Aqualung album 1 v Aqualung album 2

MrGabriel wrote: Maybe Mr Anderson wasn't great at deciding what songs to choose for albums. He had enough material to make a classic on several occasions but he decided to tone the albums down with more simple songs. This is the reason why I do not neglect any Jethro Tull album rejects. Because in this case they are not rejects. In most cases a band will make an album as strong as possible, but in Jethro's case, they show glimpes of greatness with their albums and tease fans. If only they saved the very best for each album, they would much more talked about and deservedly so. I updated all my albums to remastered cd and I have discovered many great songs for the first time. Not even my beloved Genesis have this many good songs

Completely agree with you!

gentletull wrote: hey ivan, imagine if the lamb was only a single album and it was missing the cage, slippermen, anway and lamia? Would you be saying you were not interested in those outtakes and would you say that's how the album should have been released? Imagine all the old Genesis albums were missing songs like that while collins filled the albums with some pop love ballads and people said that Genesis were not that good and all their albums were only average. Wouldn't you be telling them to listen to the outtakes and then realise the band was a much better band than people thought ;)

I don't need to imagine, because The Lamb was released originally as a Double album, but many people believe album 2 is weak in comparison with Disk one, I wouldn't accept one song less.

Or imagine of Today the band wanted to release a version with two songs that clarify the concept, neither would I care. The Lamb was edited as a double conceptula album and should stay like that, one song more or one song less would ruin the concept.

Your example is terrible, because I'm not talking about changing original versions, I'm just talking about the opposite, albums should be left as they were originally released.

Iván

gentletull wrote: the lamb disc 2 is probably better than disc 1. How can people not like slippermen, anyway, lamia, supernatural? Disc 1 has about 4 filler songs on it. Back in NYC is poor . the title track gets boring after the first minute.

Now you0re changing subject, we're not taljing about The Lamb, this album is perfect as it is, we're talking about the unnecessary outakes. You talked abour an imaginary scenario where The Lamb was missing one or two songs, well Gentletull, this scenario doesn't exist.

IMHO, an album must be listened as it was released originally, not one extra song, not one less song, unless the album is bad, in that case any change is for better.

Iván

Take Benefit as an example. The US release has Teacher and the UK release doesn't. Obviously track lists are not that important, but I'd take the US version with Teacher anyday. Great song. If the album had Witches promise too, then people would be rating the album higher and realising Tull were damn good in 1970. Tull Outtakes are important, because of the high quality of them ;)

Aqualung was my first Tull album I bought - it is not their best album.  Don't buy it if you havn't heard Tull, I don't know how the hell it became a classic

But it was still a pretty damn good album

gentletull wrote: hey ivan, tulls outtakes are not rejects. That's what I'm trying to to you all this time. If anything, about 30% of the songs on most of thier original albums are the rejects and the outtakles are better ;)

Logic helps:

1. Jethro Tull released an album named Aqualung
2. They selected this songs
   • 1. Aqualung (6:31)
   • 2. Cross-Eyed Mary (4:09)
   • 3. Cheap Day Return (1:23)
   • 4. Mother Goose (3:52)
   • 5. Wond'ring Aloud (1:56)
   • 6. Up To Me (3:18)
   • 7. My God (7:10)
   • 8. Hymn 43 (3:18)
   • 9. Slipstream (1:13)
   • 10. Locomotive Breath (4:25)
   • 11. Wind-Up (5:42)
3. This are the songs selected for the album.
4. Any other song recorded during those sessions and not selected is automatically REJECTED

You may believe those tracks are  greater than ice soda in the Sahara desert or sound beter that an angel's flatulence, but in any case those tracks  were REJECTED from the album Aqualung

If those are so great, tell them to make a box set to see if anybody buys it on this days.

Iván

ivan_2068 wrote: gentletull wrote: that's what the remasters are you silly man lol. Warchild remaster has 7 bonus songs and they are the best songs on the whole cd. The remasters are definately worth it if you haven't got the 20 and 25th box sets or nightcap. If ur not willing to buy them, them you will always underrate the band because you have only heard half of their great songs :) Great for them, I have one of the mentioned box sets (You asked me that a lot time ago) and not going to waste 70 more bucks in the other, but I ABSOLUTELY DON'T CARE FOR REMASTERED EDITIONS, I believe most of them are an excuse to get our hard earned money. Outtakes and rare versions are for box sets, leave the original albums how they were created. I have not even bought Genesis remastered editions unless they were availlable when I upgraded from the LP format (Trespass and Nursery Cryme are not remastered). And about being silly.....well, I'm not the sick pedophile saying that Jethro Tull is better than deflowering 13 year girls. So, please don't judge. Iván

And if you are like me, you buy folks albums for a buck or two after they upgrade to CD. 

Some of the remasters are good though. The extra tracks can make it worth while. I was listening to the remaster of Minstrel in the Gallery and the song Valhalla has a lot of feedback on it in the beginning. The remasters pick that up. 

I had an acquaintance years ago who had worked as a deejay and had tons of 12." He wanted to save them so he bought a digital recorder.  When he recorded them on to the digital recorder it brought out all the imperfections of the original recording, the splicing and all. 

PS since nobody has answered by Trespass question, I am going to have to pick it up on lp.