Jethro Tull didn't quite translate through the generations

Rock music back in the 50s was too simply composed. Similar to rock music today. Has nothing to do with the age of it

 

Young generation hasnt progressed since the movement of punk in the late 70s and hard rock in the 80s. Following music has become like following trends to the young generation for the last 30 years. As for me I only listen to quality

 

Funny, Zappa was a gateway drug for my kids getting into our generation's music. The marimbas and strange vocals (Dental Floss comes to mind) hooked.them in.

 

The band did put out a lot of junk, but it wasn't all junk. I can't say I've heard all or even most of their 80s/90s/00s output, but I will say that A Little Light Music (1992) and Catfish Rising (1991) have tunes that come very close to equalling some of the best music they ever did. Seems like when they returned to form they could really sound great, but trying to sound relevant or modern or whatever turned the music into what most ageing classic rock bands end up doing when they 'try' -- turgid, lumbering, forgettable dreck. But the acoustic tunes on the two albums I just mentioned are classic JT, great.

 

1978 was one of tulls best years. Love several tracks on heavy horses

 

They have a strange place in my rotation. Some albums I love, others I can't give the time of day/too big to take in (I know Thick as a Brick is good, but it's really hard to digest one 40 minute song). I've recently come to love Minstrel in the Gallery. Martin Barre just kills it on Black Satin Dancer and the title track. The folk era is great, the early stuff I'm still digging through (love Aqualung) but haven't gone past the 70s stuff. I'm 17 myself, and while Ian doesn't always resonate with me, when he does, it's pretty great.

 

Just got through playing the DCC "Aqualung". First time I can say I really enjoyed it, even though I was busy texting with this girl I met...

 

Aren't you married?

 

Nowadays, regarding the younger folks, only hipsters like Jethro Tull.

 

I've been listening to rock since around 1970, and I've only met one person who owned any JD albums (two, I believe). And he only bought them because his gf liked them.

As others have said, I think it's an Anglophile thing. They always seemed far more popular across the pond, possibly because there's a perception that they are the 'quintessential English rock band', and that we're all part-time Morris Dancers who prance around intoning nasally with a finger in our ears. But it's really not like that here. Trust me.

 

Try slipping in a Tull cd on the way to a Rennaisance Faire...Stand Up and Minstrel in the Gallery worked for everyone who took a ride with me to one, including my niece and nephew. It got everyone in the spirit!

But yeah, you gotta be in the mood for it. A spirited minstrel from the court of King Henry like Ian Anderson is not as accessible as a Hendrix or Zeppelin.

 

And the old KLOS and the old KVYS.

 

Sounds to me like they were just closed minded to the sound. I'm not the hugest Tull fan, loved Thick as a Brick, but when some of his songs come on radio they still sound good.

 

Tull does not always work in environments with all listeners. The bombast and pretentiousness can be off putting. Yes it can be. I like the various albums and eras up to 1979 or so. The 1988 Philly show is one of their great live recordings as well.

But the sound and those lyrics are not for everyone.

 

Interesting. Being around rock radio in California a few decades ago, Tull, like The Eagles and Fleetwood Mac, were inescapable.

 

I'm a bit wary of this talk comparing 'kids' to 40+ people. I'm 47 and was always the kid in school who bought all the records. Tull were considered pretty much over by the early '80s. Broadsword was liked because it had a modern sound and it got them some traction in the mainstream rock press (even Kerrang), but even then they were considered a band for old hippies. Very much the remnants of something, rather than a current act. Their original audience must be 60+ at this point, surely?

However, these days I'm not sure there's much of generation gap in music. Music just isn't such a central plank of youth culture as it was until (probably) the 1990s.
Everything is available and stuff will find it's audience, large or small, but probably one person at a time. I remember seeing the Magic Band reunion show at All Tomorrow's Parties in 2003. That was NEVER mainstream music and most of it was many years before my time and yet there were 2000 people my age and younger in that room and we were dancing. John French reckoned the audience was about 10x what they used to play to back in the day. Public Enemy headlined the following night and the same audience went nuts all over again. Do 'kids today' get Beefheart? Probably not. Does his music have an audience? Sure it does. I suspect that the same goes for other, more oddball, stuff like Tull. It's just not for everyone.

 

I think the 20 year old kids getting into older stuff are a little more open minded than the people 10 years older than them.
12 years ago I found many of the younger people I worked around would scoff at the bands like Tull and Crimson as well as 80s albums I held dear to me while they listened to their Puddle Of Mud and Linkin Park albums, stuff I just couldn't get into.
Now those 29, 30, 32 year olds may still scoff at the awesome tunes that Scorsese puts in his films or the songs on that Guardians Of The Galaxy film soundtrack but I have noticed some younger people are really giving that stuff a chance.
I don't think a lot of them were tainted by having to rely more on MTV and VH1, stations that seem to have little relevance on younger people's music choices.
I will admit, I got a kick out of MTV in the 80s.

 

Beefheart did get some play out here in the Southwest with songs like Diddy Wah Diddy, Abba Zabba and Click Clack, although it's been a few years since I've heard some of those tunes.
Just like Beefheart's old bud Frank Zappa, who had some popular tunes like Dancing Fool and Valley Girl.
There are definitely some old fans of those guys ( a couple I'm related to) out here who introduce that stuff to younger folks, and the record shops in LA and Vegas have plenty of Beefheart and Zappa on hand.

 

I think you are quite of of touch. Based on what I see around me (and I work in a University, so what I see is an endless turnover of 18/19/20 year olds) music is far less trend driven than at anytime since before The Beatles. Trends are about commerce, and the money just isn't there in music any more. Also (assuming you aren't being ironic), everybody thinks they are listening to quality.

 

To us at our age you may think that, but ask a few dozen younger people, and MOST will roll their eyes at "our music".

They do not relate to it for the most part, and DO think it sounds very dated and old.

Music, YES, has changed drastically in many ways since the 70's and 80's, and anyone younger can name off dozens of bands that are drastically different sounding in many ways from our 70s warhorses.

There may be bits of sound that are similar, but that is where it ends.

Now if you said the 90's, I might agree a lot more, but the 60's, 70's or 80, are simply old music to any younger person today.

Some MAY like it for its retro appeal, OR, for a few select groups that still have some appeal, but overall they simply do not care!

 

I'm painting with a broad brush... but the approach wasn't just lyrical... Aqualung, Thick As a Brick, and Minstrel have a distinct renaissance music approach. Sure you have Martin Barre in there.. apparently a sailing minstrel who drifted off course and stopped in the Delta for a few weeks before returning to the Atlantic. But I'm not saying NO ONE or EVERYONE responds the same way. I'm just saying.. put this music into the hands of a group of Iggy Azalea's or hip hop youth or emo dudes and it's generally going to get "what's this old stuff reaction". I remember reading like 4 or 5 years ago an interview with one of Run-D.M.C responding to the cool reaction from members of Aerosmith to the 1985 collaboration on Walk This Way. His response was.. "well WE just liked the guitar riff.. the rest of it was the most corny hillbilly s*** we'd ever heard we couldn't understand a thing he was saying. " So much for the meeting of two musical worlds and old rock and roll connecting with modern hip hop. Misunderstanding is the USUAL response with the more embracing, enlightened, listen to it with an open mind and heart being the anomaly.

By the way... as a young kid in New York City I only heard the hard rock stuff that made AM for years so stuff like Smoke on the Water or Stairway was familiar but it wasn't until 77 or 78 that I started listening to rock radio full time. And one of the first major albums released after that point besides Springsteen was Songs From the Wood. It's not music I revisited after that point but about 4 months ago at the height of summer I went on my now defunct MOG/Beats account and called up Songs and listened to the hits... The Whistler, Wonder, even the Christmas song.. title track... still holds up well!!!

 

Good point, probably accurate.

 

Maybe saying I "outgrew them" sounds condescending. It might be better to say they just didn't speak to me. I'm not really sure why, guess I'd have to think about it. But I know I never bought another LZ album after their second.
Not a big deal as there are so many bands from that era that I never got into. Many of them get a lot of good press here. They didn't do anything for me, no big deal.

 

When I was in my mid to late teens I had never heard of Jethro Tull either. Well, actually I had but as the agricultarist who invented the seed drill... I can't now remember how I got into Tull the band but I don't remember them getting much airplay back then.
Tull have some great moments but in my opinion a lot of so-so stuff. Aqualung though is a great album.

 

I'm in that age range (mid 20's) and 99% of what I listen to is older stuff... maybe it's because I grew up with it, or maybe it just resonates more with me.
These days I'm more versed in music than my parents, which is ironic since they got me started... some of my favorite bands they've never heard of.
In the "information age" we live in its easier than ever for a young person to learn about the wide world of music, it's a shame not many take advantage of it.