Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #20 on Aug 19, 2012, 10:50am »
some observations:...This is from probably one of the best sites on the internet.. Tull Press
NEW MUSICAL EXPRESS
4 September 1971
JETHRO JOBS FOR THE BOYS?
Ian Anderson is in his manager's office coping sagaciously with the day's stream of journalists. The rest of the band - Martin Barre having completed his couple of interviews - are sprawled around the Chrysalis interviewing room feasting on drink and sandwiches.
They get pushed in here to talk to us before they're allowed in with Ian,
observes John Evan acidly. Jeffrey sits mute in his sober check suit, looking like an English cousin of Tiny Tim. Barrie Barlow, the new drummer, shadow boxes through the journalistic assault course behind a mask of take it or leave it. Led by Evan, they're all being a bit boisterous, reluctant one presumes to say all over again to the luckless journalist at the end of the afternoon's session the same things they've already said several times before, which leaves me to pick out the sense among a barrage of frivolous flack.
Barlow, after some coercion, tells how before Jethro he was a semi-pro musician, married with two kids, gigging round the North of England. Foxtrots, waltzes, a bit of cabaret backing comedians at night, an engineer (of the tool-making variety) by day. He, with John Evan, Glenn Cornick and Ian Anderson were among the seven Blackpool musicians who came down to London and evolved into the first Jethro Tull. Barlow and Evan were among the five who returned home after a couple of weeks.
The music had changed from jazz blues to a lot of 12-bar crap and I couldn't stand it (the drummer recalls). It had been only the music that kept me going. There was no money, and when there was both no money and no music I went back.
The thing with the four of us (says Evan), Barrie and Jeffrey and Ian and I, we all started playing together when we were 15. We all had the same influences and evolved the same music.
He breaks off to address the room at large:
There was the Graham Bond album Sounds Of '65 ... that had a great influence. Meanwhile, we were playing 'Mr Pitiful' and 'In The Midnight Hour'.
Barrie: No we weren't. We just played those numbers to fill the gap between 'Work Song' and 'Let The Good Times Roll'.
Meanwhile, down the corridor in his manager's office, Ian Anderson holds court with cool composure. Here, I might be the first instead of the last on a tiring day. My main line of questioning revolves around Anderson's prominent role in Jethro Tull, and the fact that, on the face of it, it would seem that the other three founder members of the band left when their own musical identities became strong enough to challenge Ian's.
"The changes in personnel," I open, treading cautiously around what might be a sore point. "Do they indicate personality or musical clashes ... ?"
Yeah I know what you mean,
broke in Anderson as if in receipt of telepathy
To sum it all up, I am the only one left of the original Jethro Tull. And one of the things I know must be in people's minds is the fact that perhaps the people who've left have been squeezed out so that I could have me old mates in the band, rather than fence around.
The point about the people who have joined is that they have been chosen mainly for their availability when people left. When Mick Abrahams left, which wasn't a compatible leaving, he and I had just grown apart. He was a blues man and I ... I didn't know what I was but I wanted to find out.
When Mick left we needed somebody fast. I didn't know anybody so we held auditions. Martin was the best of the bunch so we trained him. (Anderson laughed:) In short, he had to learn very quickly and become better than he was at the time.
LIMITING
John came next. It was Jeffrey in fact, who'd seen us a couple of times, who said he thought the band was incomplete. It tended to be all guitar and a flute, a formula, and limiting to what I could write, because we didn't have enough instruments or tone colours at our disposal. So John did sessions for us and then joined. That worked for a while. We all felt better as a group.
It was some time after that, that Glenn grew apart from the rest of us. He was getting into much more riffy things. He really liked Mountain and those sort of aggressive riff-type bands and I've tried to write songs in that vein, really heavy guitar, bass and drum things, but I can't sing that way. I preferred to have a broader scope musically, and Glenn began to grow apart socially too. He spent a lot of his time in the company of other musicians.
Again there was no animosity, the split was inevitable, although it could have been smoother than it was. We had a tour coming up and needed a bass player in a hurry and there were only two people ... one that Martin knew but didn't know how to get hold of him, and the only bass player I'd played with apart from Glenn was Jeffrey in the old days. We all knew Jeffrey socially. He had just finished college. He practised and got it together and came into the band because of his availability at the time.
With Clive ... (continued Anderson), We felt on the American tour before last that Clive wasn't happy with the songs. Sometimes he would be stuck for ideas on some of the songs I'd written, others he would be more into playing, although socially we've always got on alright. The day after we discussed things with Clive and he left, I started doing these sessions the ones the single ['Life Is A Long Song'] came from and John, who had been in Blackpool, arrived with Barrie. So we just said "Okay, sit in and have a go" and we took it from there.
The whole thing boils down to people who are available. I mean, I've only played with three drummers in my life, Clive, Barrie and Rick Dharma, who's with Mick Abrahams now, and only two bass players, Glenn and Jeffrey. And I don't know any other musicians. The only guitarists who I've worked with who've been any good have been Mick and Martin. The only other way to get people is to hold auditions. We did that once and would never do it again because it is a waste of time. It gets to be a drag and embarrassing for all concerned.
I mean, I never thought of asking Barrie anyway. I hadn't even seen him for two and a half years. The whole thing has been rather a fluke, although it does seem rather strange, too much of a coincidence.
Accepting Ian's explanation, there is still linking the three Jethro departures a clash of musical ideas. Is it impossible for anyone with strong musical ideas to live with him?
Yeah, it probably is. Not maybe for me to live with them, because somebody with very definite musical ideas might join the band and get on alright with me, but I'm sure I wouldn't get on with him. Because the point is that I have been in the band for three and a half years, and I have been the front man for three and a half years. I don't like it necessarily all the time but, having assumed that responsibility at first when Mick left, that is my job now, to write and assume the role of pointing the band in different directions.
Then when the new members of the band grow in stature and begin to want to express themselves musically, you may find yourself clashing again?
Right, but if we clash we should be mature enough not to let it affect the band. There is plenty of scope, even if I don't want to make a solo album, for, let's say, John to do so. Any other members could express themselves that way if they wanted to.
Being very uncharitable about it then, one could suggest that you are gathering around you replacements who can be used as pawns to further your own end ...
Yeah, that's like John Mayall if you like. But let's face it ... I mean jokingly to Martin, Terry (Ellis) and I have always said: "We picked you out of the gutter Martin and put you on the road to stardom." It's a standing joke, but there's a serious side to it as well. I mean, God knows what Jeffrey would be doing if he hadn't got into the band. All those guys who played with Mayall ... Clapton, if you like, used Mayall as a pawn. He used Mayall to build his name. He got the sack but he got a band. Keef Hartley got a band, Mick Taylor got a band.
I had in mind you using them as pawns.
Yeah, sure, but it works the other way as well. Oh, sure, I'm writing the music but I'm only getting ... when people join this band, this is the way we work it, they come on a wage for a year. I won't tell you how much but it's a good wage. Because they don't want to accept the responsibility for the group's expenses, at the same time they want to earn money and we want to mutually decide whether we get on alright. So far everybody has stayed on in the band under those terms. After a year they come in on an equal split with me.
I'm the only one left and it could also be argued that I'm the one that the audience comes to see ... so I'm told by journalists, that you're the front man, you write the music, it's your group and all the rest of it. Well, I don't care. I only get the same money as everybody else. At the moment we split three ways and two are on wages. Jeffrey comes under a split at Christmas, Barrie nine/ten months from now. They've done alright ... John Mayall only ever paid wages.
If I write the songs then that's my right. I'm the senior member of the group, the senior partner if you like. I dominate things and have that much more responsibility, although when it comes to playing on stage there are five of us there and I am the one who's on stage the least. I know I leap around and might appear to be all action and going potty, but I am not actually making any more than one fifth of a musical contribution. In fact it is less.
I feel, well let me have that responsibility. If the songs aren't good enough I soon find out. I don't exactly dictate how things should be. I just try to write things hard enough for them to play now. If I write things that are demanding, then they get a kick out of being able to play them..
NICK LOGAN
« Last Edit: Aug 19, 2012, 10:51am by Derek Pith »
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #21 on Aug 22, 2012, 7:46am »
SOUNDS
11 March 1972
JETHRO'S HOLLOW THREAT
One of the most disillusioning experiences of my musical life occurred when I saw Jethro Tull for the second time. It was three weeks after the first time, when Id enjoyed them a lot they were musically strong, and lan Anderson had a fine stage presence, cracking lots of little comments and asides. I took it for a clever spontaneous performance.
Then I saw them again, and everything was exactly the same practically every note of the music (bar the goofs) and all the jokes and asides. I can't help feeling that someone who has his ad-libs rehearsed that carefully needs watching a little carefully, and Ive been a little wary of Jethro Tull ever since, especially when I found successive albums breaking little new ground, and doing little more than refining down and adjusting slightly a concept stated on the first album. Ian Anderson has borrowed and created his own cliches, and stays with them even on this new album.
Apart from him, the band is completely changed from the first record, and theres no doubt that its good but limited, I think, by the Tull format. Martin Barre and John Evan especially come through with some fine playing, but they dont really break any new or particularly exciting ground; they get so far and seem to hit an undefined but quite recognisable wall of Policy. I get the feeling that the band is being used as an effects box, as sidemen to a central idea that isn't really strong enough to justify its role.
That central idea is Ian Anderson's new monster work Thick As A Brick, a long, related sequence of songs which reflects a bitter, cynical view of the world around him and the people who run it businessmen, the Church, schools ... you know the things. That obviously is a vast over-simplification of the work, but I think Ian Anderson too is guilty of over-simplification somehow Thick As A Brick sounds to me like a bit of an empty gesture, a hollow threat.
There's nothing in there that hasn't been said before though he does put it quite well and I don't find much in there to jolt me, to catch my imagination. Maybe these things need saying over and over again, but does it really need a whole album to say it? I think not, but doubtless thousands will disagree.
Spin me back down the years and the days of my youth
Joined: Sept 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 2,155 Location: From down the smoke below...
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #22 on Aug 22, 2012, 7:59am »
Interesting review, the most telling part for me is the use of the term 'Policy', not a word you would expect to find in a review of a rock album or band unless the reviewer concluded that what you had then, as we may have now, is The Ian Anderson band and that there was little free rein to allow individuals to flourish as much as they were capable of, making the band and the album all a bit stymied for the reviewer.
But you could be right Steve....maybe it was just Ian playing solitaire.
Joined: Nov 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 1,267 Location: Pittsboro, NC
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #23 on Aug 24, 2012, 10:16pm »
What a great thread. Ian was entering the Rock superstars around this period. No doubt a big event in someone's life. Do you risk saying what you really feel, or do youplay along with what people expect of you? Thick as a Brick? Nothing new? I think the subtleties of this album and some of Tull's others have lived on in Rock music. Ian is an unsung hero, and in my opinion better for it. Jimmy Page is great, Clayton is great, Jeff Beck is great, Ian Anderson is great from a completely different approach.
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #24 on Aug 30, 2012, 8:23am »
Not Ian but : Martin, Barrie, and John Glasscock
From TullPress
ROSE-MORRIS INTERNATIONAL
No.2, June 1976
TULL TOUR WITH MARSHALL!
JETHRO TULL have chosen Marshall amplification to broadcast their music to the world!
Now on their first world tour for four years, the band have re-equipped with a complete set of Marshall amplification for the back line sources and a Marshall Equipment Hire P.A. rig. In the centre spread of this issue of R-M International we publish an EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW by our editor Bob Wilson.
The opening night of the world tour by the band was acclaimed internationally as a triumph and one newspaper carried the comment "an inspiring set, delivered with a clarity and perfection of sound that left me breathless."
The Marshall amplification was specially selected by the band when they visited Jim Marshall's spacious plant in Britain's newest city, Milton Keynes. It's an indication of the faith that the band has in the products handled by Rose-Morris that the entire back line amps came from Marshall and drummer Barriemore Barlow is playing a new Ludwig Vistalite drum kit. Barrie has been a Ludwig player since his earliest days with Tull when he bought his first Ludwig kit from the Rose-Morris Shaftesbury Avenue showroom. Today he keeps his original Ludwig kit for recording and uses a see-thru Ludwig kit on stage. During this summer Tull played dates across the USA, taking their Marshalls with them, flying the flag for British music and British musical products!
JETHRO TULL
Tull re-opened the "live" chapter in their history recently when their world tour opened in Brussels. For the lengthy itinerary, the band have chosen a P.A. system from Marshall Equipment Hire and the back line source amplification is by Marshall. On the opening night Rose-Morris International's Editor, Bob Wilson, visited the concert, talked with the band and offers all R-M International readers this EXCLUSIVE report and interview.
Barriemore Barlow leaned back in his chair, staring at the beer can in his hand. Outside in the Avenue du Globe the kids were still streaming out through the traffic from Brussels' Forest National. It had been Tull's first night on the road for 1976.
I can't remember when we've had so long a spell off the road (he said). Last year we toured for nine months of the year and I got down to about 8ฝ stone. It proved a little too much for me ...
The current European tour was the shortest the band had ever undertaken, lasting just three weeks. Then they faced a long summer slog across the States. The tour represented a new direction for Jethro Tull. It was the debut appearance of John Glascock, the band's new bass guitarist. In addition Tull were airing a new album, Too Old To Rock 'n' Roll, and testing their new Marshall Equipment Hire P.A. System.
Every day is different now (explained guitarist Martin Barre). We're taking old songs off into new directions ... developing them from one day to another. I think Ian's songs are getting very strong very concise.
Theatrics, he explained, are being kept to a minimum.
We were the first group to do the weird visual things on stage. But people aren't surprised any more, that's why we're getting away from it now. It's the music really that they're paying to hear so it's got to come down to the music and you've got to have a quality sound.
Which brought the conversation around to the new P.A.
When we bought our old one (continued Martin), it was the best money could buy. Now this new M.E.H. system is the best and in a couple of years everyone will be buying one or hiring one if they can't afford to buy it.
Barriemore looked up.
Actually, there are very few halls designed to accommodate rock music. We find ourselves in America playing in ICE RINKS! Personally, I think you have to be in a hall for more than one day so you can work at the sound. But it's economically not viable. So we have to do the best we can under the circumstances. I personally look forward to the day when the public realise that and the poor guy sitting at the back of a 20,000 seat hall no longer thinks "Christ, this is no good. I've paid my $8 and it's not bloody worth it. I can see five figures about 2" high and the sound is nothing like the album."
I would like to see the day when bands decide to play at a maximum capacity auditorium say 5,000 seats and play four nights.
For Martin Barre, Tull's guitarist since the halcyon days of Stand Up, the tour was an opportunity to test run the two new Marshall 100 stacks he had recently bought from Rose-Morris.
Actually, I used my old 50 watt amp on Too Old To Rock 'n' Roll simply because the 100 watt was too loud. The 50 watt has a good studio sound really thick but the 100's will work out good too, once I get used to them.
It's really strange because I still feel that tendency to play flat out, to use everything I've got and have it completely wide open to use all the top, take all the bottom out, put all the middle in, and have the volume flat out. It's psychologically difficult for me to accept that you don't need all that; that you've got some to spare. My main problem is I've never had anything in reserve I've always had to utilise everything the amp had to offer and more because I've had to boost it with pedals. But now I don't have to do this. I've got enough top and good response from all frequencies.
Also new to the group was the bassist John Glascock. Up till the end of last year he worked with Carmen, the flamenco rock group, and before that with Chickenshack. He brought his considerable experience as a bassist to Tull as well as an entirely new asset a second voice.
I believe I am the first extra singer that Jethro Tull has ever had. Up till now Ian did all the harmonies on the albums.
Martin agreed.
It's good for the group because it brings Tull closer as a band. Up till now its always been Ian. But now it'll be so much better for us having two guys singing especially on T.V. things. It's going to be very good for us.
John's bass set-up was anything but usual.
I've got two Marshall stacks. I can use four 100 watt lead tops and three 100 watt bass tops with two 2x15 Powercel reflex bins and two 4x12 Powercel cabinets. I use the four Powercels in the one cabinet. I was going to use two separate cabinets for the lead part of the sound but one is plenty for the volume I'm playing at. The two bass bins give it the bottom part.
I'm driving the whole thing about three on each amp. On stage it sounds very good to me and the guy on the board says it's giving a good sound out front through the P.A.
Barrie went on to explain that Ian was still the main creative spring in Tull.
He still writes most of the stuff, and any writing we do is the instrumental pieces. We write those pieces for the simple reason that Ian needs to get offstage and have a beer, cigarette, and go to the bathroom. When we do something like that we write it completely as a group.
Barrie was then also breaking in new equipment, in the shape and sound of a new Ludwig Vistalite kit.
It's an experiment really in visuals and sound and I'm liking it so far. But my old Ludwig kit is the one I use in the studio. I consider it too precious to take about on the road, to be perfectly honest.
I've had a Ludwig kit since my earliest days with Tull. When I joined it was the first time I'd had any decent money, and my first thought was to buy a set of Ludwig drums. So I went out and purchased a second hand kit from the Rose-Morris shop in Shaftesbury Avenue and I was very happy with it. But it was getting a bit smashed up, and I must admit I changed to a stronger shelled drum but the sound wasn't as good.
What attracts drummers to Ludwig? Is it good looks, the prestige, or workmanship?
The hardwear (replied Barrie), without a doubt, it's the hardwear. Take the snares for instance I think they're the best in the world. You can go around and watch every drummer and you can guarantee nine times out of ten they'll be playing a Ludwig snare. That's what brought me back to Ludwig the hardwear and the good looks.
He paused for a moment, with a twinkle in his eye.
I think it's at the back of every drummers mind, it was with mine it's nice to be playing Ludwig.
Prompter One of the Youngest of the Family member is offline
Joined: Mar 2012 Gender: Male Posts: 94 Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #25 on Aug 31, 2012, 2:25pm »
I think this is just the right thread for a little something I've found a while ago and am finally in the process of translating. It's an exclusive interview Ian gave for the Belgrade-based "Duboks" magazine in November 1976 (which then came out in the January '77 issue, you can see the cover here). The interview was conducted by Petar Popovic, a legendary music journalist from Belgrade, and I found it a great (and funny) read. I don't know if any of you have seen this before (since it's not on Tullpress), but here it is, anyway, in a couple of instalments.
The first visual impression is defeating. A tiny figure from the darkness of Morgan Studios' own smoke-stained pub seems nothing like one of the world's biggest performing musical stars. Especially if you cherish the memory of the frantic 'underground' flautist, at the sight of whom your mother would have prayed to the heavens that her son doesn't grow into something like that someday. Now, many years later, once one has realised that the heavens hadn't granted one's mother's prayers, one is confused by Ian Anderson's appearance. He wears a hat not unlike one from an old illustrated children's book. Underneath the silly hat lies a restless, weak, and unusually short bundle of hair. A thinnish beard covers his sunken face. Two details strike the eye: a golden earring on his left ear, and a reasonably long pipe, which he never takes out of his mouth. He is rather short. Dressed casually, but in bad taste: a pale brown velvet jacket, a shirt with the silliest colour combination, very tight velvet jeans and pointy boots. In general, off-stage Anderson is perhaps even too common. The old saying "sack o' woe" would be the most complete description of the man I had just met. After the conversation, which Anderson had predicted to last half an hour ("You're late, and I haven't got much time since I have things to do in a studio which costs 400 pounds a day"), but went on to last (with a short break) for almost three hours, the first impression has gradually, but completely melted before Anderson's highly articulate answers and opinions. A couple of minutes in the company of this man is enough to realise that Ian Anderson is a person who deeply understands both the sides of the "rock medal", leaving a strong and permanent impression.
PP: I hope you won't mind if I tape this conversation.
IA: No, do as you please. I know it's hard to remember everything, there are people who write during the interview or use stenographic marks, but often get confused so they end up ringing me later to ask if they had got something wrong.
PP: I believe it is hard to conduct longer interviews without a tape recorder...
IA: It depends. Everybody works in the way it suits them best. I don't know, I find it interesting when I read interviews by people I know. Every one of them has their own style, and I believe it correlates with their personality. There are authors who make their interviews according to a formula, so that it often ends up being silly. Journalists can be both weirdos and people who are just doing their job, in their own way. "making interviews"... I haven't given many interviews, but, more importantly, I've never read them. They don't interest me, as I am aware that everybody adapts the conversation to their own needs or style.
PP: Do you think I will do the same?
IA: I don't know... It's too soon for you to ask.
PP: I've been thinking: you are always in a better position in these kind of situations - there aren't many questions to which you haven't given an answer already. All you have to do is adjust them to the way the question is being put forward.
IA: I don't know, in some ways we all try to keep our sides. An interview - it's a small "conflict", in which both sides have their own problems. Yours is to find a suitable question, and mine is to find the most convenient answer...
PP: But... What if the questions start repeating themselves?
IA: You wouldn't believe what people can ask you. Sometimes it's the most incredible things...
PP: You probably remember some "greatest hits"...
IA: The latest are from our Spanish tour. That was the last time I spoke to journalists, and it was a press conference. Among other things they asked me, in all seriousness, if I were really bisexual, and if there was any truth that I was romantically involved with Henry Kissinger! Not to tell you how I felt while giving an interview in a ladies' room in 1969...
PP: Speaking of which, you have your fair share of problems with the English music press.
IA: Not all, only a part of the English press *laughs*
PP: How do you cope with negative criticism, if you happen to read some?
IA: No... I really don't read the English music papers. I have no time for rubbish and lies. I prefer reading specialised magazines which deal in motorcycles, or film. On Sundays I read "News of the World". I don't read and really don't want to read show-business crap like "Rolling Stone", "NME", or "Zig-Zag", and other street stuff which dazzles this "post-hippy" generation... I'm at an age when I don't care what those malicious people have cooked up in one of their offices.
PP: I remember first seeing your picture somewhere in 1968 with a caption saying, "Would you take this man home to meet Mum?" Now, I mean, at the moment, you seem completely "normal" even compared to the photos published during you last European tour. Where did such a transformation come from?
IA: *laughing* Well, I'm just an ordinary English citizen who is about to turn thirty... A lot of people succumb to this "savage" stage appearance of mine, and then go on to claim that I'm a raging drug addict just waiting to kick someone over the head with a flute... And I'm sorry to disappoint them. No one in the group takes drugs, and off-stage we are normal people, family men... The opinion that "it's hard to be one thing on stage and another this off it" doesn't concern us. Nobody seems to believe that we go on stage, in the limelight, not to shock, but to entertain our audience and show what we had prepared for them. We don't need [the shock factor]. And the picture you mentioned was published somewhere around New Year's Day of 1969. At that time such a picture was necessary. I remember my family's, I mean, my parents' reaction. They were also quite surprised with my appearance... *laughs*
PP: Since we have started talking about the early years, could we go back to the beginning of your career? When did you decide on taking up music as a way of life?
IA: The real reasons for my career choice lie in Blackpool, somewhere around 1962. That was when I first experienced a "pop-shock" with my friends. A couple of us went to a dance where there was an electric group playing. I hadn't understood much of it, but I was deeply impressed, better to say - shocked! You know - a group of exuberant young lads in front of a raging audience, unimaginable noise, during the break the band surrounded by the most beautiful girls... a shock! And when you see something like that when you're 16, it's only natural that you react by forming your own group.
PP: That group was called the John Evan Band?...
IA: No! That was the second group. At first there was a trio: with myself on guitar, John Evan on drums, and Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond on bass guitar. The group was called "The Blades". We'd had some ideas about having a name that had something to do with James Bond, since girls at the time loved him, but I don't know why that never happened. We played the blues because it suited us best as a form of music. Also, as lower-class kids, we found it somewhat closest to us. Soon John got tired of drums and switched to organ. Then Jeffrey was talked out of the group by his parents, to be replaced by Glenn Cornick. It should be said that Jeffrey had remained with the band, and that I even ended up dedicating a couple of songs to him in the early days... We then ended up being a seven-piece, and changed our name into "The John Evan Blues Band". We played quite a lot, but because of a rising number of skinheads, who had different tastes in music, we realised that we had no future in Blackpool. We then met Chris Wright who told us to come to London and have a go there. Our first demo tape went unnoticed by any record company, our then manager had just left us, and everybody ended up going home except for me and Glenn.
PP: I remember reading that in those days you were going through a tough period. There was a time when you worked as a porter at the Marquee club (or something like that)...
IA: Yes... Those were difficult times. I helped out at the Marquee, worked as a cleaner at a film theatre... Then I met Mick Abrahams and Clive Bunker by accident, and so we went on to form Jethro Tull.
PP: There are various stories of why you had picked up the flute. They say there are two basic reasons: a flute can be easily carried around, and that you had acquired one cheaply.
IA: Well, that's not exactly what happened. I knew I wasn't a guitarist who could make a career for himself, and I was a terrible singer, so I had to do something new. I saw a cheap flute at a shop and... You can carry a flute with yourself wherever you go, while on the other hand; how to get into a bus with a double bass? *laughs*
That was the first page, there are eight pages altogether, which I will be posting in, I guess, seven more parts. There isn't much interesting stuff going on in this early stage of the interview (though I find the introduction hilarious ), but I hope you like it nonetheless. Apologies for the dodgy translation (my professors at university would probably kill me if they saw this), but I didn't want to keep you from reading any longer.
Mttbsh One of the Youngest of the Family member is offline
Joined: Oct 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 91
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #26 on Sept 1, 2012, 1:35am »
"It was some time after that, that Glenn grew apart from the rest of us. He was getting into much more riffy things. He really liked Mountain and those sort of aggressive riff-type bands and I've tried to write songs in that vein, really heavy guitar, bass and drum things, but I can't sing that way"
The reason I became a Tull fan in 1971 was because they were THE "riff" band - I saw both Mountain and Tull back then, and in 1971 Ian and company were every bit as heavy and riff-oriented as Mountain. In fact Martin Barre has stated numerous times how much he was influenced by Leslie West. I just find it amusing that Ian cited Glen's getting into "riffy things" as a reason to sack him, when that's exactly the direction Ian was taking Tull in 1971. If you don't believe me, listen to Aqualung.
"It was some time after that, that Glenn grew apart from the rest of us. He was getting into much more riffy things. He really liked Mountain and those sort of aggressive riff-type bands and I've tried to write songs in that vein, really heavy guitar, bass and drum things, but I can't sing that way"
The reason I became a Tull fan in 1971 was because they were THE "riff" band - I saw both Mountain and Tull back then, and in 1971 Ian and company were every bit as heavy and riff-oriented as Mountain. In fact Martin Barre has stated numerous times how much he was influenced by Leslie West. I just find it amusing that Ian cited Glen's getting into "riffy things" as a reason to sack him, when that's exactly the direction Ian was taking Tull in 1971. If you don't believe me, listen to Aqualung.
Tull and Mountain on the same stage! That would have been fun to see. Thanks for sharing this.
"It was some time after that, that Glenn grew apart from the rest of us. He was getting into much more riffy things. He really liked Mountain and those sort of aggressive riff-type bands and I've tried to write songs in that vein, really heavy guitar, bass and drum things, but I can't sing that way"
The reason I became a Tull fan in 1971 was because they were THE "riff" band - I saw both Mountain and Tull back then, and in 1971 Ian and company were every bit as heavy and riff-oriented as Mountain. In fact Martin Barre has stated numerous times how much he was influenced by Leslie West. I just find it amusing that Ian cited Glen's getting into "riffy things" as a reason to sack him, when that's exactly the direction Ian was taking Tull in 1971. If you don't believe me, listen to Aqualung.
Yeah, that's always been one of my favorite things about Tull, Ian wrote some of the best riffs. To cry you a song, a new day yesterday, for a thousand mothers, a lot of great riffs. They did touch on riffing a lot later on in their career. There is probably at least a couple good riffs for every Tull album. Well, most of them at least.
Tulltapes Tribute Guitarist Extraordinaire member is offline
I thank everybody for making me welcome
Joined: Apr 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 758 Location: WNY
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #29 on Sept 1, 2012, 1:21pm »
That may be part of the reason Glenn was canned but mainly because he liked to party, smoke weed, and have girls up to his hotel room.. All the typical rock star stuff that Ian couldn't tolerate. His bass playing was more riffy in that he had his own unique rock riff style. Much harder to train a musician like this to play the exact things you want as Ian needs his musicians to be trainable and exact.
Joined: Nov 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 1,267 Location: Pittsboro, NC
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #32 on Sept 1, 2012, 10:15pm »
Going back to what we were talking about--Glenn had his own style, like people pointed out, that was pretty powerful and riff-driven--not easy to take--he was his own bass player. Hammond was more of a piece of clay Ian could mould--but fine clay he was.
Prompter One of the Youngest of the Family member is offline
Joined: Mar 2012 Gender: Male Posts: 94 Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #34 on Sept 2, 2012, 11:36am »
And here is part 2 of the Dzuboks interview with Ian:
PP: I'm aware that Jethro Tull was a significant figure in the modernisation of British agriculture. How did your group end up being named after him?
IA: Initially, we were without a stable name, and, since we had just been offered our first resident gig, the guy who had helped arrange it, a history student, suggested the name. Since nobody had ever heard of Jethro Tull, we took it immediately. The name had a certain strength, excitement, even mystique to it... We thought it was only to be a part-time solution, but as things soon started to progress quickly, it stuck on.
PP: Last night I read an interesting article in "Zig-Zag". The author claims to have lived in the same building with you and remembers everyone being bored to death with you practising the flute. He says that you would interrupt your practtising only to take a toilet break.
IA: Nonsense... Utterly incorrect! He is lying!
PP: You didn't practise or?...
IA: No... I have never practised playing the flute! I just play it, either in the studio, or on stage... That's why I'm a bad flute player! Really, I have never practised in my life...
PP: I couldn't swear that you're a bad flute player. Some things you have played on the instrument are legendary in this genre of music...
IA: *laughs* It's not that big a thing, really...
PP: The fact remains that you have brought the flute onto the rock scene, dazzling half a generation with it...
IA: You know, I have always played quite simple things on the flute... My music has never been that difficult to make me practise. The truth is that the only instrument I practise is the guitar, because that's just the way I write songs and compose... And the story of me playing the flute night and day - trust me - that's a lie! The guy is lying to draw attention and achieve better sales.
PP: Jethro Tull have already existed for nine years. You are a direct witness to every phase of its development, since you are the only remaining original member. I'm interested: how did you deal with the leaving of old members from the group?
IA: There is something that should always be kept in mind. Whoever has left the group had HIS OWN firm reasons for it. Somebody wanted peace, someone didn't have the strength to carry on, some wanted to carry out their own musical ideas. They followed their own decisions, and I have always respected them... I've never felt sorry because I respect them as people. Everybody has the right to do their own thing.
PP: Since you are the only remaining original member, today many people think of Ian Anderson as being Jethro Tull. I wonder if you are in need of a group at all...
IA: To work alone doesn't interest me. The album I'm working on at the moment couldn't have been made with the current Jethro Tull crew. All these amazing associates are indispensable in such a musical effort. If the group were consisting of completely different musicians, I would make completely different music... The current line-up of Jethro Tull is consisted of excellent musicians who can easily identify with whatever it is that we're doing, and who can make creative musical arrangements on each of their respective instruments. That is of utmost importance to me as a composer, and a special mark of quality for Jethro Tull.
PP: Speaking of musicians, have there been any who you would have wanted in the group but, at least for now, couldn't get to join?
IA: Yes, there was one at the time after Mick Abrahams had left the group. Tony Iommi cooperated with us for a while, but couldn't stay because one of his fingers was shorter, which is a big handicap for a guitarist. He is a good player, who can play very good improvisations, but he can't play chords, which is very important for us... I was, therefore, looking for a more useful guitarist. That's how I found out for little Mick from John Mayall's group... I forgot his last name, I know he played with the Stones later on.
PP: His name is Mick Taylor.
IA: Yes, yes! Mick Taylor was very interesting to us, but changed his mind at the last minute... A year later he joined The Rolling Stones... He wasn't the perfect choice either, he was much too blues-oriented, but had he joined Jethro Tull at that moment, he would have fitted excellently, and I'm certain he would have developed differently in time.
PP: Who has had a crucial influence on you as a musician?
IA: One man - Beethoven! His music is the only music I always enjoy listening to.
PP: You are interested in classical music?
IA: I'm very much against the term "classical music". In Beethoven's time it wasn't classical but music for everybody. Today, it is, or is at least considered to be, music for specialised halls, circumstances, or categories of people, and I think that at its time it was... rock music. Everybody listened to it, didn't they? Also, it was the time when children would take up piano or violin the same way they pick up an electric guitar these days...
PP: The fact remains that composers would work under the supervision of kings or benefactors. More or less, they were used as exhibits, mere symbols of prestige...
IA: Yes... But the kings of that period are equivalent to today's record companies. Record companies understand music no more than most of the old benefactors. They are merely looking for marketable music that will make them famous and successful. Record companies need a reason to show off. That's just what the kings would do, right? They would pay composers money to make them great in the eyes of their people, thus making music available to the people! A good alibi... But, let's get back to Beethoven! He has been known and acclaimed throughout the world for the last 200 years. I believe he is more famous and important than the Beatles, Bing Crosby, or Led Zeppelin... After all, he made very heartfelt music.
PP: Do you then think that no heartfelt music exist today? Do you make music differently?
IA: I do work from the heart, but not everyone. There are many who enter the studio with just one thought: to get out of it with a record that will make them rock 'n' roll stars. Everybody wants to be a star, to have multi-coloured suits, expensive guitars, a Rolls-Royce parked in front of their house, and big pictures of them in the papers. To be a star - that's the fundamental reason! Essentially, to them making music isn't that important anyway, they find it tiring, even boring...
PP: You might be surprised that many young Yugoslavs are dedicated followers of Jethro Tull's music and your musical activities in general. I have talked to many people who thoroughly analyse your work and have very detailed opinions on every record.
IA: You see, I sometimes think about that. Usually you are so concentrated on your work and obligations regarding the group that you rarely get a chance to look at what you have done from the perspective of a music fan from a different part of the world. With geographical distance other 'distances' can emerge... In principle, I don't like to admit to taste differences in rock music... I mean, when I think that my, that our work is taken very seriously by somebody somewhere, it causes in me an unconscious, but strong obligation not to disappoint them with the next project. That's another large problem... But, nevertheless, give my regards to everybody who listens to and analyses the music of Jethro Tull...
Joined: Nov 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 1,267 Location: Pittsboro, NC
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #37 on Sept 2, 2012, 12:22pm »
Prompted delivers!! What a great interview. I never knew Mick Taylor was a possible band member!! The Stones were sure lucky to get him. Jethro Tull with Mick Taylor... Interesting thought.
Prompter One of the Youngest of the Family member is offline
Joined: Mar 2012 Gender: Male Posts: 94 Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Re: Analyse Ian « Reply #38 on Sept 2, 2012, 6:37pm »
Thank you all for the kind words! And, since I have some time on my hands at the moment, here is part three!
PP: In early 1975 you visited Yugoslavia for the first time. You probably have some impressions from that tour.
IA: Performing in Yugoslavia was a new and unusual experience for me. Three concerts, three cities, and three completely different atmospheres. As if we had played in three different countries. The audience response was also completely different.
PP: In what way was the atmosphere different?
IA: To clear things out, I loved that tour despite the fact that we had altogether lost money rather than earning it... But, it's strange when you try equally, and experience very different reactions from the audience in return. Furthermore, the Belgrade concert has remained an unpleasant memory when the security guards took away from me the balloon which I played with on stage, and which was a crucial part of our program. I didn't feel very pleasant at that moment...
PP: During your tour I had been unable to attend any of the concerts, but my friend, a radio editor who writes for our magazine told me that Jethro Tull have offered Belgrade the best musical performance up to date.
IA: Really? Give my sincere thanks to him... Yes, that last year's tour of ours, the world tour, was very good. I think our program was attractive as well. Everywhere we went we were received well, by both the audience and the critics. We'd play the largest venues, always with great public interest.
PP: Jethro Tull are huge in America. You usually play stadiums there?...
IA: Yes, our concerts are well-attended. We were among the first to set those impressive figures, 60 or 80 thousand visitors. On the other hand, I like it also when we play for no more than two thousand people.
PP: Do you sometimes feel nostalgia for small clubs?
IA: Yes, but it's a different story. The stage, a space that has become necessary for us, is usually larger than the largest club. I'm not capable of playing on a narrow or small stage because I need the space for the show. Lack of space makes me exceptionally nervous and in a bad mood altogether... Theatres with a regular stage are a completely different matter. I'd love to play only in theatres but that's also impossible, again for other reasons.
PP: Because of the money?
IA: Yes and no... I can always afford myself the pleasure of playing smaller venues and consciously losing money. I do that in Europe sometimes, and I like to perform benefit concerts for various foundations. For me it's wonderful to be able to sing in lovely little theatres, but I can't do that always. I don't think like that about America. Especially since the Americans are a very poor people, whose "humane" funds are just waiting for our money *laughs*
PP: You play enormous venues in the United States. Isn't that more business than art?
IA: Theoretically it seems that when you play in front of 50 thousand people it is business, but practice has shown that it doesn't have to be. For example, we played the Shea Stadium in New York in front of almost 60 thousand people, and I think of it as an exciting musical event, not like business. From the collected $470 000 we didn't earn anything, but lost around $37 000. The expenses for such a spectacle are enormous, and the people from the American Musician's Union weren't very fair with their $300 000 in taxes. In the end, we lost money, but weren't particularly sad because we created an extraordinary show at an extraordinary place.
PP: In show business history Shea Stadium has been marked as the place at which The Beatles had made the largest amount of concert money to date.
IA: Probably... Certainly. But it's important to have something else in mind. In 1965 The Beatles had three Vox amplifiers, no PA, and an unheard-of mass hysteria. That's how they made their money. In the meantime, concert standards have moved forward a lot... Therefore, besides our music, we have to offer people a special stage show, lasers, video screens, a PA system that won't leave 60 thousand people who had paid for their tickets disappointed. All that - the grand spectacle - is very expensive. But it was our wish for the luxury to play the Shea Stadium at that point... There are about ten places like that in America, and those are the only places where you can make very large sums of money, under the condition that you don't make a lot of unnecessary expenses.
PP: Tell me, what are the differences in status of rock stars on tour between Europe and America?
IA: I don't know, at least when Jethro Tull are in question. We lead a normal way of life, without large private exhibitions: hotels, rehearsals, concerts, hotels. You get used to it and everything seems the same.
PP: It probably isn't, as far as money is concerned.
IA: You know... That's a misconception as well. Usually our price is the same both in Europe and America, but the difference is that on the other side of the Atlantic there are more convenient places to play in. There are around 200 cities with 10-15 thousand seat venues. In Europe such venues are rare; Zurich, Paris, Frankfurt, Berlin, Madrid. The rest is less suitable to hold a concert... That's the big difference. For example, quite a lot of people saw us in Yugoslavia but we have lost money with every one of those concerts. The transport was quite expensive, and we went below our regular price because we were interested in playing somewhere we hadn't played before... It's not like that in America. There is rarely room for sentimentalities.
PP: Jethro Tull are famous for spending a lot of time on tour. Are there many states where you would like to perform, but haven't had the chance?
IA: As I have said, tours are for us and interesting and valuable experience, and we're always ready to go on tour. My old desire is for us to tour the USSR, but that is, at least for now, impossible because one can go there only as part of a cultural exchange program. Since we're unable to enter a deal like that, it remains nothing more than wishful thinking. When Russia is in question, I'm not interested about money at all. It's another challenge... A great, interesting country, an extraordinary culture and historical heritage... I had someone speak on my behalf regarding the possibility of us playing in Moscow, but it never advanced to any further level.
PP: I'm interested, who are the authors and director of the visual part of your concerts?
IA: Well, I am, and someone else usually involved in the whole affair...
PP: How long do all the preparations for a tour last?
IA: Our problem is that we do everything just before embarking on a tour. We plan everything quickly and carry out these ideas very helter-skelter, which in fact are not the characteristics of a professional group... That is very unprofessional... but, there's not enough time...
This is where the break in the interview occurs, and the two move into Morgan Studios where Ian works on some of the tracks from the then upcoming Songs From the Wood LP. Stay tuned, I'll try to translate the next part by tomorrow night!
P.S. Ian's comments on his experience in Yugoslavia are very interesting, especially considering the fact that the three cities Jethro Tull played (Belgrade, Zagreb and Ljubljana) are now indeed capitals of three different countries.
![[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![[avatar]](http://imageshack.us/a/img819/7600/smalltullfinalv4.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
Logged![[image]](http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/5084/00616.jpg "[image]")
![[avatar]](http://i331.photobucket.com/albums/l455/QuizzKid08/rainbow74.jpg "[avatar]")
![[image]](http://i331.photobucket.com/albums/l455/QuizzKid08/-bunnies-copy-sml_zpscf61a0ba.jpg "[image]")
![[avatar]](http://i49.tinypic.com/vkn86_th.jpg "[avatar]")
), but I hope you like it nonetheless. Apologies for the dodgy translation (my professors at university would probably kill me if they saw this), but I didn't want to keep you from reading any longer. 
![[avatar]](http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/180801_138525962878756_100001640593262_260346_804875_n.jpg "[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]")
![[avatar]](http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/9592/25683674.gif "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://991.com/newgallery/Jethro-Tull-Kissing-Willie-53918.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://imageshack.us/a/img132/6641/nu2avatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}