Similarity, Tull/Zeppelin

This really only concerns two specific songs from each; I was listening to the B-side instrumental, From Later earlier by Tull and each time the part came in which first comes in at 0:21 (repeats later on), I kept scratching my head thinking, "where have I heard this besides here..???" Finally it dawned on me that Zeppelin use an extremely similar rhythmic/riff configuration in In My Time Of Dying. Certainly not earth shattering, but anyone else pick up on this..?

 

i will have to check that out. have not heard from later for years.

 

...yea, me neither. I decided to play the entire Living In The Past album having a very rare moment of relaxation on my hands...and when I heard this section come up, my head turned (as I scratched it).

 

Both played Celtic influenced folk and rock... Zeppelin rocked harder and had a rangeyer singer..
Similarities exist, but the bands are very different and shouldn't be compared
I find most Zeppelin albums to be more accessible and more immediately gratifying. Always thought it was ridiculous comparing the live energy, apples and oranges. I tend to listen to "Living in the past" and "Aqualung", the rock side of Tull. The prog side of Tull hasn't been my thing, but it might someday...... I've spent way too much time on Zeppelin.

 

Am pretty sure that I remember reading that Zep hated Tull's music, calling them "Jethro Dull"?

 

They were very happy to have them as tour openers in 1969. I've heard rumours that animosity began when Tull frequently blew Zep off stage (and I can believe that they did).

Ian Anderson incurred Robert Plant's enmity by saying something along the lines of 'with their riffs and my lyrics, we'd have a pretty good rock band.'

Personally, I think Zeppelin were jealous as Tull seemed to snapping at their heels in 1972/3.

 

In my opinion the idea of that bit in "From Later" being similar to "In My Time of Dying" is a pretty big stretch.

Both great bands at any rate.

 

That notion--not just with these two bands, but any two bands--always seems dubious to me.

I could see if there were a significant difference in the crowd reaction, so that it was clear that the crowd was clamoring for an encore from the opener, while many were leaving during the headliner's set or something like that, but such a difference would be extremely rare.

The idea that a headlining band is going to think that an opener "blew them off the stage" is pretty absurd.

 

A quote I recall having read for the first time around 1974 - in association in my mind with the release of their then-new album (War Child) - IA saying in the same interview that the flute was getting tedious to him and that the sax was much better, so it had to be in '73/'74 because he changed his mind completely after that.

Jethro Tull got so big in North America in the early '70s, and their music being globally so different from Zeppelin's, that I have no problem imagining certain crowds showing their preference to Tull in some of those shows, in spite of the Zeppelin legend (that they hit the USA like a storm, etc.). Just a feeling I have.

 

very strange but I did exactly the same yesterday , but must listen to the song again to see if I can hear the similarities , but the splendid Life is a long song ep (together with Thick as a brick their best release ever) and the acoustic LZ tracks (mainly on LZIII) go hand in hand

 

Both bands crossed paths at Island Records studios in Basing Street London. Tull were recording Aqualung in the big room, while Zeppelin were working on tracks from IV in the smaller studio space.

 

I always thought if Jethro Tull had broken up in 71 after the release of Aqualung, today they’d be grouped together with bands like Zeppelin. Both blues rock hased bands, with folk touches and hard rocking guitar. Of course after Aqualung, Tull went in a completely different direction.

 

Very different bands, but their roots and time periods are very similar. Tull's best years were from 1968-1978 (my opinion), which were very close to Zep's. I love both bands, but it can be difficult to find commonalities in their music.

 

i doubt the might zep ever felt any "heel nipping"

 

I was heavily into both bands back in the day. I favored Tull by leaps and bounds (hehe). It is a bit of a bummer how Zeppelin's fan base has continued to grow, while Tull's has not.

 

my friend was kicked out of zep's dressing room at the fillmore east in early 69 when he told them they weren't fit to shine tull's boots. true story.

 

Easy to understand. Why would anyone tolerate some a-hole insulting them in their dressing room?

 

More differences than similarities between the two bands, I'd say.

 

I'm sure they did, for a little while. Tull's albums charted #1 in America in '72 and '73, and they had no problems - still for a few years after that - selling out the Madison Square Garden, L.A. Forum, etc., and on at least one occasion several nights in a row.

 

Agreed. For one thing Zeppelin sold about ten times as many records and played to ten times as many people. Not to mention ten times as many plays on the radio nowadays.

 

Im a fan of both bands but if the two bands had to cover each others songs I suspect Zeppelin would have had the more difficult task.....way more difficult if not close to impossible.

 

With regard to musicianship, let’s remember that two members of Zeppelin were leading session musicians when Tull were just beginning to learn how to play.

 

Not really. Ian couldn’t get anywhere near Plant’s vocals. And Zeppelin could probably do a killer “A New Day Yesterday”.

 

Yeah,im sure Zeppelin could have easily pulled off Thick as Brick,Passion Play,anything off of Stormwatch or Too Old To Rock and Roll or any other Tull album....piece of cake....while Tull would have struggled with Rock and Roll,Misty Mountain Hop and When the Levee Breaks,ect etc.

 

Nope, but Jethro Tull would sound quite comical trying to do “The Immigrant Song”, “Trampled Underfoot”, “Black Dog” or “Fool in the Rain”. Point is neither could do what the other did.