Barlow left the band. Evans and Palmer were dismissed. Palmer found out about it when his daughter told him about it when she got home from school one day. Her friends informed her. John Evan received a letter informing him that his services were no longer required. (Palmer eventually received the same letter.) Ian has never fired anyone to their face. He either had someone else do it, or by letter sent by "management". All his band mates (it seems) were disposable on a whim.
"Benefit" was my first Tull album, purchased on a whim, having never heard the band before. It remains one of my Top 3 favorite albums of all-time to this day!!! Cheers!!
I agree with you. I think Heavy Horses is under valued, but it's probably my favorite. Being an American, it is for me a beautiful look into a different world.
I think what happened was .... the 80's, MTV and the new digital technology. What happened to Tull happened to other bands like Yes, for example. Music videos became paramount. Synths stopped being analogue and samplers were invented. It changed every band, many for the worst. ZZ Top put out three DISCO videos. Dire Straits used primitive CGI. Ozzy dressed up as a werewolf. It took a while to recover from this.
Checks calendar sees its 2024. And yet out there is still someone, long flowing hair from a bald top, bell bottom blue jeans and covering up a huge middle age beer belly is a DISCO SUCKS T-shirt.
Tull's foray into synths and Ian sacking the analog keyboardists occurred prior to MTV existing. Plus they barely ever got any MTV airplay, even with some decent videos off Crest of a Knave. Hell, Kissing Willie was outright banned for being to naughty for morally upright MTV.
I saw Tull in 2008 at Red Rocks. In fact a riot at their 1971 show got all rock acts banned from Red Rocks for years, and this was their first show since then. I had zero expectations, but they blew me away. They opened with Thick as a Brick, and although Ian’s voice has aged, and he isn’t as acrobatic anymore, his talent as an entertainer and storyteller were scarcely affected. A great show I will always remember.
@@schragemusikReally? There really is no accounting for taste. The last few albums have really been Ian Anderson solo albums with hired hands. The last real Jethro Tull album (apart from the Christmas album) was 'Dotcom'. The last decent album, in my opinion, was 'Roots to Branches' in 1995.
@@portcullis5622 I agree. Dot Com had a few classics like "Gift of Roses" and "Bends Like a Willow" but was overall lacking and I thought Roots to Branches was really good. I'm having a lot of trouble getting into anything after the Christmas album though; there just seems something lacking.
@@Clyde-x1x Yes, I also thought that they were the two best tracks on Dot Com. I have only heard a few tracks from recent albums, but one thing that is definitely missing is a decent vocalist! Ian Anderson has virtually been reduced to spoken word on recent recordings.
My favourites are the ones with the amazing Barriemore Barlow on them - extraordinary drummer that I wish we had more of. And I remember when the my main record shop was WH Smiths and they classified the band under T!
Barrie Barlow is one of the all time greatest drummers! He was even being considered to replace John Bonham as drummer for Led Zeppelin (had they carried on...)
I'll give you an answer that's not just merely obvious, but incredibly obvious. Jethro Tull has always been know as just Tull. If you look at the drum set on stage, the word Tull is on it.
@@ricenglish4556 - I think the OP's point was that many people, including some record store employees, thought Jethro Tull was a music artist/person and filed the records as if alphabetical, by the person's name. The proper filing is by band name, under J. I've seen their records under T, as well.
I think A and Broardsword are excellent. But after 1980, with the exception of Barre and maybe Pegg, what is called Jethro Tull is like an ever changing line up of hired session/touring musicians chosen by Anderson. It wasn't like that with the 70s line ups. Each member brought something very special, unique and memorable to the band and the live performance. This has not been replicated since.
a couple of years ago, I was visiting Stratford upon Avon with family one summer, and the record shop on the tourist street (the one opposite Shakespeare's house) was playing the Aqualung album loud enough to shake the cobbles outside!
Saw them live 1977, it was just like the Bursting Out album, crazy and on fire. Saw Jethro Tull again 1981 (A Tour), was great to see Eddie Jobson live, but it was not the same, Ian was very 'normal'!!!
I first went to a Tull concerti in 1988, and for me the line-up Anderson/Barre/Pegg/Perry/Allcock(Giddings) was a real pleasure to hear live. The first half of the '90s was a great time to attend gigs of a band that was already considered a "classic". And I agree with you that since (I'd say Dot Com) it was still Tull. Some compositions are really good also on the later albums, but they aren't Tull anymore; just Anderson's solo (and the vocals are greatly compromised). Also because of the lack of personality of the musicians the followed the last Tull lineup (95/95 onwards). Thank you for your videos, it's a pleasure hearing you. Would love to do it in front of a fireplace, after a nice italian dinner till 2 or 3 a.m.; drinking some good wine. If you ever come in Italy you are my guest.
I think Tull did some great albums after '79 (most of all "Broadsword and the Beast" and "Roots to Branches"), but although Anderson always had been the boss, Tull appearing as a band ended around 1979 and changed to Ian Anderson plus a group of musicians.
@grimble6261 The Ian Anderson music of his own often proves that without talented members closely involved, he produces very little that isn't stilted, distant and artificial. His voice has been horrid for many years too which doesn't help a thing.
Those who don't think Tull was always Ian Anderon plus a group of musicians were taken in by pop music marketing. The addition of Jeffrey, Ian's good friend, to the band when he did not even know how to play bass proves this, and it was pretty early. The other bandmembers facilitated Ian's success and added to the music and image, but not that much as beautiful music post whatever is anyone's best phase was proves.
Thanks for the interesting, almost surreal, Tull perspective! For me, post 79 marked the end of the explosive magic for most of the prog rock bands that were spawned out of the 69, 70, 71 big bang!
Here is yet another comment that no one will read: I was introduced to Jethro Tull in the mid-80s by two Deadheads I worked with (Roy & Linda). They had me play Songs From the Wood on the cassette player and it was a musical revelation to me. To that point I did not have much interest in music but that tape changed everything. Not long after, I bought most of Tull's catalog on CDs. I think each Tull era is great but I checked out after Crest of a Knave (which I really enjoy to this day). I do not think I have ever had a single listen through the A album but Broadsword and the Beast harken enough back to the English Folk era to make it one of my favorites as well.
Thanks Barry… great insights on Tull as per usual. The best Tull lineup in my view was with John Evan and Barry Barlow in the line up. I have heard Ian say that he thought his mate Jeffery was the best. The jury is out on the bass for me. I have always thought that John Evans’ contribution has been grossly underestimated. Martin’s contribution on minstrel was magnificent… he should have got songwriting credits for that. Barlow was brilliant on his contribution… I’m a Tull tragic … aqualung,tab & passion play are my favs… keep up the good work mate
@bradprescott2101: Old geezer and long long-time Tull fanatic that I am, I seem to remember that when the original "Minstrel" LP came out in 1975 Martin Barre WAS given a writing credit, but over the years with all the CD re-issues and such that credit seems to have disappeared. But if you can come across an original '75 LP I do believe you'll see that it gives Martin his proper credit.
Yes, they ended in 1979. But what continued on had its great moments now and then. I was glad you mentioned "The Whaler's Dues," which is the only thing I recall about Rock Island and I also saw that song on that tour. That and "Broadsword," "Slow Marching Band," "Jack Frost and the Hooded Crow," "Black Sunday," and a few others are some standouts from the Non-Tull Era.
My favorite Jethro Tull album is Stormwatch. I started with Tull in October 1971, with Aqualung- played Thick as A Brick everyday after purchase in June 1972! A was ...eh...OK. I saw the tour, with Eddie, 1980; Broadsword, Crest - fabulous albums... So whatever, Tull up until Martin's departure. After Martin- one band member in my opinion too many that has departed...
Good discussion! Personally, I’ve always pointed to the dramatic shift the band took between Too Old to Rock and Roll and Songs from the Wood. With TOTRNR, I feel like essentially Anderson said good-bye (hence the FU cover) to the huge rock and roll band that Tull had become, and decided to take the work in a completely different direction. I’ve never seen anyone ask Ian about that shift, but it’s always seemed clear particularly in hindsight. To me, that's Ian said he was “too old” to continue to be a rock God, got married, settled down, and became essentially a different type of musical star. I wouldn’t say Tull “ended” in that shift, but they certainly changed dramatically (IMO). For me, I treat Tull as two separate bands: before SFTW and after.
Ian has insisted all along that Too Old to Rock 'n' Roll, Too Young to Die was not autobiographical. The vast majority of his songs are not autobiographical and more from a third person perspective.
I think fortunately for Ian he had his team that could add to the magic to his tunes, and they were all focused together for the adventure. With each member leaving, it probably shrunk the replacements into just session and concert members and not collaborators. I think John Lennon, Roger Waters also were in that same boat. They wanted to go somewhere else, but they wound up lost at sea.
It actually stopped when Ian lost his voice and their sets were limited to only songs he could sing comfortably. Even Martin admits that there were too many times when it was just plain embarrassing to be on stage because Ian was so bad.
I have loved Tull since the beginning, (not so much the albums from the last 20 or years, but I have forced myself to listen to the newer ones, with dislike), you are so right, Tull is the Band not just Anderson, he should have hung up his boots over 20 years ago.
I began teetering upon the release of "A", although being a huge fan, did my best to find the nuggets that I could enjoy. Even to this day, every albums release, from "A" onward, I have tried my best to enjoy the albums. They truly lost me at "Catfish Rising", although I did like some material on "Roots To Branches". Succinctly put, I've struggled with Tull ever since his vocal decline began. "Roots To Branches" was the last time I saw them perform live and, although I enjoyed the show, I knew in my heart that was probably going to be the last time I would see them in concert. I've toyed with the idea of seeing them since that time, but the cost of the tickets, compounded by my expectation of hearing Ian straining to hit the notes, made the decision for me. One can only downscale the melodies so much before they begin to lose their overall appeal, just as one can only 'take in' a pair of trousers so much, until you end up with a single pocket centered over your bum.
What was so bad about Doctor to my Disease, Occasional Demons, White Innocence, Rocks on the Road or Little Sparrow on the Schoolyard Wall? Better than those lack of energetic or inspired tired tunes from Roots or Dot Com. One listen was all I gave them and I was a huge Tull fan.
I'd agree that 1979's Stormwatch was the last "classic" Tull album. 1987's Crest of a Knave is clearly their last "best" album. Though I'd say even up to J-Tull Dot Com we get great songs like The Dog-Ear Years. Honestly, I haven't paid attention to Tull's new music for 25 years. Still one of the best back catalogs in rock history. Thanks for another great video. Cheers!
I think you’re probably right in citing 1995 as the end of the real Jethro Tull. Crest of a Knave & Roots to Branches are terrific albums, although the live performances were probably a little more restrained by then. My first experience of them live was 1984 and although thoroughly enjoyable, I am envious of anyone who saw the 1973-80 lineup live.
I got into Jethro Tull back in 1970. I have pretty much everything they have released, both on LP and CD. Most of the albums released after Crest of a Knave have only been listened to once or twice ....
Yeah, I get that point of view for sure. Crest of a Knave sounds, to me, like a kind of a Dire Staits clone album, it's good but it just isn't the JT that we all knew and loved.
For me, Tull as an actual 'band' ended when Jon Noyce, Andy Giddings and Doane Perry left/were 'let go'. Those guys were the last to put real creative substance into the music.Since then it's been a revolving door of characterless session players obviously doing as they're told.
I'd argue this 'line-up' were only creative live. There was little studio output from them -- I think "Dot Com (99) and the semi-comp Xmas Album (02?03?) were the only actual studio recordings they did. (Giddings did help a lot with the lovely Divinities). However, I would agree it was the last line-up that boasted something of an identity.
@@kingkillah101 there are lots of groups that made only two good albums, so I agree with the original posters comment that that was really when the "Jethro Tull group concept" officially ended. As much as I admire Ian's talent, I feel like he's always been a bit of a git.. he never was really very humble and tolerant ime. At least I've never seen it..
My love for Jethro Tull has always been tied to a sense of frustration. I discovered the band in 1982 as a teenager with Broadsword, and then went back frantically to all of their 70's catalogue. Aqualung was a cornerstone of my education as a listener and as a boy. When Under Wraps came out one year later, I had decides that my favorite JT album was Songs from the Wood, and the clash between these two sonic worlds couldn't have been sharper. I hated Under Wraps, and I kind of resented Ian for making this kind of detestable sound in my young lifetime, as I resented myself for not having been born ten years earlier. So stupid, and so unfair, but I couldn't help but losing interest in the albums that came out later on. I've never stopped loving Aqualung, Minstrel in the Gallery, Songs from the Wood and Heavy Horses.
Agreed. I discovered them in 87 with Crest of a Knave and then went back in time. Under Wraps and A are my least favourite....didn’t even buy Under Wraps. I stopped at Catfish rising as I too prefer the 70’s stuff best.
Under Wraps! Brings back cringey memories. My girlfriend brought the album to my house, very excited to play it for me as she liked it a lot but I looked down my nose at it, gave it a big "meh!" dissed it pretty good! What was behind the dissing was I was thinking of breaking up with her so of course nothing she could do would be right! Iirc we did break up for a time but I thank my lucky stars and God she took me back later and we've been married for 34 years! ❤ Maybe I should give Under Wraps another listen! 😂
I pretty much agree with this assessment. Although 1980 certainly represents a major shift, I think Tull still lived on. For me, Tull drifted away some time in the 90's. Perhaps with the departure of Dave Pegg? Yes, Barre was still there but any remnant of Tull being "a band" I think had gone at the point. It was basically IA and guests.
I can only speak for myself but I agree that the 70’s Tull was the best. Favorite albums TAAB , SFTW, HH, SW. Remember being very disappointed when “A” came out. Mistake # 1 and most importantly sacking the best lineup after Stormwatch. Mistake # 2 Over using the horrible keyboards and electronics a la Under Wraps. Imagine replacing Barlow with a drum machine. Mistake # 3 Ian is a genius but also I believe he couldn’t conquer his ego and it was shameful the way he just summarily dismissed Barlow, Evans, David Palmer, Jonathan Noyce, Duane Perrv, Andrew Giddings ( see a pattern here?) and only relatively recently loyal , faithful Martin Barre. Ian can still write songs with the best of them but can’t sing live anymore . Though there were a few average to good albums after SW, Jethro Tulls best work was up to and including Stormwatch.
The reason many say that Tull ended in 79/80 is because after then they simply lost a lot of what made them interesting in the first place. They turned into a rather old fashioned rock band with a flute where one of the guitars should be. Gone the jazzy, folky, bluesy, slightly arch medieval/renaissance stylings, the deep and fascinating lyrical content, the thrilling complexity, to be replaced with comparative crap of lap of luxury, big riff and mando, kissing Willie, all sounding like it was played by passionless sessioners…. That’s why they ended for me (don’t get me started on the last two “Tull” albums) , but that first 12 years of Tull produced the best music ever made and because of that they are STILL my favourite band.
I have to point out that TULL were one of the few bands who managed to sound good in the old barn, Boston Garden. maybe a great mic and a great flute was the trick. it was built for boxing, anyway. their live show had a dynamic. they could easily sound nearly as good as their studio records, which we knew well. Aqualung is my favorite, but I didn't have them all. now I can hit YT and hear all their records. run thru a seriously old boom box by SHARP.
You make some good points here about Tull being eclectic, so we shouldn't expect the same album twice. However, after 1979 the only albums I had time for were "Crest.." & "Rock Island" the best song on there for me is "Ears of Tin". The Paradigm shift in music in the 1980s forced many an artist to move with the times & abandon a working formula in favour of attempting to pander to the tastes of the day. Of course, we already know this, & Jethro Tull weren't the only ones this happend to.
Jethro Tull… I split their career in two. I think for most Tull fans This Was to Stormwatch is the period we think of when we think of Tull. A to Rok Flote is a different Jethro Tull. Their catalogue became a little more sketchy but there were still some pretty good albums like Broadsword and Roots and even Rok Flote. But when we talk about Tull we’re talking about an A tier band so we get kinda nit picky. It’s like picking your favourite child really. Another thing that should be said in regards to a band’s history. Great careers are marked with up and downs, peaks and valleys. All of the great artists are the same. Think Bowie and Sparks. What about Dylan? So something like Under Wraps adds to the richness of their careers…sorta. Yes have a very similar thing going on. Yes to Drama…then 90125 to Mirror to the Sky. Practically the same as Tull’s discography. 🤘😳🤘
I'm definitely one of those who consider "This Was" to "Stormwatch" as the only real Tull albums. After Stormwatch, I didn't like whatever it was that came next, and never bought or listened to any more of their albums. But I still consider them my favorite band of all time. I listen to all those albums up to 1979 frequently, and don't really need or care about anything else from the band.
My first Tull concert was the Thick As A Brick tour, and that still stands for me as the best evening of showbiz I’ve ever experienced. I saw them three times after that, and all of the concerts were entertaining. But the firing of Martin Barre was the end for me. It may have been justified, but it seemed rather cold to me, given his contribution to the band.
I have been a huge Jethro Tull fan and own pretty much every record…Ian has always attracted stellar musicians and I have enjoyed everything up to and including the Tull Christmas album. I do find the latest releases to be less inspiring…
Tull was my number 1 band through 1979. I went to 3 or 4 concerts, one in England (I was already there). As much as I like "Stand Up", it's so different and really a jazz album. Having been a percussionist myself, I really liked the Barrymore Barlow years of Tull.
I concur with your viewpoint , They ended for me after Roots to Branches . I couldn’t bring myself to see them live after the 1992 tour . While that was a good concert in 1992 , it was a shadow of the wildly exciting shows that I saw throughout the 70 s and 80s . For that very same reason , I couldn’t go watch Genesis on their final tour . While I admired Phil Collins’ fortitude , I just couldn’t watch him doing vocals from a chair . I preferred to remember his performances throughout the 70s and 80s . Thanks .
Yes, I rather agree! For me it’s everything from Aqualung to Stormwatcher, the first 3 albums and Broadsword, and Roots to Branches get an occasional listen.
I am not a Tull fan as such… But Thick as a Brick is amazingly tight and skillfully played. I could live happily with just that one Tull album, but yes, I also enjoy many of Aqualung’s songs and the general heaviness of Benefit. Usually bands create their best stuff within their first six studio albums anyway.
I first saw Tull in October 1972 in Nashville on the "Thick As A Brick" tour. As a 70 year old who has seen all the Rock greats that gig stands out as the BEST concert I have ever seen. I had the chance to meet Ian Anderson in 1999 and told him that. I would give anything to have that show on hi def DVD with state of the art sound but sadly (because I asked him) they didn't film any of those shows.
Thank you for your Crest of a Knave by Jethro Tull shout out. I never ventured past their 1973 or 1974 Thick as a Brick era. I'm also a bit thick as a brick!
I have been a Jethro Tull fan since my high school days, back in the late 80s, when the 20th anniversary box set was issued, those records were a crash course on learning the JT universe that fascinated me until these present days. In my opinion, what makes JT one of the greatest bands ever to exist, with Ian Anderson as its sole driving force, is precisely the permanent musical innovation that makes each album a unique work of art. I do enjoy their “prog rock” period (1970-1975) better than their other periods (A Passion Play is my all time favorite JT album) however, the whole JT discography constitutes a musical legacy worth listening to, as well as preserving it for posterity.
I draw the line at “Bursting Out” and the album of that tour “Heavy Horses”. The only time I saw Tull was the “Stormwatch” tour and it was the last album of Tull I bought. With Spotify I did go back to those later albums, but I didn’t find any of them to be on the level of the 70’s albums, especially the drums, and I don’t just mean “under wraps” electronic drums.
In 1973, when I went to the 2nd live performance of a Passion Play in the US, I went with my older sister and her then boyfriend, a big fan of the Beatles, Stones and Dylan, but unfamiliar with Tull. After watching that show and me playing him some albums he remarked: "Ian Anderson IS Jetrho Tull" and I think that was true then and right up until now. So, Tull is whatever Anderson and the guys playing with him at the time say it is. That does not mean the other contributors (I think 40+ or so) over the years have had some important ones and helped him and the band with their then current sound, but it has always been Anderson's musical project.
Tull certainly continues with a changing rota of musicians as in life you move on with who you work with! It's the music! At the end of the day! People have their favourites which is the same for many bands!
Legendary band forever. Ian is a genius. I respect all of their releases over the years. Seems like most of the super 70s bands peaked in new music creativity around that timeframe. The Who, Pink Floyd, Black Sabbath to name a few. Although that might be the case their music lives on..only the Stones seemed to have the ability based on their last release to reach previous high standards.
To me, Tull survives in RokFlote and Zealot Gene. They feel like Tull records to me. Tull's always been more of a concept and less an assemblage of particular players. What's unfortunate is that Anderson never established a clear distinction between Tull and his solo work. He bullocksed it badly by not putting his foot down with Chrysalis, insisting that "A" remain a solo release. He also seemed to confuse matters further by playing fast and loose with the branding of both "solo" Thick As A Brick 2 and Homo Erraticus, both of which were every bit as much Tull albums as the most recent two releases. As much a creative wizard as Ian is, he's less so a marketing genius. Blurring the lines of solo vs. Tull has hardly helped define his or Tull's legacies.
I think you've explained this perfectly. Who are we to say when Tull ended such as 1980 or 1995? I could venture to say that SLOB with guitar could have been a Tull album as well!
If we are talking about pure, top tier Jethro Tull then yes that band really did end with Stormwatch as the last true JT album. But Tull did have an ace up their sleeve and I thought Broadsword was a return to form with an 80's production value that I don't mind. I could give Broadsword a 3.5 out of 5 rating which to me says it's a good rock album. I happen to like a lot of A as well. But yeah I think if we have to define Tull as a band with certain characteristics it seems Stormwatch and the end of the 70's really closed that unstoppable run that defined Jethro Tull.
I see it differently: like many other famous groups (Deep Purple or Manfred Mann's Earth Band for example), Jethro Tull simply had several eras, not only two: First it was very bluesy, then it was the peak in the 70s (the best indeed), then experiments (imposed by the inevitable 80s which ruined the general quality of the music in terms of arrangements, production and format), then a gentle slope towards weakness in the 90s, and a resurgence of maturity in starting from the Christmas Album (which I find good), including the latest two which I consider more as solo Ian Anderson, and moreover I include in this last era The Secret Language Of Birds and his three following solos albums as well.
Roots to Branches is my favourite Tull album. No other Tull album I played more than this one and I love the Giddings/Noyce line up. For me after this line-up ended Tull stopped being a real band.
My mum says I should be offended that you said I am still living with her - - I want to make clear we are in separate rooms! Strangely - I would agree with 1995, but I keep returning to the view that the 2000 solo album by Anderson (The Secret Language of Birds) was actually the best Tull Tull album since 1979.
I first became aware of Tull at Hyde Park when I was in the 6th form. I admired Anderson's frenetic flute playing, but I was not in tune with bluesy music in general. The revelation came with Stand Up after Mick Abrahams had left. I was a solid Tull fan throughout the Seventies but only an episodic one after the A album, when the 'ironing board' players turned up
Great review. 70's Tull albums were and remain outstanding definitive masterpieces - perhaps considered the "prime" decade for the band and it's lineup. Rock Island, Crest and even DotCom to have some good songs and those tours were enjoyable. CRising however I simply cannot enjoy. As JT followers know so well Tull is much to do about experimentation + pushing creative limits and with that comes the possibility of turning some listeners off and not getting the rave reviews. Broadsword, Roots, and UnderWraps are strong albums and in spite of Ians vocal struggles those live shows were excellent. Don't forget the quality of musicians Ian brought in during those 80-90's albums - he had a knack for picking tremendous talent. And here we are today in 2024 with even more fresh music from Ian, woo! granted the live shows are a challenge.
It is true that Broadsword and the Beast has the desperation that is life in the songs: that quality which makes the early albums so great, but it is couched in a comfortable soundscape, thus demoting most of it to being soothing music for Aga oven owners who live in the countryside. It very good rather than great. Give me the rawness of early work such as 'Seventeen' any day, because it has the immediacy of life being lived in its desperation, both in its sound and in its subject matter...
I hate long comments, but here goes. I don't think so, no. It's always down to taste, and for me, I love their first three '80s albums (and I also love Walk Into Light), I like Crest of a Knave quite a lot, and I like enough of Rock Island to keep it on the thumb drive in the car. But Rock Island is where the self-consciousness, the sense that Ian was no longer making music, he was making Jethro Tull product, gets too intense to tolerate ("Big Riff and Mando"-ugh). By Catfish Rising it's beyond saving ("White Innocence"-argh). So I would say that they ended in 1989. One of the things that defined Tull was boldly going where no Tull had gone before, and they did so through Under Wraps. They didn't do so on Crest, but the material was solid enough to overcome it. By Rock Island, their days of doing something interesting were over. (Yes, Roots to Branches is a bit of a return to form, but frankly, I don't see a brief focus on exotic scales and instruments as out of left field for Tull, so I don't count it.)
Roots To Branches is my favorite Jethro Tull album, but I may be unusual in that regard. I believe that Tull means different things to different people.
With the loss of John Evan on organ it was no longer Tull even thought I liked "A". The industry wanted to get away from the Hammond organ and called it dated. A Passion Play is my all-time favourite!
Am I the only one who loved Under Wraps from the day it was released? It was certainly an oddball record at the time for Tull along with being loaded with keyboards but the lyrical content made it sound more mature than what the other synth/keyboard bands were doing at the time. Also, the tour for this album was a lot better than the A tour.
It is a good album. It tends to sound cold, however I have found that is mainly on a bad to mediocre stereo set or ghetto blaster. It really comes alive on a high quality stereo set that simply can produce a bigger range of frequencies. Some albums have that presumably because they were mixed on a high quality system where you can hear what you can't on a low quality system.
I think Stormwatch possibly signalled the end of Jethro Tull's ubiquitous phase when considering the behemoths of 60s / 70s rock. For the likes of Genesis and Yes (although more fleeting) the transformation into a more accessible form of music was met with some commercial success. Unfortunately with Tull's attempt to integrate the more electronic sounds of the day this was met with a degree of apathy from which their formative status was never reached again. These days Martin Barre suggests that the current version of the band is Tull lite and having witnessed their performance at Ephraim Gardens in 2023 i tend to sadly agree. Competent musically of course but lacking character as they come across as simply backing musicians. BTW special mention for Roots to Branches as suggested is a strong late period Tull album.
New subscriber here. I never gave “A” much of a chance back in the day, but today I really enjoy it. I have always loved “Crest Of A Knave” and all of the later albums have their moments. I was also pleasantly surprised by “The Zealot Gene” that came out a few years ago. Anderson is the only Tull regular on it, but the album is solid.
Yes I see the point, but I think Tull really ended in 1999. Stormwatch was my first Tull concert, and I'm glad to have seen the original lineup. But I continued to follow them quite intensely for long after that. There were some some great albums right up to end. After 2000 he should have quit before he lost his voice. I saw the 50th anniversary and it was frankly sad and embarrassing to see him struggling to sing and sounding lousy. Also I think Tull really drove the final nail into its coffin when Ian fired Martin Barre, who was his right hand man since 1969. That made me lose repect for him totally. But I still really appreciate all the good times I had listening to Tull since high school.
In my view A is a great album, as great as several other Tull albums in the 1970s. I like the comments that Tull albums are significantly different from each other.
No. One thing you can't deny is that the band led by Ian Anderson were masters of reinvention. They never could be put in a box. That's the greatest thing about them IMO.
What I like about Jethro Tull, or rather another one of the things I like about Jethro Tull is that an album like Roots to Branches which I did not immediately take to, can be returned to in time and listened to and rediscovered. All IA/JT music is good for me. Same with the new albums. Almost universally I find new albums to be a real challenge. I usually do not hear what is in the music the first times I listen to an new album, but over time I start to like the things that initially sounded difficulte. People are too quick to judge.
Jethro Tull never released a bad album in my opinion. It was just that some were better than others. And 'A' is a fine album with some brilliant writing.
@@SH-ud8wdThe drum machines were an 'interesting' choice. But credit to him for trying something different. To be honest, the drums wouldn't be half as bad if they were not so high in the mix.
Most fans know that ‘A’ was an Ian Anderson solo album. The members assumed that they’d been fired when they heard the news that it was going to be called Jethro Tull. Ian just didn’t fight it because he was ready to move on anyway. To say they were “sacked” is pretty misleading. And the previous lineup change was only 3-4 years earlier when Jeffrey left, not in the early ‘70’s. So the idea that they ever had a stable classic lineup for a long while is kind of a stretch. I have a pretty unique opinion on the 80’s. I believe that A and Under Wraps are both Ian Anderson solo albums. So if you remove those then the sequence is Stormwatch, Browdsword, Crest… Yes, there are still lineup changes and an increase of drum machine and 80’s synth sounds but the essence of Tull is fully intact. I would recommend any fan look at it this way unless they’re as obsessive as I am and aim to devour every single recording he has ever produced. Crest, Catfish and Rock Island were a few of the first ones I heard at age 10, not long after their release and I was hooked right away. So when I eventually heard Songs from the Wood and Thick as a Brick, it was just more awesome stuff from my already favorite band. Not anything that could lessen the value of the first ones I heard. It’s too bad others don’t get to share that experience.
For me, Jeffrey Hammond leaving the band was the end of the very exciting live shows Tull were known for. Strange but my favorite period was when their hair was the longest. Particularly "Thick as a Brick". John Glascock was a great player and "Songs from the Wood" was an incredible album, but the interplay between Barlow, Evan, Barre, Hammond and Anderson was the most exciting.
I agree that Thick as a Brick was their last album that was almost 100% great. I consider it a work of genius. The first 10 minutes of side B of passion play was great, but I didn't like the rest of the album. I guess you're the only one that agrees with me, that from war child onward, all their albums were bad. Some good songs, but no good Albums, like stand up, benefit, Aqualung and Thick as a Brick. That was core jt and what made them a supergroup IMO. My favorite band of all time.
@@shb7772000if - What's bad about Minstrel In The Gallery, Songs From The Wood, Heavy Horses and Stormwatch? I love every song on those albums. I agree that War Child and, especially, Too Old to Rock 'n' Roll are subpar, but there are some later Tull records that are good all the way through, namely the four I mentioned and I'll throw in Roots to Branches, too. To each his own...
Stormwatch is the last Tull album that I unreservedly love every track on, but I love almost all of Broadsword, ditto with Rock Island (c'mon, Kissing Willie is a hoot! How can you not love lyrics like "Willie hangs his head behind grey factory walls"?), and the lion's share of Roots to Branches. So (imho) they certainly didn't end in 1979. I haven't heard anything post Roots to Branches that I give a tinker's cuss for, so I think I agree with your conclusion that Roots to Branches was probably the last great Tull long-player.
I have everything they've ever made, but after 1979, I have little interest in much of the output since then. Barrymore Barlow was an amazing drummer for Tull, as was John Evans keyboards totally amazing.
I largely agree although I should say that My first Tull gig was May 1980 on the Stormwatch tour. Dave Pegg went into the big line-up replacing the late, great John Glascock of course. It was fantastic and the best of the 10+ Tull gigs I've seen. With hindsight, I wished they'd packed up before A.
I saw them three times - 78, 80 and 82. The first (Heavy Horses tour, with John Glascock on bass) was by far the best, but the other two were also excellent shows. The April 1980 show was one of the final shows to feature Barlow, Palmer and Evan(s), and was genuinely the end of an era. It was sad the way the band broke up that year. I have zero interest in seeing them live now, given the painful decline in IA's once-magnificent voice and the changes in personnel.
@@8ackbiter434 Completely agree. Similarly, I wish Yes had finished after Drama and Genesis after Duke. Incidentally, Pegg once told me that the Australian leg of the Stormwatch tour was the most depressing he'd ever undertaken.
Album-wise, for me it ended in 1975 with Minstrel. After three great albums that were very different to what had come before and from each other, Tull delivered their final classic album and for me at least returned partly to their earlier pre-TAAB style. Too Old ... was a big disappointment when it came out and despite not being terrible, we felt this looks like the end of the Tull we know and love. Songs from the Wood was a good album in many ways but not what we wanted from Tull and after Heavy Horses I checked out. I saw them on the HH tour and that was great. A few years later someone lent me Broadsword and I thought this just isn't for me. I'm sure there'll always be individual great tracks and I have cherry picked some of the later albums second hand as part of my attempt to get physical media while it's still out there.
For me, the peak Tull years were wiith Jeffrey Hammond and barrie barlow. My first concert, and the first time I heard tull , was the thick as a brick tour in 1972 at msg nyc. How's that for a first concert? Instant tull freak. I had just entered high school and didn't miss a show for years. But I noticed when Hammond left something was different or missing. Hammond stage presence was equal to Anderson. I also think being they were friends long before Hammond entered the band there was a chemistry between the two. Anderson even wrote a couple of songs that mentions Jeffrey on previous albums. I think Hammonds personality counterbalanced Anderson's. Anderson was quite serious and intense while Jeffreys humor took the edge off. Anything quirky, offbeat and tongue in cheek came from jeffery. He added a charm, a sense of not taking themselves too serious. Unless you were following tull in those years you wouldn't understand the unique subtleties that Jeffrey brought to the band and the music. the only other bass player I ever saaw who was more active on stage was verdin white of Earth wind & fire.
I share your perspective on Jeffrey.John Glascock was musicaly speaking probably better bass player, but on the live shows Jeffrey's presence was irreplaceable.I saw Tull 6 times live, but the best show was 75. with Jeffrey in his famous zebra outfit.I'll never forget the begining of this concert - they started with this heavy rock part of "Wind Up", and Martin & Jeffrey literally fly up to the stage using some spring-boards!The impression was every member of this band have real fun (I use to call them "happy Jethros")Later (after Jefrey left) was still great live performances, but.....(you describe it realy well)
Writing credits should have recognized the obvious musical contributions of John Evans. Especially TAAB and PP. of course MB bits are obvious too and Ian did acknowledge the guys on SFTW. But still you can see how heavily he leaned on keyboardists up to Crest. Anyway, not to take away from all of Ian’s excellence but the magic the 70’s guys delivered seems under recognized compositionally.
Hi Barry, I both agree and disagree with you. I agree that Tull definitely did NOT end in 1979 despite the lineup changes. While the albums from A onward were not back-to-front gems like everything from Stand Up to Stormwatch, each featured a fair share of great songs. Those who stop listening to Tull's output with SW (or, mistakenly, with HH) are missing out on some outstanding material. I disagree, however, that Tull ended with RTB. I would argue that the Anderson/Barre/Giddings/Noyce/Perry lineup was indeed a legitimate version of Tull; their shows in the mid- and late 2000s were still excellent. Things went off the rails for me when those fellows were all sacked around 2010 and Anderson went with his current crop of musicians. Of course, he recorded and toured as "Ian Anderson" back then, so one could argue that it wasn't technically Tull. But we all know it was. Lifeless performances mixed with Ian's failing voice caused me to jump of the train at that point.
Yes, there is an alternative date for the end of Tull i.e. when Anderson's voice went completely. I would date that to the late 1990s. At that point, Tull's live shows became progressively more embarrassing.
I really don't mind if you sit this one out... I first heard Tull, Aqualung, at a friends home in '72, and was hooked. Every album was a Gem, with no filler songs (Too Old, and Heavy as exceptions IMHO) through Broadsword. That and not getting stuck in the mold of a fixed sound / theme keep me hooked. (the opposite of BTO whom many claimed all their songs sounded the same) I always felt Martin was much underappreciated by fans as a guitarist, as his was a big part of the Classic Tull Sound that I love. If Ian and Martin are on it, it sounds like a Tull Album to me. I'm not as familiar with Tull's later work as after Broadsword as I only bought Knave and it seemed like Ian's songwriting had went past its peak by then. That High Quality I loved seemed to be waning and I'd rather live in their Hay-day than listen to lesser works. mike Living in the past
I would say aside from the very first album anything with Ian Anderson and Martin Barre is what I considered Tull. Stuff without Martin feels more like solo albums which isn't necessarily A Bad Thing. Martins contributions are unique and he is a singular guitarist. Losing Barrie Barlowe was massive but Anderson was on to something when he hired Mark Craney. I wish that he'd stuck with him
I think that Ian said that after the A album, that he just couldn't go back to the old lineup. I still think that it was a mistake by the record company to brand that album as a Tull album. The classic period of Tull ended there, at least for me. There were a few bright spots, here and there going forward, but just not enough. The fact that his voice went away and the COPD just made it impossible to perform like he used to were just nails in the Tull coffin. Too bad, really, they were a great band.
Barry, thank you for this video. I have always been a big fan of JT starting way back when “Benefit” was released. There was always something about the band that kept me interested. Nothing they did followed convention. I liked the changing sounds and appreciate them more now than ever. Just a thought but “Living in the Past” and “Nightcap” are non traditional albums that are really good and an interesting topic. I think many fans aren’t familiar with “Nightcap”. I enjoy that album quite a bit. I would be interested in your thoughts.
The most famous line up in JT was the "Thick as a Brick" onward band, but it slowly unraveled starting with Jeffery H-H leaving and Glascock & Palmer joining. After the Stormwatch album, JT was blown up and major changes occurred. Maybe it was time for a change as B. Barlow in 1980 commented on how the band's songs and formula were starting to wear thin. Perhaps new blood was needed to give energy to the idea of JT in the 80's, and they had a few solid albums in that era. I loved that 70's band lineup the most and enjoy those albums even to this day.
That which solidified the classic JT sound was truly a '70's band'. In the 40 or so years since "A" Ian's trotted out about ten 'band studio' albums, and the very best of them (TB&TB '82, Crest of a Knave '87, Roots to Branches '95) were STILL dozens of years ago. It could be argued the 'late classic period of Tull' round the turn of the century (Andy Giddings, John Noyce, Doane Perry et. al.) were mostly a hits live band. So honestly, as big a fan as I am, I've been unable to get into anything beyond Rupi's Dance (03). What of the modern catalog holds up to "Living in the Past"? Nada.
I mostly stopped following after “Rock Island” (saw the tour). I would check in occasionally and be disappointed. TAAB2 (billed as a solo record) was a forgettable, nearly tuneless mess. However… I think the most recent one, RökFlöte, is a return to form. Yes, I wish they used a real producer. The album’s sound is brittle and thin… But the concept works. The words are interesting. And best of all, it rocks hard for Tull. With long and memorable instrumental passages. More than good enough for 2023. And it followed a year on the heels of the previous Tull album, which wasn’t a bad album itself. Keep up the pace, Ian! I look forward to a new Tull album in 2024!
I have always loved Jethro Tull. Through all the years even though the line up and albums during the 70-ties before A were the best. I don't mind the change of style during the years and also Ian's solo albums. Many songs are great. I listen now very much on Zealot Gene and Rök Flöte wich I consider as a step back (forward) to the 70-ties.
The classic Jethro Tull ended in April 1980 when the Stormwatch tour ended and Barriemore Barlow and John Evans left the band.
Barlow left the band. Evans and Palmer were dismissed.
Palmer found out about it when his daughter told him about it when she got home from school one day. Her friends informed her.
John Evan received a letter informing him that his services were no longer required. (Palmer eventually received the same letter.)
Ian has never fired anyone to their face. He either had someone else do it, or by letter sent by "management". All his band mates (it seems) were disposable on a whim.
For me Jethro Tull is Benefit. A beautiful album. Their best.
I love benefit. The deluxe box set is outstanding.
'Tis indeed! But, for me, it's Thick as a Brick!
"Benefit" was my first Tull album, purchased on a whim, having never heard the band before. It remains one of my Top 3 favorite albums of all-time to this day!!! Cheers!!
@hurdygurdyguy1 a monumental album, to be sure!!
Absolutely love benefit. Desert island album for sure!
Songs from the wood and heavy horses are the pinnacle of Jethro Tull for me.
I'll 2nd that emotion.
Agreed
Benefit and Minstrel!
Agreed.
I agree with you. I think Heavy Horses is under valued, but it's probably my favorite. Being an American, it is for me a beautiful look into a different world.
I think what happened was .... the 80's, MTV and the new digital technology.
What happened to Tull happened to other bands like Yes, for example.
Music videos became paramount. Synths stopped being analogue and samplers were invented. It changed every band, many for the worst. ZZ Top put out three DISCO videos. Dire Straits used primitive CGI. Ozzy dressed up as a werewolf.
It took a while to recover from this.
Sure, the ZZ Top videos and records were really great though. I'm still waiting for the remaster of Afterburner!
@@pfzt ..amazing
Styx were robotos who turned into the band. Pink Floyd had a live video with German shepherds with yellow eyes.
Checks calendar sees its 2024. And yet out there is still someone, long flowing hair from a bald top, bell bottom blue jeans and covering up a huge middle age beer belly is a DISCO SUCKS T-shirt.
Tull's foray into synths and Ian sacking the analog keyboardists occurred prior to MTV existing. Plus they barely ever got any MTV airplay, even with some decent videos off Crest of a Knave. Hell, Kissing Willie was outright banned for being to naughty for morally upright MTV.
I saw Tull in 2008 at Red Rocks. In fact a riot at their 1971 show got all rock acts banned from Red Rocks for years, and this was their first show since then.
I had zero expectations, but they blew me away. They opened with Thick as a Brick, and although Ian’s voice has aged, and he isn’t as acrobatic anymore, his talent as an entertainer and storyteller were scarcely affected. A great show I will always remember.
Stormwatch was the last truly great Tull album.
I found Stormwatch to be rather poor. I adore the last few albums. Rokflute is bloody wonderful.
@@schragemusikReally? There really is no accounting for taste. The last few albums have really been Ian Anderson solo albums with hired hands. The last real Jethro Tull album (apart from the Christmas album) was 'Dotcom'. The last decent album, in my opinion, was 'Roots to Branches' in 1995.
@@portcullis5622 I agree. Dot Com had a few classics like "Gift of Roses" and "Bends Like a Willow" but was overall lacking and I thought Roots to Branches was really good. I'm having a lot of trouble getting into anything after the Christmas album though; there just seems something lacking.
@@Clyde-x1x Yes, I also thought that they were the two best tracks on Dot Com. I have only heard a few tracks from recent albums, but one thing that is definitely missing is a decent vocalist! Ian Anderson has virtually been reduced to spoken word on recent recordings.
@@portcullis5622 - I'd say Dot Com is decent, while Roots To Branches is great.
My favourites are the ones with the amazing Barriemore Barlow on them - extraordinary drummer that I wish we had more of. And I remember when the my main record shop was WH Smiths and they classified the band under T!
I agree, Barriemore Barlow is an amazing drummer!!
Barrie Barlow is one of the all time greatest drummers! He was even being considered to replace John Bonham as drummer for Led Zeppelin (had they carried on...)
I'll give you an answer that's not just merely obvious, but incredibly obvious. Jethro Tull has always been know as just Tull. If you look at the drum set on stage, the word Tull is on it.
@@ricenglish4556 - I think the OP's point was that many people, including some record store employees, thought Jethro Tull was a music artist/person and filed the records as if alphabetical, by the person's name. The proper filing is by band name, under J. I've seen their records under T, as well.
@@ricenglish4556 I distinctly recall Ian Anderson saying "welcome to another evening with TULL".
I think A and Broardsword are excellent. But after 1980, with the exception of Barre and maybe Pegg, what is called Jethro Tull is like an ever changing line up of hired session/touring musicians chosen by Anderson. It wasn't like that with the 70s line ups. Each member brought something very special, unique and memorable to the band and the live performance. This has not been replicated since.
Heavy Horses was the last Tull album I’ve been interested in.
a couple of years ago, I was visiting Stratford upon Avon with family one summer, and the record shop on the tourist street (the one opposite Shakespeare's house) was playing the Aqualung album loud enough to shake the cobbles outside!
It was over when Martin Barre left. Not to mention others who left earlier, John Evan and Barriemore Barlow.
You forgot David Palmer.
I agree with this assessment
Saw them live 1977, it was just like the Bursting Out album, crazy and on fire.
Saw Jethro Tull again 1981 (A Tour), was great to see Eddie Jobson live, but it was not the same, Ian was very 'normal'!!!
I first went to a Tull concerti in 1988, and for me the line-up Anderson/Barre/Pegg/Perry/Allcock(Giddings) was a real pleasure to hear live. The first half of the '90s was a great time to attend gigs of a band that was already considered a "classic". And I agree with you that since (I'd say Dot Com) it was still Tull. Some compositions are really good also on the later albums, but they aren't Tull anymore; just Anderson's solo (and the vocals are greatly compromised). Also because of the lack of personality of the musicians the followed the last Tull lineup (95/95 onwards). Thank you for your videos, it's a pleasure hearing you. Would love to do it in front of a fireplace, after a nice italian dinner till 2 or 3 a.m.; drinking some good wine. If you ever come in Italy you are my guest.
I think Tull did some great albums after '79 (most of all "Broadsword and the Beast" and "Roots to Branches"), but although Anderson always had been the boss, Tull appearing as a band ended around 1979 and changed to Ian Anderson plus a group of musicians.
@murdockreviews
Yeah, I can get behind this.
I would like to hear A less electronic-y version of under wraps tho...!
( no I don't live with me mum 😂😂)
@grimble6261i very much have to agree.
agree!
@grimble6261 The Ian Anderson music of his own often proves that without talented members closely involved, he produces very little that isn't stilted, distant and artificial. His voice has been horrid for many years too which doesn't help a thing.
Those who don't think Tull was always Ian Anderon plus a group of musicians were taken in by pop music marketing. The addition of Jeffrey, Ian's good friend, to the band when he did not even know how to play bass proves this, and it was pretty early. The other bandmembers facilitated Ian's success and added to the music and image, but not that much as beautiful music post whatever is anyone's best phase was proves.
Thanks for the interesting, almost surreal, Tull perspective! For me, post 79 marked the end of the explosive magic for most of the prog rock bands that were spawned out of the 69, 70, 71 big bang!
Here is yet another comment that no one will read:
I was introduced to Jethro Tull in the mid-80s by two Deadheads I worked with (Roy & Linda). They had me play Songs From the Wood on the cassette player and it was a musical revelation to me.
To that point I did not have much interest in music but that tape changed everything.
Not long after, I bought most of Tull's catalog on CDs. I think each Tull era is great but I checked out after Crest of a Knave (which I really enjoy to this day). I do not think I have ever had a single listen through the A album but Broadsword and the Beast harken enough back to the English Folk era to make it one of my favorites as well.
Got me. I read it. Was on board in the early 70's. Feel the same about "A".
@@spooge33 Black Sunday is an amazing track but the album betrayed the inheritance
well i read it!
Thanks Barry… great insights on Tull as per usual. The best Tull lineup in my view was with John Evan and Barry Barlow in the line up. I have heard Ian say that he thought his mate Jeffery was the best. The jury is out on the bass for me. I have always thought that John Evans’ contribution has been grossly underestimated. Martin’s contribution on minstrel was magnificent… he should have got songwriting credits for that. Barlow was brilliant on his contribution… I’m a Tull tragic … aqualung,tab & passion play are my favs… keep up the good work mate
@bradprescott2101: Old geezer and long long-time Tull fanatic that I am, I seem to remember that when the original "Minstrel" LP came out in 1975 Martin Barre WAS given a writing credit, but over the years with all the CD re-issues and such that credit seems to have disappeared. But if you can come across an original '75 LP I do believe you'll see that it gives Martin his proper credit.
@@ijustgottasay1281 He definitely was. That was the only other credit on the whole album.
Crest of a Knave is one of my favourite Tull albums.
Yes, they ended in 1979. But what continued on had its great moments now and then. I was glad you mentioned "The Whaler's Dues," which is the only thing I recall about Rock Island and I also saw that song on that tour. That and "Broadsword," "Slow Marching Band," "Jack Frost and the Hooded Crow," "Black Sunday," and a few others are some standouts from the Non-Tull Era.
My favorite Jethro Tull album is Stormwatch. I started with Tull in October 1971, with Aqualung- played Thick as A Brick everyday after purchase in June 1972!
A was ...eh...OK. I saw the tour, with Eddie, 1980;
Broadsword, Crest - fabulous albums...
So whatever, Tull up until Martin's departure. After Martin- one band member in my opinion too many that has departed...
Good discussion! Personally, I’ve always pointed to the dramatic shift the band took between Too Old to Rock and Roll and Songs from the Wood. With TOTRNR, I feel like essentially Anderson said good-bye (hence the FU cover) to the huge rock and roll band that Tull had become, and decided to take the work in a completely different direction. I’ve never seen anyone ask Ian about that shift, but it’s always seemed clear particularly in hindsight. To me, that's Ian said he was “too old” to continue to be a rock God, got married, settled down, and became essentially a different type of musical star. I wouldn’t say Tull “ended” in that shift, but they certainly changed dramatically (IMO). For me, I treat Tull as two separate bands: before SFTW and after.
Ian has insisted all along that Too Old to Rock 'n' Roll, Too Young to Die was not autobiographical. The vast majority of his songs are not autobiographical and more from a third person perspective.
I think fortunately for Ian he had his team that could add to the magic to his tunes, and they were all focused together for the adventure. With each member leaving, it probably shrunk the replacements into just session and concert members and not collaborators. I think John Lennon, Roger Waters also were in that same boat. They wanted to go somewhere else, but they wound up lost at sea.
No it stopped when Martin was sacked and Ian started his tribute band.
You're absolutely right, but forgive the narrator. He's a huge Tull fan who never heard of Martin. Just when you think you've seen and heard it all.
It actually stopped when Ian lost his voice and their sets were limited to only songs he could sing comfortably. Even Martin admits that there were too many times when it was just plain embarrassing to be on stage because Ian was so bad.
I have loved Tull since the beginning, (not so much the albums from the last 20 or years, but I have forced myself to listen to the newer ones, with dislike), you are so right, Tull is the Band not just Anderson, he should have hung up his boots over 20 years ago.
TAAB2 was a market devise and to think without Martin! TAAB1 should largely remain credited to John Evan
I began teetering upon the release of "A", although being a huge fan, did my best to find the nuggets that I could enjoy. Even to this day, every albums release, from "A" onward, I have tried my best to enjoy the albums. They truly lost me at "Catfish Rising", although I did like some material on "Roots To Branches". Succinctly put, I've struggled with Tull ever since his vocal decline began. "Roots To Branches" was the last time I saw them perform live and, although I enjoyed the show, I knew in my heart that was probably going to be the last time I would see them in concert. I've toyed with the idea of seeing them since that time, but the cost of the tickets, compounded by my expectation of hearing Ian straining to hit the notes, made the decision for me. One can only downscale the melodies so much before they begin to lose their overall appeal, just as one can only 'take in' a pair of trousers so much, until you end up with a single pocket centered over your bum.
What was so bad about Doctor to my Disease, Occasional Demons, White Innocence, Rocks on the Road or Little Sparrow on the Schoolyard Wall? Better than those lack of energetic or inspired tired tunes from Roots or Dot Com. One listen was all I gave them and I was a huge Tull fan.
@@alwilson3204 - Roots To Branches utterly smokes Catfish Rising in every possible way, IMO, and Dot Com is better, too, but to each their own.
I think you're spot on regarding the timing of Jethro Tull's wandering off the big stage. The "Roots" record was a brilliant capper to the legacy.
I'd agree that 1979's Stormwatch was the last "classic" Tull album. 1987's Crest of a Knave is clearly their last "best" album. Though I'd say even up to J-Tull Dot Com we get great songs like The Dog-Ear Years. Honestly, I haven't paid attention to Tull's new music for 25 years. Still one of the best back catalogs in rock history. Thanks for another great video. Cheers!
I think you’re probably right in citing 1995 as the end of the real Jethro Tull.
Crest of a Knave & Roots to Branches are terrific albums, although the live performances were probably a little more restrained by then.
My first experience of them live was 1984 and although thoroughly enjoyable, I am envious of anyone who saw the 1973-80 lineup live.
I got into Jethro Tull back in 1970. I have pretty much everything they have released, both on LP and CD. Most of the albums released after Crest of a Knave have only been listened to once or twice ....
Yeah, I get that point of view for sure. Crest of a Knave sounds, to me, like a kind of a Dire Staits clone album, it's good but it just isn't the JT that we all knew and loved.
Agreed. Crest of a Knave is a terrific album but thereafter……
@@usaturnuranus At least it's...good!
@@Tangerine229 Personally, I felt that about half of Catfish Rising was good stuff too.
@@alwilson3204, agreed. It was an interesting effort.
For me, Tull as an actual 'band' ended when Jon Noyce, Andy Giddings and Doane Perry left/were 'let go'. Those guys were the last to put real creative substance into the music.Since then it's been a revolving door of characterless session players obviously doing as they're told.
I just wrote nearly the same exact thing.
I'd argue this 'line-up' were only creative live. There was little studio output from them -- I think "Dot Com (99) and the semi-comp Xmas Album (02?03?) were the only actual studio recordings they did. (Giddings did help a lot with the lovely Divinities). However, I would agree it was the last line-up that boasted something of an identity.
@@kingkillah101Good point. Giddings and Perry played on Roots to Branches though. I saw them on that tour and it really was a great live band.
@@kingkillah101 there are lots of groups that made only two good albums, so I agree with the original posters comment that that was really when the "Jethro Tull group concept" officially ended. As much as I admire Ian's talent, I feel like he's always been a bit of a git.. he never was really very humble and tolerant ime. At least I've never seen it..
very plausible..
I agree.👍
My love for Jethro Tull has always been tied to a sense of frustration. I discovered the band in 1982 as a teenager with Broadsword, and then went back frantically to all of their 70's catalogue. Aqualung was a cornerstone of my education as a listener and as a boy. When Under Wraps came out one year later, I had decides that my favorite JT album was Songs from the Wood, and the clash between these two sonic worlds couldn't have been sharper. I hated Under Wraps, and I kind of resented Ian for making this kind of detestable sound in my young lifetime, as I resented myself for not having been born ten years earlier. So stupid, and so unfair, but I couldn't help but losing interest in the albums that came out later on. I've never stopped loving Aqualung, Minstrel in the Gallery, Songs from the Wood and Heavy Horses.
Agreed. I discovered them in 87 with Crest of a Knave and then went back in time. Under Wraps and A are my least favourite....didn’t even buy Under Wraps. I stopped at Catfish rising as I too prefer the 70’s stuff best.
Under Wraps! Brings back cringey memories. My girlfriend brought the album to my house, very excited to play it for me as she liked it a lot but I looked down my nose at it, gave it a big "meh!" dissed it pretty good! What was behind the dissing was I was thinking of breaking up with her so of course nothing she could do would be right! Iirc we did break up for a time but I thank my lucky stars and God she took me back later and we've been married for 34 years! ❤
Maybe I should give Under Wraps another listen! 😂
@@hurdygurdyguy1 - Don't bother. It sucks even worse now.
I pretty much agree with this assessment. Although 1980 certainly represents a major shift, I think Tull still lived on. For me, Tull drifted away some time in the 90's. Perhaps with the departure of Dave Pegg? Yes, Barre was still there but any remnant of Tull being "a band" I think had gone at the point. It was basically IA and guests.
I can only speak for myself but I agree that the 70’s Tull was the best. Favorite albums TAAB , SFTW, HH, SW. Remember being very disappointed when “A” came out. Mistake # 1 and most importantly sacking the best lineup after Stormwatch. Mistake # 2 Over using the horrible keyboards and electronics a la Under Wraps. Imagine replacing Barlow with a drum machine. Mistake # 3 Ian is a genius but also I believe he couldn’t conquer his ego and it was shameful the way he just summarily dismissed Barlow, Evans, David Palmer, Jonathan Noyce, Duane Perrv, Andrew Giddings ( see a pattern here?) and only relatively recently loyal , faithful Martin Barre. Ian can still write songs with the best of them but can’t sing live anymore . Though there were a few average to good albums after SW, Jethro Tulls best work was up to and including Stormwatch.
The reason many say that Tull ended in 79/80 is because after then they simply lost a lot of what made them interesting in the first place. They turned into a rather old fashioned rock band with a flute where one of the guitars should be. Gone the jazzy, folky, bluesy, slightly arch medieval/renaissance stylings, the deep and fascinating lyrical content, the thrilling complexity, to be replaced with comparative crap of lap of luxury, big riff and mando, kissing Willie, all sounding like it was played by passionless sessioners…. That’s why they ended for me (don’t get me started on the last two “Tull” albums) , but that first 12 years of Tull produced the best music ever made and because of that they are STILL my favourite band.
I have to point out that TULL were one of the few bands who managed to sound good in the old barn, Boston Garden. maybe a great mic and a great flute was the trick. it was built for boxing, anyway. their live show had a dynamic. they could easily sound nearly as good as their studio records, which we knew well. Aqualung is my favorite, but I didn't have them all. now I can hit YT and hear all their records. run thru a seriously old boom box by SHARP.
You make some good points here about Tull being eclectic, so we shouldn't expect the same album twice. However, after 1979 the only albums I had time for were "Crest.." & "Rock Island" the best song on there for me is "Ears of Tin". The Paradigm shift in music in the 1980s forced many an artist to move with the times & abandon a working formula in favour of attempting to pander to the tastes of the day. Of course, we already know this, & Jethro Tull weren't the only ones this happend to.
Jethro Tull…
I split their career in two.
I think for most Tull fans This Was
to Stormwatch is the period we think
of when we think of Tull.
A to Rok Flote is a different Jethro Tull.
Their catalogue became a little more sketchy
but there were still some pretty good albums
like Broadsword and Roots and even Rok Flote.
But when we talk about Tull we’re talking about
an A tier band so we get kinda nit picky.
It’s like picking your favourite child really.
Another thing that should be said in regards to
a band’s history. Great careers are marked with
up and downs, peaks and valleys. All of the great
artists are the same. Think Bowie and Sparks.
What about Dylan? So something like Under Wraps
adds to the richness of their careers…sorta.
Yes have a very similar thing going on.
Yes to Drama…then
90125 to Mirror to the Sky.
Practically the same as Tull’s discography.
🤘😳🤘
I'm definitely one of those who consider "This Was" to "Stormwatch" as the only real Tull albums. After Stormwatch, I didn't like whatever it was that came next, and never bought or listened to any more of their albums. But I still consider them my favorite band of all time. I listen to all those albums up to 1979 frequently, and don't really need or care about anything else from the band.
My first Tull concert was the Thick As A Brick tour, and that still stands for me as the best evening of showbiz I’ve ever experienced. I saw them three times after that, and all of the concerts were entertaining. But the firing of Martin Barre was the end for me. It may have been justified, but it seemed rather cold to me, given his contribution to the band.
I have been a huge Jethro Tull fan and own pretty much every record…Ian has always attracted stellar musicians and I have enjoyed everything up to and including the Tull Christmas album. I do find the latest releases to be less inspiring…
Ian's post-Christmas Album material is so luke warm and watered down. Ugh. It's painful to hear!
Tull was my number 1 band through 1979. I went to 3 or 4 concerts, one in England (I was already there). As much as I like "Stand Up", it's so different and really a jazz album. Having been a percussionist myself, I really liked the Barrymore Barlow years of Tull.
I concur with your viewpoint ,
They ended for me after Roots to Branches .
I couldn’t bring myself to see them live after the 1992 tour .
While that was a good concert in 1992 , it was a shadow of the wildly exciting shows that I saw throughout the 70 s and 80s .
For that very same reason , I couldn’t go watch Genesis on their final tour .
While I admired Phil Collins’ fortitude , I just couldn’t watch him doing vocals from a chair .
I preferred to remember his performances throughout the 70s and 80s .
Thanks .
Yes, I rather agree! For me it’s everything from Aqualung to Stormwatcher, the first 3 albums and Broadsword, and Roots to Branches get an occasional listen.
I am not a Tull fan as such…
But Thick as a Brick is amazingly tight and skillfully played. I could live happily with just that one Tull album, but yes, I also enjoy many of Aqualung’s songs and the general heaviness of Benefit. Usually bands create their best stuff within their first six studio albums anyway.
I first saw Tull in October 1972 in Nashville on the "Thick As A Brick" tour. As a 70 year old who has seen all the Rock greats that gig stands out as the BEST concert I have ever seen. I had the chance to meet Ian Anderson in 1999 and told him that. I would give anything to have that show on hi def DVD with state of the art sound but sadly (because I asked him) they didn't film any of those shows.
Agreed, after Stormwatch, albums were different, save a song or three
" The tale of a wandering bard " was undoubtedly his best performance...IMO of course. Thx. ✌️👍
Thank you for your Crest of a Knave by Jethro Tull shout out. I never ventured past their 1973 or 1974 Thick as a Brick era. I'm also a bit thick as a brick!
I have been a Jethro Tull fan since my high school days, back in the late 80s, when the 20th anniversary box set was issued, those records were a crash course on learning the JT universe that fascinated me until these present days. In my opinion, what makes JT one of the greatest bands ever to exist, with Ian Anderson as its sole driving force, is precisely the permanent musical innovation that makes each album a unique work of art. I do enjoy their “prog rock” period (1970-1975) better than their other periods (A Passion Play is my all time favorite JT album) however, the whole JT discography constitutes a musical legacy worth listening to, as well as preserving it for posterity.
I draw the line at “Bursting Out” and the album of that tour “Heavy Horses”.
The only time I saw Tull was the “Stormwatch” tour and it was the last album of Tull I bought.
With Spotify I did go back to those later albums, but I didn’t find any of them to be on the
level of the 70’s albums, especially the drums, and I don’t just mean “under wraps” electronic drums.
In 1973, when I went to the 2nd live performance of a Passion Play in the US, I went with my older sister and her then boyfriend, a big fan of the Beatles, Stones and Dylan, but unfamiliar with Tull. After watching that show and me playing him some albums he remarked: "Ian Anderson IS Jetrho Tull" and I think that was true then and right up until now. So, Tull is whatever Anderson and the guys playing with him at the time say it is. That does not mean the other contributors (I think 40+ or so) over the years have had some important ones and helped him and the band with their then current sound, but it has always been Anderson's musical project.
Tull certainly continues with a changing rota of musicians as in life you move on with who you work with! It's the music! At the end of the day! People have their favourites which is the same for many bands!
Legendary band forever. Ian is a genius. I respect all of their releases over the years. Seems like most of the super 70s bands peaked in new music creativity around that timeframe. The Who, Pink Floyd, Black Sabbath to name a few. Although that might be the case their music lives on..only the Stones seemed to have the ability based on their last release to reach previous high standards.
Last proper Tull album Stormwatch
To me, Tull survives in RokFlote and Zealot Gene. They feel like Tull records to me. Tull's always been more of a concept and less an assemblage of particular players. What's unfortunate is that Anderson never established a clear distinction between Tull and his solo work. He bullocksed it badly by not putting his foot down with Chrysalis, insisting that "A" remain a solo release. He also seemed to confuse matters further by playing fast and loose with the branding of both "solo" Thick As A Brick 2 and Homo Erraticus, both of which were every bit as much Tull albums as the most recent two releases. As much a creative wizard as Ian is, he's less so a marketing genius. Blurring the lines of solo vs. Tull has hardly helped define his or Tull's legacies.
I think you've explained this perfectly. Who are we to say when Tull ended such as 1980 or 1995? I could venture to say that SLOB with guitar could have been a Tull album as well!
Ian IS Tull !
I think Rok Flote is a brilliant album, i cant help but get vibes from Broadsword, stormwatch. But thats just me
I agree. Secret Language, Rupi's Dance, Thick 2 and Homo Boringus should all be Jethro Tull catalog members proper.
@@GeoffCB, I'd love to hear a version of SLOB (a very good album) with Martin's guitar work added to every song, not just two.
If we are talking about pure, top tier Jethro Tull then yes that band really did end with Stormwatch as the last true JT album. But Tull did have an ace up their sleeve and I thought Broadsword was a return to form with an 80's production value that I don't mind. I could give Broadsword a 3.5 out of 5 rating which to me says it's a good rock album. I happen to like a lot of A as well. But yeah I think if we have to define Tull as a band with certain characteristics it seems Stormwatch and the end of the 70's really closed that unstoppable run that defined Jethro Tull.
I see it differently: like many other famous groups (Deep Purple or Manfred Mann's Earth Band for example), Jethro Tull simply had several eras, not only two: First it was very bluesy, then it was the peak in the 70s (the best indeed), then experiments (imposed by the inevitable 80s which ruined the general quality of the music in terms of arrangements, production and format), then a gentle slope towards weakness in the 90s, and a resurgence of maturity in starting from the Christmas Album (which I find good), including the latest two which I consider more as solo Ian Anderson, and moreover I include in this last era The Secret Language Of Birds and his three following solos albums as well.
Don't think I've ever been insulted so much and yet agree with every word uttered. My mother upstairs agrees.
Agreed, Roots to Branches is a spectacular album but after that it's a slow lingering transformation into something else.
Older fans who stopped listening by then missed out on a very solid album. Really good work on Roots.
Roots to Branches is my favourite Tull album. No other Tull album I played more than this one and I love the Giddings/Noyce line up. For me after this line-up ended Tull stopped being a real band.
I agree, and posted the same. They were a very powerful, hugely entertaining band with that line-up.
@@slowmarchingband1 Agreed.
you are absolutely correct in that statement. I personally think that tull ended after that album.
My mum says I should be offended that you said I am still living with her - - I want to make clear we are in separate rooms!
Strangely - I would agree with 1995, but I keep returning to the view that the 2000 solo album by Anderson (The Secret Language of Birds) was actually the best Tull Tull album since 1979.
I first became aware of Tull at Hyde Park when I was in the 6th form. I admired Anderson's frenetic flute playing, but I was not in tune with bluesy music in general. The revelation came with Stand Up after Mick Abrahams had left. I was a solid Tull fan throughout the Seventies but only an episodic one after the A album, when the 'ironing board' players turned up
Great review. 70's Tull albums were and remain outstanding definitive masterpieces - perhaps considered the "prime" decade for the band and it's lineup. Rock Island, Crest and even DotCom to have some good songs and those tours were enjoyable. CRising however I simply cannot enjoy. As JT followers know so well Tull is much to do about experimentation + pushing creative limits and with that comes the possibility of turning some listeners off and not getting the rave reviews. Broadsword, Roots, and UnderWraps are strong albums and in spite of Ians vocal struggles those live shows were excellent. Don't forget the quality of musicians Ian brought in during those 80-90's albums - he had a knack for picking tremendous talent. And here we are today in 2024 with even more fresh music from Ian, woo! granted the live shows are a challenge.
It is true that Broadsword and the Beast has the desperation that is life in the songs: that quality which makes the early albums so great, but it is couched in a comfortable soundscape, thus demoting most of it to being soothing music for Aga oven owners who live in the countryside. It very good rather than great. Give me the rawness of early work such as 'Seventeen' any day, because it has the immediacy of life being lived in its desperation, both in its sound and in its subject matter...
I hate long comments, but here goes. I don't think so, no. It's always down to taste, and for me, I love their first three '80s albums (and I also love Walk Into Light), I like Crest of a Knave quite a lot, and I like enough of Rock Island to keep it on the thumb drive in the car. But Rock Island is where the self-consciousness, the sense that Ian was no longer making music, he was making Jethro Tull product, gets too intense to tolerate ("Big Riff and Mando"-ugh). By Catfish Rising it's beyond saving ("White Innocence"-argh). So I would say that they ended in 1989. One of the things that defined Tull was boldly going where no Tull had gone before, and they did so through Under Wraps. They didn't do so on Crest, but the material was solid enough to overcome it. By Rock Island, their days of doing something interesting were over. (Yes, Roots to Branches is a bit of a return to form, but frankly, I don't see a brief focus on exotic scales and instruments as out of left field for Tull, so I don't count it.)
Roots To Branches is my favorite Jethro Tull album, but I may be unusual in that regard. I believe that Tull means different things to different people.
It's Top 5 for me, along with Minstrel, Songs, Heavy Horses and Stormwatch.
With the loss of John Evan on organ it was no longer Tull even thought I liked "A". The industry wanted to get away from the Hammond organ and called it dated. A Passion Play is my all-time favourite!
Am I the only one who loved Under Wraps from the day it was released? It was certainly an oddball record at the time for Tull along with being loaded with keyboards but the lyrical content made it sound more mature than what the other synth/keyboard bands were doing at the time. Also, the tour for this album was a lot better than the A tour.
Yes.
It is a good album. It tends to sound cold, however I have found that is mainly on a bad to mediocre stereo set or ghetto blaster. It really comes alive on a high quality stereo set that simply can produce a bigger range of frequencies. Some albums have that presumably because they were mixed on a high quality system where you can hear what you can't on a low quality system.
I think Stormwatch possibly signalled the end of Jethro Tull's ubiquitous phase when considering the behemoths of 60s / 70s rock. For the likes of Genesis and Yes (although more fleeting) the transformation into a more accessible form of music was met with some commercial success. Unfortunately with Tull's attempt to integrate the more electronic sounds of the day this was met with a degree of apathy from which their formative status was never reached again. These days Martin Barre suggests that the current version of the band is Tull lite and having witnessed their performance at Ephraim Gardens in 2023 i tend to sadly agree. Competent musically of course but lacking character as they come across as simply backing musicians. BTW special mention for Roots to Branches as suggested is a strong late period Tull album.
New subscriber here. I never gave “A” much of a chance back in the day, but today I really enjoy it. I have always loved “Crest Of A Knave” and all of the later albums have their moments. I was also pleasantly surprised by “The Zealot Gene” that came out a few years ago. Anderson is the only Tull regular on it, but the album is solid.
Yes I see the point, but I think Tull really ended in 1999. Stormwatch was my first Tull concert, and I'm glad to have seen the original lineup. But I continued to follow them quite intensely for long after that. There were some some great albums right up to end. After 2000 he should have quit before he lost his voice. I saw the 50th anniversary and it was frankly sad and embarrassing to see him struggling to sing and sounding lousy. Also I think Tull really drove the final nail into its coffin when Ian fired Martin Barre, who was his right hand man since 1969. That made me lose repect for him totally. But I still really appreciate all the good times I had listening to Tull since high school.
In my view A is a great album, as great as several other Tull albums in the 1970s. I like the comments that Tull albums are significantly different from each other.
No. One thing you can't deny is that the band led by Ian Anderson were masters of reinvention. They never could be put in a box. That's the greatest thing about them IMO.
What I like about Jethro Tull, or rather another one of the things I like about Jethro Tull is that an
album like Roots to Branches which I did not immediately take to, can be returned to in time and
listened to and rediscovered. All IA/JT music is good for me. Same with the new albums. Almost
universally I find new albums to be a real challenge. I usually do not hear what is in the music
the first times I listen to an new album, but over time I start to like the things that initially sounded
difficulte. People are too quick to judge.
I agree that Tull was never the same after ‘79
Jethro Tull never released a bad album in my opinion. It was just that some were better than others. And 'A' is a fine album with some brilliant writing.
Under Wraps?
@@RainonasphaltI feel the same way. Ian’s Cold War obsession on that record makes it seem really dated listening to it today
Ever listen to Dot Com? That’s a real stinker
I don't know, I think we could be in for a cold war revival
@@SH-ud8wdThe drum machines were an 'interesting' choice. But credit to him for trying something different. To be honest, the drums wouldn't be half as bad if they were not so high in the mix.
I like every Lp from This Was to Roots To Branches, so I agree with you, that's where it ended.
Most fans know that ‘A’ was an Ian Anderson solo album. The members assumed that they’d been fired when they heard the news that it was going to be called Jethro Tull. Ian just didn’t fight it because he was ready to move on anyway. To say they were “sacked” is pretty misleading. And the previous lineup change was only 3-4 years earlier when Jeffrey left, not in the early ‘70’s. So the idea that they ever had a stable classic lineup for a long while is kind of a stretch.
I have a pretty unique opinion on the 80’s. I believe that A and Under Wraps are both Ian Anderson solo albums. So if you remove those then the sequence is Stormwatch, Browdsword, Crest… Yes, there are still lineup changes and an increase of drum machine and 80’s synth sounds but the essence of Tull is fully intact. I would recommend any fan look at it this way unless they’re as obsessive as I am and aim to devour every single recording he has ever produced.
Crest, Catfish and Rock Island were a few of the first ones I heard at age 10, not long after their release and I was hooked right away. So when I eventually heard Songs from the Wood and Thick as a Brick, it was just more awesome stuff from my already favorite band. Not anything that could lessen the value of the first ones I heard. It’s too bad others don’t get to share that experience.
For me, Jeffrey Hammond leaving the band was the end of the very exciting live shows Tull were known for. Strange but my favorite period was when their hair was the longest. Particularly "Thick as a Brick". John Glascock was a great player and "Songs from the Wood" was an incredible album, but the interplay between Barlow, Evan, Barre, Hammond and Anderson was the most exciting.
Stand Up is still my favorite album of their's. I had them all up through Thick as a Brick, then never bought another one...
I agree that Thick as a Brick was their last album that was almost 100% great. I consider it a work of genius. The first 10 minutes of side B of passion play was great, but I didn't like the rest of the album. I guess you're the only one that agrees with me, that from war child onward, all their albums were bad. Some good songs, but no good Albums, like stand up, benefit, Aqualung and Thick as a Brick. That was core jt and what made them a supergroup IMO. My favorite band of all time.
@@shb7772000if - What's bad about Minstrel In The Gallery, Songs From The Wood, Heavy Horses and Stormwatch? I love every song on those albums. I agree that War Child and, especially, Too Old to Rock 'n' Roll are subpar, but there are some later Tull records that are good all the way through, namely the four I mentioned and I'll throw in Roots to Branches, too. To each his own...
Stormwatch is the last Tull album that I unreservedly love every track on, but I love almost all of Broadsword, ditto with Rock Island (c'mon, Kissing Willie is a hoot! How can you not love lyrics like "Willie hangs his head behind grey factory walls"?), and the lion's share of Roots to Branches. So (imho) they certainly didn't end in 1979. I haven't heard anything post Roots to Branches that I give a tinker's cuss for, so I think I agree with your conclusion that Roots to Branches was probably the last great Tull long-player.
Dave Pegg was a great asset for Tull in the 80s & mid 90s
Indeed
Man.....Nothing beats that 1978 lineup. My first ever exposure to the band was Bursting Out.
I have everything they've ever made, but after 1979, I have little interest in much of the output since then. Barrymore Barlow was an amazing drummer for Tull, as was John Evans keyboards totally amazing.
I largely agree although I should say that My first Tull gig was May 1980 on the Stormwatch tour. Dave Pegg went into the big line-up replacing the late, great John Glascock of course. It was fantastic and the best of the 10+ Tull gigs I've seen. With hindsight, I wished they'd packed up before A.
I saw them three times - 78, 80 and 82. The first (Heavy Horses tour, with John Glascock on bass) was by far the best, but the other two were also excellent shows. The April 1980 show was one of the final shows to feature Barlow, Palmer and Evan(s), and was genuinely the end of an era. It was sad the way the band broke up that year. I have zero interest in seeing them live now, given the painful decline in IA's once-magnificent voice and the changes in personnel.
@@8ackbiter434 Completely agree. Similarly, I wish Yes had finished after Drama and Genesis after Duke. Incidentally, Pegg once told me that the Australian leg of the Stormwatch tour was the most depressing he'd ever undertaken.
Album-wise, for me it ended in 1975 with Minstrel. After three great albums that were very different to what had come before and from each other, Tull delivered their final classic album and for me at least returned partly to their earlier pre-TAAB style. Too Old ... was a big disappointment when it came out and despite not being terrible, we felt this looks like the end of the Tull we know and love. Songs from the Wood was a good album in many ways but not what we wanted from Tull and after Heavy Horses I checked out. I saw them on the HH tour and that was great. A few years later someone lent me Broadsword and I thought this just isn't for me. I'm sure there'll always be individual great tracks and I have cherry picked some of the later albums second hand as part of my attempt to get physical media while it's still out there.
79 was the end John Evan brought the Madrigal Magic. Gave up University for Tull and ended up as a builder. They had been friends from School!
For me, the peak Tull years were wiith Jeffrey Hammond and barrie barlow. My first concert, and the first time I heard tull , was the thick as a brick tour in 1972 at msg nyc. How's that for a first concert? Instant tull freak. I had just entered high school and didn't miss a show for years. But I noticed when Hammond left something was different or missing. Hammond stage presence was equal to Anderson. I also think being they were friends long before Hammond entered the band there was a chemistry between the two. Anderson even wrote a couple of songs that mentions Jeffrey on previous albums. I think Hammonds personality counterbalanced Anderson's. Anderson was quite serious and intense while Jeffreys humor took the edge off. Anything quirky, offbeat and tongue in cheek came from jeffery. He added a charm, a sense of not taking themselves too serious. Unless you were following tull in those years you wouldn't understand the unique subtleties that Jeffrey brought to the band and the music. the only other bass player I ever saaw who was more active on stage was verdin white of Earth wind & fire.
I share your perspective on Jeffrey.John Glascock was musicaly speaking probably better bass player, but on the live shows Jeffrey's presence was irreplaceable.I saw Tull 6 times live, but the best show was 75. with Jeffrey in his famous zebra outfit.I'll never forget the begining of this concert - they started with this heavy rock part of "Wind Up", and Martin & Jeffrey literally fly up to the stage using some spring-boards!The impression was every member of this band have real fun (I use to call them "happy Jethros")Later (after Jefrey left) was still great live performances, but.....(you describe it realy well)
Writing credits should have recognized the obvious musical contributions of John Evans. Especially TAAB and PP. of course MB bits are obvious too and Ian did acknowledge the guys on SFTW. But still you can see how heavily he leaned on keyboardists up to Crest. Anyway, not to take away from all of Ian’s excellence but the magic the 70’s guys delivered seems under recognized compositionally.
By Ian's own design, I'm sure, as songwriters get most of the royalties. Anderson is equal parts musical genius and cold-hearted, greedy prick.
Wonderful and at times hilarious analysis.
You nailed it, Roots to Branches!
I think Tull did end in 1979.
Indeed, I saw them in 1994 and it was basically a concert of old songs, supporting the view of the 1979 division
Hi Barry, I both agree and disagree with you. I agree that Tull definitely did NOT end in 1979 despite the lineup changes. While the albums from A onward were not back-to-front gems like everything from Stand Up to Stormwatch, each featured a fair share of great songs. Those who stop listening to Tull's output with SW (or, mistakenly, with HH) are missing out on some outstanding material. I disagree, however, that Tull ended with RTB. I would argue that the Anderson/Barre/Giddings/Noyce/Perry lineup was indeed a legitimate version of Tull; their shows in the mid- and late 2000s were still excellent. Things went off the rails for me when those fellows were all sacked around 2010 and Anderson went with his current crop of musicians. Of course, he recorded and toured as "Ian Anderson" back then, so one could argue that it wasn't technically Tull. But we all know it was. Lifeless performances mixed with Ian's failing voice caused me to jump of the train at that point.
Yes, there is an alternative date for the end of Tull i.e. when Anderson's voice went completely. I would date that to the late 1990s. At that point, Tull's live shows became progressively more embarrassing.
I really don't mind if you sit this one out...
I first heard Tull, Aqualung, at a friends home in '72, and was hooked. Every album was a Gem, with no filler songs (Too Old, and Heavy as exceptions IMHO) through Broadsword. That and not getting stuck in the mold of a fixed sound / theme keep me hooked. (the opposite of BTO whom many claimed all their songs sounded the same)
I always felt Martin was much underappreciated by fans as a guitarist, as his was a big part of the Classic Tull Sound that I love.
If Ian and Martin are on it, it sounds like a Tull Album to me. I'm not as familiar with Tull's later work as after Broadsword as I only bought Knave and it seemed like Ian's songwriting had went past its peak by then. That High Quality I loved seemed to be waning and I'd rather live in their Hay-day than listen to lesser works.
mike
Living in the past
IMO, Too Old To Rock 'n' Roll is mostly filler (Salamander is fantastic), while Heavy Horses is great front to back.
I would say aside from the very first album anything with Ian Anderson and Martin Barre is what I considered Tull. Stuff without Martin feels more like solo albums which isn't necessarily A Bad Thing. Martins contributions are unique and he is a singular guitarist. Losing Barrie Barlowe was massive but Anderson was on to something when he hired Mark Craney. I wish that he'd stuck with him
I think that Ian said that after the A album, that he just couldn't go back to the old lineup. I still think that it was a mistake by the record company to brand that album as a Tull album. The classic period of Tull ended there, at least for me. There were a few bright spots, here and there going forward, but just not enough. The fact that his voice went away and the COPD just made it impossible to perform like he used to were just nails in the Tull coffin. Too bad, really, they were a great band.
Barry, thank you for this video. I have always been a big fan of JT starting way back when “Benefit” was released. There was always something about the band that kept me interested. Nothing they did followed convention. I liked the changing sounds and appreciate them more now than ever. Just a thought but “Living in the Past” and “Nightcap” are non traditional albums that are really good and an interesting topic. I think many fans aren’t familiar with “Nightcap”. I enjoy that album quite a bit. I would be interested in your thoughts.
Lots of great stuff on both of those compilations!
The most famous line up in JT was the "Thick as a Brick" onward band, but it slowly unraveled starting with Jeffery H-H leaving and Glascock & Palmer joining. After the Stormwatch album, JT was blown up and major changes occurred. Maybe it was time for a change as B. Barlow in 1980 commented on how the band's songs and formula were starting to wear thin. Perhaps new blood was needed to give energy to the idea of JT in the 80's, and they had a few solid albums in that era. I loved that 70's band lineup the most and enjoy those albums even to this day.
I am glad that you like Roots To Branches. It is a fun album.
That which solidified the classic JT sound was truly a '70's band'. In the 40 or so years since "A" Ian's trotted out about ten 'band studio' albums, and the very best of them (TB&TB '82, Crest of a Knave '87, Roots to Branches '95) were STILL dozens of years ago. It could be argued the 'late classic period of Tull' round the turn of the century (Andy Giddings, John Noyce, Doane Perry et. al.) were mostly a hits live band. So honestly, as big a fan as I am, I've been unable to get into anything beyond Rupi's Dance (03). What of the modern catalog holds up to "Living in the Past"? Nada.
I mostly stopped following after “Rock Island” (saw the tour). I would check in occasionally and be disappointed. TAAB2 (billed as a solo record) was a forgettable, nearly tuneless mess.
However… I think the most recent one, RökFlöte, is a return to form. Yes, I wish they used a real producer. The album’s sound is brittle and thin… But the concept works. The words are interesting. And best of all, it rocks hard for Tull. With long and memorable instrumental passages. More than good enough for 2023. And it followed a year on the heels of the previous Tull album, which wasn’t a bad album itself.
Keep up the pace, Ian! I look forward to a new Tull album in 2024!
I have always loved Jethro Tull. Through all the years even though the line up and albums during the 70-ties before A were the best. I don't mind the change of style during the years and also Ian's solo albums. Many songs are great. I listen now very much on Zealot Gene and Rök Flöte wich I consider as a step back (forward) to the 70-ties.