Jethro Tull didn't quite translate through the generations

Jethro Tull are the most famous underground band in the world according to Ian Anderson.

 

I'm old. And I have no idea whatsoever about the music teens like. I can find out what's in the charts, but I don't know a single person who listens to any of it. With old age comes the confidence to not care.

Tull have been going for more than 40 years. As such, it stands to reason they would have had good periods, and bad periods. It's unrealistic to expect anything else. Along with their classic early albums, I'd not want to be without Broadsword, Under Wraps, Catfish Rising, and A Little Light Music. They're great albums. But along with that we get things like dot com, which is half baked. Tull aren't an all or nothing affair. Whether they appeal to youngsters or not........ I don't know. I learned about them by sitting around with people older than I, and hearing it. How many people sit around in groups just listening to music, these days?

 

This.

I've seen Tull at least 10 times and we own a BUNCH of their albums. My wife is/was a huge Tull fan and she had most of their albums when we met.

But, I agree, for some reason, their catalog did not age well. Much of it seems mired in the 70s proggie catalog with Emerson Lake and Palmer, and its an acquired taste at best. The more "basic", less proggie sounding albums, Benefit, etc, probably resonate better with the average listener today.

In my opinion, no matter what Anderson says, its not Tull without Martin Barre. But, Ian Anderson gets to decide what Tull is... not me.

 

There's nothing quite like the sound of Ian Anderson's flute playing live. His sound is incomparable. That sound is a thrill ride live.

 

I still can't believe Barre and Anderson ended up like this. It's madness. I've still not bought the latest Tull because.... well, it just doesn't seem urgent without Barre. I've heard the new one, and while the band are competent, there are problems. The main problem for me is on drums, they're just too straight. But yeah, I totally miss Barre's licks....... maybe I'll pick up the new one at some point...

 

I used to think it would be nice if someone young who I may know liked the kind of music I liked .Now.... I don't want to seem like I don't care but I don't care.

The ones that do also amaze with there good taste that goes beyond todays offerings.Like what was said most are into todays music which is what we were into thirty five years ago.

 

Yeah but the difference is that there are still new rock bands that some kids are into and are considered hip, Black Keys, White Stripes etc...so the genre is still perpetuated somewhat unlike Big Band, I think thats why these questions about bands like Tull come up.

 

Actually TaaB, Passion Play, War child, Minstrel, Too Old To RnR, Songs From the Wood, Heavy Horses, and Stormwatch all charted higher in the US than the UK.

 

Anderson doesn't say it's Tull. Tull hasn't toured since 2011, and the last two albums are billed Jethro Tull's Ian Anderson.

 

Great post,but in the early 70s,when I was in junior high,I was pretty much burned out on the state of contempoary music,and it would take punk to bring me out of my state of disgust.I did not like 99% of what I heard on the radio at the time.What I was discovering at that time was early rhythm and blues,and 1920s to 1950s jazz.Fletcher Henderson and Sonny Til and The Orioles spoke to me,Jethro Tull,Pink Floyd,and Joe Walsh did not.

It would be years later,in the 80s and 90s,that I would discover that this was one of the greatest,most exciting periods in all of music,it's just that I wasn't hearing anything I liked on the radio or at my local record stores.If there were radio stations at the time who were hip enough to play Brinsley Schwarz,Fela Kuti,Kraftwerk,Coloured Balls,Toots and The Maytals,or Gong,I would have felt very different.I don't even recall Humble Pie or Frank Zappa getting much love on my local rock radio stations at the time.It took many years,well into my thirties,before I could appreciate either ABBA,who I love the heck out of,or Jethro Tull,or Pink Floyd.I am still more selective on what I like from both of these latter bands.Tull and Floyd are acquired tastes,sort of like Phillip Glass is.

I own most of their albums,but I never play any Tull,or any Pink Floyd after Atom Heart Mother.I would much rather toss on some Stax/Volt or some Kraftwerk than DSOTM or Aqualung.

 

I remember hearing Aqualung when I was in High School in the late 80s early 90s. I bought a copy of that album, but I really never got into them much other than that and "Teacher"

 

I have noticed that whenever one of these threads about old bands comes along, members will state either that few young people are into the old band, or that many young people are into the old band. Both sides will back up this position by citing their experience with very few young people they know. I think that this type of anecdotal evidence is not very useful.

 

Their loss. But I guess seeing Cyrus shaking her butt is just more appealing that some excellent Classic rock.

 

I dont know the full story about how Anderson and Barre came to their differences. I heard just a little bit but there wasnt really any sort of explanation except Barre saying something like "Ian doesnt call anymore".

There has to be more to it than that - anybody know?

 

http://jethrotull.proboards.com/post/54155/thread
Currently you are traveling as Jethro Tull's Ian Anderson and also your new album "Homo Erraticus" before. At the same time your former touring guitarist and second longest Tuller (from 1969) as Martin Barre's Jethro Tull & Band. What are the reasons for the split, and it is final?

Ian Anderson - There were about 28 members at the annual Jethro Tull. And in my last phase of life I want to make my name known better before I bless the temporal. For many people, I am Jethro Tull or Mister. I do not care if it's worn out after 46 years, but I was always embarrassed given the naming by our former manager and whether the identity theft, the result was the real historical names (English agricultural pioneer) to do business. The music of Jethro Tull lives on - whether by me, Martin Barre or one of the former band members. It is also great that Martin Barre now organized his own musical life. Our interaction in the future is open. In the moment in which we have both projects and tours with own separate new songs as well as Jethro Tull-repertoire, the people themselves are used to it.
17.11.2014
Questions by Michael Schaust - translated to English

 

excellent tastes - glad to see someone younger enjoying JT - and I see you like late 70s Genesis too

I grew up mid 70s TaaB first album I bought on release date
love the folk era MitG, SftW, and HH - am I missing any superb folkish stuff after that?
the early blues stuff so so
I do like the last two Ian albums and saw the TaaB II tour

Jethro Tull is as far away as hip as you can mention
The hipsters are listening to soul, 70s prog, 80s new wave ala Joy Division and Gang of Four and Nick Drake

 

oh boy, that's like saying the "paranoid album" IS black sabbath. from a classic rock radio perspective you might be correct.

 

The exact opposite of what kids think is cool today:

 

Really? Apart from the flute (which would probably be something phallic today), Ian is wearing something I'd see at the AMA's.

 

Not on a big hairy man, though...

 

Benefit is a Progressive album!

 

and what other radio formats would play jethro tull besides classic rock?

 

Really?
Beard- check
Goatherder/serf style fashion ensemble- check
Codpiece- optional, but cool
Longhair- fine
High boots- ditto
Carrying a musical instrument- essential.
I see folks that look just like this in the checkout line, if not behind the cashier's counter, of Whole Foods in downtown Austin everyday.

 

Kids nowadays aren't much different from when "we" were kids 40 or more years ago when Tull was more popular. Most young people like the new and disdain the old. Much of that is a generation gap mostly created by marketing. Ask yourself why would some music appeal to younger people and other music to older people? There isn't anything inherent in the music itself that would make it so, other than perhaps lyrics that resonate more with one stage of life or another (and maybe attendant cultural changes to some extent). The rest is just fashion and image, it seems to me, and planned obsolescence (part of the economic system which strongly affects the music business). To a large extent, young people like and buy what they are told to buy, either from advertising or peer pressure/approval. There are plenty of exceptions to this, but usually not enough to generate real or lasting popularity for a group that seems out of step or a bit strange and unusual.

 

God love 'em, but they do have a Renaissance Fair air about them, don't they.