mix
Journeyman
Posts: 136
|
Post by mix on Jul 8, 2009 10:48:42 GMT
We know new music is recorded. We know Ian updated his studio equipment recently but it is looking like 2009 will be another year to pass without any new Tull music being released.
I wish Ian would tell us his plans regarding recordings. I thought he would have tried the download thing by now. I'd prefer a new album but if a new song was released I'd pay 1.99 for it. There is clearly a financial incentive to do it. For someone so business minded I'm amazed Ian hasn't got into this.
Anyway, Dot Com was out ten years ago. Let's hope that album isn't Tull's last.
|
|
|
Post by fatman on Jul 13, 2009 15:39:59 GMT
Ian says he no longer likes loud, hard rock. Fine, I could deal with that. But why does this mean he can only do solo and orchestral albums. Why not a new Jethro Tull album consisting of all acoustic rock material, like Jack-A-Lynn, Witch's Promise, Life's a Long Song, The Clasp or any of the material from Secret Language? Ian has always said that he loves acoustic songs with an aggressive edge to them. I think we would all be very happy with something like that.
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by nonrabbit on Jul 13, 2009 16:00:36 GMT
Ian says he no longer likes loud, hard rock. Fine, I could deal with that. But why does this mean he can only do solo and orchestral albums. Why not a new Jethro Tull album consisting of all acoustic rock material, like Jack-A-Lynn, Witch's Promise, Life's a Long Song, The Clasp or any of the material from Secret Language? Ian has always said that he loves acoustic songs with an aggressive edge to them. I think we would all be very happy with something like that. Jeff Hey Jeff I know we have a time difference but it's still only July !! patience my son patience ............. i27.images obliterated by tinypic/21mror6.gif[/IMG]
|
|
|
Post by fatman on Jul 13, 2009 17:13:19 GMT
Ian says he no longer likes loud, hard rock. Fine, I could deal with that. But why does this mean he can only do solo and orchestral albums. Why not a new Jethro Tull album consisting of all acoustic rock material, like Jack-A-Lynn, Witch's Promise, Life's a Long Song, The Clasp or any of the material from Secret Language? Ian has always said that he loves acoustic songs with an aggressive edge to them. I think we would all be very happy with something like that. Jeff Hey Jeff I know we have a time difference but it's still only July !! patience my son patience ............. i27.images obliterated by tinypic/21mror6.gif [/IMG][/quote] I know, but I thought that what was mentioned as a possible new release was another solo album. Better than nothing, of course, but why can't it be an acoustic Tull album rather than a solo album? Jeff
|
|
|
Post by nonrabbit on Jul 13, 2009 17:37:04 GMT
Apologies Jeff I thought it was you that started this thread and therefore my retort should be for Mix - so there ;D ;D I agree I think an all round acoustic album with a tinge of something different and marketed in a better way would be the way forward --> -->-->--> TULL INC !!
|
|
mix
Journeyman
Posts: 136
|
Post by mix on Jul 13, 2009 22:35:24 GMT
Yeah, Tull is a better brand than IA, I'm sure a new album would sell more with Jethro Tull on the title regardless of content. And anyway, Tull was always Ian's baby, why he felt the need to launch the IA brand is beyond me when you consider his solo band seem to end up joining Tull anyway.
|
|
tommie
Master Craftsman
Posts: 392
|
Post by tommie on Jul 14, 2009 0:19:08 GMT
IMHO there will never again be a new Tull album. I've given up and it saddens me b/c the last one, DotCom was excellent.as were Ian's 2 solo albums since then. It's also weird that, whenever Ian's put out a solo album he has most of Tull members (at the tome) on it! I dont think he ever felt comfortable being "challenged" by other strong musicians.
eg. Walk Into Light......Vetesse
Divinities................ Giddings
Birds......................Giddings, Barre, Doane, Conway
Rupi........................ditto
|
|
rayman2112
Journeyman
Don't ask me, I'm just improvising.
Posts: 109
|
Post by rayman2112 on Jul 14, 2009 6:44:46 GMT
I was so optimistic at the start of this year... and last year... and the year before...
|
|
|
Post by nonrabbit on Jul 14, 2009 9:06:47 GMT
I forbid this pessimism FORBID !! i31.images obliterated by tinypic/14ky3ci.jpg[/IMG] There will be a new album - I can feel it in my water and it will be released either the end of the year just before Xmas or early next year. However my gripe is that they should employ a better system of marketing themselves globally. Mind you I had a conversation with a man that I work with who's about the same age as myself and who wasn't ever a Tull fan. He finished by telling me "they're still around you know" ;D So there's hope! but I still think we could better that!(LOL 'WE' - moderator skills gone to head) I think Ian's solo albums are in keeping with the general output of fodder over the years (excellant fodder ) but this time I would like to see something different. What about the special guests idea is that cr** as well ?? or should it be purely Tull the band?
|
|
|
Post by maddogfagin on Jul 14, 2009 9:19:24 GMT
Jethro Tull - the band.
No guests, no gimmicks just a good solid mixture of what we have come to know as the Tull sound, examples such as Crest of a Knave, Warchild or Broadsword IMO.
Tull have always had rubbish publicity and bad support from record companies. The best information has always been by word of mouth via the fan base, A New Day magazine (when it's published before the events), and in recent years this forum and Tullskull's chat room amongst others.
. . . . . and a good tour of venues around the UK and Ireland. We've been slightly sidelined this year with only a handful of dates.
|
|
chea
Master Craftsman
Posts: 356
|
Post by chea on Jul 14, 2009 14:30:18 GMT
Jethro Tull - the band. Tull have always had rubbish publicity and bad support from record companies. I totally agree,Maddog. I would not want to alarm too much,but i read an interwiew Ian fears an insufficient sales forecast for a new studio J.T Album I hope it won't be so!!
|
|
rebecca
Master Craftsman
Posts: 458
|
Post by rebecca on Jul 14, 2009 15:25:59 GMT
That's the way it is now - the music biz is fragmented and even "hits" aren't as universal as they once were. Other bands adapt their ways of getting music out there (downloads, etc), Tull can too, if they get savvy about it. Besides, hasn't he been releasing his music himself for awhile now? Can't blame anybody else for bad publicity in that case.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jul 14, 2009 16:35:06 GMT
Very true Rebecca.
Ian's had the website for a good 10 years now, but it's pretty obvious that he doesn't even care to use it to it's fullest to promote his material.
As an example, click on their discography and see how many albums can actually be viewed. Probably 4 or 5.
The truth is that Chrysalis promoted Tull pretty well.
|
|
|
Post by maddogfagin on Jul 14, 2009 17:05:37 GMT
Very true Rebecca. Ian's had the website for a good 10 years now, but it's pretty obvious that he doesn't even care to use it to it's fullest to promote his material. As an example, click on their discography and see how many albums can actually be viewed. Probably 4 or 5. The truth is that Chrysalis promoted Tull pretty well. Good point about the web site. A download or two now and again would be interesting, after all IA allows A New Day to issue the odd live song(s) on cover mounted CDs and he also OK'd the John Evan Band recording. As for publicity, well I reckon they've been served badly since the early to middle eighties. Chrysalis in the early days were good, promoting everything they did both in the UK, States and worldwide. I recall going into my local record shop and asking for the details of Broadsword, if memory serves me right, and speaking to a twenty something Chrysalis rep who knew nothing about Tull or the band's involvement in the formation of the label. He had nothing in the way of publicity sheets to help him out and the owner of the shop spent 10 to 15 minutes putting him straight about Tull. It was quite embarrassing. A true story: In 1993 I worked as a security officer in London and for a week I was holiday relief at the Chrysalis building at Bramley Road on the night shift. Heaven you might think but I was surprised how little Tull memorabilia there was around the building. One or two gold discs on the walls, no posters around the place, in fact if you didn't know the Tull involvement with the label you would think they were with someother outfit. Again, when speaking to the people working in the building, most knew very little and these were the individuals who either had to sell the band, organise publicity, design record sleeves, etc, etc. I'm surprised that IA hasn't gone down the road of having his own label such as Fairport or even A New Day. He must surely know the people to run it for him and to advise on what to put out. I know a fair few people who would volunteer! After all, there are bands who put out live recordings of concerts on a regular basis (I think Procol Harum are one such outfit) which keep the fans happy and the money coming in. Oh well, wishful thinking on my part?
|
|
|
Post by nonrabbit on Jul 14, 2009 17:21:43 GMT
I think that he must be considering many things if this question from the Q&A in Feb is anything to go by..... (pity we couldn't have an annual Q&A ?)
Digital distribution is clearly changing the way music is purchased and even produced. I've read that bands are considering releasing occasional singles and EP's online rather than producing full length albums. Is this something you would consider doing either on your own or with Tull? Ray, New Hampshire, US
Funny you ask this, Ray, as I have been talking to our record company friends about this for a couple of years and I see no reason why we should be stuck in this groove of thinking only about music in conventional vinyl or CD album lengths of 10 - 15 tracks. I rather like the idea that a new track every couple of months would be more fun for our fans and us too. We will have to see if we can make that work. But traditional record companies doing deals for physical distribution don't find the idea so appealing for commercial and logistic reasons.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jul 14, 2009 19:18:25 GMT
Very true Rebecca. Ian's had the website for a good 10 years now, but it's pretty obvious that he doesn't even care to use it to it's fullest to promote his material. As an example, click on their discography and see how many albums can actually be viewed. Probably 4 or 5. The truth is that Chrysalis promoted Tull pretty well. Good point about the web site. A download or two now and again would be interesting, after all IA allows A New Day to issue the odd live song(s) on cover mounted CDs and he also OK'd the John Evan Band recording. As for publicity, well I reckon they've been served badly since the early to middle eighties. Chrysalis in the early days were good, promoting everything they did both in the UK, States and worldwide. I recall going into my local record shop and asking for the details of Broadsword, if memory serves me right, and speaking to a twenty something Chrysalis rep who knew nothing about Tull or the band's involvement in the formation of the label. He had nothing in the way of publicity sheets to help him out and the owner of the shop spent 10 to 15 minutes putting him straight about Tull. It was quite embarrassing. A true story: In 1993 I worked as a security officer in London and for a week I was holiday relief at the Chrysalis building at Bramley Road on the night shift. Heaven you might think but I was surprised how little Tull memorabilia there was around the building. One or two gold discs on the walls, no posters around the place, in fact if you didn't know the Tull involvement with the label you would think they were with someother outfit. Again, when speaking to the people working in the building, most knew very little and these were the individuals who either had to sell the band, organise publicity, design record sleeves, etc, etc. I'm surprised that IA hasn't gone down the road of having his own label such as Fairport or even A New Day. He must surely know the people to run it for him and to advise on what to put out. I know a fair few people who would volunteer! After all, there are bands who put out live recordings of concerts on a regular basis (I think Procol Harum are one such outfit) which keep the fans happy and the money coming in. Oh well, wishful thinking on my part? Terry Ellis sold his stake in Chrysalis in the mid-80's I think which has something to do with it. But he wasn't too fond of Tull's music at the time from what I've read anyway. I haven't any expectations for new Tull or IA solo music any longer.
|
|
chea
Master Craftsman
Posts: 356
|
Post by chea on Jul 15, 2009 6:59:15 GMT
About what said by Maddog yesterday - in the years 70'even buy tickets was a sort of challenge,in Italy.I live near Milan,the only office able to sell concerts'tickets was in Turin(100 km far) :oAll that to get tickets for shows in Switzerland or South of France......
|
|
|
Post by maddogfagin on Jul 15, 2009 17:36:26 GMT
About what said by Maddog yesterday - in the years 70'even buy tickets was a sort of challenge,in Italy.I live near Milan,the only office able to sell concerts'tickets was in Turin(100 km far) :oAll that to get tickets for shows in Switzerland or South of France...... In the past when I lived in London, I used to get a phone call from a friend telling me of tickets going on sale at the Hammersmith Odeon et al and then I would phone another Tull friend to tell them and the word would slowly but surely get out. All that because of the complete absence of publicity in those pre internet days. Mrs maddog used to call it the Tull Mafia
|
|
|
Post by tullistray on Jul 15, 2009 18:43:25 GMT
About what said by Maddog yesterday - in the years 70'even buy tickets was a sort of challenge,in Italy.I live near Milan,the only office able to sell concerts'tickets was in Turin(100 km far) :oAll that to get tickets for shows in Switzerland or South of France...... In the past when I lived in London, I used to get a phone call from a friend telling me of tickets going on sale at the Hammersmith Odeon et al and then I would phone another Tull friend to tell them and the word would slowly but surely get out. All that because of the complete absence of publicity in those pre internet days. Mrs maddog used to call it the Tull Mafia Particularly back throughout the seventies and probably thru the eighties I considered the lack of publicity and hype concerning Tull back when they were a truly enormous act to be an endearing trait, and one practiced by others of their timeframe and similar levels of fame, Zappa, GDead and Traffic come to mind. Ones who began to embrace the hype would include Elton John, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd and ELP would all fit in this category. I will give a pass to the Stones, because, after all, they are the freaking Rolling Stones. However having said that, anyone who was truly of age during the length and breath of Tulls ride that can say with a straight face that Chrysalis did an even remotely adequate job of not even so much hyping their flagship and creator, as having a solid knowledge and pride in them. Comments earlier from the Maddog about working security at the Chrysalis building bare out what I have known in my heart to be the case for 35 years, even their own label was embarrassed of them. If you did not live thru the early years of punk and everything since I cannot overemphacize the full byword Jethro Tull had become as unhip, the flagship of dinasours. Always have been bitter about that as I felt Tull could be trivialized by an overmarketing of Aqualung, Loco, Bungle, great songs perhaps but still leaving an opening for compartmentalizing what Jethro Tull was/is. And of course codpieces. I could always understand to an extent stick being put to the Moody Blues, ELP, Yes, Genesis, Rush, Pink Floyd and other "prog" bid daddies. But the pomposity and such for which it has been permanently trivialized was trimmed to next to nothing with Tull, particularly as compared with these acts that even IA (I believe mistakenly)seems to claim as his cousins, musically and in age terms.
|
|
|
Post by steelmonkey on Jul 15, 2009 19:20:18 GMT
yeah...no one ever explained to me why Peter Gabriel...a guy who i always thought of as 'proger then Prog',,,got snuck off the sinking prog rock ship and promoted to Bowie-esque respect by the new wavers....Eno, too......talk about someone who was leading music away from rock and roll toward proggy intricacy, creativety for the sense of cleverness etc etc....so he hangs out a few minutes with the talking heads and all is forgiven?
|
|
|
Post by tullistray on Jul 15, 2009 19:34:50 GMT
Yeah Peter Gabriel, who I saw a few times in the earlier years when he was still playing theaters, and doubtless always not a good, always a great show. But I would be pressed to remember a performer who has been more overpraised this side of MJackson. So much of Gabriel era Genesis veers much more deeply into areas I guess that are supposed to be hated by those in the not/know, yet their material was rarely or never talking about the real thing (Please, much of the lyrics to the "legendary" Selling England By The Pound make me cringe) such as the actual folk myth of Jack in the Greens, Biggles, Beltane's flower, Tull has always been talking about the real thing, even when connected with myth. Dun Ringill, I have stood in the thing. There are too many to name, but a visit to that Dutch guys site, Cup of Wonder, goes a good way to illucidating these facts that mostly I already knew through decades of my own sleuthing prior to the net. How many Americans, or non Brits know/care that a bog as in Aqualung refers to a restroom? I will admit that a Genesis track like Carpet Crawlers was a moment of genius, but listening to a Lamb era Gabriel Genesis show the other day, these were Tulls challengers? O why can it not be reduced to sport to issue them the horrendous beating they deserve, and my friends who all went for the bait. As good as those Gabriel shows I saw nearly 30 years ago, much of his solo material, which I generally preferred to Genesis, has not stood the test of time, half of his first solo record, revered by all in the know, is crap. Gabriel and Paul Simon both received far too much credit for delving into particularly African musical cultures, a practice that had been common in other musics, most specifically jazz, for decades or centuries.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jul 15, 2009 20:02:25 GMT
In the past when I lived in London, I used to get a phone call from a friend telling me of tickets going on sale at the Hammersmith Odeon et al and then I would phone another Tull friend to tell them and the word would slowly but surely get out. All that because of the complete absence of publicity in those pre internet days. Mrs maddog used to call it the Tull Mafia Particularly back throughout the seventies and probably thru the eighties I considered the lack of publicity and hype concerning Tull back when they were a truly enormous act to be an endearing trait, and one practiced by others of their timeframe and similar levels of fame, Zappa, GDead and Traffic come to mind. Ones who began to embrace the hype would include Elton John, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd and ELP would all fit in this category. I will give a pass to the Stones, because, after all, they are the freaking Rolling Stones. However having said that, anyone who was truly of age during the length and breath of Tulls ride that can say with a straight face that Chrysalis did an even remotely adequate job of not even so much hyping their flagship and creator, as having a solid knowledge and pride in them. Comments earlier from the Maddog about working security at the Chrysalis building bare out what I have known in my heart to be the case for 35 years, even their own label was embarrassed of them. If you did not live thru the early years of punk and everything since I cannot overemphacize the full byword Jethro Tull had become as unhip, the flagship of dinasours. Always have been bitter about that as I felt Tull could be trivialized by an overmarketing of Aqualung, Loco, Bungle, great songs perhaps but still leaving an opening for compartmentalizing what Jethro Tull was/is. And of course codpieces. I could always understand to an extent stick being put to the Moody Blues, ELP, Yes, Genesis, Rush, Pink Floyd and other "prog" bid daddies. But the pomposity and such for which it has been permanently trivialized was trimmed to next to nothing with Tull, particularly as compared with these acts that even IA (I believe mistakenly)seems to claim as his cousins, musically and in age terms. Maddog's experience came in 1993 - after Ellis had left Chrysalis and Tull had jumped the shark. Interesting though that this somehow confirms a 35 year old suspicion. But who gives a rat's ass about Tull's promotion, or lack of it in years past? What is important is NOW. And now we have the Tull website. Too bad Ian doesn't care to bring it up to speed.
|
|
|
Post by tullistray on Jul 15, 2009 21:00:22 GMT
One dot you fail to connect there in taking me under your abundant suspicion is though this may have occured to Maddog in 93, it came to my awareness in 7/09.
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jul 15, 2009 21:30:14 GMT
One dot you fail to connect there in taking me under your abundant suspicion is though this may have occured to Maddog in 93, it came to my awareness in 7/09. My bad. I thought you stated that it came to your awareness 35 years ago. The fact that you choose to interpret Maddog's experience to support your beliefs is your business. I'll say it one more time. I would not use events from 1993 as my basis to determine whether or not Chrysalis promoted Jethro Tull properly throughout their career. Instead I would look to see how they were promoted. And funny enough there was time when I used to collect such things. So "If the rowan, the oak or the holly tree fell in the wood and no one was around to hear it, did it make a sound?"
|
|
|
Post by tullistray on Jul 15, 2009 22:00:44 GMT
One dot you fail to connect there in taking me under your abundant suspicion is though this may have occured to Maddog in 93, it came to my awareness in 7/09. My bad. I thought you stated that it came to your awareness 35 years ago. The fact that you choose to interpret Maddog's experience to support your beliefs is your business. I'll say it one more time. I would not use events from 1993 as my basis to determine whether or not Chrysalis promoted Jethro Tull properly throughout their career. Instead I would look to see how they were promoted. And funny enough there was time when I used to collect such things. So "If the rowan, the oak or the holly tree fell in the wood and no one was around to hear it, did it make a sound?" What I use to come by this assumption is having regularly visited news stands to see if any of the rock rags mentioned Tull, this sleuthing started about 72, and even after having just visited the last sold out tour, there would either be nothing or something very negative, re Chicago reviews or Lester Bangs. Now the amount of info most normally available was far more limited, Rolling Stone, which last spoke kindly of Tull in 70 or 71, they even gave a bad review to TAAB, (which I can kind of understand if it was after one listen, in part true of all Tull material)would virtually never review anything, once every five years they might pop up and say something mean spirited about them, Creem, more of the same, Crawdaddy, I am pretty sure Tull was just not groovy enough as opposed to say, Lou Reed. I guess Downbeat, the 70 plus year old jazz rag did a nice spread on them in the mid seventies, I did not start subscribing til 77 but luckily David Rees reprinted the things. Even when I would get to the more well stocked book stores and such which might carry the British rags, specifically NME and Melody Maker there would either be nothing or occasionally scathingly mean spirited takes, after all, here was Johnny Rotten and the boys spitting at old folks in London, what could be more rock and roll in fairness. In fact it was in David Rees' rag that I read probably my favorite of the mean spirited takes, something along the lines of, Jethro Tull, that swivel eyed little turd, is he still around then? I shall have to give him a good slagging. Love that swivel eyed little turd bit. But I do find the net amazing, with all the stuff thats on here like the Jethro Tull press, or the beermats from Heavy Horses, trust me folks, these type of things were not readily available for the most part, and entire sold out tours would occur with no advertizing whatsoever, in many respects the ultimate underground band, regardless of popularity.
|
|
|
Post by nonrabbit on Jul 15, 2009 22:02:10 GMT
Now I'm thinking that we should have a Q&A with someone in the know- someone involved in the promotional side of things? I can see where Tullistray is coming from cause it pissed me off that I didn't see any adverts leading up to the 40th concerts in the Glasgow newspapers. Maybe I missed it but I don't think I did! Why is it important? imo in the last couple of years that I've been yakking on about Tull I have noticed an untapped market of young ones wanting to know/hear more and others wanting to remember and catch up. I want to spread the f***** word man......better ;D
|
|
|
Post by nonrabbit on Jul 15, 2009 22:13:10 GMT
yeah...no one ever explained to me why Peter Gabriel...a guy who i always thought of as 'proger then Prog',,,got snuck off the sinking prog rock ship and promoted to Bowie-esque respect by the new wavers....Eno, too......talk about someone who was leading music away from rock and roll toward proggy intricacy, creativety for the sense of cleverness etc etc....so he hangs out a few minutes with the talking heads and all is forgiven? Ha! yet another spooky spooky uncanny similiarity us Tull fans here have! I thought that too about Gabriel. The Peter with the straw hanging out his mouth and the sunflower hat onstage didn't work for me when he became almost Brian Ferry like overnight. I remember the big thing at that time was the groundbreaking video for Sledgehammer which played a big part in his new promotion.
|
|
|
Post by tullistray on Jul 15, 2009 22:32:12 GMT
I actually prefer this level of popularity Tull has occupied since about the early eighties, to me the size they should always have been, and, in the past twenty years, when I do read non Chicago reviews, (in the main, a Tull show is not reviewed at all in the past 30 years, the few exceptions were not terrible reviews more recently) there have been some quite fantastic ones that I never would have seen without David Rees or the net. But it still maddens me that on the very rare times when Tull is mentioned in the mainstream press, it will be concerning the one Grammy they got, (how is it so mind boggling that to the extent that Tull fits in ANY of their categories, that the first might be HARD ROCK/ Heavy Metal. Have they never seen a live Tull show and heard Martin, or Ian's sometimes violent take on flute playing), David Palmers sex operation, or Ian codpiece or comments regarding American flag wavers, taken out of context and not without merit. Yet I will bet to this day it is not a band that others are eager to follow on stage, and way back Jimi was known to have doubts about following them, even though he invited them. That's right folks, they are a motherf....., and the best they can give them is one damnable grammy, what does Metallica have now, at least ten?
|
|
|
Post by TM on Jul 16, 2009 1:28:58 GMT
My bad. I thought you stated that it came to your awareness 35 years ago. The fact that you choose to interpret Maddog's experience to support your beliefs is your business. I'll say it one more time. I would not use events from 1993 as my basis to determine whether or not Chrysalis promoted Jethro Tull properly throughout their career. Instead I would look to see how they were promoted. And funny enough there was time when I used to collect such things. So "If the rowan, the oak or the holly tree fell in the wood and no one was around to hear it, did it make a sound?" What I use to come by this assumption is having regularly visited news stands to see if any of the rock rags mentioned Tull, this sleuthing started about 72, and even after having just visited the last sold out tour, there would either be nothing or something very negative, re Chicago reviews or Lester Bangs. Now the amount of info most normally available was far more limited, Rolling Stone, which last spoke kindly of Tull in 70 or 71, they even gave a bad review to TAAB, (which I can kind of understand if it was after one listen, in part true of all Tull material)would virtually never review anything, once every five years they might pop up and say something mean spirited about them, Creem, more of the same, Crawdaddy, I am pretty sure Tull was just not groovy enough as opposed to say, Lou Reed. I guess Downbeat, the 70 plus year old jazz rag did a nice spread on them in the mid seventies, I did not start subscribing til 77 but luckily David Rees reprinted the things. Even when I would get to the more well stocked book stores and such which might carry the British rags, specifically NME and Melody Maker there would either be nothing or occasionally scathingly mean spirited takes, after all, here was Johnny Rotten and the boys spitting at old folks in London, what could be more rock and roll in fairness. In fact it was in David Rees' rag that I read probably my favorite of the mean spirited takes, something along the lines of, Jethro Tull, that swivel eyed little turd, is he still around then? I shall have to give him a good slagging. Love that swivel eyed little turd bit. But I do find the net amazing, with all the stuff thats on here like the Jethro Tull press, or the beermats from Heavy Horses, trust me folks, these type of things were not readily available for the most part, and entire sold out tours would occur with no advertizing whatsoever, in many respects the ultimate underground band, regardless of popularity. I think we all felt Chrysalis was not doing Tull justice all those years. But was that really the case? Fuel 2000 sent out Christmas EP's to all the radio stations a few years back. Did a single radio station ever play anything from it? I know I never heard a thing about. So who's to blame?
|
|
mix
Journeyman
Posts: 136
|
Post by mix on Jul 16, 2009 13:08:44 GMT
Seems the problem is Ian. I just don't think he cares to promote Tull. Now he did recently turn up on BBC R2 for an interview regarding the Flute wise event. Clearly he felt the need to do a little bit of promo for that. I'm quite sure Ian has A LOT of contacts and could use the media to raise his solo and Tull events.
Of course I cannot talk for any other country other than the UK but there are many programs Ian would be welcome on. The new BBC one show for example. And why Tull have never been on Later with Jools Holland is beyond me. I'm also surprised Tull have not been at Glastonbury festival. Anyway, ultimately it all comes down to Ian and considering he still demands a big audience at his gigs I guess he figures he doesn't need or want the hassle of promo.
|
|