Jethro Tull is one of those weird bands that is simultaneously
famous and almost completely unknown. They actually do get a fair amount
of radio play, with Aqualung contributing its fair share of
standards to a station's playlist, and it's not that unusual to hear a 5
minute, condensed version of Thick as a Brick. Plus, there quite a
few people in this world who own the Original Masters compilation,
and heck, I read somewhere that Ian Anderson is the richest rock musician
in the world (though that might be more due to his catfish farms than to
record sales). Despite this, however, there really aren't that many
hardcore Tullers in the world (which may be for the better, judging from
the demeanor of some of the fans I've come across on the net). And this is
where things start to get complicated.
If one were to ask 100 Joe Schmo classic rock buffs what they thought of
when they heard the name "Jethro Tull," virtually every single one would
mention the menacing opening riff to the title track of Aqualung.
The thing is, while Aqualung is a great song (as is most every song on the
album), it is certainly not the group's finest moment. And this is where
hardcore prog-rock fans come in with all their might. Perhaps as a
retaliation to the popularity of "mainstream" and "mindless" rock songs
such as Aqualung and Locomotive Breath, many have taken the approach that
the "true" Jethro Tull does not begin until Thick as a Brick and
A Passion Play. They claim that the high-brow proggy albums of the
remainder of the 70's are the band's most important legacy to the musical
world and pretty much dismiss the group's early stuff as too simple. Well
... I'm a pretty big fan of prog rock myself, but I would have to say
pretty definitively that this viewpoint is as far from the truth, if not
further, as to merely associate Tull with Aqualung.
The main problem I have is that trying to pigeonhole Jethro Tull as prog
rock only does a major disservice to the band, mainly becase they can't be
pigeonholed as ANYTHING but simply 'Jethro Tull.' I mean, there's a reason
you don't hear about too many Jethro Tull cover bands - the style they
created is simply inimitable. Some folk, a smidge of classical, a touch of
hard rock and a pinch of blues, all mixed just right with the unusual
personality of frontman Ian Anderson. Besides being a songwriting genius
(sometimes), his style of flute-playing, combined with his bouncing around
the stage on one leg prattling on about goodness-knows-what, created an
image that was always exciting to watch and often enjoyable to hear. For a little while, anyway, it was VERY enjoyable to hear, at least to my ears; I can honestly say without exaggeration that 1969 for Jethro Tull is one of my favorite years for any band ever, and a compilation I made for myself containing Stand Up and all the A and B-sides from that year is one of my most listened-to CD's. It's not as if Ian only had one year of glory in him, though; as he became more serious, he managed to create in Aqualung and Thick as a Brick (as well as the Chateau D'Isaster tapes) some of my favorite albums ever, especially TAAB, which is a worthy candidate for one of the five greatest achievements in the history of prog rock.
Unfortunately, around 1973, Anderson crossed the line he had successfully walked on TAAB, and the result is that, as far as I'm concerned, an alarming amount of the band's output for the rest of the decade is either tediously boring or unlistenably crappy (and that's made worse by the fact that he came out with a new album every year). He became much more concerned with flooding the world with poetic manifestations of his views on God, organized religion and how much critics hated him than with making the kind of entertaining music he had been able to do before ... no, wait, I need to take a step back on the "entertaining" statement. This era of the band certainly falls into the category of prog rock, which is more than willing to accept mystical lyrics and an overall bombastic nature than "regular" rock does, but it's certainly not the case that I dislike this era on an overall level because of the fact that it's prog rock (in case you didn't notice, this page is linked from John McFerrin's Rock and Prog Reviews). The problem I have is that he decided to do prog rock in exactly the way I don't like (but a way that apparently many fans prefer): consciously avoiding "conventional" song-writing approaches, ie memorability and cohesive melodies, and using complexity and atmosphere as a substitute. Thick as a Brick is as great as it is because, among other things, the raw materials (which are then pasted together using experimental structures and wildly entertaining instrumental breaks) are solid songs in their own right, with terrific hooks and solid riffs and the same kinds of gifts that Ian showed he had in spades in his heyday. From Passion Play onward, though, way too much of Tull's output gets away from those materials, instead leaning as much as possible on Ian's philosophical musings (which I don't have an opinion on either way), his "atmospherics" (which aren't his greatest gift) and complex (the trait always mentioned in defense of them) instrumental breaks that aren't really more complex than his best pre-'73 moments (though some of the textures are at least theoretically intriguing; theoretically, mind you) but that manage to strike me (on the whole) as dull and tedious. If you can get your rocks off with them, more power to you; as for me, no thanks.
There's also the unfortunate fact that (with a couple of exceptions, of
course) his post-seventies work ranges from mediocre to outright garbage,
as he dabbled first in electronics and then moved to generic heavy-metal,
where he's pretty much stayed ever since. BUT, the amazing quality of the
band's output through '72, plus the fact that they were (and are, to an
extent) an amazing live band and that Ian _did_ pull out a couple of very
good albums after the band's peak guarantees the group a rating of four
out of five on my scale. Just remember, though - BE CAREFUL when buying a
Jethro Tull album. Just as many, if not more, of the group's albums are
mediocre or bad as are very good or great.
But hey! That's why I'm here - to tell you which albums are the good
ones.
What do you think about Jethro Tull?
Jamie Anthony (jaony@lineone.net)
Well, I'm a hardcore Jethro Tull fan, and you got my Tullian philosophy
pretty right. The album-orientated Tull sound emerged around 1972, with
Thick As A Brick. Before that, they released a bunch of fantastic,
light-hearted pop singles which can mostly be found on Living In the
Past (10/10 for that one).
It's true that Jethro Tull are also one of those bands which are massive
in a way, and yet hardly anyone you meet on the street will even know who
they are (like Yes, or Crimson, or, well, almost any Prog band) - I guess
that's what's called a "cult" band - they have a limited following, but
boy, that limited following is a devoted following.
It's also funny how many people I've met who have heard of Jethro
Tull
who seem to share your views on them - a good band who did too much. I
don't think they did enough, personally.
Still, I've always thought that when it comes to art (or music), it's
better for some people to love it rather than everyone to
like it.
Jan Vooribj (jvoorbij@kabelfoon.nl)
My opinion? Tull rules!
(author's note): Profound.
Sam Thirouin (scthir@1st.net)
Probably one of the most eclectic rock (if you want to categorize it
somewhere) groups in history, Jethro Tull have always been my favorite in
all the years I have known of them (1971, with Aqualung). For one
thing, there's always a Tull album that reflects the listening mood I'm
in, thanx to the diversity of each album. I am one to listen to lyrics
also, and Ian Anderson's lyrics are some of the most intelligent and
thought-provoking I've heard.
I know quite a few people that either hate, or love, Jethro Tull. And
only a handful that just like them. Tull are just one of those groups
you have to love or hate. And No, they can't be loved by everyone. They
don't do that MOR stuff everyone loves to hear. They won't do that
Pop/Soft rock stuff that makes the girls swoon to the floor. The can't
abide by everyone else's wishes and put out music every year like
clockwork. They are Jethro Tull. And Jethro Tull do things in an
out-of-the-ordinary way. Always have. Probably always will. We can
only hope.
Becky Alex (balex1@tampabay.rr.com)
I agree with some of what you say in your review of the various Tull
albums. However:
1. All of the songs on the Benefit album are outstanding. Teacher
is
your best song. You have been listening to too much classic rock &
roll radio.
(author's note): I never listen to classic rock radio. Haven't
regularly in almost a year. There's way too much crap on it.
2. APP is a great album, period. You seem to be stuck on melody,
try three blind mice. By the way The Lamb album, Genesis... now
that's boring!! Where are they now, touring with Yes, making Disney
songs, or propping up Donny Osmand's career?
(author's note): I don't even know where to begin with the melody
comment ... suffice it to say that a melody can exist and be complex - in
fact, those are the best kinds, without a doubt. But when you cross the
line from very complex melodies (Brick) to unstructured and
rambling chord changes (APP) ... oof.
Also, have you bothered to check out the rest of my site? Have you read my
review of Tales From Topographic Oceans, the supposed sucking
vortex that supposedly has no decent melodies, just a bunch of noodling?
Guess what? I gave it a 13 overall! Eat that, people who think I
only like simplistic melodies!
And about Genesis -
1. Genesis in their prime ruled. The instrumentation was nowhere near as
good as with most prog bands, but the melodies and song structures were
wonderfully complex (and yet still interesting), and Gabriel's singing
brought his already entertaining lyrics completely to life.
2. Actually, Kansas is touring with Yes (which I had the misfortune to sit
through at the Taste of Chicago show).
3. Genesis has broken up. Mercifully. Calling all Stations is
atrocious, and I wish that the group had realized as much before releasing
it.
Now back to the comment ...
4. Crest, Nightcap, Roots, and .com are all
good albums. Granted not
as
good as earlier material, but far better than the crap I here on radio in
Tampa Florida, that I can guarantee you. Maybe you haven't gotten around
to listening to them, but if you think that Tull's last good album is
Broadsword... wow your missing some very good music.
(author's note): Actually, I think that Tull's last good album is
.com. Cut it down to Broadsword length and you have an album
as good as or better than HH.
Tull is a great band, somebody must like them there going on thirty-two
years of music. Tull is in the middle of a US tour just after completing a
European tour. I saw them for the first time and was impressed. One
thing they are not a that is a band hanging on to the hits from the past
like some many of the bands touring these days. I've got to give them
credit for that! I enjoyed reading your reviews (your humor is pretty
good too) and appreciate the work you put into your site.
(author's note): Actually, I'm planning to go see them August
something-or-another at an outside venue. And seeing as I cannot fathom
their live shows having suddenly gotten dull after thirty-plus years, I'm
greatly looking forward to it.
(author's note - a while later): Yup, sure enough, it ruled. With
one small exception, the song selection was fabulous, and the performances
were great.
RHennHouse@aol.com
Minstrel, Too Old to Rock n' Roll..., and Songs From the
Wood. While I
love all three, I find it hard to figure out why you rated Too Old
highest. I would have ranked them completely opposite of you. I would
imagine that you get some angry messages, being the way some Tull fans are
very loyal, to say the least. I've come to the conclusion that you and I
are going to disagree on almost everything Tull. Oh well. That's the way
it goes. Locomotive Breath is your favorite song off three different
albums?! They have so much more to offer.
(author's note): Well, I would first definitely agree that there is
much more to Tull than Locomotive Breath. But I can't help it if, on both
of the live albums I own of the group, LB kicks so much ass.
As for angry messages ... well, not really. All readers comments I've
gotten on the site have been posted, and they're not that venomous.
And as for my thoughts on "classic" Tull albums like Minstrel or
Songs ... well ... I think I've said everything that needs to be
said.
And besides, don't forget that for all of the band's many, many flaws, I
still love and respect them enough to grant them a rating of 4/5 stars,
which is NOT bad at all.
David B (davbo6@hotmail.com)
Hi
Good site, and a pretty good assessment of Tull's career.
I tend to agree with a great deal of what you say.
1982 was a turning point for me as a fan of the band. Some of their albums
up to then were absolutely fantastic. I agree that 'Stand Up' is a
great album, and one which I listen to regularly.
Importantly, though, even the crappier Tull albums had some redeeming
features on it. A decent couple of tracks, maybe. A nice lyric. Perhaps a
good guitar solo. But from 'Under Wraps' onwards things were,
simply, terrible. Imagine being a Tull fan, looking forward to the next
release with great anticipation, hoping for a return to the better days.
Instead, after buying each new release, there comes the realisation that
Ian Anderson has served up yet another almighty pile of poo.
And I'm sorry, but I don't buy the theory that Tull has gone through some
kind of musical renaissance that started with 'Roots to Branches'
and has continued with 'J-Tull.com'. These albums are BAD. Their
only positive point is that there are not as unremittingly dreadful as
those that have come before -- and this is, I think, why they've been
slightly more positively received.
All in all, though, I feel a great deal of affection for Tull. I love alot
of their stuff up to and including Broadsword. I just wish Ian
Anderson would recognise that many of his fans would prefer him to stick
to the fish farming....you're never disappointed with a nice slice of
smoked salmon, whereas you're always disappointed with a new Tull album.
Philip Maddox (slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com)
Ahhh, good old Jethro Tull. I don't think that there's a band out there
than splits critcal opinion quite like Tull. There are people who think
that only their albums up through Aqualung are worthwhile, there
are people who think they didn't hit their stride until Thick As A
Brick, and people who like a few albums from each era of the band. I'm
going to just type out my comments on each Tull era (or at least what I
think the eras are):
The really early years (This Was) - They hardly even sounded like
Tull here. Mick and Ian wanted the band to go in separate directions. The
album they produced was good, but it certainly doesn't sound like Tull as
everyone know them. Tull as everyone knows them doesn't really start
until...
The early years (Stand Up - Aqualung + Living In The
Past) - Ian started to flex his muscles here, getting Abrahams out and
starting to write more unique music. These albums are all pretty distinct,
and I like all of them a lot, especially Stand Up (which is one of
my all time favorites, and I'd give it that 15 you almost gave it). This
evolved right into...
The extremely progged out yeares (Brick - Play) -
Brick, with it's beautiful melodies and great lyrics, is my
favorite album, period. An easy 15. Play wasn't a bad follow up
(I'd give it somewhere between an overall 10 or 11), but it certainly
didn't hit the majesty of Brick. Side 2 pretty much rocked, though,
and I ADORE the "I am the overseer over you" bit. Side one kinda lagged,
though. They gave up on the long song format and moved on to...
The prog-pop years (Warchild - Too Old) - Good years for the
band. Warchild, though my least favorite Tull album of the
seventies (for the same reasons you gave for it), has some good tunes
regardless, and I dig it. I really like Minstrel, too, WAY more
than the overall 7 you gave it (it's a 13 from me). I think the melodies
and lyrics on that one are tops. Too Old is a good rock album and a
highly underrated one by most people and hardcore Tull fans. As much as I
loathe "Bad Eyed 'n' Loveless", it's a really good album, probably worth
an overall 10, maybe an 11. After that, it's...
The folk-prog years (Songs - Horses) - With the exception of
Brick, this is the prettiest music the group ever produced, and I
like both of them a whole lot. Very, very pretty music. Great discs to pop
in any old time.
Stormwatch - Doesn't fit into any particular era, but I like it's
dark atmosphere and dark atmosphere, and "Dun Ringill" and "Elegy" are
among my favorite Tull tracks. Unfortunately, it was time for...
Electro-Tull (A - Under Wraps) - Broadsword and the
Beast had some fantastic melodies on it, despite its electronic
nature, and in my opinion, ranks among Tull's best. Though it isn't all
that good, I still like Under Wraps more than you, something like
an overall 8 - some of the melodies, like on the title tracks, are good,
but the electronics smothered it. And as for A... "Black Sunday"
might be my favorite Tull song, and a couple of others are listenable, but
most of this is nearly unlistenably crappy. Electronics and Tull wasn't
quite a match made in heaven. Then, after a break, you get...
Generic hard rockin' Tull (Crest - Catfish) - I've never
heard Crest, but Rock Island was, with a couple of mild
exceptions, never really awful, but almost unforgivably boring.
Catfish, although it was better and actually has a few decent
tracks, isn't THAT much better. C'mon, generic hard rock? From JETHRO
TULL? Who needs it? Not me. Now, though, I think we've got...
Comeback Tull (Roots - Dot Com) - Roots was, in my
opinion, the best Tull album since Broadsword. By losing the
generic hard rock and twidlling around like they used to, they made what I
consider to be a pretty decent album, with a few great tunes on it. Dot
Com, though, is one helluva comeback, because I really like it,
possibly enough to give it a 12. The return of the melodies, Ian's voice
is getting better, and the filler is at a minimum.
Well, that's about it. I'd recommend the outtakes album Nightcap if
you ever see it, because the original draft of Passion Play is WAY
better than the final product, and most of the outtakes on the second disc
are better than the albums they were supposed to be on (despite a couple
of less than stellar Broadsword outtakes). I might get to
commenting more on the individual albums later, but that's all I've got
time for now.
venkatanarayan ramasubramanian (stambi@yahoo.com)
I just wanted to say that you were being a bit harsh with the later stuff
of jethro tull. I agree a 100% that under wraps and A were terrible
terrible albums but I personally liked the mid-late 70's stuff that they
did. I dont understand how you dont like budapest...i thought it was a
masterpiece especially the flute section. Also, in crest of a knave, the
flute sound became more refined and sounded clearer than it had ever
sounded before. That's one reason I liked the album so much... I also
liked roots to branches...there were some good arrangements on it e.g.
beside myself!!
Finally I liked j-tull dot com..glad we agree on that.
The thing about hard core fans is that there is always one band you hold
dear...and even if some stuff is mediocre or down right bullshit, you
force yourself to like it!!
I noticed you liked master of puppets....I am a big fan of metallica
too!!
David Koukol (dops@mail.com) (8/15/01)
I've been a Tull fan for 21 years and am also a person who
loves friendly debate and a variety of opinions on subjects
such as this. I've read your website with interest and, while
I disagree with much of the content, I found it all the more
interesting because of it.
I may be unusual for a Tull fan as I tend to prefer their later
work over the earlier material. Oh, I love Stand Up, Thick As
A Brick, Songs From The Wood, Heavy Horses, etc...but the
stuff I listen to the most often is from 1987-the present.
I was just a kid (ten years old) in 1979 when I first heard
the Songs From The Wood album and asked for it for my
birthday. I don't recall exactly what my contemporaries
were listening to (Kiss, I think) but I was certainly the odd
one out. As I grew up, I eagerly purchased each new Tull
album and saw them on tour - and the same holds true to
this day - in fact I'm going to see them in concert next week
as I write this on August 8, 2001. And yet Tull are not like
the stuffed toy from my youth that I could never bring
myself to throw away; Ian Anderson's writing has grown up
with me, and I'm constantly amazed by the depth of
invention and creativity he can still, produce, play, and
record (Roots To Branches and Ian's recent solo album, The
Secret Language of Birds, are masterpieces in my mind).
I've read pop cultural studies which claim that, for many
people, favorite songs are those that they grew up with and
a certain level of nostalgia is associated with people's
tastes in these matters. Well, I discovered Tull early and
while they are still my favorite band, my appreciation for
their fresh material outstrips that which I feel for the
albums I "grew up with." For me, Tull is not a band that is
"Living in the Past," but rather living WITH the past while
living IN the present...and the future. Dare I say it, but I look
forward to the next album!
I realize that my opinions might be untypical (but not
unique, as I have discovered), but I feel they are worth
adding to the sampling of opinions herein. Keep up the good
work with your website.
Rex M Ramsay (quietlistener@lycos.com) (8/21/01)
My comments about Jethro Tull would start out first by saying that if you want
to know the bands' music never listen to reviews of someone that would
call any of the albums or music, "garbage". How amusing to read your words
about the band and yet you seem to profess to be a 'casual listener'.
(author's note): So who wants to do the honors of pointing out why statements of this nature are pure idiocy? Anyone? Anyone?
Since following the group since 1972 I have to state that yes, I am a true
Tull follower. However, it is the attempt to personalize, reflect and paint a
musical storytelling that makes the music interesting to me and hardly what I
would call garbage. Each album is in fact (at least up to Crest') an attempt to
come up with a new sound different to the ones before. Does this mean that I
would call each album a success? Well no and yes.
Regardless of the style of any given album, it could be given a 3 of 5 rating
merely on originality, musicianship, and lyrics. A 4 or 5 rating would then be
reserved for the ones or songs that have a sort of majic that sets them apart
from the others in a clearly distinct way. Each album has at least 3 or 4 songs
that would fit into this quailfier. Then the invidual listener is bound to have
or
be able to find an album that fits into a style of music that would be
considered
a favorite. Which albums do I not like or like the least? Well that would be
'A'.
This was an album that was never intended to be a Tull work anyway. The real
treat of the album is having Eddie Jobson on keyboards and violin.
I have never found it necessary to give up on any of the albums. In fact, the
album that is always fascinating to listen to now and again is 'Under Wraps'.
To
readily dismiss this album is to miss some very interesting layering of
instrumentation not found on any Tull efforts since.
(author's note): Yes, but there's nothing in the layering of instrumentation that I can't find on any one of a hundred other albums from the era, many of which have some modicum of entertainment.
My problem with the band
since Crest' is that they have or seem to have developed a safe marketing
formula that supplies or responds to the diversity of Tull listeners musical
ears.
It is a fact that Ian Anderson did some serious marketing research before the
release of Crest'. Sort of a 'as fans, what is it that you like or want to
hear'?
The musicianship continues to satify, the lyrics, the songs, can't really be
faulted. But having listened to every album being totally different in sound to
the previous ones, at least through Wraps', it would seem that a certain level
of comfort has befallen the efforts since. To understand this is not to leave
out
the reality of the music buis' and the costs involved throughout the total
process of production, sales, touring, etc... Not to mention the fact that
Ian's voice has been forced to adapt to it's injury in 84'.
Treat every album as a unique attempt to reinvent itself. How many bands have
done this or have even tried? It is perhaps the best fact about J-TULL
that they really have never have played crappy music that could be called
similar to any other music. To be able to enjoy their music means you have to
develop a musical ear to hear what they are trying to accomplish. It's funny,
but the same ear I have also allows me to be able to hear the nuances of the
various musical styles that have influenced them and thus allowed me to
appreciate those influences even more. ANY music that successfully peaks or
challenges you cannot be considered garbage.
(author's note):Unfortunately, large chunks of the Tull catalogue do neither for me, therefore I have no qualms about calling them garbage.
So, 'prick up your ears' my
friend, before you 'rehearse your loudest cry'.
Steven Knowlton (knowstev@med.umich.edu) (10/19/01)
I find it hard to believe that Ian Anderson is richer than Paul McCartney, who
regularly gives million pound donations to his favorite charities.
Chris Federico (drummerboy_91@yahoo.com) (3/15/02)
In general, I agree with you that Jethro Tull was a
better band in the past than during their latter
years. However, my love for their music extends a bit
further ahead in time than yours -- well into the
Heavy Horses album, in fact. By the way -- just so you
know -- "anyways" is not a word. Please don't take
that remark too personally. I'm just a stickler for
that sort of thing. Also, I think that rating an album
with a number is ridiculous. Your text is detailed and
opinionated enough to not require a general numeral
rating, which is a futile, utterly subjective item.
Thomas Griffiths Wainewright (gavemegasoline@earthlink.net) (3/25/03)
I find this band completely exasperating. I don't like Prog Rock, I wasn't
alive when they were productive, but every once in a while I develop a
fascination with them, in part because they were just so fucking weird, in
part because, as you say, they started out SO great and then began to suck
SO bad. One actually starts to feel a bit betrayed. Here's four random
thoughts on this eternal puzzle.
1)Tull is an idiotic band. Has been since they started doing impersonations
(Too Old to Rock and Roll, SONGS FROM the WOOD [which is fun, BUT...])
2) All the music produced up until, say, '73 is great. The band feels
alive. LIVING IN THE PAST is tremendous, because you realize that before Ian
tried to say so much, he actually had a lot to say (Alive and Well, Nursie,
Singing all Day). The hooks are great, and they were generally an amazing
singles band and an amazing blues/fusion band. And the production on their
singles was much better than the production on those early albums, which is
always either flat (Aqualung & the concept albums) or soupy (Stand up)
3) And then somehow Anderson just lost his way. Talent flared out, I don't
know . The rot starts to set in around Aqualung, and everything's gone with
TOO OLD, because this is where Ian's imagination just bottoms out
altogether. From there on in, it's just impersonations of this style or
that, observations on this trend or that (environmentalism, farm subsidies,
.COM [please]), posture-striking of this sort or that (Country Squire, Rock
Star, Gremlin, SPY for chrissake), all combined with that irritating
willingess, visible from Aqualung on, to reduce ANYTHING (train rides,
crossword puzzles, circuses, BLAH BLAH BLAH) to a facile metaphor for life
itself. This is actually why I like Minstrel--it's just nakedly, honestly
bitter. What a relief. A personal voice. Haven't heard that since the
acoustic cuts on Aqualung.
4) You can also track the band's decline via the thinning of IA's voice and
IA's hair. And the decline of his visual invention. Teasing your hair and
Wearing a plaid overcoat over tights and a codpiece is weird & cool and Rock
& Roll: like some kind of homeless/Jesus/minstrel thing . Dressing yourself
like you're out of a renaissance fair is just lame.
5) Preferred albums for me would be LIVING IN THE PAST, The Carnegie Hall
concert, one particular bootleg from '68 with Martin's Tune on it, and
--strangely--the Chateau D'Isaster recording, which would have sounded just
as lousy as Passion Play if they'd actually finished it back then. It
sounds vast and symphonic now because by the time he released it Anderson
had discovered reverb. Also because he's not SINGING--and here's what you
realize when you listen to it: the longer the band went on, the more
Anderson started to write vocal lines in terms of his instrument; so what
sounds magisterial when played on flute on NIGHTCAP just sounds crap when
sung on Passion Play
there you go, for what it's worth. I'm going back to my White Stripes album
now.
-Tom Wainewright.
Howard (benetth@telus.net) (5/20/04)
Best song writer is his time. His singing...well...I got used to it.
Howard Bennett
andreascg@aol.com (12/31/05)
I'm not knocking Ian Anderson AT ALL, let me clarify, but I would
like to point out that, while Ian Anderson's flute playing is very
innovative in the context of a rock band, the style and many of the
"shtick", such as vocalizing thru the flute, are actually copying
what was done earlier by the great Rahsaan Roland Kirk. I'm sure Ian
Anderson is a fan of Kirk's, especially since Tull covered "Serenade
to a Cuckoo". Anyone who appreciates Ian Anderson's flute playing
should check out Rahsaan Roland Kirk. On the album "I Talk to the
Spirits" he plays only flute (he was also a great sax player) and you
can compare his version of "Serenade".
rudge rodgers (rudgeraok@yahoo.com) (06/07/07)
jethro tull is one of the longest running rock'n'roll bands ever.
I pass up Rolling Stones concerts right and left but rarely miss
Jethro Tull when they come to town. Long live Ian Anderson.
Best song: Beggar's Farm
Anyways, at the time, they were one of the many psycho blues acts popping
up around London, differentiated only by Anderson and his already
incredible flute playing (a neat trick given that, supposedly, he'd only taken up the instrument a few months beforehand, and didn't even know proper fingerings). The rest of the band was decent, though. The
guitarist was one Mick Abrahams, who was primarily responsible for the
band's bluesy direction. The drummer was Clive Bunker, who could actually
make a legitimate claim to being the best drummer the group would ever
have. And finally, the bassist was Glen Cornick, a decent fellow who was
at least competent, though nowhere near as good as the later ones.
So, anyways, we have this collection of ten tracks (well, nine - I still
don't know the point of the closing Round, which is only a minute long),
and while none of the tracks are really bad, there's quite a bit of filler
if you ask me. For instance, side two has a pair of instrumentals which,
quite frankly, serve no purpose but to take up space. The first is a drum
solo entitled Dharma for One, and, well, it's a drum solo. I don't like
drum solos much at all. There's also the five-and-a-half minute Cat's
Squirrel (Cream covered it on their debut too) that's even MORE pointless
- just some random jamming from a band that wasn't exactly packed with
virtuosos at all.
Even some of the 'normal' songs aren't that great. The five-minute It's
Breaking Me Up, wedged betweened the previously mentioned instrumentals,
strikes me strongly as nothing but an imitation of Cream's Sleepytime
Time, and while I like the original, this is just kinda ehn. There's also
a composition by Abrahams on the first side (the ONLY time in
Tull's discography that Ian didn't write a song himself), and it's little
more than a generic lounge-jazzy number with some odd orchestration
occasionally. Thankfully, it's only two minutes, so it's tolerable, but
still ...
The rest of the album, though, is good stuff. The highlight is Beggar's
Farm, the first instance of Ian completely taking over a song with his
amazing flute playing. It has a good riff throughout, but it is definitely
the flute that makes it the best song on the album. And closing out the
first half is a cover of the Roland Kirk (the man from whom Ian largely, er, borrowed his general instrumental and compositional style) instrumental Serenade to a
Cuckoo, an extremely pleasant six-minute number that never gets boring and
leaves you wanting more at the end. Good stuff.
There's even some good 'generic' blues on here too. The opening My Sunday
Feeling, which you can see the gang perform well on the Message to
Love video mentioned elsewhere on my site, is solid, with nice
flutework and a peculiar, stop-and-go rhythm with good Anderson singing
over the top of it. The following Someday the Sun Won't Shine For You is
also good, not so much for the melody (it's generic blues, after all), but
for the interesting and cruel lyrics about how "I'll leave your mother
too."
And finally, there is the single, the bizarre A Song For Jeffrey, with a
somewhat bluesy motif, but with Anderson contributing a great flute and
harmonica riff and singing through something that makes his vocals
completely undecipherable. It's catchy, though, and extremely clever if
you ask me. I think it was a minor hit for them too, so that's good.
Anyways, the album is decent enough, but I think it's obvious that the
band didn't have much of a future doing pure blues. So Anderson took
control, and things started going really well ...
bsitting@mail.math.ucsb.edu (2/19/03)
An entertaining debut! None of these tracks sound bad at all, though one can
immediately see that Jethro Tull couldn't just stay restrained to the blues
forever. "My Sunday Feeling", "Beggar's Farm", and the very jazzy "A Seranade
to a Cookoo" are my highlights from this album. 8(11)
Best song: Bouree
The first major difference between this and This is the guitarist.
Due to various creative differences, Mick Abrahams left the group to
bounce around various small bands for the rest of his career. After a
short stint with future Black Sabbath axe-man Tony Iommi, the group picked
up the terrific Martin Barre. This guy really is incredible - extremely
versatile, with a full, rich tone, his very presence would bring a
serious rock element to the band for the first time. Heck, he even
played flute on a couple of tracks - what a cool guy.
The second difference, which is even more important, is that Ian finally
discovered that he had an incredible songwriter within him. Of course, as
a corollary to this, he became a complete despot from this time onward,
and in later years it would've been nice to have an additional writer in
the band to help out when Ian's talents began to wane, but for now it's
all good. There are ten tracks on here, each one a gem, with only a small
quibble here and there on my part. Furthermore, the sound of the album is just amazing, showcasing all of the best aspects of what I described in the band's introduction with none of the bad aspects.
Three of the tracks on here are complete and total classics, and are
easily among the very best songs the group ever did. The first, the opening
A New Day Yesterday, is a blues song, but it's better than any blues on
This Was if for no other reason than that it has a simply terrific riff accompanying it. My
personal favorite part of it is the way Martin does that neat little
slide at the end of each riff repetition, but it also includes a solid
middle jam (featuring both great guitar and flute solos, with a badly needed sense of 'looseness' that would tend to get lost in later years), good lyrics, and a nice coda (something that a lot of songs on here have, by the way). The second, the best
song on the album, is a rock, blues and classical fusion of a Bach number
entitled Bouree. Even if you've heard the original (and you probably have,
even if you don't realize it), this cover version will simply blow you
away (and the jazzy section in the middle will drop your jaw at how utterly wrong it is, as will the bass solo). And it's got another great coda, with Ian panting the same note on
his flute over and over again until the band closes together. And finally,
there's the first song of side two, Nothing is Easy. WHY this is not
playing on every classic rock station in the country every day simply
blows my mind. The vocal melody rules, the jams between verses are great,
and that coda is AWESOME. I do admit that I can see finding it a little cheezy; it's the kind of "rev up and rock it to the max" coda that has become a staple of live shows for thousands of rock bands around the world, and thus hearing it in a studio setting might seem offputting. Then again, Tull deserves a lot of credit for coming up with this kind of coda in the first place, and there is a terrific build of energy and intensity up to the very end of it, so I'll probably never get sick of it. I can say is that there is nothing in this world like banging your head to a
flute and guitar jamming the same note again and again until it all stops (especially after it had been built up like this).
Don't forget the rest of the album, though. For instance, there's a couple
more terrific rockers, Back to the Family and the closing For A Thousand
Mothers (with a great album-ending jam following it). The former starts off alternating between a simple electric folksy-bluesy shuffle (with lyrics about being bored with family life) and a more intense bluesy section where Ian sings over loud repeated Barre power chords, with an exciting flute part in the breaks, and then accelerates into a frantic flute-and-guitar jam for a coda. Here's a tip; listen to the coda jam while crusing down the highway one day, and if you don't feel the pure creative energy and excitement that comes from this album in that moment, then you and this album just aren't compatible. And then there's the closing track, which has a GREAT riff, although the production leaves
something to be desired. The lyrics are among my favorite on the album, about getting to sneer at those who tell you you can't do something when you then do it, and my favorite moment is when Ian sings, "It was they who were wrong and for them is a song," followed by a brief, aggressively sneering flute line.
Hey, there's even a couple of great ballads! Of course, Look Into the Sun
and Reasons For Waiting do sound a bunch alike, but they're still simply
gorgeous, and they're easily the best slow ballads that Ian would ever
write (though a small number come close). The latter is also the first instance of David Palmer's association
with the band, as he arranged strings for it in a wonderful way. Keywords for these are: rich vocals, crisp tender vocal melodies, logical chord progressions, gorgeous fluting. There's also a nice introspective quiet number called We Used to Know, which has the chord progression the Eagles would use on Hotel California. The best part of it, though, is that Barre does his best Clapton imitation, turning on the wah-wah and pulling off a simply wonderful solo. I've seen it accused of being the first power ballad, which I guess isn't something to be proud of, but it's an amazing song nonetheless, so whatever.
Finally, there's also a couple of 'grooves', and while they're weaker than
the other songs of the album, they're still fairly well-written, and don't
lower the album's rating too much (though they did cost it a 15, to be
fair). The first is a bizarre balalaika-driven number called Jeffrey Goes
to Leicester Square, and while it's amusing, I'm glad that it's only two
minutes long. The other is an Indian-tinged song called Fat Man, where Ian
laments about being, well, fat. The lyrics are hilarious, though, no
matter which way you look at it.
So there you are. In my esteemed opinion, no decent rock collection is
complete without this. And since it (like the rest of Tull's discography, which fully came back into print in the late 90's) is easy to find at basically any store, you have no excuse for not going out and buying it asap.
Thought09@aol.com
This album is vastly underrated, agreed. However, I got a copy of a '1969
- the greatest year in rock' guitar magazine from '99 and stand up was one
of the 15 or so albums they praised. In fact, it tells this little story
of how this guy came up to Ian at a tull concert freaking out about how he
listens to stand up every night before he goes on stage and
stuff....Ian at the time just thought he was some crazed freak, but it
turned out to be Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam!! Quite entertaining that was.
Anyway, Stand Up is definately my fav Tull album by far and is
prob. in my top 20 albums of all time...
Daniel
Clmnts5@aol.com
It did my heart good to see somebody recognize the beautiful Stand Up.
My favorite album of the late 60s - early 70s and one of the best ever, I
think. Tull's best WITHOUT QUESTION, in my mind.
Kathy Fisher (klfisher@webtv.net) (9/10/01)
Till this day I still keep a tape of Stand-Up in the car to put meself
in the right frame of mind. I find the music keeps me from gettin out
the car and clobberin someone! Know what I mean?
Right,knew you would.
ALPH1217@aol.com (1/28/02)
John:
Couldn't agree with you more regarding this absolute gem of an album.
Although the early seventies were the height of Tulls popularity with
Aqualung and Thick As A Brick enormously well received, this record is the
best work Ian has ever come up with in my opinion. I've spent endless hours
all through the years listening to this band and can readily proclaim myself
as a 'hard core fan'. This does not mean however that I've enjoyed everything
I've heard. Like any other group they don't always get things right.
Nevertheless Ian's song writing and durability all through the years never
ceases to amaze me.
I enjoy reading your reviews . . agree with you on some things, disagree on
others but what the hell!
Cheers,
ALPH
Chris Federico (drummerboy_91@yahoo.com) (3/15/02)
I completely agree with you. This is an
underrated, absolutely gorgeous album. However, if you
listened a little closer to "Reasons For Waiting," you
wouldn't say it sounded nearly identical to ANY other
tune (even its very tempo is unique on the album). How
some people can listen (on purpose, even) to Bob Dylan
and not consider this superior band's superior '69
album an absolute, definitive '60s classic is beyond
me.
bsitting@mail.math.ucsb.edu (8/27/02)
Before I read yours and George's review for this album, all I knew is it won
Best Album cover for some magazine that year. But, the album itself... is good!
I knew I was in for a treat when I heard "A New Day Yesterday". The riff is
killer, and the drums just bash away! Sometimes in the past, I'd hear "Bouree"
here and there. But, hearing it here, it made me realize how much energy was in
that track! I could comment on every song here, but for brevity, all
the 'rockers' have something special to offer, and the acoustic ballads are
actuall memorable to me. This is a surprise for me! 10(14) it is!!
NOTE: To sweaten the pill further, the newer edition contains four singles from
that era, including "Sweet Dream" and "Living in the Past". Now, we're talking!
Greg.Goldman@ci.austin.tx.us (5/15/05)
Thank you John for turning me on to this album after years of writing off
Tull. I know everyone loves 'Bouree' but my vote for best track is 'We Used
to Know' while my favorite extra track is 'Sweet Dream.'
I have gotten used to Ian's voice now in the same way I got used to
Hendrix's - it's a process of gradual accommodation. Now is sounds
authoritative and commanding and makes the tracks sound more epic.
Jason Kuykendall (tullite@yahoo.com) (6/11/2005)
Sorry man, but to a true enthusiast you come across as musically
trite. Had to stop reading at SU, because you praised the stale FM
classics and failed to exalt the living beauty that is We Used To
Know
Trfesok@aol.com (01/30/07)
Agreed, really, really good. Diverse, intelligent music. Actually, I
think the least interesting ones are two that you think rule -- "A
New Day Yesterday" and "Nothing is Easy." These two are pretty
popular and turn up on a lot of anthologies, but while they're nice
enough, I think they are less innovative and interesting than the
other songs. "Bouree" is pretty fun and amusing, and "Fat Man"
sounds Indian without actually using any Indian instruments. Bongos,
mandolin and flute carry the song. The one that pushed me to get it
was "Look into the Sun," which actually used to turn up on radio
every once in a while around here. A totally gorgeous ballad that I
have to play more than once whenever I play the album. The rest is
all really nice, too. Not an unlistenable filler track in the bunch.
I have the remaster with the four single sides, which is the only
place that you can find all of these, now that the Living in the Past
and 20 Years Of.. collections have disappeared. They don't really fit
in, but no one can deny that "Living in the Past" and "Sweet Dream"
are classic songs. "Driving Song" sounds like Ian was already sick of
touring by that point. "17" seems to be a reminiscence of a teenage
romance, but is far less melodic than all of the other songs on the
CD.
Best song: Teacher
Ok, I guess I'm being a little harsh on the man. See, it's obvious that
Ian was going for a darker, more mysterious sound than he had previously
had, and in that way he succeeds well. But, in my opinion, he put so much
effort into the general atmosphere that he largely forgot about writing good,
interesting melodies. There are a couple of exceptions, of course. The
hard-rockers Son and (when I'm in the mood) To Cry You a Song are pretty
good. The opening With You There to Help Me pulls off the mystical mood of
the album far better than any other track on here, and it's actually quite
good; the closing jam used to seem overlong to me, but it's seriously grown on me over time, as Ian's flute creates noises amidst the structured guitar chaos that must have seemed mindblowing back in the day (and still sound it now). And there's also a pretty 'pop ditty' called Inside that would later wind up on Living in the
Past (and which I suppose came from around the SU sessions, seeing as it was the B-side of the marvelous Witches Promise); I'll tell you what, as far as songs with the ability to pull me out of a bad mood go, this is on the short list for the best.
But that's about it. Sossity; You're a Woman does almost nothing to
register itself in the mind of the listener, as does For Michael Collins, Jeffrey and Me, A Time For Everything? (at least in the verses; there's at least a little bit of uplift in the chorus, I guess), and
the already mentioned Play In Time. Aside from PIT, they're all just
bland, soft pieces of acoustic strumming that don't hold a candle to
Reasons for Waiting. And even in the 'rockers', Barre doesn't really do
anything interesting, which is pretty much the death-knell for Nothing to Say and (to a lesser extent) To Cry You a Song; the instrumental passages are much stiffer and more rigid than the ones from SU, and it's the kind of stiffness that bugs me about a lot of later Tull instrumental passages.
But wait! After all my complaining about this album, I gave it a 7! Yup, that's because the version of the
album that I own contains what I feel is the absolute best Jethro Tull
song of all time, Teacher. It starts with a descending guitar/piano riff
with Ian singing this terrific vocal melody. Then it speeds up in the
latter half of the verse, and then we have THE riff. I tell you, that
12-note riff is GENIUS! GENIUS, I tell you! Ian and Martin each play it
simultanously a few times, then they go back to the verses, then the riff
comes back, and then they jam. Whoopee! And then we get that verse melody
again, and then the riff, again and again, as the song fades out. It
doesn't sound at all like any other songs on the album, but that's for
the better.
Get the album if only for Teacher; it preserves the feel and greatness of Tull as I love them most, and that's always a major positive in my eyes. And who knows, you might discover that you actually
like the darker side of Tull, even though I'm just kinda ehn about it.
Chris Federico (drummerboy_91@yahoo.com) (3/15/02)
I agree that it's not as good as Stand Up!,
and that the best song is "Teacher." That riff's a
hell of a lot better than "Aqualung"'s Beethoven-like
intro. I think "Inside" is terrific, however, and "For
Michael Collins, Jeffrey and Me" deserves your extra
attention. Try listening to it ouside the context of
the rest of the LP. Its verses are lovely -- poignant,
even -- and its chorus is pretty damn catchy. It's
about Ian wanting to be in the LEM spacecraft during
the first moon landing (a staged event, if you ask me,
but that's a different topic). Michael Collins is the
astronaut who had to stay in the Module when the
others were out jumping around. Jeffrey is Ian's old
friend and Tull's future bass player (1971-75, I
think).
bsitting@mail.math.ucsb.edu (2/19/03)
Apart from the excessive psychedelic noises in the middle of "Play in Time",
nothing is particually bad here. BUT, that doesn't mean that everything else
comes out smelling like roses. Enough cliches, much of this album I can't
recall to save the life of me! From the proper album itself, only "With You
There to Help Me" and "To Cry You a Song" I can remember, and both of these are
quite good. The first song has a nice atmosphere about it (partly due to the
way Ian Anderson plays the flute), though a tad long (like many songs on this
album. That's what primarily mars "Nothing to Say". I'll avoid any obvious puns
here.). "To Cry You a Song" has a good overall structure, nice riff based on
what I think are triplets.The six minute running time doesn't bother me either
this time.
Special mention should go to (three of the four) additional tracks. These are
more memorable (and possibly better) than the entire album itself! I like the
light-hearted way "Singing All Day" goes about. It's hummable, unlike some
other stuff earlier. "Witche's Promise" is another nice folkish piece. Finally,
there's "Teacher". Though it may be not my favorite Tull song, it's up there
somewhere (too bad it's not on "Original Masters"!). With these tracks
included, this is about a 7(10), maybe a low 11.
Best song: My God
Too bad about these blights, because the rest of the show is pretty terrific. A little sloppy in places, sure, but sloppy in the sort of way that brings an edge to the performances, especially since it comes from the band glorying in its gritty hard-rock base, mixed in with just enough other elements to make things really interesting. The best and most passionate performance is of the then unreleased My God, with the band (especially Barre) sounding absolutely monstrous in its crunchy might, and Ian's flute performance in the middle sounding out-of-this-world fabulous. You can practically feel the tension of the audience, taking in what must have been the first public mass-exposure of one of the most biting criticisms of organized Christianity to that point, and I have to suspect that a lot of people who didn't know Tull beforehand went out and bought Aqualung largely because of that performance.
Other major highlights are the opening My Sunday Feeling, which is given (surprise) much more of a hard-rock feel than in the jazz-blues original, the energetic blast of Nothing is Easy, and of course the ever-wonderous Bouree. To Cry You a Song is done decently, and the closing pair of We Used to Know and For a Thousand Mothers is less effective here than on Stand Up but terrific nonetheless, and ... that's it. Man, it's amazing how little gets played in an hour when you WASTE TEN MINUTES ON A PIECE WITH A DRUM SOLO. It is for that reason, then, that this can only get a solid 7/10, even though I really like listening to most of it. And needless to say, it's heartily recommended for any Tull fan.
Nick Pulliam (nickpulliam@resonetics.com) (03/12/06)
I think it was still Clive Bunker who inserted the offensive drum
solo at this point in Tull's career. I agree with your review though
on every other point.
Best song: Locomotive Breath
As you may already know, the concept of the album is essentially this -
Man created their own definition of God so that they might have a method
by which they could put down the impoverished class, referred to in this
album as Aqualungs. But while Ian's snide lyrics certainly shine through
at all times, he was kind enough to the public to realize that he still
had to write good, entertaining songs. They're complex and lengthy, but
filled to the brim with solid riffs and good melodies. Add that to the
fact that with the addition of keyboardist John Evans and bassist Jeffery
Hammond-Hammond, two of the best at their instruments of anybody in the
70's, and your experience can only be delectable.
You probably know the opening title-track from the radio, and it's a fully
deserving classic. It starts with this great riff with a menacing vocal
melody, then goes into a brisk acoustic part, then gets faster, goes back
to the riff, and then Barre is given a chance to tear the roof off the place. Whee. Then you get
Cross-Eyed Mary, which starts with this ominous flute line over Evans'
mellotrons before moving into a solid rocker with a GREAT riff. After the
first of the three acoustic links, you then move into the amusing Mother
Goose, which isn't really about anything, but it's catchy, and it has an
interesting drum sound in the middle. And then, following the second link,
the pretty Wondering Aloud, we close the side with Up to Me, with yet
another great, driving melody. Again, I ask - how can anybody (especially a Tull fan) NOT like
this album? This is one of the best LP-sides of Tull ever (the best, of course, is the first half of Thick as a Brick, but that's for later)!
The second half of the album focuses more on the religion aspect of
Anderson's concept, and kicks off suitably with the lengthy My God. It
drags at times, with the emphasis clearly on the lyrics, but it also has
that great flute jam in the middle with all sorts of Russian chanting in
the background while Ian goes nuts. So the song is worth it, after all.
Then we have the catchy piano-driven Hymn 43, with Anderson further
denouncing the hypocrisies of organized religion, but also with a great
vocal melody.
Then, after link number three, we have the best song of the album, even
better than the title track. I'm speaking, of course, about Locomotive
Breath. It starts off with this ultra-majestic piano part from Evans, with
occasional hints of guitar, then it starts to speed up, and then the
cleverness begins. The riff purposely imitates a locomotive speeding down
the tracks, and it RULES. Not to mention that it has an awesome flute solo
near the end, and a terrific vocal melody, as usual (with fine lyrics as well). It's certainly the
'crowd-pleaser' of the group, the equivalent of Stairway to Heaven or
Another Brick In the Wall, and daggnabbit, it fully deserves that status. The last
track is no slouch either, though. Wind Up is Anderson striking back at
the church-oriented education he received growing up, but the melody is
decent, and dang it, the riff in the fast portion of the song is great!
Heck, I might like it even more than the train riff. Well, maybe not, but
it's close.
This album is great. Even if you have no intention of becoming an in-depth
Tull fan, there is no excuse for not having this album in your collection.
This is the most 'hard-rocking' that concept rock has ever been, and that
is enough to make it a classic.
PS: Am I the only person who notices that Ian's voice has seriously changed between Stand Up and Aqualung? Before, it sounded just kinda weird, whereas here it's become the sneering, somewhat unpleasantly disagreeable tone that would be Ian's staple until he needed throat surgery more than fifteen years later. Not that that's a bad thing, of course; his vocal tone fits the lyrical and atmospheric tone of the album perfectly.
RHennHouse@aol.com
Cheap Day Return, Wond'ring Aloud, and Slipstream space fillers?! Where I
used to think Locomotive Breath and Aqualung and Hymn 43 were the best on
this album, after listening to it for the last 29 years, I've learned that
the acoustic songs are what really make Ian Anderson the best songwriter.
That I know of, anyway. For someone to think that those songs are fillers
is really missing out. I believe even Ian called them fillers when the
album came out, but I think he knew better and is very proud of them.
(author's note): Well, I didn't call them 'filler', per se. But I
don't think anybody would want to say that they are "primary" material on
the album. They're quite pretty, and very well-written, but there is
little question that they mostly serve as "plot-setters" for the "main"
songs.
Chris Federico (drummerboy_91@yahoo.com) (3/15/02)
I agree that saying something is "too
accessible" is pretentious, irrelevant, and in fact
restrictive to the extent of being non-musical.
However, your apparent dismissal of anything and
everything that endeavors to be progressive or
artistic beyond mere catchiness could be construed as
equally limiting.
(author's note): This can only be a possible interpretation if this is the only one of my pages you read. Let it be yelled out loud and clear that I LOVE well-done progressive rock. It just so happens that, and I'm serious here, I consider most of Tull's progressive efforts to be mediocre at best and unlistenable at worst. Prog-rock can be incredibly good, but most of Tull's efforts in this department (aside from Brick) are not sufficiently engaging as to keep my attention.
The most moving songs on this album
are "Mother Goose," "Up To Me" and "Wind-Up." If only
the production (surprisingly not much improved in the
'98 remaster) were decent. The material's consistently
fantastic, but the sound quality's awful. Ian's dry,
high-end vocal sound and the too-quiet level of the
"Wind-Up" intro are just two instances of Island
Studios' shortcomings. Could you imagine this album
with the sound quality of (the Ian-produced) Benefit?
WOWZERS! The three acoustic "links," as you call them,
are lovely and shouldn't be discounted just because
they're not super-long. I'd rather hear these short
interludes than "Aqualung" or "Locomotive Breath"
anytime. (Face it -- they're the closest we get to the
Stand Up! motifs.)
bsitting@mail.math.ucsb.edu (8/27/02)
For some reason, I don't enjoy this album nearly as much as I should. Pretty
much from start to finish, the songs are very solid. And, of course, the
classics (Aqualung, Cross-Eyed Mary, and Locomotive Breath) are well deserved
of their status. Perhaps, it's that none of the other songs blow me away as the
aforementioned do (Wind-Up gets close, though). At any rate, this album gets a
low to solid 9 out of 10.
Paige Anderson (paigea@silcom.com) (11/17/03)
In my humble opinion, Aqualung is not only the best effort put forth by
Tull, it is one of the best rock albums of all time. For me, Aqualung
represented a dramatic change in the bands direction. Stand Up, This
Was and benefit are pretty much all alike. With the entry of Aqualung,
we see Tull at it's very best. It was a brief moment of brilliance
from the mind of Ian Anderson. Despite Ian's denial that it is a
"concept" album, I am convinced that it turned out that way...even if
by accident. There is not a single song on this album that is bad. I
am in the habit of listening to it only in the order for which it was
originally presented. As far as the acoustic songs go...they are
critically important to the overall tone of the presentation. The
juxtaposition of the lighter songs book-ended by the more popular
"heavy" material is (in my opinion) a purposeful move on the part of
Ian. By far, the most brilliant cut from the album is "My God." It is
like a concerto of beautiful sounds and meaningful lyrics...it is a
masterpiece of music. The flute section in the middle with the choir
in the background is absolutely the high point of the offering. Listen
to it on headphones and tell me that this is not a stroke of musical
genius. The way this section moves back into the song never fails to
move me. I do not consider Jethro Tull a true "progressive" rock band.
In fact, I think that they defy definition. They were and still are
one of the most original bands in rock history.
Trfesok@aol.com (09/29/07)
Certainly, Ian was starting to get darker on the last album, and now
he goes full tilt. It's a good thing that he balanced it with the
lighter acoustic stuff. Still, the sense of humor that showed up
earlier ("Fat Man") and later (the next album) is pretty much absent.
"Hymn 43" is the angriest one -- and they released it as a single!
How could they think a song with lyrics like "If Jesus saves/then he
better save Himself/from the gory glory-seekers/that use His name in
death." would make the Top 40? But it's great. Nowadays, though,
there are several Tull albums that I'd rather listen to.
I also have the remaster, and it does, unfortunately, emphasize the
fact that the album wasn't really recorded well in the first place.
As bonuses, there are three BBC tracks from the This Was and Stand Up
periods; an OK album outtake called "Lick Your Fingers Clean" which I
think is way overrated by fans; and an alternate version of "Wind Up"
that was originally on the quadraphonic LP. It's not as good as the
original, with a cruder production and Ian singing them in a
register too high for himself.
A couple of remixes also have shown up elsewhere. The MU collection
has a remix of the title track with the distortion removed from Ian's
vocal on the acoustic bridge, which makes the track less annoying.
The 25th Anniversary Box also has a mix of "Cross-Eyed Mary" was does
the typically irritating 90's thing of adding reverb to the drums and
bringing them forward. In this case, though, that's done at the
expense of the very cool flute/piano/mellotron arrangement.
Oh, and the remaster also has 13 minute interview with Ian about the
making of the album. He doesn't discuss the lyrical content, though,
which is a shame. He also says that he thinks that "Budapest" is a
better example of Jethro Tull than anything on this album! Bet you
like that!
Bob
Best song: heh
Once again, there is a concept - the way people are forced to take upon
certain societal roles against their wishes and despite their youthful
promise that they would be different than their parents - but I couldn't
care less, really. The music is flabbergastingly stupendous. Especially
since the album is one long forty-five minute track (yep, you read
right).
Before you feel nervous about listening to such an album, though, you need
to know a few things. First of all, it isn't really one song. Rather, it consists of a number of great 'normal' songs, albeit sometimes not completely fleshed out with "proper" beginnings and endings, connected to each other with instrumental passages instead of having pauses between them, with a few reprises throughout as needed. If you want, think of this as the Abbey Road suite taken to its most bombastic and technically immaculate extreme (that is, the most extreme before losing the fundamental melody strengths of the original). Some people have said (approximately) that this album is essentially just the opening theme and variations upon it, but that frankly makes me wonder if they've bothered to keep track of the other songs that pop up. There aren't that many individual song ideas on this, granted, but there are certainly enough; any album that can freely shuffle war marches, differently-styled bombastic acoustic ballads and unconventional organ-driven 'rockers' (among other things) with the ease that this album does is going to get a thumbs up from me.
Since (naturally) this isn't an album one can easily dissect into individual sections for analysis, I'd instead like to focus on some of the aspects that really grab my interest and respect. The first thing I really love about this album is how, through the entire first half and most of the second, it never feels like it's just sitting there fiddling its diddle, treading water or killing time until its time for another 'main' theme. Every song has instrumental and vocal hooks out the wazoo, and when the band engages in a lengthy instrumental passage, it makes that passage wild and crazy and (as far as I'm concerned) incapable of sounding boring. There is an exception to this, of course; near the beginning of the second side there's an overlong drum solo (which, granted, is both very fast and very loud, but is still a generic drum solo), as well as a blotch of Zappa-style noises, and this kinda puts a crimp on the immaculate momentum the album has built for itself to this point. Other than that, though, everything feels justified and "in place," if you will; they even make sure to link up the start of the second half to the end of the first half (which seemed to be kinda echoing off into the distance) by dragging it back from the same distant void and acting as if the break was only an illusion. Neat!
I'm also extremely fond of the lyrics, which (a) are an awful lot of fun despite the (theoretically) serious subject matter (they really do a good job of keeping Ian in his 'mischievious little scamp' role that he could pull off so very very well) and (b) do an excellent job of repeating certain themes in just the right way, with just the right variations, to invariably hook in the listener. The "See there a son is born and we pronounce him fit to fight..."/"See there a man is born and we pronounce him fit for peace" split between side one and side two is a good example, as are the repeated allusions to our "comic paper idols" and "Where the hell was Biggles when you needed him last Saturday?" and so on.
And sheesh, I know I mentioned that the instrumental passages are great, but it really cannot be stressed enough. Evans, Barre, Anderson and Hammond-Hammond (Barrow is fine too, though he doesn't particularly stand out) sound like an insane unstoppable machine (is it really true this album was recorded in only three takes? Holy Hell!!), combining tightness and aggression of an unbelievable level with chances for each to have their moments to shine as individuals. The biggest standout is, of course, the terrific flute solo around 37 minutes in, but that's hardly the only standout.
Beyond this, I don't really know what to say. Please buy this album and
appreciate what an amazing musical machine this group was in the good old
days, as well as to see what prog rock is fully capable of before the
pomposity overcomes the music itself. And don't trust the Rolling Stone
Record Guide, which only gave it one star.
Robert Grazer (xeernoflax@jack-the-ripper.com)
Good. Flows perfectly from start to finish.
BEST TRACK: To my knowledge this is going to be the only album on here
that defies my formula. On sing song forty-five minutes and thirty-six
seconds long, and I love long songs. I don't really know how to comment on
this, it's just so good. Even the fact that I don't much care for Jethro
Tull can't stop the fact that this is an absolute masterpiece. My favorite
part probably starts at the "Let me tell you the tale of your life," and
ends with the song. It;s good throughout the entire thing, leaving little
to be desired.
COMPLAINTS: None really....I wish the gap in the middle wasn't ther but I
guess that was unavoidable.
RATING: My Scale: ****** John McFerrin's Scale *10(15)*
Thought09@aol.com
What a good example of intellect in rock. Wow. This album blows the mind.
I don't especially like the turn Tull took here towards a more synthy
sound, but somehow thoughout most of the album the music keeps you
interested. There are parts (musically, mostly) I don't like as much, in
fact that can get outright boring, but the great bits by far make up for
it.....I especially the 'so where the hell was biggles' bit. There was
this dude I met last year while on a travel study trip to Japan that was
your typical 'gen-x culture is all that matters to me' type guy and he
openly admitted to not liking most of the music of the baby boomers. To
my amazement though he started humming part of TAAB!!!! I asked
him about it and he said that some of his older coworkers would play
TAAB on the job and he found that he actually really liked it.
I'm sure it was Ian's great thought provoking lyrics that did the trick
for him.
TheRubberCow@aol.com (1/01/02)
Yes, oh, yes. I was blown away by this album when I got it when after
hearing the 5 minute version on the radio I saw that it was all one song.
But when I got it home and listened to it, it surpassed my already high
expectation. I knew they were good, since my parents' had played their
greatest hits (M.U. - The Best of Jethro Tull), but I had no idea they
were so intelligent! I know a lot of this was due to Anderson's writing,
but you are right about the band sounding very tight. Some sections
remind me of Supper's Ready, like the electric piano part somewhere near
the first stretches (can't remember exactly where), and, that flute solo
at the 37 minute mark is actually a lute. How cool!
bsitting@mail.math.ucsb.edu (8/27/02)
Since last summer or so, I had essentially most of the essential (and well-
reputed) prog albums from the 'principal' prog groups: Yes, Genesis, and King
Crimson (plus "Aqualung" from Jethro Tull). But, the sheer length of this album
scared the living daylights out of me. 20-minute epics are work enough! Oh
well, fast forward to this last Spring. I FINALLY bought this 'bloated'
behomath. It was intriguing from the start (I loved the first half almost
immediately).
Now, with the exception of the notorious beginning of the second half, this
piece rules! Let me explain. All the segments, save the 'Zappaesque' section,
have some sort of catchiness going on, be it the meoldy, or the instrumentation
which is often quite fast and furious, yet tight as a thistle. The "Poet and
the Painter" and "Do You Believe" sections are especially beautiful. Jeffrey
Hammonds' baselines are extraordinary throughout, especially in the "I've come
down from the upper class" section.
Finally, the booklet itself is the other half of the fun. They spent more time
on this than the music!? However, it very well adds cohesion to the
entire 'concept'. And my edition of the CD has a live adbridged version of the
(title) track which burns even more than the studio version, as well as an
interview with the band on the making of this album, filled with hilarious
stories.
Due to the one 'bad' section which still hurts my ears, I can't give this a
ten, but a 9(14) it is! (Almost tied with "Stand Up" as my favorite/best Jethro
Tull album.)
Ken D'Angelo (vze2m7hi@verizon.net) (10/08/02)
Making a song continuous like Jethro Tull did with Thick As A Brick is
just amazing. Ian Anderson, Martin Barre, and Jeffrey Hammond did a
fantastic job. I find some of the lyrics hard to understand, for
example, your sperm's in the gutter, your love's in the sink. However,
the song sounds great since everyone gets their turn to play their
instruments and no one can play a flute like Ian Anderson.
Trfesok@aol.com (03/17/07)
I guess that I have to concede that Tull reached its peak here. My
latest listen was straight through, via headphones, and it's still
amazing. I do think that you underrate Barlow on this album -- his
"solo"in the second half actually had flute and chimes overdubbed on
top, so it becomes more listenable. You can really appreciate his
playing on this album. Evans' playing on his Hammond organ is also
underrated, I think. Otherwise, no real disagreement -- an essential
prog album.
The remastered version also has a 12-minute live version from 1978 -
sort of a "highlights" of TAAB. Although you could argue which
sections they should have left in (I miss the "Where the hell was
Biggles.." part), it's still good. There's also an interview with
Ian, Martin and Jeffrey, where the talk about the music and the album
art. Very entertaining.
Best song: Witches Promise
Of course, there were too many for a single lp, but not enough for a
double lp, so the band and co. did something strange to fill out the third
side - they put on a couple of performances from their 1970 Carnegie Hall
gig. Unfortunately, the choices weren't particularly great. One is a
lengthy piano piece that also contains excerpts from With You There to
Help Me, and the other is Dharma For One with a longer drum solo and the
addition of lyrics. Needless to say, I had to deduct some points from the
rating for that.
And actually, to tell the truth, not all of these recordings excite me,
particularly the ones on the fourth side. Life's a Long Song is pretty,
though somewhat dull, and the others have good playing to them, but ... I
dunno, I guess I just expect more from the band (though I guess Nursie can stick around). But there's a reason for
that - the singles that come before the live performances are GREAT! Screw
the rest of the album - these are why Living in the Past gets a
12.
It kicks off with A Song For Jeffrey, discussed previously in the This
Was review, then moves into the terrific Love Song. It has a terrific,
simple riff, a catchy, driving vocal melody (I guess it's technically a blues song, but I don't mind that, and the lyrics are hilarious), and gives a great sign of
what was to come on Stand Up. The B-side, A Christmas Song, is
mostly notable in that it's the first instance of Ian's anti-religion and
anti-hypocrisy lyrics, but it has a good melody, as well as a terrific
string arrangement from future member David Palmer.
And then we hit the 1969 numbers, and things get really good. The title
track is extremely famous, with a strange and complex melody,
pseudo-nostalgic lyrics, and a great flute solo closing it out. It should
also be noted that this was the first of three top-ten singles that Ian
would produce in a span of ten months. In any case, the B-side, the
bluesy Driving Song, has yet another cool riff with neat lyrics of being
forced to keep going even when you're tired. Don't even think of getting
tired of listening to this album, though, because next is the second of
the top-ten singles, the frightening Sweet Dream (by the way, all three of
these singles also fall into my personal top ten of Tull songs). It's a
hard rocker at heart, but it is so much more, partially because of the
orchestral arrangements, but as much because of Ian's scary singing and
that ominous chorus. And it's got a really good guitar solo near the end.
I actually hated it for a while, for reasons that currently escape me, but
you shouldn't repeat my mistake. Oh, and as contrast to the menacing
A-side, the B-side is a lighthearted mantraesque number called Singing All
Day. I can see where lovers of 'serious' Tull would hate it, as the lyrics
aren't exactly deep, but it's catchy and funny, and that's enough for
me.
We then hit 1970, and the third of the top-ten singles and my personal
favorite on the album, the gorgeous Witches Promise (the b-side, btw, is
Inside, from Benefit. ). It starts with an explosion of flute, then
turns into an anthem of mystical love, if you will, with a nice chorus and
well-placed strings at the "kissed by a witch" portion of the verses.
I love it to death, and the ending portion is simply to die for.
A great album this is, even if it is a compilation, sort of. In any case,
lovers of early Tull simply require this in their collection, especially
since it's been condensed into one CD.
TheRubberCow@aol.com (1/01/02)
Wow. I cannot believe no one has commented on this one yet. A great
album. Kind of their Physical Graffiti, but almost have more respect for
this one: although I do agree with you Side Three, there is almost no
song on here that don't love immensely. I think my favorite is probably
"Love Story", "A Christmas Song" and one that I have recently starting
liking a lot more, "Life Is A Long Song". I don't know if it's the
melody or the way it builds or what (it seems to build differently than
your average builind song, rather than going from very soft to very big,
it starts at a moderately gentle level and just builds to a sort of
comfortably strong mezzo-forte, and I think that's cool).....could just
be the way it sounds in general. And then there's so many other good
songs on there like "Dr. Bogenbroom" and some others that you have
mentioned......I could go on about them all. A ! very impressive album;
always stunning to listen to.
Chris Federico (drummerboy_91@yahoo.com) (3/15/02)
How you could fail to mention
"Life Is a Long Song," one of Tull's greatest ever, is
beyond me, but we agree on the merits of "Witch's
Promise."
Michael Gray (michael.gray@gza.com) (04/29/08)
Although this song is not on every version of the album that was
released, "Wondering Again" is both rare and as close to a signature
Tull song as you get. The acoustic arrangement, the very beautiful
and introspective lyrics (which have also stood the test of time),
and the Ian Anderson vocal that is melodically one of the band's
best. The only thing it lacks in connection to signature Tull is a
flute part; however, the song is more spare and honest without. This
song stands out for them even on this greatest hits album.
Best song: ...
In any case, virtually everything that I dislike about mid-70's Tull can
be found on this album. The instrumental passages are longer than on
Brick, but they are almost uniformly extremely boring, and lack the
Tommyesque type of repetition that made the Brick ones work.
You know, take a couple of solid musical themes, tweak them, mess with the
rhythm, play them loudly one place and softly another, and bring it all
together in the end. Here, they just keep droning on and on, and when you
factor in Ian's extensive use of synthesizers, which he just couldn't
write for very well (see: Play In Time), as well as the fact that Martin
just doesn't sound anywhere near as alive as he did on previous albums (in fact, where the hell is he? It almost sounds like he's not even there until the middle of side two),
and you get a fully tedious experience. It also doesn't help that Ian suddenly decided to fill the sound with saxaphones almost as much as with flutes, and while he might have been a great flute player, this album certainly gives no indication of great sax abilities.
Worse, though, is that the songs within the long song are usually mediocre
or worse. With one major exception - the Lover of Black and White sequence
on side one is top-notch, and also incorporates Ian's most clever use of
background vocals/noise on the album, with John Evans delivering those
bizarre lines that can do nothing but amuse you. But the rest drones and
drones and drones. The 'title track' is decent, with Anderson setting the
ominous tone of the album well, but the melody isn't very good (though certainly not terrible). Meanwhile,
though, the 'take the prize for instant pleasure ...' part, another
chunk of side one, sucks mightily, and the 'along the icey wastes'
part, while not nasty, doesn't do much to help matters either.
To be honest with you, side two is little better. Lots of fans claim that
the final 15 minutes of the album, right after the Hare story, are the
best chunk of Tull ever, but I don't hear it. The lyrics are fairly
interesting, actually, but the music ... *yaaaaaaaaaaawn* (after well over two dozen listens I'll admit some of the parts grew on me a little bit, but that's not really saying much). What's most
frustrating, though, is that by the time the band starts to 'rock out' a
bit, the album is almost over! Ugh! Of course, it doesn't rock that
much, and in fact it sounds quite generic to my ears, but it is nice to
hear some actual electric guitar taking an active role for once. And next
thing you know ... the album is over. Which brings me to my final point.
Regardless of Ian finishing with the 'into the Ever-passion play' lyrics,
the music provides almost no sense of resolution, unlike, say,
Brick. I mean, maybe it's just me, but I think that it's just not a
good sign when you spend a whole album waiting for it to end, and when the
end comes, you go, "That's it?".
Regardless, I give the album a six, because as annoying as it can be, it's
not actually bad. After all, Ian's musical skills may have started
their decline with this album, but they didn't disappear overnight, and as
such there is enough good in the album to save it from the trashbins of
history. But it is not a masterpiece. If I want to hear an album that
deals with a soul travelling into hell and facing matters of eternal
perspective, I'll listen to The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway, thank
you very much. Lamb is great - this is not.
TheRubberCow@aol.com (1/01/02)
The Lamb is tough competition, and I don't think it comes very close, but
I don't think this is that much worse than Thick As a Brick. I'm not too
picky about sounds in general when it comes to the 70's, so I don't have
a problem with the synths, and I'm just happy to hear intelligent music
with synths in it, or I guess I should say, more intelligent music with
synths, just in case you were thinking of making better recommendations
that I already have listened to a million times. I actually like what
they do to the sound in the part after the story, (and in the story after
"....a bee...") when the acoustic guitar comes in and those soft
pad/leads are playing and panning around it.....it makes me picture a
sunny field of daisies from the 70's. I don't really see what people are
talking about with the last 15 minutes either. I think it's the most
boring part. But possibly my favorit! e is the part that was extracted
as a "single" for the M.U. comilation, the part that starts with "Colors
I've none - dark or light, red, white or blue." I'll tell you, getting
that song stuck in my head from hearing my parents listen to that
greatest hits and going through it in my head while cutting the grass
must have done a lot for my comositional appreciation and writing
influence....it was easily the first progressive thing I had been exposed
to besides the jazz-fusion of Jeff Beck, and it is some very intelligent
writing and arranging.
ALPH1217@aol.com (2/05/02)
Your rating for this album might actually be a bit too generous! I can
remember purchasing the record in 1973 with eager anticipation only to be
let down enormously. Although it indeed went to number one on the charts
(on the coat tails of the previous albums) it did not capture the
imagination of the buying public who were expecting so much more.
Saxophones, synthesizers, weird lyrics, uncanny starts and stoppages . .
. phew!! Repeated listenings didn't help any and the music critics were
unmerciful as I recall. It's worth mentioning that no part of this
particular album has been played in the live set for many many years
which speaks volumes. This was a clunker.
Chris Federico (drummerboy_91@yahoo.com) (3/15/02)
WHAT?!?? You people don't have very
open ears. This is an adventurous drama of music that
changes tempo and melody before you can really grab
any "hooks," which strikes me as a brilliant way of
pulling off a monstrous project like this. The story
about how humans are not meant to be either purely
good or purely evil is wonderful (your comment "or
something" goes to show how little you really listened
to this album); and this is one of those albums that,
once you've listened to it maybe three times, hurdles
past its "weird" effect and becomes incredibly
addictive. "Progressive Rock" or any such label is
immaterial to me; it's just good music. Granted, this
one's not as immediately accessible as, say,
"Teacher," but remember, you yourself said...ah, never
mind. Now for something you won't like: Genesis has
always been mind-bogglingly dull.
bsitting@mail.math.ucsb.edu (9/02/03)
This is a tough album to talk about. After my initial listen, I was left quite
bored, having purchased this a few weeks after "Nightcap". The captivating jams
in the "Chateau" tapes seemed absolutely devoid of fire when presented here.
And, there was a sax (and synths!). But, I've listened to this enough times
until I can see some sort of overall view of the entire work.
And, I must admit that though this is a drop from TAAB, it wasn't as much as I
initially thought. The sax brought an interesting flavor to the proceedings. As
for the occasional synths, they are a bit unnecessary (stick to the
organ/piano!). Although perhaps unsatisfying as a whole, unlike TAAB, most of
the music here is at least good. Most of the second side is very good, though
not the best of Tull's history. And, I have grown to like some of side one,
once the shock after listening to "Nightcap" wore off a bit (especially, the
beginning jam, and "the lovers of the black and white" sections). Much of this
probably has to do with Jeffrey Hammond's base playing (much more prevalent
here than on "Nightcap"). Oh, and his "Hare" story is quite amusing!
As for the ending, it definitely does not tie things together after a few
really good sections before hand. But, maybe it ends that way, as one doesn't
know what the eventual fate of the character (with his new life, if I
understand the 'story'...). That's my theory if there is any justifiable reason
for the "puttering out" ending.
Rating: This is tough! In sections, much of this works, but many of the
transitions are very rough or even a bit artificial to my ears. And there are
melodies, though nowhere as striking as those on TAAB overall: 7(11).
Jack King (jack@cfl.rr.com) (1/08/04)
Hello,
I have been a Tull fan for the past 33 years.
It is my opinion, The Passion Concert was the best show they ever did.
I can understand most folks being luke warm towards the recording. But
many who saw the show can appreciate the record in a unique and wonderful
way.
Jack
Langas de los Langas (putolangas@hotmail.com) (7/21/05)
Take my advice: keep listening to 'A Passion Play'. Give it a try,
then another one, and yet another one. For a long time I HATED it
(partly because I was expecting another 'Thick as a Brick', I guess),
and now I consider it one of Tull's most brilliant and underrated
works. It's extremely dark and hard to listen, but it deserves extra
attention (the instrumental intro may be my favourite Tull moment,
tied with another instrumental passage in 'Brick'). If you don't get
to like it, then... I guess it's not suitable for everyone.
Best song: Bungle in the Jungle
To be honest with you, half of this album blows worse than anything on
APP. The middle 60% of side one, for instance, is a total
wasteland. Queen and Country is just dumb, with Ian trying to sound all
pompous and such but failing to resonate at all. Ladies is a first-rate
bore, and Back-door Angels is an inordinate pain to sit through. The
playing is very good, of course, but there's virtually no rhyme or reason
to it, as it just keeps going and going and going while Ian blurts out
lyrics about his disgust with people who rely on blind faith to get them
through. All well and good, but where's the melody Ian?
The last two tracks aren't very good either. The Third Hoorah is a
dance-style reprise of the title track (discussed later) and just takes up
space, and Two Fingers, no matter how many times I listen to it, simply
refuses to stick in my ears. Now do you understand why I called this 'a
great band wasted'? Once again, the playing is fine, but ... UGH!
FORTUNATELY, the other five tracks are all great. We kick off with the
title track, with Ian adopting an atmosphere never before heard on a Tull
album, as well as producing a fairly interesting chorus. The best stuff,
however, is sandwiched between the two stretches I mentioned before - kind
of an oasis of good tuneage in a desert of no melody. Sealion starts off
sounding like it's just going to be a generic fast Tull number, but the
verse melody is good, and it has a simply delectable chorus about
"balancing the world on the tip of your nose." Good stuff.
And, of course, the next two tracks are simply wonderful. Skating Away on
the Thin Ice of a New Day has a charming acoustic atmosphere, as well as
more of Ian's terrific lyrics about it sometimes seeming that you're just
a spectator in the play of life. The next track, meanwhile, might not seem
like too much when heard on a greatest hits album, but here, with all of
the other crap on the album, it just seems fabulous. Bungle in the Jungle
has a great, driving rhythm, all sorts of animal noises, yet more
interesting lyrics ("Did he who made kittens put snakes in the grasses?" is a really eye-opening line), and a catchy chorus that even my mother remembers,
even though she was never a heavy Tull fan by any means. It's simply a
great song.
Oh, and as a followup, we get a hilarious acoustic number called Only
Solitaire. If you suspected that Ian might have felt a little angry and
resentful towards all of the critics who mocked his last few conceptual
albums, well, this song proves that you were right. It is completely
self-referential, but the attacks he musters on members of the press are
simply hysterical ("who the hell can he be if he doesn't even sit on
toilet seats?"). It's definitely worth a few listens - you should get a
chuckle from it each time.
So, all in all, this is either a good album marred by some awful garbage,
or a bad album lifted up by bits of good tuneage. Personally, my vote is
towards the latter, and I feel perfectly justified in only giving this
album a 6. Although, to be fair, it's not as bad as it could have been ...
Richard Savill (dreklind@btinternet.com)
Warchild is high point for Jethro Tull. The fact the CD is
currently
out-of
print shows that I am clearly in the minority-that's okay. I still like
it.
I believe you are far too critical towards this album; I agree it really
is
rebellious towards living in modern society. But isn't Tull always
throwing
dirt at this or that? Most of their songs seem to have been written from
the
point of view of what happens to people when they get stuck in grubby
'boys
only' schools.
This album though has a great line/theme:
Warchild, dance the day and dance the night away.
If these words don't mean anything to you, then this album won't interest
you.
My father was a child during the blitz of London. A warchild himself.
Children who experience the war become outsiders and misfits when they
grow to adulthood. They never escape the bonds of war throughout their
life. Thus he consoles himself with every war movie that comes on
television. The memories of war seem to fill his character. I think he's
gone nuts in fact. He hates me because I've never condoned his
nationalist, racist and other extreme right wing views. Most people would
consider him a dinosaur. I would agree that he is.
He could never take the advice Jethro Tull seems to offer in these
songs.
I am fascinated by the way this album seems to capture the day in the life
of post-war people. The theme is certainly not tight and I don't think it
was meant to be. The long guitar solos in Back Door Angels caused my
younger
brothers to turn their heads, refusing to believe that it was an old
Jethro
Tull album.
Oh well, I accept your taste and I do see where you are coming from, but
sheesh to use the word 'crap' in your review is really inexcusable.
(author's note): Fine, it's been replaced with 'garbage'. The
sentiment remains the same.
TheRubberCow@aol.com (1/01/02)
I like Richard Savill's review better. The Third Horrah is a very joyous
romp! And you do like the classic, "Skating Away" but failed to mention
that one it's best attributes is how it keeps adding instruments every
other line until it is has I think 9,000 instruments in there, all played
by Ian Anderson. Though I might be somewhere in between you two on this
one: I will admit that some of the songs are a little generic-tull
sounding. But there is some good stuff on here.
Nick Pulliam (nickpulliam@resonetics.com) (11/13/02)
Love your site,
Your Warchildreview has one glaring inaccuracey that I thought I would
mention before a real Tull nut sees it and goes ape. The song "Solitaire"
was actually recorded before a Passion Play during the infamous Chateau
Disaster sessions. Ian was still the critic's darling at that point and
consequently left with no axe to grind. Your overall review for this
album is on target except you short change the Third Hurrah, one of the
best songs on the disk, IMHO.
Best Regards,
Nick Pulliam
bsitting@mail.math.ucsb.edu (9/02/03)
I can definitely tell this was made after APP. But, the song topics are often
more whimsical (thank goodness!) and the songs are shorter. The songs overall
aren't as melodic as TAAB and back, but most still are enjoyable to listen to
(after expecting the sax and accordion) though not quite as memorable overall.
Only "Back Door Angels" strikes me as truly bad, with its very jarring
(musically) lyric section and a rather pointless jam. I enjoy the 'hits' from
this album, along with "Queen and Country" even! Rating: 7(10).
Notes: 1)Apparently even "Bungle in the Jungle" dates back from the "Chateau"
sessions, according to Ian's liner notes.
2)Also, having obtained the remastered edition, this also has some bonus
tracks including "Paradise Steakhouse", "Sealion 2", "Quartet" (these I've
already commented on with "Nightcap"), "Warchild Waltz" (ok), "Rainbow Blues"
(a pretty good track from the old "MU" compilation).
Trfesok@aol.com (04/29/08)
If APP wasn't enough to convince people that the crash and burn of
Chateau D'isaster had discombobulated Ian's melodic sense, then just
have them compare the 4 tracks here that predated APP ("Skating
Away..", "Bungle..", "Two Fingers", "Only Solitaire") with the rest
of this stuff. The first five tracks mostly lack catchiness and fun,
seeming like pointless rambling. Plus Ian continued to use his
discordant, annoying sax in the arrangements. Yuck. I do like the
Celtic-jig style "Third Hoorah", a lot more upbeat and interesting
than the title track. "Two Fingers" is actually a rework of an
Aqualung outtake called "Lick Your Fingers Clean". Although most
people seem to think this version is inferior, I like it better. It's
less jokey, flows better and rocks harder. And ("Skating Away..",
"Bungle.." and "Only Solitaire" further prove that Ian made a serious
mistake when scrapping Chateau D'isaster. Still, having to dredge up
old material for half of the album indicates that Ian had a ways to
go before he'd recover.
With the exception of "Warchild Waltz", all of the bonus tracks had
previously made it to various collections. "Quartet" is sort of an
interesting "variations on a theme" sort of instrumental. However, I
can't stand the alternate version of "Sealion", another bit of
stupidness along the lines of "The Hare Who Lost His Spectacles."
"Saturation" (from 20 Years of..) would have, unfortunately, fit
right in the first half of the album, sharing the same lack of
coherence. On the other hand, "Rainbow Blues" and "Glory Row" (from
the second Best of.., called Repeat), are strong mid-tempo rockers
that would have been a lot better than "Back Door Angels" and the
title song. The latter also has sax playing better than any of the
album tracks. Excluding them from the album was yet more evidence
that Ian's musical judgement was still impaired at the time.
Best song: Minstrel in the Gallery
It's amazing, really. From a purely technical standpoint, the playing is
nothing less than superb. The song structures are just as complex as ever. It
makes a strong effort at fusing Elizabethan music with rock. And finally,
it has some of the most introspective lyrics that Ian would ever put to
tape. So what went wrong??
Well, what went wrong is that the songs drag and drag and draaaaaaaaaag.
And I have nothing against introspective 'soul-searching' albums - Peter
Gabriel's Us, Lennon's Plastic Ono Band, and Dylan's
Blood On The Tracks are all unabashedly great albums. But those all
had solid melodies up the wazoo - this has almost none. Even the title
track, unquestionably the best song on here, is only somewhat above
average here. The opening acoustic parts are good, of course, and the
electric guitar playing of Barre is solid, but is little more than
technique flashing at its most obvious, if you ask me. Still, at least it
has a good amount of energy, although it certainly shouldn't be almost 9
minutes long. But don't think that I hate the song or anything - I adore
the Bursting Out version, since on that live album almost all of
the fat is trimmed away and the listener is left with a terrifyingly
powerful rocking monster.
The rest of the songs, though ... oy. Well, at least Cold Wind to Valhalla
has an interesting chorus that invokes various Nordic images (though the
verse melody isn't good at all). But Black Satin Dancer is a stately bore,
regardless of the interesting 'buh buh buh buh' noises coming from Ian and
the occasionally emotional guitar work of Martin. And Requiem ... ugh. I
mean, it's pretty while it's on, with only Ian and his acoustic, and I
somewhat like it when I hear it, but for the life of me I CANNOT remember
how it goes. If Ian Anderson wants to present me a downbeat acoustic ballad, then Ian Anderson had better make it have something resembling a melody, not like somebody tuning his guitar.
Side two is even worse. One White Duck, regardless of the depth of the
lyrics (having one white duck is a symbol of being divorced, if I recall
right), has virtually no semblance of melody, just some random chord
changes here and there with Ian prattling on (at least the part of the chorus where he sings the title of the song has something resembling a hook, though). The nadir, though, is the
seventeen-minute Baker St. Muse, with Ian taking us on a tour through the
streets of London and only occasionally coming up anything resembling a
melody (I hate to keep stressing the total lack of melody on this album,
but I'm not the one who recorded this piffle). And oh my goodness does it
drag - I'm falling asleep by minute three. And remember, I can sit through
Tales From Topographic Oceans without sleeping almost no
problem. To be fair, there's a section in the middle where the band somewhat wakes up and goes into passable jammy groove, but it's nothing to get overly worked up about unless you need to desperately collect every last bit of Ian/Martin jamming recorded in the 70's.
All in all, I'm sure I've offended the heck out of many, many hard-core
Tull fans here. Too bad, really - who else would be reading this page? But
I refuse to bend on my disgust with this album - in fact, one more listen
and I might have dropped the rating further. Only people who judge albums
solely by either complexity (which I am not, regardless of how much I enjoy
good prog) or by how many "generic Tull" aspects a work contains need this album.
TheRubberCow@aol.com (1/01/02)
Well, I am not offended by your review in general; you are entitled to
your own opinion, and it sounds like you will never like this album. The
only thing that is offensive is that you say one would only need this
album if you judge off of complexity alone. I think there is much more
to this album than complexity. I guess I hear melodies that you don't.
"One White Duck" and the main part of "Baker St. Muse" are stuck in my
for the whole rest of the day any time I listen to this album. Granted,
I don't like it as much as Thick As a Brick, but I think it's a damn good
album.
Chris Federico (drummerboy_91@yahoo.com) (3/15/02)
WHAT???!!!??? This album's
beautiful, hard-rocking, poetic,
fantastic...everything "Too Old..." is NOT. The
"Little Light Music" rendition of "One White Duck" is
better than this version with its strange vocal
effects, but other than that, I just can't get enough
of this masterpiece album. For you to suggest that
"One White Duck" has "no semblance of melody" simply
means that you've never given it a chance, or maybe,
indeed, that you haven't listened to it more than
once, so maybe I'm being too hard on you. But at least
give "Cold Wind To Valhalla" two or three listens,
forgetting for the moment about what might be, for
you, the overwhelming musicality of the other stuff,
like "Baker St. Muse" (maybe you have to be a composer
to appreciate some of this stuff...not that I'm much
for ego, but this is definitely Tull music for those
who might've outgrown the ordinary).
bsitting@mail.math.ucsb.edu (9/02/03)
Prog. rock with Elizabethan overtones sure sounds intriguing, at least on
paper. But, there are even fewer melodies on this album than the last two
subtracted (instead of combined)! This includes the title track (which despite
that, I still enjoy) and "Cold Wind to Valhalla" (still an okay song). After
that things get more interesting. Other than "Black Satin Dancer" containing a
nice Barre solo, there's not much more to say. Most of it is very unmemorable,
though inoffensive when on. And, "Baker St. Muse" just goes on and on... . This
is sad to say, especially since the group jams aren't too bad (very tight, but
ultimately not really going anywhere). Rating: About 5(8), since nothing is
truly offensive.
Trfesok@aol.com (01/30/07)
Well, I enjoy it a little bit more than you do. Martin's playing, I
think, reaches a peak here. Tight, powerful, even if it does get to
be a bit much. You call the late 80's Tull "heavy metal", but this, I
think, is the hardest the group ever got. On the other hand, John
Evan gets almost nothing to do, which is a minus.
The weakest parts are some of the mix-and-match sections of "Black
Satin Dancer" and "Baker Street Muse," which do sound quite
discordant and disjointed in places. Still, I do enjoy these tracks
more than big portions of the previous two albums. I really like the
gorgeous, moving ballad "One White Duck/Nothing At All," too. I would
say that the album is good for an occasional listen, but they did
better, both earlier and later.
The remastered version has some bonus stuff, too. The are versions of
"Minstrel in the Gallery" and "Cold Wind to Valhalla" which are
billed as live, but are really working versions of the acoustic
intros that were broadcast on the BBC. But you also get a gorgeous
instrumental called "Pan Dance" which was played on the tour, and
eccentric ballad called "March, the Mad Scientist" and an even better
ballad called "Summer Day Sands" which really should have been on the
original album. If you hear the remaster, you might bump the rating a
point or two because of these songs.
Best song: Too Old to Rock and Roll, Too Young to Die
Anyways, this is a concept album, but this time the concept exists because
the album was meant to be a soundtrack for a film that never got made. The
story can be found in the liner notes and on all sorts of other websites,
so I won't bother with it here. Suffice it to say, though, that the story
is heavily based around 'rock and roll,' which means that Ian had little
choice but to go along. The result is a collection of tunes which, while not always spectacular, tends to consist of actual melodies, good riffs and good guitar work. No, this isn't Tull returning in any way to the rip-roaring days of Nothing is Easy, but there's a lot of punch and efficiency to the moments that are actually supposed to rock, whereas in some other instances of 70's Tull attempting to rock the result was a cacophonous bore
The classic of the album is, of course, the title track, which has a
particularly interesting guitar intro, a terrific vocal melody, and
eventually speeds up to become a 50's-style piano-driven boogie-woogie
tune. Neat, and anthemic to boot. The more 'rocking' tracks are relatively generic, but Quizz Kid is able to satisfy me with its good amount of distorted riffage, Big Dipper has several decent hooks (I also like the small contrast in the verse instrumental feel vs the chorus instrumental feel), and Taxi Grab has a terrific rhythm to it.
There are also a couple of ballads which, as far as I'm concerned, are miles above the more "intimate" numbers on Minstrel. I see no reason From a Dead Beat to an Old Greaser should be seen as any less tender than Requiem, not to mention that this has a logical melody and a nice David Palmer saxaphone solo to boot. And I definitely don't see how any Tull. And, man, if The Chequered Flag (Dead or Alive) isn't one of the most glorious odes to the power of great music to transcend time and mortality, especially with that beeeeautiful, low-key electric piano under the strings, then I just don't know what's what.
There's not a tremendous amount else to say about the album; nothing else on the album really stands out as terrific, but there's also definitely nothing I'd consider a lowlight. As far as I'm concerned, where a hardcore Tuller might think I'm a complete moron, my take is that (a) it's fun to listen to when it's on, (b) the melodies are consistently above average and (c) there's tons more energy here than on Minstrel. And that, as far as I'm concerned, is enough.
baba dz (cirobl70@yahoo.se) (04/29/08)
I totaly agree with you. Too Old To Rock n Roll...is a very good and
underrated album.
Best song: The Whistler
Unfortunately, this seemingly shows, once again, that I'm not a real
Jethro Tull fan. An enthusiast, for sure, but not a fan. There are two
main problems I have with this album. The first is that, regardless of his
newly-found medium of musical expression, Ian too often took the same
approach to writing the tunes on here that he did on APP and
Minstrel - filling them with droning, never-ending (though complex
and technically flawless) guitar, flute and organ jams. And the second
problem is that even when he stays in 'pure' folk territory, the interest
level that I can muster for them is hit-or-miss at best.
Not to say the album is bad, though. In fact, the first quarter of
the album is actually pretty good. The opening title track starts with a
beautiful folkish melody with all sorts of cool harmonizing before going
into one of those jams that I mentioned earlier, but here it's quite
enjoyable. The jam is well structured, and I especially love the booming
drums at the beginning before Ian and Co. take off. And most of all, it's
fairly short. Good boy, Ian!
Immediately following are a pair of 'pure' folk numbers, and they're both
perfectly acceptable. Jack in the Green is a pretty flute-and-guitar
driven with Ian prattling on about some nature guy who lives in the forest
and does things like drink from an acorn cup. I enjoy it, and it even
found its way into the live set. Following is another pretty song,
entitled Cup of Wonder. The verse melody is decent enough, and the chorus
is even catchy in its own way! I especially like the way he goes
"...cup of crimson wonderererererer" at the end of each pass through the
chorus.
Unfortunately, the album starts to get very, very boring from this
point onward. Hunting Girl, regardless of its brisk tempo, is an extremely
dull attempt at a rocker that just goes and goes on. The following Ring
Out Solstice Bells, which was actually a hit for the band, has a decent
chorus, but the verse melody is amazingly difficult to remember even 5
seconds after it's over. And then we have Velvet Green, which COMPLETELY
escapes my mind, except for the nice harpsichord at the very beginning.
Strangely enough, though, it seems to be the choice of many Tull fans as
their favorite song by the group ever, so what do I know ...
Fortunately, the following song, a Celtic-style ballad entitled The
Whistler, is simply great. It has a terrific melody, filled with flutes
and all sorts of 'exotic'-sounding instruments over a brisk rhythm
section. It's truly an awesome song (though I'm betting Ian directly
stole the melody from an actual Celtic ballad), and I specifically raised
the rating of the album a point for it.
Unfortunately, the album ends on a down note, and the point which I gave
the album for The Whistler is taken away for the last two songs (boy, I'm
a little bastard). Well, not so much for the last one, Fire at Midnight,
which is merely another one of the dull acoustic numbers (but with a predictable "generic Tull" instrumental section in the middle as well) on the album (ok,
so the deducted point was more for the dullness of the album in general
rather than for the last two songs - I just wanted to feel saucy for a
moment). Unfortunately, Pibroch (Cap in Hand) is exactly what I was
talking about when I mentioned the never-ending jams near the beginning.
The playing is impeccable and grand, but you have no idea how much that "look at me, I am mighty and bombastic and great!" guitar line irritates me as it gets repeated ad nauseum, and the other instrumental breaks don't grab me either. And it's almost
nine minutes long. And it's BORING. *twitch*
Ok ... as much as I respect Ian's attempt to try something slightly
different, he just didn't pull it off in the songwriting department here,
if you ask me. And again, I know this is a fan favorite, and I am again
sorry if any Tull-fanatics are ready to cry. On the plus side, though,
Ian's next attempt at 'folk-prog' is much better ...
NYGiants30@aol.com (9/03/01)
You know this is there best album.
It is so versatile.
Pibroch has some great folkish crap on it.
this is there beast since........well,its just there best!!!!!!!!!!
TheRubberCow@aol.com (1/01/02)
Well, even though you dissed my baby, this review was more fair than than
the previous one. I do love this album, but I can kind of see what
you're saying about "Pibroch" and I have always thought "Fires At
Midnight" was a little dull. But besides that, the songs that are on
here are great, and the whole sound/cover art is nice. Before I heard
it, judging from the title and cover art, I was expecting a very folky,
almost all acoustic album, which I would have enjoyed, but was pleasantly
surprised to find a very warm blend of this outside, folky sound with a
great deal of electric guitar and rockiness. Kind of like you're out in
the woods, but someone started a fire.
Chris Federico (drummerboy_91@yahoo.com) (3/15/02)
Ian didn't go in this direction
because of the lack of commercial success on the part
of the largely awful "Too Old..." LP, as you imply. If
you'll notice, EVERY Tull album is different than all
the others (well, Warchild and Too Old... might be
identically dull, but still...). Songs From the Wood
is their last excellent studio album, I'm afraid. It's
a breath of fresh air in ANY climat
Vancouver
This Was - 1968 Chrysalis
7 (10)
Stand Up - 1969 Chrysalis
9 (14)
Benefit - 1970 Chrysalis
7 (10)
Nothing Is Easy - Live At The Isle Of WIght 1970 - 2004 Eagle
7 (11)
Aqualung - 1971 Chrysalis
9 (13)
*Thick as a Brick - 1972 Chrysalis*
10 (14)
Living In The Past - 1972 Chrysalis
9 (12)
A Passion Play - 1973 Chrysalis
6 (9)
Warchild - 1974 Chrysalis
6 (9)
Minstrel in the Gallery - 1975 Chrysalis
4 (7)
Too Old to Rock and Roll, Too Young to Die - 1976
Chrysalis
7 (11)
Songs From the Wood - 1977 Chrysalis
6 (9)