Genesis verses Jethro Tull ... poll

To Progger, I have seen you post about this "conspiracy" way too many times, and frankly I don't believe it!!!  There are just as many Pink Floyd, Yes, etc... fanatics that will rate an album highly.  You may have some formula to figure this out, but like I stated before, I can't believe it and nor do I care that much (apparently you do...). However, I do think that the rating system is flawed, just not in the way that you speak of.

Edited by meurglysIII

In answer to the above!

It's because the system is flawed. Some members have multi-log in handles and review an album numerous times. I have noticed Genesis albums given 5 stars by the same reviewers on occasions and any albums that are a threat to their position are given low rankings. Also note how many times Genesis albums have been reviewed in comparison to many others. The more five stars an album getes the higher it will climb up the charts. There should be some some way of working out averages! That way you will see albums like Tresspass and Nursey Cryme drop out of the top twenty like led balloons.

Edited by Progger

stonebeard wrote: gentletull wrote: if u genesis fans had all the tull album outtakes u would rank tull higher than genesis Not by a sight. I have all Tull albums from Stand Up to Broadsword and Some more from the 90s and all Genesis albums from Trespass to Ababcab. I don't think some demos and unreleased tracks will change my mind.

Exactly my case, I have each and every album released by Jethro (Including Rolling Stones Circus), almost each and every DVD by them and it's the prog' band I've seen the most (7 times) and I loved each and every concert.

And I believe there's not a serius (older than 35) proghead that doesn't have most of Tull's material, but nothing compares to Genesis IMO, even when I've never been in one of their concerts (Except Invissible Touch tour which sucked) and only have bootleg DVD's from the Gabriel era.

Iván

if u genesis fans had all the tull album outtakes u would rank tull higher than genesis

Edited by gentletull

raindance wrote: Jethro Tull for me. Gabriel era Genesis were too comical for me though they had their moments of excellence.

Yep you're right, Steve Hackett sitting in a chair,Mike Rutherford playing back in the left corner where no one could see him and Tony Banks hidding his face behind the keyboard should be comedians.

Pater was pretty funny with his costumes and Ian Anderson is so serious

Don't misunderstand me, I love Tull almost as much as I love Genesis, but this is a lame argument (Sorry Raindance) both Peter Gabriel and Ian Anderson were interested in theatrics (Just look at the Heavy Horses video), both are eccentric and had a very acid sense of humour, lyrics of Tull have even more sarcasm and comedy than Genesis.

And you know what? That makes them great, sense of humour mixed with talent is a wonderful combination, Chaplin used to say  it was harder to make people  laugh than to make people cry, and he was damn right.

It's ok to like one more than the other, but please, give good reasons.

Iván

Edited by ivan_2068

Genesis.  I could never get into Jethro Tull nearly as much as Gabriel-era-Genesis.

check out the aqualung album 1 v aqualung album 2 and warchild album 1 v warchild album 2 threads

The answer is simple when you consider the question. The better BAND easily would be Genesis, who individual working parts all contributed in the creating of Prog gems.Unified and working as one to create (Gabriel era/ TOTT and WAW) masterpieces. Tull, honestly speaking, as great as the music is, has always been the product of the genius of one man, Mr. Anderson himself. The better BAND, Gabriel,Hackett,Rutherford,Banks and Mr. Collins themselves.

Well, I can't even cast a vote on this one. I love Tull and Genesis. It's like asking "which do you like more, your right ball or your left?"

Tull for no other reason other than I find their albums more interesting.