear in the tabloid press.”

Led Zeppelin’s deliberate avoidance of extensive media exposure, coupled with their reluctance to delve into non-musical ventures, set them apart from the publicity-driven approaches of the Beatles and the Stones. The band’s minimal engagement with the press, stemming from a desire to let their music speak for itself, shielded them from the same level of scrutiny and media attention faced by their contemporaries.

While Led Zeppelin’s unconventional path garnered them a devoted fan base, it also subjected them to criticism from the press and music critics who, in their distinctive style and sound, found elements that defied the norms prevalent during that period.


Leave a Comment