Since a few people on here are quick to point out when "proper" members of the band are missing, it's worth noting that Tony Williams is standing in on bass for this gig.
Nevertheless the video is Tull at their very best. Ian Anderson's current album and tour is nothing like that. But it's still very enjoyable for different reasons.
I wish I could agree with your view. Unfortunately, I don't consider TAAB2 to be a masterpiece at all. Initially I was very happy with it because I was afraid that Ian would fail miserably in this endeavor. Well, IMO, he obviously didn't fail, but it in no way compares to the original. I also don't think it should have been called TAAB2 without getting the input of the original members.
The original is a masterpiece. Probably a once in a lifetime masterpiece. An album that was able to raise my spirits on an almost daily basis for at least a decade or more. The new piece can never have that same impact on me ... not with Ian's current vocals and not without the input of the other band members.
It has been my experience that the great works by Tull ceased when the band stopped working as a close-knit unit. Ian has said many times that the most recent material is done in a much more isolated manner. Ian writes the stuff and then sends the score to the other members wherever they happen to be on the globe. I think this is probably the biggest problem with the newer material. Moreover, I really think he should give up singing.
Hey Ian, how about a progressive album of stunning instrumentals ... with flowing acoustic guitar, flute, Martin, and a great drummer. Now, that could be a masterpiece.
By original members are we talking Glenn, Mick and Clive? Or the replacement guys sourounding the only original Tull member, sorta like the current outing?
Yes, I think that expresses what "Tull is" quite elegantly. A great band. I was comparing drumming styles and I think these two clips show the difference between Barriemore Barlow and other, later, Tull drummers (in this case, Gerry Conway) . The difference is shocking, and it shows really what Tull (the entity) had in the 70s. Again, pay close attention to the drums (also the remarkable Martin Barre):
And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George, who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision...
Morthoron Potent Glockenspielist member is offline
Curmudgeonly Wordwraith
Joined: Jun 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 621
Re: TJTB's 'Official' Review of TAAB2 « Reply #66 on Apr 24, 2012, 6:26pm »
I wish I could agree with your view. Unfortunately, I don't consider TAAB2 to be a masterpiece at all. Initially I was very happy with it because I was afraid that Ian would fail miserably in this endeavor. Well, IMO, he obviously didn't fail, but it in no way compares to the original. I also don't think it should have been called TAAB2 without getting the input of the original members.
The original is a masterpiece. Probably a once in a lifetime masterpiece. An album that was able to raise my spirits on an almost daily basis for at least a decade or more. The new piece can never have that same impact on me ... not with Ian's current vocals and not without the input of the other band members.
It has been my experience that the great works by Tull ceased when the band stopped working as a close-knit unit. Ian has said many times that the most recent material is done in a much more isolated manner. Ian writes the stuff and then sends the score to the other members wherever they happen to be on the globe. I think this is probably the biggest problem with the newer material. Moreover, I really think he should give up singing.
Hey Ian, how about a progressive album of stunning instrumentals ... with flowing acoustic guitar, flute, Martin, and a great drummer. Now, that could be a masterpiece.
By original members are we talking Glenn, Mick and Clive? Or the replacement guys sourounding the only original Tull member, sorta like the current outing?
You need a history lesson before you make such callow remark. There's much more to it than Ian hiring studio musicians as he has for the past two decades.
You forgot David Palmer, who appears in one form or the other on all Tull albums in the 60s and 70s (including their first, "This Was" and every other except "A Passion Play"). John Evan, Jeffrey Hammond and Barrie Barlow were actually playing with Ian before Tull (as early as 1962 and 1963), Evan and Hammond returning in 70 and Barlow in 1971.
Saying Martin Barre is not an original Tull member, while technically correct (he started after the album "This Was" was released in late 68), is rather like saying David Gilmour was not original to Pink Floyd, just a hired toady. Too funny.
And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George, who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision...
Since a few people on here are quick to point out when "proper" members of the band are missing, it's worth noting that Tony Williams is standing in on bass for this gig.
Nevertheless the video is Tull at their very best. Ian Anderson's current album and tour is nothing like that. But it's still very enjoyable for different reasons.
Yes, sadly I never saw John Glascock live. I was looking forward to seeing him on this tour and found out after the show that Tony filled in for him.
I wish I could agree with your view. Unfortunately, I don't consider TAAB2 to be a masterpiece at all. Initially I was very happy with it because I was afraid that Ian would fail miserably in this endeavor. Well, IMO, he obviously didn't fail, but it in no way compares to the original. I also don't think it should have been called TAAB2 without getting the input of the original members.
The original is a masterpiece. Probably a once in a lifetime masterpiece. An album that was able to raise my spirits on an almost daily basis for at least a decade or more. The new piece can never have that same impact on me ... not with Ian's current vocals and not without the input of the other band members.
It has been my experience that the great works by Tull ceased when the band stopped working as a close-knit unit. Ian has said many times that the most recent material is done in a much more isolated manner. Ian writes the stuff and then sends the score to the other members wherever they happen to be on the globe. I think this is probably the biggest problem with the newer material. Moreover, I really think he should give up singing.
Hey Ian, how about a progressive album of stunning instrumentals ... with flowing acoustic guitar, flute, Martin, and a great drummer. Now, that could be a masterpiece.
By original members are we talking Glenn, Mick and Clive? Or the replacement guys sourounding the only original Tull member, sorta like the current outing?
This of course is laughable. You cannot seriously try to compare his current solo band with Jethro Tull in 1972.
Yes, I think that expresses what "Tull is" quite elegantly. A great band. I was comparing drumming styles and I think these two clips show the difference between Barriemore Barlow and other, later, Tull drummers (in this case, Gerry Conway) . The difference is shocking, and it shows really what Tull (the entity) had in the 70s. Again, pay close attention to the drums (also the remarkable Martin Barre):
Re: TJTB's 'Official' Review of TAAB2 « Reply #71 on Apr 24, 2012, 7:40pm »
1: Ian=Tull 2: No he isn't 1: Yes he is 2: No he isn't, I can prove it! 1: No you can't 2: Yes I can! 1: No you can't 2: This is futile! 1: No it isn't
By original members are we talking Glenn, Mick and Clive? Or the replacement guys sourounding the only original Tull member, sorta like the current outing?
You need a history lesson before you make such callow remark. There's much more to it than Ian hiring studio musicians as he has for the past two decades.
You forgot David Palmer, who appears in one form or the other on all Tull albums in the 60s and 70s (including their first, "This Was" and every other except "A Passion Play"). John Evan, Jeffrey Hammond and Barrie Barlow were actually playing with Ian before Tull (as early as 1962 and 1963), Evan and Hammond returning in 70 and Barlow in 1971.
Saying Martin Barre is not an original Tull member, while technically correct (he started after the album "This Was" was released in late 68), is rather like saying David Gilmour was not original to Pink Floyd, just a hired toady. Too funny.
Well thanks for the lesson, but I think I can find a legion of Floyd fans who might mension Sid Barrett.
The reality is that you can parse Tull in so many ways based on when you started listening to the band. There is no argument that the Tull I saw perform the original TAAB in 72 had balls and energy, and a certain style that made them exciting. The good thing is that as the energy waned (after APP), their playing improved, I would argue that the two key elements that made them a better band was the music Anderson provided, and the changing cast.
Where do you draw the line, when JHH left, when JG died, seems everyone had no issues with Pegg. I think it is unfair to characterise everyone in the last 20 years as hired players only, especially since many of the "heroes" were hired help too, but no one seemed to care. Not to take away anything from the old John, I think the new John brings a solid talent and skills, he allows Ian to do things differently than before, he is certainly better than Giddings. It just seems people like to live in the past, when new John is replaced, you will miss him, and shit on his replacement.
There was an interview with IAN with Wakeman, (check you tube),well before TAAB2 was on the scene, when Rick asked him what Ian's favourite Tull was. I found his response interesting, he said the most current, because they had to learn and adopt everything that came before. Everyone on this board who has seen the current tour has spoken well of how TAAB1 was performed by the current band, so why get caught up in stuff only Ian and Martin know the facts about.
I understand that some MB fans miss him, but many of us card carrying Tull Freaks don't, I'd welcome him back, although I don't see a scenario where that can happen. As I read the reviews of shows by respected members of this board, I don't see many who are missing Martin. It is mostly the ones with an agenda who take cheap shots at Florien.
History will show JT=IA, with a series of footnotes relating to the other 20 some odd supporting cast, some bigger than others, with an extra bigger asterisk for Barre, who is good, legendary in the minds of many, but he is one of many, not the one and only (think Ian).
But hey, I can always use a history lesson, as I am the first to admit that I have only seen them for the past 42 years, I am sure I missed something, right?!?
You need a history lesson before you make such callow remark. There's much more to it than Ian hiring studio musicians as he has for the past two decades.
You forgot David Palmer, who appears in one form or the other on all Tull albums in the 60s and 70s (including their first, "This Was" and every other except "A Passion Play"). John Evan, Jeffrey Hammond and Barrie Barlow were actually playing with Ian before Tull (as early as 1962 and 1963), Evan and Hammond returning in 70 and Barlow in 1971.
Saying Martin Barre is not an original Tull member, while technically correct (he started after the album "This Was" was released in late 68), is rather like saying David Gilmour was not original to Pink Floyd, just a hired toady. Too funny.
Well thanks for the lesson, but I think I can find a legion of Floyd fans who might mension Sid Barrett.
The reality is that you can parse Tull in so many ways based on when you started listening to the band. There is no argument that the Tull I saw perform the original TAAB in 72 had balls and energy, and a certain style that made them exciting. The good thing is that as the energy waned (after APP), their playing improved, I would argue that the two key elements that made them a better band was the music Anderson provided, and the changing cast.
Where do you draw the line, when JHH left, when JG died, seems everyone had no issues with Pegg. I think it is unfair to characterise everyone in the last 20 years as hired players only, especially since many of the "heroes" were hired help too, but no one seemed to care. Not to take away anything from the old John, I think the new John brings a solid talent and skills, he allows Ian to do things differently than before, he is certainly better than Giddings. It just seems people like to live in the past, when new John is replaced, you will miss him, and shit on his replacement.
There was an interview with IAN with Wakeman, (check you tube),well before TAAB2 was on the scene, when Rick asked him what Ian's favourite Tull was. I found his response interesting, he said the most current, because they had to learn and adopt everything that came before. Everyone on this board who has seen the current tour has spoken well of how TAAB1 was performed by the current band, so why get caught up in stuff only Ian and Martin know the facts about.
I understand that some MB fans miss him, but many of us card carrying Tull Freaks don't, I'd welcome him back, although I don't see a scenario where that can happen. As I read the reviews of shows by respected members of this board, I don't see many who are missing Martin. It is mostly the ones with an agenda who take cheap shots at Florien.
History will show JT=IA, with a series of footnotes relating to the other 20 some odd supporting cast, some bigger than others, with an extra bigger asterisk for Barre, who is good, legendary in the minds of many, but he is one of many, not the one and only (think Ian).
But hey, I can always use a history lesson, as I am the first to admit that I have only seen them for the past 42 years, I am sure I missed something, right?!?
As someone of about the exact same Tull duration as you, my first show, Jun 72, and every one without fail until 07, when only financial constraints, NOT Ian Anderson's voice or choice of material forced me to miss a handful. I believe folks confuse Tull having been a bit more of an energized rock band in the 70's with necessarily being a better band. To me the idea that several of those guys in the seventies were hands down, no questions asked, the best musicians to have performed with them is laughable, not worthy of consideration. Also brings to mind another interview with IA, might have been on one of the anniversary tapes, when he specifically addressed the emotion of nostalgia, and its implicit dangers, remembering things as being better than they actually were. I can name all the following years in the 70's as having provided lesser shows than I expected, 73, 75, 77, 78. Now 75, 7 and 8 I saw more than once but in the sports arenas they used to play in, if you were not situated properly the bass would go boom a little too much, and I know of no band who's music suffers more with the audio even being a teensy weensy out of focus, let alone a big booming bass arena rocker, the stuff of nightmares when attached to something I put so much belief in, coupled with the galoot bellowing for Aqualung like...nonstop. And one man's crap is another man's gold, to me little doubt that the back to back to back releases of PPlay, WarChild, and Minstrel dealt Tull a critical blow, in part earned as some of that material does reek of self importance, albeit with a nice triplet or paradiddle maybe from Barrie Barlow, but, for instance, in any way imaginable every inch, for instance, Dave Mattacks superior? I think not.
Joined: Jul 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 2,952 Location: North Carolina, U.S.A.
Re: TJTB's 'Official' Review of TAAB2 « Reply #74 on Apr 24, 2012, 8:18pm »
TAAB 2 = Tull ? Only to those who still feel the magic every time Ian or whomever is in the Band. I was sure there would be those that would disagree. My only hope is to give this album a sense of continuity to all albums before. Once this tour began, I realized how special it would be. This may be the best performance ever. IMHO>
Well thanks for the lesson, but I think I can find a legion of Floyd fans who might mension Sid Barrett.
Undoubtedly Syd Barrett would be mentioned, but how many will know the series of concerts where Syd was propped up in a corner mumbling insanely while Gilmour did his parts? He did just one album (Pipers at the Gates of Dawn, 1967) and another (Saucerful of Secrets, 1968) where Gilmour was already a full member. Who in their right mind wouldn't consider Gilmour an integral part of the sound of Floyd? Likewise, Mick Abraham is the footnote, not Martin Barre.
The reality is that you can parse Tull in so many ways based on when you started listening to the band. There is no argument that the Tull I saw perform the original TAAB in 72 had balls and energy, and a certain style that made them exciting. The good thing is that as the energy waned (after APP), their playing improved, I would argue that the two key elements that made them a better band was the music Anderson provided, and the changing cast.
The only change from 72 to 79 was Jeffrey Hammond retiring and John Glascock taking his place, and David Palmer no longer just doing orchestral arrangements (which he had been doing for Tull since 68), but adding portative organ and synth on several albums as well (and composing the stately and sad "Elegy" for Stormwatch). Everyone of their greatest albums from TAAB to Stormwatch had basically the same cast of characters, save for Glascock. What better band? What changing cast?
Where do you draw the line, when JHH left, when JG died, seems everyone had no issues with Pegg. I think it is unfair to characterise everyone in the last 20 years as hired players only, especially since many of the "heroes" were hired help too, but no one seemed to care. Not to take away anything from the old John, I think the new John brings a solid talent and skills, he allows Ian to do things differently than before, he is certainly better than Giddings. It just seems people like to live in the past, when new John is replaced, you will miss him, and shit on his replacement.
I don't miss much of anyone past 1979, because that's when Ian started his revolving door policy, and became an insuffereable egoist. And if you are honest, you'll admit the music suffered tremendously.
Say what you will, but their is appreciable difference in the quality of work from the bands as well as Ian's songwriting and arrangements post-Stormwatch. I do have a soft spot for Dave Pegg, but mostly because I prefer his work in Fairport Convention (who I've seen countless times). The hilarious thing is he kept nonentities like Noyce around for years.
TAAB2 is definitely an improvement over something like Dot Com, and slots in well with Secret Language of Birds and Rupi's Dance, where Ian is the central focus from start to finish and each musician plays their assigned parts they were hired to do. There are no extended jams which Ian is not part of, and no noticeable differentiation from one bassist, drummer or keyboardist to the next. And that's fine, all solo albums are pretty much like that. TAAB2 is a fine solo album.
There was an interview with IAN with Wakeman, (check you tube),well before TAAB2 was on the scene, when Rick asked him what Ian's favourite Tull was. I found his response interesting, he said the most current, because they had to learn and adopt everything that came before.
The music hasn't gotten better. And except for a brief period around Crest of a Knave, the concerts were not nearly as good as the ones I saw pre-"A". You can argue the point all you'd like, but all one need do is look at concert footage to tell the difference. Like the Minstrel in the Gallery clips I provided. It is quite evident.
I understand that some MB fans miss him, but many of us card carrying Tull Freaks don't, I'd welcome him back, although I don't see a scenario where that can happen. As I read the reviews of shows by respected members of this board, I don't see many who are missing Martin. It is mostly the ones with an agenda who take cheap shots at Florien.
No swipe at Florian, but as a guitarist I can tell you that nearly every riff was borrowed from Barre for TAAB2. There's not a shred of Florian's own style evident in the album. So what's the point?
History will show JT=IA, with a series of footnotes relating to the other 20 some odd supporting cast, some bigger than others, with an extra bigger asterisk for Barre, who is good, legendary in the minds of many, but he is one of many, not the one and only (think Ian).
History will show Tull making several landmark progressive and prog-folk albums in the 70s, Ian with a new cast of characters trying to revise his sound in order to stay hip in the early 80s (and failing miserably), Tull stealing a Grammy from Metallica in 1987, and not much else afterward but Ian's strained vocals that are often painful to listen to. Who hasn't been to a show in the last 30 years that hasn't winced on several occasions? These days, it's better to listen to Ian during acoustic sets. I go to the bathroom if he tries to sing "Songs from the Wood". I remember seeing his lounge tour to support Rupi's Dance, and a whole row of people all cringeing simultaneously while he was singing "A Hand of Thumbs".
But hey, I can always use a history lesson, as I am the first to admit that I have only seen them for the past 42 years, I am sure I missed something, right?!?
I don't know what it was you listening to for 42 years. So yeah, I think you missed a great deal.
And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George, who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision...
Tulltapes Tribute Guitarist Extraordinaire member is offline
I thank everybody for making me welcome
Joined: Apr 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 772 Location: WNY
Re: TJTB's 'Official' Review of TAAB2 « Reply #76 on Apr 24, 2012, 11:50pm »
Yes, I think that expresses what "Tull is" quite elegantly. A great band. I was comparing drumming styles and I think these two clips show the difference between Barriemore Barlow and other, later, Tull drummers (in this case, Gerry Conway) . The difference is shocking, and it shows really what Tull (the entity) had in the 70s. Again, pay close attention to the drums (also the remarkable Martin Barre):
Tull, 1976
Tull, 1982:
Ouch.
Ouch is right. I never understood why Ian would settle for such things? at least when Mark Craney replaced Barrimore yet different it was still quality drumming and kinda gave Tull a new edge. http://youtu.be/SW3dym7m_dU?t=5m43s How could you go from Clive, to Barrimore, to Craney..to that? At least he kind of upgraded shortly after.
Tulltapes Tribute Guitarist Extraordinaire member is offline
I thank everybody for making me welcome
Joined: Apr 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 772 Location: WNY
Re: TJTB's 'Official' Review of TAAB2 « Reply #77 on Apr 24, 2012, 11:58pm »
Tony Williams from Steelers Wheels (stuck in the middle with you) Was Sad when they had to replace John but my point was Ian and Martin's interplay. One of the big reasons I love tull in the first place.
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
Logged
![[avatar]](http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/1630/copyoftaab211.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/75/JethroTull-albums-heavyhorses.jpg/220px-JethroTull-albums-heavyhorses.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/3946/minstrelinthegallery.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/9592/25683674.gif "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://imageshack.us/a/img132/6641/nu2avatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
![[avatar]](http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/5093/chicagoblackhawkslogo.png "[avatar]")
![[image]](http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt78/jtull2008/6249680382282da3f89em.jpg "[image]")
![[avatar]](http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/6173/ppscreen.jpg "[avatar]")
![[image]](http://s12.postimage.org/q2x9ryugd/TB3.jpg "[image]")