Print Page | Close Window

Jethro Tull rumours.

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
Forum Description: Discuss specific prog bands and their members or a specific sub-genre
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=77802
Printed Date: November 28 2024 at 13:50
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Jethro Tull rumours.
Posted By: leonalvarado
Subject: Jethro Tull rumours.
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 00:27
I read somewhere that Jethro Tull will make an announcement about something happening 125 days from now. That's a long time to even worry about it. however, it does make one wonder. It has been many years since a Tull album has come out. also, the rumours are strong about the band doing a 40th anniversary tour of "Thick as a Brick" where they'll play the album in its entirety. Either way, I think it would be good to hear something from the Tull camp.

About two weeks ago I started a blog that covered various aspects of the band YES and got some pretty good responses from it. I decided to start this week with a series of postings on Jethro Tull. Please take the time to check the whole thing out over at my blog and feel free to comment here or over at the blog's page:  http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow - http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/




Replies:
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 00:31
They seriously better release someting in 125 days. If, after 125 days, the only announce the release of something, then I might take a crowbar to their publicity agent or whatever. God.

-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 01:18
TAAB in its entirety?  At their age?  I doubt they've played in whole for decades, if they ever really did other than in '72 .  I do hope it's not a "we're through" announcement, but they certainly deserve their retirement; of all the prog bands, I think they've probably toured the most.




Posted By: Ozexpat
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 01:37
Well, I for one would see them again. 

-------------
And for a moment when our world had filled the skies, Magic turned our eyes,
To feast on the treasure set for our strange device


Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 01:42
As would I, were this to be the case. That would be so keen. I can't quite believe it, of course.

-------------
"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson


Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 02:17
I heard Ian Anderson is a descendant of William Wallace


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 02:19
Isn't everyone? 


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 11:04
In the last issue of CRPR Anderson said that it was likely there would be a new Tull album.

-------------
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!


Posted By: Evolver
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 11:12
You may have the wrong album:
From jtull.com:
 
"Aqualung 40th Anniversary Tour hits USA/Canada in June, Ian solo dates in Latin America, and more!"


-------------
Trust me. I know what I'm doing.


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 15:46
Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Well, I for one would see them again. 
Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 16:49
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

In the last issue of CRPR Anderson said that it was likely there would be a new Tull album.
 
I think I read that somewhere too, but it was no reliable source. Hopefully its true though. I know they have some new songs that could use a home.


-------------
Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.


Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 16:52
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

They seriously better release someting in 125 days. If, after 125 days, the only announce the release of something, then I might take a crowbar to their publicity agent or whatever. God.

Well announcing that you're going to be making an announcment seems to work pretty well for Valve...

-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 20:03
Aw, I thought they were going to cover that Fleetwood Mac album. Cry

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 21:35
Here is the thing though, I read somewhere that there will be another Tull album. I also have read more than once that Ian is not that  interested in rock anymore, instead he prefers something more in tune with British folk songs (which in a way, it means a more docile and quieter Tull). The days of albums full of raw energy are long gone. Ian is an excellent song writer but time has a way in slowing down the fastest one on all of us. I don't know how good a new Tull album will be. The last album I really enjoyed was "Crest Of A Knave". The albums that followed seemed to copy the same formula but not quite the same.

For me, I rather they go ahead and do a "Thick as a Brick" tour were they play the whole thing from beginning to end. I'd go see that! Then, maybe I'll be ready for a new "docile" Tull album. 


Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 21:36
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

They seriously better release someting in 125 days. If, after 125 days, the only announce the release of something, then I might take a crowbar to their publicity agent or whatever. God.

Well announcing that you're going to be making an announcment seems to work pretty well for Valve...


And for the developers of any sourcemod, ever.


Posted By: Heathcliffe
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 21:43
Dunno about 'docile' the acoustic songs of Tull are beautiful. I would be happy with an album of new gentle Tull songs.


Posted By: Evolver
Date Posted: April 26 2011 at 22:09
Originally posted by Heathcliffe Heathcliffe wrote:

Dunno about 'docile' the acoustic songs of Tull are beautiful. I would be happy with an album of new gentle Tull songs.
I agree. Thay are approaching 100. Big smile

-------------
Trust me. I know what I'm doing.


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 27 2011 at 08:09
The acoustic Tull songs may be beautiful but to me the best Tull albums offer a good balance between acoustic and more energetic songs. I liked "Crest of a Knave" because it sounded different at the time. It was, to me, the first of the "gentler" Tull albums and had a sound not too dissimilar to late Dire Straits. However, albums like Songs form the Wood have a bit more energy to them (plus Barrie Barlow who is an incredible drummer). I wish (and I'm aware theat is only a wish), that the band would come out with another album that's more balanced like "Songs" or "Heavy Horses" were.

That's just my opinion.



Posted By: JeanFrame
Date Posted: April 27 2011 at 09:47
Perhaps Ian Anderson is going to announce an album that other people had a hand in? Far-fetched, I know.


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 27 2011 at 22:04
I think either way, it will be nice to have something new from the Tull camp. On my blog I started a post regarding people's perceptions of Ian as well as some anecdotes form when I met him.

http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow - http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 30 2011 at 17:51
I have added a somewhat lengthy chronological history of Jethro Tull on my blog. I'm trying to give a pretty complete picture of the bands that I have done work for. Please take the time to check it out:
http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/2011/04/jethro-tull-living-with-past-isnt-what.html" rel="nofollow - http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/2011/04/jethro-tull-living-with-past-isnt-what.html


Posted By: jean-marie
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 11:47
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Aw, I thought they were going to cover that Fleetwood Mac album. Cry
and so what? you love this album? or is it a new joke? i do  LOL LOL


Posted By: Ozexpat
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 12:35
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Well, I for one would see them again. 
Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


A matter of opinion. They were certainly the original JT, but not necessarily the 'definitive' JT.

I see that as Martin Barre, Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond, Barriemore Barlow and John Evan. Or if you want to be pedantic John Evan was a guest performer along with long time orchestrator and collaborator David Palmer.


-------------
And for a moment when our world had filled the skies, Magic turned our eyes,
To feast on the treasure set for our strange device


Posted By: jean-marie
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 12:45
being a great Tull fan , i saw the band many times on stage in France as well in the seventies as in the eigties, never been disapointed....but of course i prefer when the band was so much theatralistic, whith a great humour sense


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 14:55
Originally posted by jean-marie jean-marie wrote:

being a great Tull fan , i saw the band many times on stage in France as well in the seventies as in the eigties, never been disapointed....but of course i prefer when the band was so much theatralistic, whith a great humour sense

I know what you mean. One thing I have definitely noticed about Ian is his ability to be a whole performer and not just a musician. He is quite different outside his persona in Jethro Tull. On stage, he has a great ability to make the audience feel comfortable. He has a sharp wit and is exceptionally good with words. Regarding the music, he has always put the quality of his music as a top priority. Albums like "A" and "Under Wraps" didn't work out as well due to many conflicting forces at the time. Things like preassure from the record label, trends in popular music and the invention of MTV. But , even with all that put into play, Ian did a very good job in keeping the Tull sound at least within its own grasp. They never changed the personality in search for a big commercial hit. Tull simply changed enough of itself in order to survive the onslaught of commercialism that took over the airwaves. Bands like Genesis and YES changed completely form what they were once. Tull stayed true to their sound because of Ian.

as far as which incarnation of Jethro Tull was the best one, I think that is in the eye of the beholder. For me, the best music the band did started with "War Child" and ended with "Heavy Horses". Having said that, I like all the work Jethro Tull has done so far. Some albums past "Heavy Horses" are much weaker in my opinion but "Crest of a Knave" was a brilliant album. Who knows? If there is another Tull album coming, it could be a great one.


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 06:01
Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Well, I for one would see them again. 
Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


A matter of opinion. They were certainly the original JT, but not necessarily the 'definitive' JT.

I see that as Martin Barre, Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond, Barriemore Barlow and John Evan. Or if you want to be pedantic John Evan was a guest performer along with long time orchestrator and collaborator David Palmer.
Of course it's a matter of opinion, and 'definitive' is in the ear of the listener as well as the figures for the record sales, but that isn't necessarily the same as thing as the 'product' being artistically accurate or valid. As far as I'm concerned, the 'guests' you mention were collaborators/assistants in Ian Anderson's projects, not fully-fledged band members as such. If Ian could have gone to the concerts and played all the instruments himself he would have done. He's a clever and talented guy, but it makes it all too one-dimensional. I heard several of these incarnations 'live'. I stand by my opinion - the original band was the best, and in fact, the only 'band' as such.


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 07:09
Originally posted by jean-marie jean-marie wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Aw, I thought they were going to cover that Fleetwood Mac album. Cry
and so what? you love this album? or is it a new joke? i do  LOL LOL
I also heard they were going to take an elevator up to the moon...


-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: Phideaux
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 14:28
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


I feel the same way about The Beatles - anything after Pete Best was just Lennon/McCartney and guests.


Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 14:45
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

Isn't everyone? 


Even my dogs are. And they love haggis and they wear kilts.


-------------
                


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 16:42
Originally posted by Phideaux Phideaux wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


I feel the same way about The Beatles - anything after Pete Best was just Lennon/McCartney and guests.
You're quite right; 2 + 2 does equal 22.


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 17:08
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Phideaux Phideaux wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


I feel the same way about The Beatles - anything after Pete Best was just Lennon/McCartney and guests.
You're quite right; 2 + 2 does equal 22.


I don't know that I agree with the Beatles reference. What did Peter Best ever done worth anything? The rest of the band might have treated him poorly but musically the band was better for it.


Posted By: Stool Man
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 10:08
I was just thinking the other day, that none of the Big Six have released a new album since before 2004. 
And now two are coming along at once?  No chance of there being a 3rd or 4th, at all, is there?


-------------
rotten hound of the burnie crew


Posted By: Sanmartinphase7
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 10:17
This is just pure guessing but what if the "very famous prog album from the 70's" Steven Wilson is mixing in surround sound is Aqualung? It would fit the Jethro news about something happening in 125 days, and it would make sense to release a deluxe edition of Aqualung in its 40th anniversary (a tour would be nice too, and 'd be even happier if the albums turns out to be TAB, but in 125 days, if my math doesn't fail me, it will still be 2011, and TAB would turn 40 in 2012)


Posted By: Sanmartinphase7
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 13:54
As a matter of fact I just came upon this:

http://www.rhythms.com.au/features/default,id,20319.aspx" rel="nofollow - http://www.rhythms.com.au/features/default,id,20319.aspx

In Ian's words:
“Yeah, that record is the subject of discussions with EMI at the moment because we’re doing some remixing and remastering in 5.1 Sound, a kind of collector’s edition which we’ll release this year to celebrate the anniversary of Aqualung,” Anderson explains. “And then next year is the 40th anniversary of Thick As A Brick, so we’re already looking at the 2012 calendar and beginning to put together tours to regenerate theThick As A Brick material in live performance for the first time since 1972, in its entirety.”




Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 14:00
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Aw, I thought they were going to cover that Fleetwood Mac album. Cry


Tusk?


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 15:51
Originally posted by leonalvarado leonalvarado wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Phideaux Phideaux wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


I feel the same way about The Beatles - anything after Pete Best was just Lennon/McCartney and guests.
You're quite right; 2 + 2 does equal 22.


I don't know that I agree with the Beatles reference. What did Peter Best ever done worth anything? The rest of the band might have treated him poorly but musically the band was better for it.
I rest my case.


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: May 05 2011 at 20:15
Originally posted by Sanmartinphase7 Sanmartinphase7 wrote:

As a matter of fact I just came upon this:

http://www.rhythms.com.au/features/default,id,20319.aspx" rel="nofollow - http://www.rhythms.com.au/features/default,id,20319.aspx

In Ian's words:
“Yeah, that record is the subject of discussions with EMI at the moment because we’re doing some remixing and remastering in 5.1 Sound, a kind of collector’s edition which we’ll release this year to celebrate the anniversary of Aqualung,” Anderson explains. “And then next year is the 40th anniversary of Thick As A Brick, so we’re already looking at the 2012 calendar and beginning to put together tours to regenerate theThick As A Brick material in live performance for the first time since 1972, in its entirety.”



The plot thickens. Very interesting.


Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: May 06 2011 at 13:27
Originally posted by Evolver Evolver wrote:

You may have the wrong album:
From jtull.com:
 
"Aqualung 40th Anniversary Tour hits USA/Canada in June, Ian solo dates in Latin America, and more!"


I would rather see them do TAAB in it's entirety if they could pull it off but I don't even think that they did it back in the seventies at all. Aqualung is just too high up there on the familiarity scale. It was definitely the Tull album that got the most airplay. But then again a few bands are doing this nowadays playing classic albums in their entirety. Black Sabbath did Heaven & Hell ( as Heaven & Hll 0 and Rush is currently on tour doing Moving Pictures. I Guess TAAB would be over the top for many though.

How about KC doing Red in it's entirety? Bob would never do that although I've seen them play it live on a few occasions.


-------------
                


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: May 09 2011 at 23:01
As I understand it there is to be a final studio album, one more mega tour and then that's it.


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 01:23
As we are on the subject,
On my latest post on my blog I talk about working with Jethro Tull as well as some examples of the work. I hope that some of you find it somewhat interesting.


Posted By: dr prog
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 05:15
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Well, I for one would see them again. 
Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


A matter of opinion. They were certainly the original JT, but not necessarily the 'definitive' JT.

I see that as Martin Barre, Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond, Barriemore Barlow and John Evan. Or if you want to be pedantic John Evan was a guest performer along with long time orchestrator and collaborator David Palmer.
Of course it's a matter of opinion, and 'definitive' is in the ear of the listener as well as the figures for the record sales, but that isn't necessarily the same as thing as the 'product' being artistically accurate or valid. As far as I'm concerned, the 'guests' you mention were collaborators/assistants in Ian Anderson's projects, not fully-fledged band members as such. If Ian could have gone to the concerts and played all the instruments himself he would have done. He's a clever and talented guy, but it makes it all too one-dimensional. I heard several of these incarnations 'live'. I stand by my opinion - the original band was the best, and in fact, the only 'band' as such.
 
Raw Jazzy Blues from 1968 better than the advanced prog folk and heavy rock compositions spanning 1969-82? I don't think so Cool


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 05:29
Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Well, I for one would see them again. 
Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


A matter of opinion. They were certainly the original JT, but not necessarily the 'definitive' JT.

I see that as Martin Barre, Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond, Barriemore Barlow and John Evan. Or if you want to be pedantic John Evan was a guest performer along with long time orchestrator and collaborator David Palmer.
Of course it's a matter of opinion, and 'definitive' is in the ear of the listener as well as the figures for the record sales, but that isn't necessarily the same as thing as the 'product' being artistically accurate or valid. As far as I'm concerned, the 'guests' you mention were collaborators/assistants in Ian Anderson's projects, not fully-fledged band members as such. If Ian could have gone to the concerts and played all the instruments himself he would have done. He's a clever and talented guy, but it makes it all too one-dimensional. I heard several of these incarnations 'live'. I stand by my opinion - the original band was the best, and in fact, the only 'band' as such.
 
Raw Jazzy Blues from 1968 better than the advanced prog folk and heavy rock compositions spanning 1969-82? I don't think so Cool
You're perfectly entitled to your opinion. I'm also entitled to mine, and that's the opposite. And I also saw every incarnation 'live', which convinces me even more.


Posted By: dr prog
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 06:35
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by Ozexpat Ozexpat wrote:

Well, I for one would see them again. 
Well you'd best rustle up Bunker, Abrahams, and Cornick. THAT was Tull. The rest was/is Ian Anderson and friends.


A matter of opinion. They were certainly the original JT, but not necessarily the 'definitive' JT.

I see that as Martin Barre, Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond, Barriemore Barlow and John Evan. Or if you want to be pedantic John Evan was a guest performer along with long time orchestrator and collaborator David Palmer.
Of course it's a matter of opinion, and 'definitive' is in the ear of the listener as well as the figures for the record sales, but that isn't necessarily the same as thing as the 'product' being artistically accurate or valid. As far as I'm concerned, the 'guests' you mention were collaborators/assistants in Ian Anderson's projects, not fully-fledged band members as such. If Ian could have gone to the concerts and played all the instruments himself he would have done. He's a clever and talented guy, but it makes it all too one-dimensional. I heard several of these incarnations 'live'. I stand by my opinion - the original band was the best, and in fact, the only 'band' as such.
 
Raw Jazzy Blues from 1968 better than the advanced prog folk and heavy rock compositions spanning 1969-82? I don't think so Cool
You're perfectly entitled to your opinion. I'm also entitled to mine, and that's the opposite. And I also saw every incarnation 'live', which convinces me even more.
 
You sound a bit old fashioned LOL


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 07:15
Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

[QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=dr prog][QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=Ozexpat] [QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=Ozexpat]
 
You sound a bit old fashioned LOL
I probably am; I'm not fooled by superficial decoration and organisation that tries to cover for lack of chemistry. It's also easier to fool people via recordings than it is with live concerts. I'd say the later records are obviously far better made than "This Was", but the band wasn't as good to listen to live, unless you are a cut-and-dried fan. And I didn't say the other versions of the band were bad; I said they weren't as good.
 
You sound a bit set in your ways.


Posted By: Passionist
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 07:20
Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

   
 
You sound a bit old fashioned LOL

Here, fixed it for ya Wink



Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 08:04
Originally posted by Passionist Passionist wrote:

Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

   
 
You sound a bit old fashioned LOL

Here, fixed it for ya Wink

 
You sound like you need to grow up.


Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 08:41
Easy people, keep it nice...

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012


Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 11:35
Actually i like more the JT from 68-82 than 84 afterwards.

-------------






Posted By: jean-marie
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 13:03
The Tull had many episodes as the Floyd,but most of them are ...........Thumbs Up Heart Just a matter of taste, make your choice and enjoy , i saw Ian and the guies in74 , 76 , 80 , 82 and 84 in Paris and always enjoyed the show though it was more theatratical in the first years


Posted By: dr prog
Date Posted: May 11 2011 at 19:15
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

[QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=dr prog][QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=Ozexpat] [QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=Ozexpat]
 
You sound a bit old fashioned LOL
I probably am; I'm not fooled by superficial decoration and organisation that tries to cover for lack of chemistry. It's also easier to fool people via recordings than it is with live concerts. I'd say the later records are obviously far better made than "This Was", but the band wasn't as good to listen to live, unless you are a cut-and-dried fan. And I didn't say the other versions of the band were bad; I said they weren't as good.
 
You sound a bit set in your ways.
 
Fooled by ians great compositions? Wink
Tulls songs got better and better. I rate a band on what they put in the studio. They're the bands I'd bother to see live. I have every tull studio track and they definately improved each year from 1968 until 1974. I don't rate them on albums alone though. I rate them on quality of studio songs and in 1971,1973, 1974 and 1982 they had double albums worth of studio songs and many of my favorites were not included on original albums. Warchilds remaster is a much much better cd than what you'd find on vinyl. I like the bonus tracks the most on that cd. Living in the past is full of gems. I love their 1977-1982 era just as much as their 1970-1974 era. So many quality tunes. Even Broadsword is pretty cool although I'd swap Beastie with Too many Too and would consider the  full acoustic version of Jackalynn(not the sh*tty version with drums) and Motoreyes for the album too. I tend to listen to this album with bass and treble turned down for a better listen though


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 00:53
Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

[QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=dr prog][QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=Ozexpat] [QUOTE=giselle][QUOTE=Ozexpat]
 
You sound a bit old fashioned LOL
I probably am; I'm not fooled by superficial decoration and organisation that tries to cover for lack of chemistry. It's also easier to fool people via recordings than it is with live concerts. I'd say the later records are obviously far better made than "This Was", but the band wasn't as good to listen to live, unless you are a cut-and-dried fan. And I didn't say the other versions of the band were bad; I said they weren't as good.
 
You sound a bit set in your ways.
 
Fooled by ians great compositions? Wink
Tulls songs got better and better. I rate a band on what they put in the studio. They're the bands I'd bother to see live. I have every tull studio track and they definately improved each year from 1968 until 1974. I don't rate them on albums alone though. I rate them on quality of studio songs and in 1971,1973, 1974 and 1982 they had double albums worth of studio songs and many of my favorites were not included on original albums. Warchilds remaster is a much much better cd than what you'd find on vinyl. I like the bonus tracks the most on that cd. Living in the past is full of gems. I love their 1977-1982 era just as much as their 1970-1974 era. So many quality tunes. Even Broadsword is pretty cool although I'd swap Beastie with Too many Too and would consider the  full acoustic version of Jackalynn(not the sh*tty version with drums) and Motoreyes for the album too. I tend to listen to this album with bass and treble turned down for a better listen though
 
Why should I be fooled? That statement doesn't make sense. We all are entitled to our own opinions, and in mine, Ian couldn't write a real song to save his life. His talents are considerable, but lie in his arranging ability in the main, allied to his excellent playing, singing and all-round musicality. Having said that, he is more of an artisan than an artist. I like what Ian produces, anything he does is bound to be interesting, it's just that I regard it as his solo work, and nothing to do with the original band.
 
It's indeed fine that you enjoy it, I certainly don't grudge you that, but you mustn't make the mistake of thinking your own enjoyment means that you are correct in your judgments, therefore everyone else is wrong or too old to understand. Actually, as you get older, you're more likely to understand more, not less.


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 01:12
Sorry, I read your reply out of context; you were of course referring to my earlier remarks, not to me directly.


Posted By: dr prog
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 01:24
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Sorry, I read your reply out of context; you were of course referring to my earlier remarks, not to me directly.
 
I don't know of any better prog composer than Ian Tongue


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 02:21
Well you already know my views on that, but as I said, we are all perfectly entitled to our own opinions, it makes the world go round.


Posted By: dr prog
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 04:18
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Well you already know my views on that, but as I said, we are all perfectly entitled to our own opinions, it makes the world go round.
 
When it comes to verse, chorus compositions and lyrics who comes close to ian? Bloody freak he is Tongue


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 05:09
Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Well you already know my views on that, but as I said, we are all perfectly entitled to our own opinions, it makes the world go round.
 
When it comes to verse, chorus compositions and lyrics who comes close to ian? Bloody freak he is Tongue
 
As far as I'm concerned, anyone who can actually write songs is miles ahead of Ian in that sense. I've already said how talented Ian is in other ways, We're never going to agree, so why don't you just leave it? Each to their own.


Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 05:53
Just got to jump in here.

In part I agree with dr prog, but at the same time I find that IA lost most of that ability with the release of Rock Island or thereabouts.

After that point I believe that giselle is right.

I find it hard to believe that someone like IA can just seem to lose an ability that made him shine all of a sudden.


Posted By: dr prog
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 08:16
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Well you already know my views on that, but as I said, we are all perfectly entitled to our own opinions, it makes the world go round.
 
When it comes to verse, chorus compositions and lyrics who comes close to ian? Bloody freak he is Tongue
 
As far as I'm concerned, anyone who can actually write songs is miles ahead of Ian in that sense. I've already said how talented Ian is in other ways, We're never going to agree, so why don't you just leave it? Each to their own.
 
Ian is the best composer i've ever heard in rock music. I think you're on a different planet LOL


Posted By: giselle
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 08:49
Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Well you already know my views on that, but as I said, we are all perfectly entitled to our own opinions, it makes the world go round.
 
When it comes to verse, chorus compositions and lyrics who comes close to ian? Bloody freak he is Tongue
 
As far as I'm concerned, anyone who can actually write songs is miles ahead of Ian in that sense. I've already said how talented Ian is in other ways, We're never going to agree, so why don't you just leave it? Each to their own.
 
Ian is the best composer i've ever heard in rock music. I think you're on a different planet LOL
He is the best composer YOU'VE ever heard - what's the matter with you? Can't you accept that other people have a different point of view? And seeing as you want to get personal, you're the one from outer space - you haven't a clue what a song is. I could say a lot more about where you stand in the scheme of things, but I bow to moderation and good sense, as per Prog Archive guidelines. So be sensible and leave it there.


Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: May 12 2011 at 09:31
I think Giselle is maybe taking DP's remarks a little more seriously than they are intended here; I'm sure that as per forum rules & guidelines, DP would not stoop to personal insults.

As you're both relative newcomers to the forum I think we should all leave it there as I'm sure there is no serious insult intended...

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 04:06
This line of off-topic discussion has reached an impass where it is just one person's opinion against another. Any further exchanges will only fan the flame war so it's time to heed Jim's advice and move on.
 
/edit: off-topic posts hidden.


-------------
What?


Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 09:51
I thought this was a rumours of a tour thread. Confused. Even if they're doing Aqualung I guess I would go see them because they would have to play some additional material in order to make a full show. It doesn't matter what the lineup is Anderson has always selected his band with Prudence. There, we're back on topic.

-------------
                


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 10:41
How about Ian Anderson's real name actually is Jethro Tull? Tongue

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: jean-marie
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 11:47
Hello Slarti ,i suppose you already know who was Jethro Tull , he was the guy who invented the dibble, and in the beginning Ian thought the name is quite silly LOL


Posted By: JeanFrame
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 13:11
I thought the real Jethro Tull invented the seed drill? Or is that the correct name for the contraption?


Posted By: jean-marie
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 13:15
LOL What i read was about the seeds dibble ,probably a bad translation from a guy as good as me with english language Embarrassed


Posted By: cacha71
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 14:16
Yes, he did invent the seed drill

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jethro_Tull_%28agriculturist%29


-------------
http://www.last.fm/group/Progressive+Folk


Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 15:21
Whatever you want to call it





-------------
                


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 16:01
Jethro Tull was an English agriculturist that helped bring about the British agricultural revolution by perfecting the horse-drawn seed drill.

According to the story, the name Jethro Tull came to the band when a local booking agent in London who fancied himself as a bit of a historian, gave them the name in order to book them at a nightclub.

http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/2011/04/jethro-tull-more-than-farmer-from-past.html" rel="nofollow - http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/2011/04/jethro-tull-more-than-farmer-from-past.html


Posted By: Ludjak
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 16:51
Yes, a complete Thick as a Brick tour in 2012 and then a complete A Passion Play tour in 2013 (would be quite appropriate too, with all that 'end of the world' talk Clown).



On a serious note, I think I'd prefer hearing a new album (or get a DVD release of that Paris concert from 1975).


Posted By: jean-marie
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 17:04
Originally posted by Ludjak Ludjak wrote:

Yes, a complete Thick as a Brick tour in 2012 and then a complete A Passion Play tour in 2013 (would be quite appropriate too, with all that 'end of the world' talk Clown).



On a serious note, I think I'd prefer hearing a new album (or get a DVD release of that Paris concert from 1975).
   i've been there Smile


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 18:37
Originally posted by jean-marie jean-marie wrote:

Hello Slarti ,i suppose you already know who was Jethro Tull , he was the guy who invented the dibble, and in the beginning Ian thought the name is quite silly LOL
Yeah, that would be a good one for a prog trivia contest.


-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: May 13 2011 at 19:57
Just heard about this on the local radio:

http://www.thechicagotheatre.com/events/jethro-tull-chi.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.thechicagotheatre.com/events/jethro-tull-chi.html


Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: May 15 2011 at 11:57
Originally posted by leonalvarado leonalvarado wrote:

Jethro Tull was an English agriculturist that helped bring about the British agricultural revolution by perfecting the horse-drawn seed drill.

According to the story, the name Jethro Tull came to the band when a local booking agent in London who fancied himself as a bit of a historian, gave them the name in order to book them at a nightclub.

http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/2011/04/jethro-tull-more-than-farmer-from-past.html" rel="nofollow - http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/2011/04/jethro-tull-more-than-farmer-from-past.html


Well that's part of it. When they started playing gigs they would appear at each gig under a different name. Some of the names they went under were Ian Henderson's Bag Of Blues, Candy Coloured Rain and Navy Blue. The reason the name from the hisory buff / booking agent name stuck is because they were invited to play a second gig. This happened to be at the renowned Marquee Club in February 1968. The name stuck. I've seen many interviews with Anderson commenting on this and frequently saying that he didn't mind the Tull part but the Jethro part didn't sit too well because it reminded him of Jethro from the Beverley Hillbillies.


-------------
                


Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: May 15 2011 at 12:00
Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Just heard about this on the local radio:

http://www.thechicagotheatre.com/events/jethro-tull-chi.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.thechicagotheatre.com/events/jethro-tull-chi.html


No more rumours. Wonder what else they'll be playing? If they come to Montréal I'll definitely go. They always sell out here.


-------------
                


Posted By: hobocamp
Date Posted: May 15 2011 at 12:02
^ You forgot to mention that the reason they kept changing the name of the band was so they would get another booking. It helps make sense of that strategy.

PS thanks for the update.


Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: May 16 2011 at 00:46
Originally posted by Vibrationbaby Vibrationbaby wrote:

Originally posted by leonalvarado leonalvarado wrote:

Jethro Tull was an English agriculturist that helped bring about the British agricultural revolution by perfecting the horse-drawn seed drill.

According to the story, the name Jethro Tull came to the band when a local booking agent in London who fancied himself as a bit of a historian, gave them the name in order to book them at a nightclub.

http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/2011/04/jethro-tull-more-than-farmer-from-past.html" rel="nofollow - http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/2011/04/jethro-tull-more-than-farmer-from-past.html


Well that's part of it. When they started playing gigs they would appear at each gig under a different name. Some of the names they went under were Ian Henderson's Bag Of Blues, Candy Coloured Rain and Navy Blue. The reason the name from the hisory buff / booking agent name stuck is because they were invited to play a second gig. This happened to be at the renowned Marquee Club in February 1968. The name stuck. I've seen many interviews with Anderson commenting on this and frequently saying that he didn't mind the Tull part but the Jethro part didn't sit too well because it reminded him of Jethro from the Beverley Hillbillies.


It is a rather strange name. If it weren't because I'm used to it after 40-odd years, I would think it wouldn't be a very good name at all. "Bag Of Blues" has a nice ring to it except that the music has some bluessy tones to it but is not necessarily blues. I do agree with Ian in the sense that TULL by itself sounds better but after so many years I guess it would be strange to make any name changes.


Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: May 16 2011 at 09:27
I've found that many people refer to the band as just "Tull". Even the fans aren«'t too crazy about the Jethro part. I think the name was suitable during their folky period especially Heavy Horses,& Songs From The Wood. Very rustic. It also looked good in all the different lettering configurations used on the albums and promotional material. It could look old or futuristic.

-------------
                


Posted By: Lizzy
Date Posted: May 16 2011 at 12:35
^ I don't think usage of the whole name or just Tull has anything to do with the band's different musical periods. It's basically idleness. Why type/say Jethro Tull when people (the connoisseurs) understand what you are referring to by simply saying 'Tull'?
Also, as a fan of the band I have always seen 'Tull' as a more intimate way of addressing the band.


-------------
Property of Queen Productions...


Posted By: Ronnie Pilgrim
Date Posted: May 16 2011 at 14:35
^ Good point. May I call you Liz?  Wink


Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: May 16 2011 at 15:01
I know it doesn't have anything to do with any of the musical periods it just seems to go better  with a guy leading two draft horses through a farmers field  than say ,Captain Lockheed and The Starfighters. Get my gist?

-------------
                


Posted By: Lizzy
Date Posted: May 17 2011 at 09:44
^ Aye!

... and Tom, be my guest. (so long as you agree with me :P)


-------------
Property of Queen Productions...


Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: August 28 2011 at 00:55
So..there's a countdown clock on the Tullers website. It goes down in less than 24 hours. When it hits zero...Ian rides around the globe on a seed drill (if this thread is to believed). 

-------------
"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 28 2011 at 01:12
I think the Tull clock is the real "end of the world" clock.....Tull will then issue a concept album after the world ends. 

-------------


Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: August 28 2011 at 01:42

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

I think the Tull clock is the real "end of the world" clock.....Tull will then issue a concept album after the world ends. 

Sick bro. I'm pre-ordering...like, SIX of those albums. 



-------------
"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 28 2011 at 02:11
^ but umm who will be left to deliver them to you?
Smile


-------------



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk