|
Post by Mix on Jun 20, 2014 9:46:02 GMT -5
I don't understand what your point is here. Ian has stopped using the Jethro Tull name and goes by his own name, all be it while still maintaining a reference to JT for marketing reasons. Clearly this decision came about for two reasons; 1. He never liked the name Jethro Tull to start with and 2. Out of respect to Martin Barre and one can assume if he ever plays with Martin in the future it will again be billed as Jethro Tull.
But Jethro Tull was Ian's band and its the same band today minus the name.
Its all actually very confusing and I'd prefer Jethro Tull, Ian's band, was still on the tickets and albums. But surely, Ian's decision not to use the name says something for his respect to Martin?
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jun 20, 2014 10:37:47 GMT -5
I don't understand what your point is here. Ian has stopped using the Jethro Tull name and goes by his own name, all be it while still maintaining a reference to JT for marketing reasons. Clearly this decision came about for two reasons; 1. He never liked the name Jethro Tull to start with and 2. Out of respect to Martin Barre and one can assume if he ever plays with Martin in the future it will again be billed as Jethro Tull. But Jethro Tull was Ian's band and its the same band today minus the name. Its all actually very confusing and I'd prefer Jethro Tull, Ian's band, was still on the tickets and albums. But surely, Ian's decision not to use the name says something for his respect to Martin? I was being facetious about his name change. The fact is there was a time that it was very important to Ian to let everyone know that Tull was in fact a band, and that each member played an significant part in the process of developing the music even if he didn't give them credit in writing. Listening to Ian today, it was all him.
|
|
|
Post by Mix on Jun 20, 2014 10:57:42 GMT -5
I think he's just responding in the most efficient way. The interviewers and readers of these tour promotional pieces aren't interested in who wrote this bar or who played that solo 40 years ago, they just want to read about Ian. Ok, we all know he didn't do it all on his own but I'm getting the sense that the old Ian today just cannot be bothered to keep going over it. He's clearly very aware that the clock is ticking, I don't blame him for taking a bigger bite of the credit at this stage in the game. I mean lets be honest, most of the 70's band became millionaires off of Ian and would be unknown otherwise. That's not to say credit where credits due but Ian's getting on a bit now and you gotta cut him some slack. We all change our views as we age, we all see our past today differently than we did 20 years ago. And as I said to start with, Ian isn't perfect, no one is, including extremely unique/talented people we idolise.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jun 20, 2014 13:42:21 GMT -5
I think he's just responding in the most efficient way. The interviewers and readers of these tour promotional pieces aren't interested in who wrote this bar or who played that solo 40 years ago, they just want to read about Ian. Ok, we all know he didn't do it all on his own but I'm getting the sense that the old Ian today just cannot be bothered to keep going over it. He's clearly very aware that the clock is ticking, I don't blame him for taking a bigger bite of the credit at this stage in the game. I mean lets be honest, most of the 70's band became millionaires off of Ian and would be unknown otherwise. That's not to say credit where credits due but Ian's getting on a bit now and you gotta cut him some slack. We all change our views as we age, we all see our past today differently than we did 20 years ago. And as I said to start with, Ian isn't perfect, no one is, including extremely unique/talented people we idolise. You could very well be right Mix. Maybe I'm misreading him.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Crowe on Jun 21, 2014 1:16:09 GMT -5
Michael, Ian being a loner isn't a reason to treat people badly but I see Ian no differently than a company boss who has successfully kept the company going and the shareholders happy. Frank Zappa could be ruthless, Steve Jobs could be insane, I think its a quality of extremely driven people and whatever their behaviour, they get amazing results. Ian has a huge ego too but he's quite an unlikely rock star. I once read that had Ian not been a rock star he might have liked to be in the police. The strange thing is I can see him as Police commissioner or some high up role. If you listen to Ian's entire catalog you can hear that the core of it is his music otherwise you couldn't have consistency. The compositional contributions by others can clearly be heard by heavyweights like Barre, Evans & vettese or the outstanding musical contributions by people like Barrie. But through Ian flows this unique amazing gift of song and ideas. Who he chooses to work with to interpret those ideas is surely determined not only by their ability but by their personal relationship with Ian. I'm just trying to imagine how it is for Ian. He has this thing that he does, that no one else in the world can do, he has millions of people watching his every move and an entire business to keep afloat. He's surrounded by people who he must rely on to get the job done but let's just say one of those people is pissing him off. Maybe for no good reason other than they just don't gel personally anymore. What's Ian gonna do? Ignore it because he's a nice guy? Its not easy to replace a member of a band, especially one performing the often complicated arrangements of Ian's music, let alone the commitments that band must be under. Switching out a member is risky. You gotta go back to rehearsal, you gotta hope the new guy is accepted by the rest of the band, its a complicated dynamic and its rare to get a group of guys functioning perfectly without any weak links. I actually think the current band is a band that Ian is happy with and as a result its given us a return to form and two new studio albums and a proper stage show. But considering when I saw the band last month and the only change in that band was Martin compared to when I saw them in 2011, one can conclude that it was an issue between Ian and Martin that was at the heart of the most dullest period in Ian's career the last ten years of no new albums and a never ending best of tour. Clearly Ian struggled on and on for a decade or more with Martin out of loyalty, fear and change. But change did come eventually and its worked out. I'm not taking a dig at Martin, I'd have him back in a flash but a musical collaboration is as as much about the personal relationship as it is about the music. I agree with most of what you say, and you bring a balance to the dicussion. I'm not saying IA is a bad guy. Surely he did play to Martin over the last few years out of loyalty - in my opinion anyway, and some of those best of tours were to keep a band together and to provide parole - as Ian said in an interview once. But the best business people are those who first invest in people, even if it cost. There is a moral standard that will see to it that what goes round comes round - the ole sowing and reaping law. I think Ian is just trying to justify his lastest decisions. And really, he doesn't owe anyone an explination. He can do what he wants at this point. He hasn't much time left so it's all about him and that's fine with me - we have the back catalog. But TM makes a point and his is THE point of the conversation. IA is coming off as a selfish clown and it is rather lack of class on his part I think, and the real fans and media know better. I don't think anybody that matters is buying. Perhaps this is the two-face persona former members have been seeing for a few decades now, I don't know. My response was, well, what should they/we expect. Par for the course I'd say. None of it surpises me.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jun 21, 2014 11:56:29 GMT -5
The real fans know better but most wont say a word - especially those closest to Ian.
I'd rather align myself with someone like Dave Pegg, who not only had the balls to leave the band, but came out and admitted one of his reasons for leaving was because it was too painful to listen to Ian trying to sing.
|
|
|
Post by housebrick on Jun 23, 2014 15:50:57 GMT -5
Did he play to Martin ,i dont think thats correct. Ian always said it wasnt worth recording anything new as it didnt pay,thats the reason Tull slugged away for years with best of . Weird we get 2 albums that probably also didnt pay also ,quickly. Spinal Tap couldnt have wrote it all better.
The people that defined the 'Tull sound' were a lot more than 1 person in reality.
|
|
StanDup
One of the Youngest of the Family
Posts: 85
|
Post by StanDup on Jun 23, 2014 22:17:01 GMT -5
yeah you're right, Jerry Garcia would never have said that in a zillion years. I was looking for examples of successful bands where the name of the band eclipses the names of the members. And yet very few members of those bands can strike out on there own and release a solo album that is not only good but sells well.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jun 24, 2014 11:22:27 GMT -5
Does anyone know of another band that's had as many members as Jethro Tull? And I don't mean orchestras.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jun 24, 2014 11:26:04 GMT -5
Did he play to Martin ,i dont think thats correct. Ian always said it wasnt worth recording anything new as it didnt pay,thats the reason Tull slugged away for years with best of . Weird we get 2 albums that probably also didnt pay also ,quickly. Spinal Tap couldnt have wrote it all better. The people that defined the 'Tull sound' were a lot more than 1 person in reality. Not sure I understand the part about Martin. In 2005 Ian stated in AND when pressed by David Rees that he didn't want to pay for Martin and Doane's expenses to make another record nor did he want to dedicate a few months to record back then, as he would rather be touring.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 25, 2014 6:52:09 GMT -5
Does anyone know of another band that's had as many members as Jethro Tull? And I don't mean orchestras. I think this question is in and of itself quite telling... the fact that there have been so many permutations and combinations surrounding that which we call "Jethro Tull" calls into doubt the degree to which we really are talking about a 'band' in any traditional sense. It is as much a vehicle through which Ian and his partners may express themselves, as it is a single band. Fairport Convention, Yes, and especially King Crimson have gone through this kind of radical re-invention. If you had someone in 1969 that Fairport without Richard Thompson or Sandy would be trucking along just fine years later... that would have blown a few minds. Or King Crimson... the ONLY point of consistency has been Fripp, and its because he injects a certain 'ethos' or 'spirit' that enables the music to fall under the heading of "King Crimson", as opposed to a 'side-project' (and there have been no shortage of those either). Perhaps the best place to look for the roots of this kind of thing is jazz. Take Miles Davis and all the casts of characters he played with, let alone styles. Yet each group with Miles in it had his name in the title... and nobody was going to suggest that he wasn't playing with a real band in each formation. Some prefer early Miles, some prefer the Quintet, some the fusion period. Some prefer early Crimson, some the 80's with Belew... and who knows where they are going now. And so it is with Jethro Tull. There is a 'spirit' to this music that flows throw Ian... just as Crimson flows throw Fripp... or everything Miles touches turns to gold. Best not get hung up on it. This is not a 'band' akin to the Beatles... its, IMHO, become something categorically different. It has different periods, and different actors... kind of like a theatre troop lead by Mr. Anderson. And that's just fine with me.
|
|
|
Post by Mix on Jun 25, 2014 10:11:38 GMT -5
Reading the AND Interviews books, especially the third book, its interesting to read over those interviews with Ian circa 2000-2010. From those interviews you can conclude from Ian, that albums are pointless nowadays, cost too much money, make a loss, its too much hassle, no one gives a fuck about new material and so on.
This was the most frustrating and dark time for us Tull fans. No new music. But the change of direction did finally come in 2012 and Ian's on a role again, clearly over the bad attitude he had to new music and new albums.
My money is on two main reasons for all this. The band, AKA Martin, Doane was tired but it was easy, everyone knew what was required. They all got complacent, especially Ian but my observation is Ian thrives off of the musicians around him, both personally and musician. That clearly hadn't been happening for a long time and its a big part of the reason Ian couldn't be bothered or want to spend time with the guys off the road. It also perhaps explains why so many guests were playing with Tull during this era.
The other reason is surely to do with money. Perhaps Rupi and Xmas just didn't sell that well. This was the reality for the entire music industry and not just a Tull issue. The bitterness Ian expressed must stem from that frustration with the industry. In the 2011 interview on this board I asked Ian about releasing new tracks on the website as downloads. He didn't dismiss the idea but also let on that he had written a big project that turned out to be TAAB2. So again, the shift away from Martin/Doane must have freed him from a situation where he felt he couldn't move forward. The fact that he stuck at it for so long, which seems out of character for Ian, says something about his loyalty to Martin and Doane.
But with Taab2 and HE he rediscovered how to create a buzz, its the old tried and tested formula that has worked for his entire career and just about every other artist. You write and record a new album, you've then got something to market and make a fuss about and you go out and tour it and then repeat the formula. Prog being back in fashion is also worth a mention, its clearly something Ian feels comfortable with, even though he has dismissed it in the past. The use of social media has worked for Ian and one can only conclude Ian's son, James, is the one behind all that, and indeed making the stage shows more interesting. I actually think James deserve a lot of praise, he's really helped fan the spark back to a flame.
Anyway, I'm rambling but I do actually think the album as an art form is recovering. For a while there it looked like it might all be over but somethings just work. Kids will always be into singles, its a mainstream market but real appreciators of music will always find the album to be a fitting vessel for a bunch of songs tied to an era.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Crowe on Jun 25, 2014 12:16:45 GMT -5
Does anyone know of another band that's had as many members as Jethro Tull? And I don't mean orchestras. Chuck Berry used a different band every night for years - only three chords to play, but that's not really a band, so I nominate Frank Zappa, which was basically a band brand name of sorts. I would think he's rolled through close to as many as Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Biggles on Jun 25, 2014 21:59:19 GMT -5
I don't understand what your point is here. Ian has stopped using the Jethro Tull name and goes by his own name, all be it while still maintaining a reference to JT for marketing reasons. Clearly this decision came about for two reasons; 1. He never liked the name Jethro Tull to start with and 2. Out of respect to Martin Barre and one can assume if he ever plays with Martin in the future it will again be billed as Jethro Tull. But Jethro Tull was Ian's band and its the same band today minus the name. Its all actually very confusing and I'd prefer Jethro Tull, Ian's band, was still on the tickets and albums. But surely, Ian's decision not to use the name says something for his respect to Martin? Dear Ian, If you are Jethro Tull, the band you employ should be able to perform any and every Jethro Tull song in lt's entirety nearly note perfect. This current Ian Anderson solo band cannot. However, the Ian Anderson solo band I saw at the Gallo Arts Center in Modesto, CA on Sunday, Nov 8, 2009 @ 7:00p did so. Why? because of the drummer.. period! I'm willing to give you wiggle room on the guitar player because he's capable but, you offed Martin because his rig was too loud (4/12 Saldano-Marshall half-stack vs Florian's 1/12 Fender Twin?). You blew it. You should've kept that 2009 band. Then you could say, I am JETHRO TULL!
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jun 26, 2014 9:06:22 GMT -5
I don't understand what your point is here. Ian has stopped using the Jethro Tull name and goes by his own name, all be it while still maintaining a reference to JT for marketing reasons. Clearly this decision came about for two reasons; 1. He never liked the name Jethro Tull to start with and 2. Out of respect to Martin Barre and one can assume if he ever plays with Martin in the future it will again be billed as Jethro Tull. But Jethro Tull was Ian's band and its the same band today minus the name. Its all actually very confusing and I'd prefer Jethro Tull, Ian's band, was still on the tickets and albums. But surely, Ian's decision not to use the name says something for his respect to Martin? Dear Ian, If you are Jethro Tull, the band you employ should be able to perform any and every Jethro Tull song in lt's entirety nearly note perfect. This current Ian Anderson solo band cannot. However, the Ian Anderson solo band I saw at the Gallo Arts Center in Modesto, CA on Sunday, Nov 8, 2009 @ 7:00p did so. Why? because of the drummer.. period! I'm willing to give you wiggle room on the guitar player because he's capable but, you offed Martin because his rig was too loud (4/12 Saldano-Marshall half-stack vs Florian's 1/12 Fender Twin?). You blew it. You should've kept that 2009 band. Then you could say, I am JETHRO TULL! You referring to Mark Mondesir on drums? I thought he was fantastic drummer.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jun 26, 2014 9:12:14 GMT -5
Does anyone know of another band that's had as many members as Jethro Tull? And I don't mean orchestras. Chuck Berry used a different band every night for years - only three chords to play, but that's not really a band, so I nominate Frank Zappa, which was basically a band brand name of sorts. I would think he's rolled through close to as many as Ian. The thing is everyone thought all along that either a) Ian's name was in fact Jethro Tull or b) Jethro Tull was Ian's band, but Ian went out of his way over the years to dispel that myth - until recently that is.
|
|
|
Post by Biggles on Jun 26, 2014 19:59:04 GMT -5
Dear Ian, If you are Jethro Tull, the band you employ should be able to perform any and every Jethro Tull song in lt's entirety nearly note perfect. This current Ian Anderson solo band cannot. However, the Ian Anderson solo band I saw at the Gallo Arts Center in Modesto, CA on Sunday, Nov 8, 2009 @ 7:00p did so. Why? because of the drummer.. period! I'm willing to give you wiggle room on the guitar player because he's capable but, you offed Martin because his rig was too loud (4/12 Saldano-Marshall half-stack vs Florian's 1/12 Fender Twin?). You blew it. You should've kept that 2009 band. Then you could say, I am JETHRO TULL! You referring to Mark Mondesir on drums? I thought he was fantastic drummer. Yes TM, I may be repeating myself but, it was one of the best Tull shows I'd never seen . Ian was playing all of these obscure Tull songs that I guess he thought he could only get away with on a solo tour. Mark Mondesir was superb!
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jun 26, 2014 20:36:24 GMT -5
You referring to Mark Mondesir on drums? I thought he was fantastic drummer. Yes TM, I may be repeating myself but, it was one of the best Tull shows I'd never seen . Ian was playing all of these obscure Tull songs that I guess he thought he could only get away with on a solo tour. Mark Mondesir was superb! Agreed, I loved that tour and Mark sounded fantastic with the band.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Crowe on Jun 30, 2014 1:34:29 GMT -5
Chuck Berry used a different band every night for years - only three chords to play, but that's not really a band, so I nominate Frank Zappa, which was basically a band brand name of sorts. I would think he's rolled through close to as many as Ian. The thing is everyone thought all along that either a) Ian's name was in fact Jethro Tull or b) Jethro Tull was Ian's band, but Ian went out of his way over the years to dispel that myth - until recently that is. Steppenwolf has been John Kay for the last thirty years, Black Oak is Jim Dandy, and Neil Young wishes he were Bob Dylan. On the other hand you have Blondie, a band led by a lone blond woman named Debbie who I suppose everyone thought was Blondie early on. I'm not sure what constitutes a band anymore, or even if Debbie Harry is Blondie. The meaning has obviously changed over the years, but I think we now see, or at least I do, that IA wasn't Jethro Tull artisticly speaking. Even the later versions of Tull sounded like a band (mostly) and it basically came down to Martin Barre, whose departure was the last straw. Pegg's leaving put an ugly dent in the machine and I thought that was it, but Martin's departure wrecked the bus for me. So these days words just don't mean much, nor covenants, nor honor, nor truth. This is the world we live in, "oh oh oh." So if IA claims he was Jethro Tull, but isn't anymore, and the casual listener used to think he was but don't anymore, then the artist formally known as Tull won't have to convince those who thought he was that he wasn't after all, and those who thought he wasn't can clearly see that that is in fact the case. Not that there's anything wrong with that. So the guy who always said he was'nt Jethro now says he was, but not anymore. If he were American I'd say let's vote, then let a judge over rule the vote in true American fashion, or just fess up that you were on sterioids during the Tull years and all will be forgiven. Being British however, I'd say just leave it in limbo for arguments sake. We like things nice and tidy but once in a while it's good to just have a contradiction. It's all part of the act anyway.
|
|
Heathcliffe
Ethnic Piano Accordian-ist
The candyfloss salesman watches ladies in the sand..
Posts: 116
|
Post by Heathcliffe on Jul 5, 2014 7:00:30 GMT -5
The band I worshipped was the 1970's version with John, Martin, Barry and Jeffrey..... and all those great old albums. Loved and followed what followed. Then discovered what had gone before in the sixties. But those days were the halcyon days. Can't help living in the past when the band were THE Band.
|
|