Jethro Tull Appreciation Thread

The flute lick overlaps the end of the line so Ian couldn't do both live. Later Barrie played the lick on glockenspiel, and in the 80's version on the 20 Years CD the keyboardist plays it.

 

I saw them on the "War Child" tour (w/Carmen as the support act, for bit of foreshadowing...), and BB was already playing it on the glock by then. Spring 1975 I think.

 

Thanks to my brother, I love 70's Jethro Tull...but during the late 80's I got into them without any outside help.

Crest of a Knave, Rock Island and Catfish Rising are all very enjoyable albums.

 

I really love this album and the Mick Abrahams s/t release that followed.
I like what Bloodwyn Pig I've heard, though I've never bought any.

I confess: I don't find the post-Mick JT stuff half as interesting. Might be folked-out!

 

hi you guys once and for all can someone explain to me whats up w/ john evan, barrie and teh whole late 70s band being replaced by new people in 1980....did ian fire em all, or was it the record company as ive heard...or whats up....

 

Chip, I'm guessing you have heard Stand Up, but just in case you haven't, give it a spin!

 

After John Glascock died Barrimore Barlow had already decided to split and form his own band. According to Anderson, John Evans had lost his interest in playing rock 'n' roll. All in all, Ian thought the whole thing started to get a bit stale and took some time off to make an solo album.

When Martin Barre and the new boy David Pegg were involved on Anderson's album the record company suggested that it should be released as a Jethro Tull album. Ian saw of it as a fresh start, and invites Eddie Jobson and Mark Craney to be part of the new Tull line up.

...and bye bye Evans and Palmer...

 

One of my problems with this album, which is not even in my top-ten Tulls, is that Martin Barre - I stress on this one - comes accross as a poor substitute to Mick Abrahams, whom was a big part of the first line-up's success. I mean MB has a couple of great tracks on it (Back to the Family for instance). But elsewhere he muffs notes and sounds like a nervous, poorman's Eric Clapton...

As of Benefit, things get more interesting and he gets to shine more as himself instead of as a copy.

 

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=4823284&postcount=76

 

I appreciate Jethro Tull very much, in fact I'm taking Abbey Rose on a walk right now, and spinning my gold disc of Stand Up just to savor the sweet music... I much prefer this one to This Was, and the new struggling guitar player as well... I hoped they keep him on for awhile...

 

Everytime I think of Abbey Road now, I think of your dog's name "Abbey Rose" and it makes me

 

Did You Hear Mother...

So I listen to Stand Up on CD on headphones today for the first time in ages, a pleasant revisit. I think I like this album more than Stand Up for a number of reasons. First, I am not that big a fan of Mick's British white-boy playing American Black man blues, in general--Led Zeppelin and early Fleetwood Mac--and a few others) excepted... And, though I like Mick on This Was--and I have Blodwyn Pig on vinyl and Cd and four Mick solo Lps/Cds, I just don't like his guitar stylings that much... I do on This Was, and Ahead Rings Out, the most... Thus, for me, Martin Barre's admittedly embryonic guitar playing on Stand Up is rather refreshing, plus, instead of the dynamic, and at times viseral, tensions between Mick and Ian on This Was, on Stamp Up there is now more room for not only Ian to shine through with more force--and less tension, but also for the rythym section too...

As I posted somewheres upthread, I recently had a Tull appiffanny... that I love ealry Tull--pre-Thick, best, because of this rythym section--and I know about when Jeffrey and Barry came it... But I love Stand Up and Benefit the most because on those two records you have this crack ryhtym section, so full of expressive playing, kudos to Clive in particular, and then you Martin's flirtive fills and odd, expressive solos--We Used To Know would do quite well on Disreali Gears or Axis: Bold as Love... and then Ian really starting to stretch out and grow, not only as a singer and flautist, but as an acoustic player and songwrtier, lyricist... all because Mick and he dynamic is gone...


For years my least fave tracks on stand up have been the two lead of tracks to each side: A New Day Yesterday and Nothing Is Easy, the latter I like better.... I still feel that way, they seem almost like leftovers from This Was, and are the same soiled cloth... But then things change, for the better... Nothing on This Was was quite as special and exciting and new to my ears and when I first hear--and heard again today: Jeffrey Goes To Liester Square--two minutes that fly by... Back To The Family.. and Look Into The Sun, what a song, and then Fat Man, always a love and hate track for a fat man like me, and I think the last three tracks on Stand Up, take Tull to a new level... WYTK is just classic, through and through... Reason For Waiting is the beginnings of Ian's amazing solo acoustic pieces, but with strings...great lryic too, and 1,000 Mothers just rocks, all the way to the end, and back into the false ending coda...


I just love this record, shame there is no 40th anniversary version comin' out this year... end of an era it would appear...


must away,'

"being picked up at ate in a limousine..."





cheers,

 

weeeellll...but for me it really seemed like some kind of steam had gone out of the band, and a whole bunch of mellow crept in. Previous tours had of course their acoustic-ish parts, but at other times hell and damnation blasting out of Ian's mouth (and Martin's guitar). That intensity level was basically missing in the Chicago Theater, excepting perhaps a VERY dynamic "My God" which rocketed from pin-dropping quiet to wall-rattling loud.

Comments from anyone who's seen them after that tour? Am I on target or off base?

 

I've heard that the last Jethro Tull tour with some merit was when they were promoting "Roots to Branches". But since i didn't saw that tour i can't say.

I saw them in 2000 (?) and 2003 and decided not to see them again. It was disillusioning. Ian was limping pitifully, singing badly and every song was played at too slow tempo. Even Aqualung sounded pretty bad and unenthuastic.

I mean, why bother to play old classics when you are not in the psychical condition to do them anymore? King Crimson did a right move to play only material that suited the current line up, whether a punter would like it or not.

...and this was many years before Ian choosed to tour with under-rehearsed session musicians under Jethro Tull banter.

 

Doctor Flang:

>I've heard that the last Jethro Tull tour with some merit was when they were promoting "Roots to Branches". But since i didn't saw that tour i can't say.<

If I recall well what I have read, on the first (European) leg of that '95 tour, the first one without Dave Pegg, their set consisted of about 50% new material. ...And I really like Roots to Branches!

>I saw them in 2000 (?) and 2003 and decided not to see them again. It was disillusioning. Ian was limping pitifully, singing badly and every song was played at too slow tempo. Even Aqualung sounded pretty bad and unenthuastic.<

And I have lost the count of how many steps they need to drop the key of Aqualung so that Ian Anderson can make believe he can still wing it. The tension and dynamics or the original piece is completely lost! I personally have stopped going in '97, where the only parts of the concert that didn't depress me at least a little bit where the fresher material, that I really enjoyed (but too little of it got played). I might buy a ticket again when there is new material to promote.

>I mean, why bother to play old classics when you are not in the psychical condition to do them anymore? King Crimson did a right move to play only material that suited the current line up, whether a punter would like it or not.<

I am not Crimson-savvy and have never heard that: now that's an approach with b%&*#, worthy of an artist!

 

The evidence against this proposition is contained in the fine Jethro Tull Plays Montreaux DVD which is wonderful and widely available for small money.

 

Actually, IMO the Montreaux DVD proves the point!

To my ears and eyes it sounds and looks tired and uninspired. Some songs, like Bouree and sound like easy listening muzak. Compare it to the Isle of Wight, Madison Square Garden, Live in Germany or to the 1992 clips on the 25th Anniversary DVD and you'll see how low the energy levels have dropped. And no, i didn't like Living With The Past DVD either.

I think the best performance is Dot Com.

 

Ian Anderson plays acoustic Jethro Tull gems

http://nwitimes.com/entertainment/music/article_6f158184-8b00-56de-82da-12cac2315731.html

 

http://www.telegram.com/article/20091008/NEWS/910080792/1011

 

Pretty much on target, IMO. I saw the 25th Anniversary tour in 1993 (with Procol Harum!) and it was absolutely smoking. Great setlist, great visuals, the band was loud, tight and energetic. Absolutely on fire. I've seen Jethro Tull six times since then hoping to see some of that magic and it just hasn't happened. They're a band on autopilot.

The 40th anniversary Tour had Peter Frampton opening and Frampton pretty much blew Tull off the stage. And you'd think being a 40th anniversary tour they might celebrate the great music they've created over the past 40 years and not focus on mostly predictable songs from the first four albums. I think Tull did 3 songs post 1972. And seeing Ian Anderson strain on his tiptoes to hit notes was just sad.

Anyway, I guess I'm ranting a little and it sucks to say it as I love Jethro Tull. But I'm finally done going to see them in concert.

 

The Jethro Tull Christmas Album
2009 issue UK 33-track 2-CD album set
A fantastic double album which is bound to get you in the festive spirit! A combination of two superb Christmas albums including the original 'Jethro Tull Christmas Album' released in 2003. And the more recent recording 'Jethro Tull - Live At St Brides'...
http://jethrotull.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=730&page=1

 

Obviously a lot of people appreciate JT as much as me. I was bidding on a Thick as a Brick MFSL CD. I put 70 bucks on it and still got outbidded; and there's still 2 days left on the auction.

 

Haven't seen them since November 2007, and despite Ian's voice losing steam by the day, it was a good show with lots of songs played live for the first time in quite a while. The saving grace is the *band*. A lot of my friends ripped me for seeing Tull(again), and I just told them as long as the band sounds good and the setlists are interesting, I'll keep going. Call it a guilty pleasure. And the last time I saw the band was in Mobile, AL, not exactly around the corner from me.

 

A reissue of the Christmas album? I can see it for the second Live disc which looks great but why package it as a double cd? Why not just make a new single release. Is this even going to be available in the US? I don't really see much info for it...