CDs in your player now - Page 119 - The Orange Mane

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hogan11

Oh, I don't know...I thought that summed up all the band's strengths quite nicely in a package that was solid from top to bottom. I know it's not as popular as Aqualung or as career definitive as Living In The Past, but I still consider it the apex of early Tull.

The record was a pretty good snapshot of Tull at that particular moment, but the band continued to evolve and change over time.

"Stand Up" was particularly impressive when you consider that the band had just switched guitarists.

Hogan11 · 07-30-2008, 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

The record was a pretty good snapshot of Tull at that particular moment, but the band continued to evolve and change over time.

"Stand Up" was particularly impressive when you consider that the band had just switched guitarists.

The apex of early Tull, yes

The band always had a somewhat revolving door of musicians around Anderson...the most interesting to me is noted in bombay's quote:

Quote:

I like this one from the Rolling Stones Rolling Stones Rock and Roll Circus. Ian Anderson appears to be somewhat deranged

The guitarist is none other than Tony Iommi on his way towards Black Sabbath

Hogan11 · 07-30-2008, 04:33 AM

Speaking of The Rock And Roll Circus, everyone generally acknowledges The Who stole the show, so why not?

Moonie at his best

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hogan11

Speaking of The Rock And Roll Circus, everyone generally acknowledges The Who stole the show, so why not?

I've never been much of a Who fan.

When I was in my teens, just about everyone my age was infatuated with Led Zeppelin, and The Who was sort of like your older brother's band. The consensus among my peers at that time was that there was nothing The Who could do that Led Zeppelin couldn't do a hundred times better, so who needs 'em?

Also, the smashing of the instruments thing is such a huge turn-off for me that I just can't get past it - no matter what they play. It's just so boorish and low-rent, IMO.

OK - you can flame me now.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hogan11

The guitarist is none other than Tony Iommi on his way towards Black Sabbath

I'm so glad Martin got the gig instead (although he was so nervous he almost blew it.)

Iommi is about as mind-numbingly monotonous and one-dimensional as rock guitarists get, IMO.

Not good if you want to play with Ian Anderson.

Hogan11 · 07-30-2008, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

I've never been much of a Who fan.

When I was in my teens, just about everyone my age was infatuated with Led Zeppelin, and The Who was sort of like your older brother's band. The consensus among my peers at that time was that there was nothing The Who could do that Led Zeppelin couldn't do a hundred times better, so who needs 'em?

Also, the smashing of the instruments thing is such a huge turn-off for me that I just can't get past it - no matter what they play. It's just so boorish and low-rent, IMO.

OK - you can flame me now.

Well, I'll take The Who over Zep anyday...but I've been Zepped to death over the years and never really thought they were all that anyways, so that's not surprising. The only thing about The Who's legend that I dispute is that the rock operas IMHO, really didn't work. I never thought Tommy was all that successful an album (convoluted story, didn't really flow well and had bad production) That clip of "A Quick One" is one of the rare times when something like that worked...the studio version sure didn't.

Hogan11 · 07-30-2008, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

I'm so glad Martin got the gig instead (although he was so nervous he almost blew it.)

Iommi is about as mind-numbingly monotonous and one-dimensional as rock guitarists get, IMO.

Not good if you want to play with Ian Anderson.

Maybe that's why he only lasted a week

Rohirrim · 07-30-2008, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

I've never been much of a Who fan.

When I was in my teens, just about everyone my age was infatuated with Led Zeppelin, and The Who was sort of like your older brother's band. The consensus among my peers at that time was that there was nothing The Who could do that Led Zeppelin couldn't do a hundred times better, so who needs 'em?

Also, the smashing of the instruments thing is such a huge turn-off for me that I just can't get past it - no matter what they play. It's just so boorish and low-rent, IMO.

OK - you can flame me now.

Oh yeah? Well who the **** are you?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Oh yeah? Well who the **** are you?

I dunno, but a policeman knew my name...

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hogan11

Well, I'll take The Who over Zep anyday...but I've been Zepped to death over the years and never really thought they were all that anyways, so that's not surprising.

Plant > Daltrey
Page > Townshend
Jones > Entwistle
Bonham > Moon

JMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hogan11

The only thing about The Who's legend that I dispute is that the rock operas IMHO, really didn't work. I never thought Tommy was all that successful an album (convoluted story, didn't really flow well and had bad production) That clip of "A Quick One" is one of the rare times when something like that worked...the studio version sure didn't.

I thought the film itself was cool (sort of) but the music was lame.

Hogan11 · 07-30-2008, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Plant > Daltrey
Page > Townshend
Jones > Entwistle
Bonham > Moon

JMO.

I disagree on all counts...to put it as mildly as I possibly can.

Quote:

I thought the film itself was cool (sort of) but the music was lame.

Oh you've got to be kidding me...That thing was close to being unwatchable IMO (save for the Moon appearances and Ann-Margret rolling around in beans). I'll take Quadrophenia over it (both film and album) anyday and twice on Sundays.

Hogan11 · 07-30-2008, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

I dunno, but a policeman knew my name...

Didja wake up in a SoHo doorway?

BroncoInferno · 07-30-2008, 09:15 AM

Frankly, I always thought Jethro Tull sucked balls. That damn flute always gave me the image of hippies frolicking in a meadow. And those mystical lyrics...ugh. Not my cup of tea at all.

On the Who vs. Zepp debate...I enjoy both, but I've gotta go with the Who as the better band. Pages' playing got too repetitive at times, Plants' voice could become a tad annoying over the course of an entire album, and the lyrics were a bit uninteresting when written by Page and too damned mystical when penned by Plant.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hogan11

Oh you've got to be kidding me...That thing was close to being unwatchable IMO (save for the Moon appearances and Ann-Margret rolling around in beans). I'll take Quadrophenia over it (both film and album) anyday and twice on Sundays.

That's why I said "sort of."

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

....and the lyrics were a bit uninteresting when written by Page and too damned mystical when penned by Plant.

Page wrote lyrics?

cutthemdown · 07-30-2008, 09:26 AM

Jethro Tull was different though didn't sound like the other bands. The Who were a little more versatile then Led Zep was. Led Zep was more the hard blues band with soaring lyrics. Still though both bands had great drummers who died and famous lead guitar players so they have some stuff in common.

cutthemdown · 07-30-2008, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

Frankly, I always thought Jethro Tull sucked balls. That damn flute always gave me the image of hippies frolicking in a meadow. And those mystical lyrics...ugh. Not my cup of tea at all.

On the Who vs. Zepp debate...I enjoy both, but I've gotta go with the Who as the better band. Pages' playing got too repetitive at times, Plants' voice could become a tad annoying over the course of an entire album, and the lyrics were a bit uninteresting when written by Page and too damned mystical when penned by Plant.

Ian Anderson is the name of that flute player I think. He's a good player but I have to agree that its pretty hard to work flute into a rock band. There is a reason the saxophone is the woodwind of choice when it comes to rock.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

Frankly, I always thought Jethro Tull sucked balls....

I guess you had to be there.

I think ~98% of all popular music recorded since about 1980 sucks balls, so I guess it's all relative.

BroncoInferno · 07-30-2008, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Page wrote lyrics?

Pretty sure he wrote the songs in full during the early days of the band, but I'm sure Hogan can confirm. There is certainly a variance in style lyrically between early Led Zep and later.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

The Who were a little more versatile then Led Zep was.

Are you serious?

Led Zeppelin's music drew from a much broader range of styles than The Who's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Led Zep was more the hard blues band with soaring lyrics.

LZ started out as a "hard blues" band, but they didn't stay that way for very long. Each successive album drew from a broader range of musical styles, e.g., acoustic fingerstyle ala Bert Jansch and Joni Mitchell, traditional Celtic folk, Indo-Carnatic melodies, Arabic modes, and more.

Not sure what "soaring lyrics" means.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Still though both bands had great drummers who died and famous lead guitar players so they have some stuff in common.

Is Townshend really famous for his lead work? Most of his fans would probably say he's more noted for his rhythm work.

Moon couldn't carry Bonzo's practice pads, IMO.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

Pretty sure he wrote the songs in full during the early days of the band...

Um, no.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 07-30-2008, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Ian Anderson is the name of that flute player I think. He's a good player but I have to agree that its pretty hard to work flute into a rock band.

For something that's supposed to be so hard, Tull was pretty successful doing it.

Rohirrim · 07-30-2008, 10:28 AM

Just put on Live at Leeds and crank it.

Argument over.

Hogan11 · 07-30-2008, 10:32 AM

I'm not aware of Page actually writing very much lyrically, that's more of Plant's domain and the main reason for all the hippy dippy fantasy bullshat. Page is solely credited with a few songs here and there ("Dazed And Confused") but I believe his main input overall was song construction and not lyrics.

I'd agree with The Who being more versitle, but more than anything, The Who was much more creative....any doubts can be easily erased by looking at not only the bodies of work of each band, but also the individual members themselves, who all (save for Moon) had decent and quality solo careers outside of the band whereas only Plant has gone on to anything of note musically (The Firm was a disaster and I do not count producing as the same as actual music creation, so Jones does not count). Zep also never attempted anything as complex an idea as Tommy, Lifehouse or Quadrophenia...lofty concepts that sometimes escaped The Who themselves.

Hogan11 · 07-30-2008, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

For something that's supposed to be so hard, Tull was pretty successful doing it.

Well, if it was so easy, more bands would've done it. It is hard to intergrate instruments like that into the rock band form...even Tull itself was not wholly successful in doing so all of the time. Yeah, sometimes the flute grates and I do have to concede that a little Jethro Tull does go a very long way unless one is truly committed but IMHO, the early records (before the formula set in) are pretty rewarding listenings in small doses.

07-30-2008, 10:32 AM	#2974
Hogan11 Rock-N-Roll Historian Let's take these SOB's out!!!!!! Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: W.NY.B.C. Posts: 21,300 Adopt-a-Bronco: Floyd Little	I'm not aware of Page actually writing very much lyrically, that's more of Plant's domain and the main reason for all the hippy dippy fantasy bullshat. Page is solely credited with a few songs here and there ("Dazed And Confused") but I believe his main input overall was song construction and not lyrics. I'd agree with The Who being more versitle, but more than anything, The Who was much more creative....any doubts can be easily erased by looking at not only the bodies of work of each band, but also the individual members themselves, who all (save for Moon) had decent and quality solo careers outside of the band whereas only Plant has gone on to anything of note musically (The Firm was a disaster and I do not count producing as the same as actual music creation, so Jones does not count). Zep also never attempted anything as complex an idea as Tommy, Lifehouse or Quadrophenia...lofty concepts that sometimes escaped The Who themselves. Last edited by Hogan11; 07-30-2008 at 10:43 AM..

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-30-2008, 04:33 AM	#2953
Hogan11 Rock-N-Roll Historian Let's take these SOB's out!!!!!! Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: W.NY.B.C. Posts: 21,300 Adopt-a-Bronco: Floyd Little	Speaking of The Rock And Roll Circus, everyone generally acknowledges The Who stole the show, so why not? Moonie at his best

07-30-2008, 09:15 AM	#2963
BroncoInferno Ring of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: South Carolina Posts: 13,031	Frankly, I always thought Jethro Tull sucked balls. That damn flute always gave me the image of hippies frolicking in a meadow. And those mystical lyrics...ugh. Not my cup of tea at all. On the Who vs. Zepp debate...I enjoy both, but I've gotta go with the Who as the better band. Pages' playing got too repetitive at times, Plants' voice could become a tad annoying over the course of an entire album, and the lyrics were a bit uninteresting when written by Page and too damned mystical when penned by Plant.

07-30-2008, 09:26 AM	#2966
cutthemdown A verbis ad verbera Zimm to HOF Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Long Beach Posts: 32,878	Jethro Tull was different though didn't sound like the other bands. The Who were a little more versatile then Led Zep was. Led Zep was more the hard blues band with soaring lyrics. Still though both bands had great drummers who died and famous lead guitar players so they have some stuff in common.

07-30-2008, 10:28 AM	#2973
Rohirrim Partisan Human Cannonball Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater Posts: 49,100	Just put on Live at Leeds and crank it. Argument over.