Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (09.09.99)

Hi,

"...Maybe everything we'd be hearing on the radio right now wouldn't be Led Zep."

"...besides Ian, there were Mick Abrahams (guitar; quit right after the first album because he wanted to write songs and Ian didn't want him to)..."

"...In 1969 Abrahams replaced by Martin Lancelot Barre (guitar)..."

"...In 1971 Cornick quit, replaced on base by Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond - the "ultimate" base player, in my opinion, sometimes sounds better than John Entwistle!..."

"...Hammond-Hammond quit and was replaced by David Glascock.."

"...In 1976 one more member was added - David Palmer (keyboards, all kind of strings, saxophone, etc.)..."

"...In 1979 disaster struck - Glascock died of an infection, there were other problems, and the band dissolved..."

"...In 1980 Ian got Martin Barre back (smart guy!), grabbed session players Eddie Jobson (keyboards, strings) and Mark Craney (drums) and recruited Dave Pegg on base.."

"..the electronic rubbish on the 80-s albums). Conway was replaced by Doane Perry in 1984..."

"..Peter Vettese was dropped soon afterwards, and after that I lost count..."

Matthew Bush <Matthew.Bush@PSS.Boeing.com> (28.10.99)

As a Tull fan from almost the beginning I wanted to tell you I thoroughly enjoyed - and often agreed - with your album reviews.

Jamie Anthony <jaony@lineone.net> (08.12.99)

I don't at all agree with your philosophy of Jethro Tull. I think the band's peak was around mid-Seventies - you see, progressive music has a lot of energy and is never dull - it's energy comes from constructive melodies and complex brilliance. Tull in the sixties were very much blues-based. Now that's usually a good thing, but Tull can't do blues that well - they were born to be prog! Prog takes time to understand, it can take 10-20 listens before you appreciate a prog album. I think your taste is much more pop-orientated.

<JethroTull18@aol.com> (15.01.2000)

I just have a few comments on your comments about Jethro Tull.

Michael Carroll <Michael_Carroll@merck.com> (08.02.2000)

Why

Hans Lindelöw <lipinlist@hotmail.com> (13.02.2000)

Interesting to read your reviews, especially on a group such as Jethro Tull, which I have listened to very much in previous years.I think they are quite good(your review´s), unsentimental and sometimes just to the point.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

In this moment I have no time to write comments about all groups and musicians placed on your web-site and decide to concentrate on my favourite band (and the best band on earth) - Jethro Tull.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

Don't twist my words, Georgie! I said that your comments are full of mistakes, and I don't like people pretending to observe music (not necessary Tull) and writes absolutely rubbish about the band's history. OK, you're lazy to read about Tull, so take the booklet from 20 Years CD and copy Pete Frame's line-up's tree. (And who would be interested in that besides fanatics like yourself? And I do not twist your words. I wrote 'In 1976 David Palmer was added'. You apparently think that this is a mistake and 'October 1976' is the correct answer. Thank you oh so much Mr Know All; you probably must have your pockets full of coupons won over trivia contests - G. S.)

Becky Alex <balex1@tampabay.rr.com> (23.07.2000)

You and this McFerrin guy have similar takes on Tull (I've been to his site as well).  Who's the original and who's the copy?  I'll give you the credit for being the original since I see McFerrin has the balls (nay stupidity) to critique an album without listening to it (see a Little Light Music)!  Tull has made outstanding music since day one and continues to do so.  If you don't like it that's cool, but you really should have your facts correct before you go over the top with your negative criticism (see just about every review of a Tull album) (yeah, like the 'fact' that "A Passion Play is Tull at their very best" - am I getting it right? - G. S.).  Other than that your site is very enjoyable and I look forward to reading reviews about some of your highly overrated bands. (If they're so highly overrated, why read about them at all???!! - G. S.)

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (25.07.2000)

1. In the time since, I've managed to acquire LLM, and it proved to be pretty close to what I imagined it would be.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (30.09.2000)

First let me say that for a guy who obviously doesn't like Jethro Tull all that much, your comments are astonishingly astute both journalistically and musically. The insight into Barlow's superior technique vs. Bunker's greater energy for example, is the type of thing you'd not only practically have to be a drummer to say, but you'd also have to have heard not only all the later stuff by Tull as well as some of Barlow's rather obscure sessions, like Maddy Prior's Woman in the Wings and that Robert Plant solo LP. (I think it's the one with "Big Log," or the one right after that.) Yeah, sure, I wonder how you overrate Hammond's completely by-the-book playing, but then you rally with great insights about Barre. So on the whole I give the writer a huge thumbs up, especially when so many people with no love for or knowledge of music (but rather a huge addiction to whatever the latest scene or scandal is -- you know, the type of people who'd tell you Eminem is talented and Ian Anderson is not) delight in bashing Tull -- whose J-Tull Dot Com, by the way, was their best album since Under Wraps (see my sure-to-infuriate defense of ...Wraps, which should be up on the site by now courtesy of George).

Paul Stadden <paul@stadden.com> (16.11.2000)

I think that any band that had Black Sabbath's Tony Iommi must be cool. Artsy rock? Except for Pink Floyd, these guys are the best. And Black Sabbath had astable line-up compared to this band.

David Lyons <d.t.lyons@btinternet.com> (16.12.2000)

(To Michael Caroll:) "Question: Why would someone who hates 'War Movies' with a passion be assigned to review a crap load of'War Movies'. Where's the value, what is learned?"

Charles Oliver <charles@cfs.com.au> (20.12.2000)

I enjoyed your Jethro Tull reviews and even purchased a couple of their albums on your recommendations. I've also listened to a lot of Tull's music in 'mp3' format downloaded from the internet and I must point out that, I'm in no way a Tull fanatic like that Tikhonov Konstantin character.

Jeff Melchior <Jeffmoncheri@aol.com> (28.12.2000)

The one thing I hate about progressive rock is the almost "Trekkie" fervor so many of its fans take in it. I mean, I know people who can argue all night about whether Rick Wakeman or Tony Kaye was the better keyboardist in Yes. And when you get a band that has had so many line-up changes as Tull has, you therefore have that many more minute points to debate. I don't think there's anything wrong with serious discussion about music (otherwise I wouldn't be here) but I think condemnation over missing a couple of minor details borders on the obsessive.

Morten Felgenhauer <Morten.Felgenhauer@kvaerner.com> (15.01.2001)

It's not particularily original of me, but my favourite Tull-period is 69-72. That doesn't mean that I find the rest of their catalogue boring. Far from it - in fact I find points of interest on every album they have released. It's just that they weren't that consistent anymore. Although I consider myself as a Tull fan, I may not be recognized as one by the really die-hards (I just wrote that not EVERYTHING they did was brilliant). And I wouldn't want to mess with the 'real' fans now, would I? I'm a little scared of them. Being a bass man myself I just can't help some bass commenting: The fact that Jeffrey Hammond (I think he added an extra Hammond after joining the group) was unexperienced does not rule out the fact that he became an effective bassist and that he played on two of the most complex tracks they ever did (Thick & Passion). Jeffrey is also the person Ian sang about in several of his early compositions. My favourite, however, is Glenn Cornick, with his fluent, original and melodic bass lines - best appreciated on tracks like "Living in the past", "Bouree" (even a solo there!) and "Nothing is easy".

Tom Anger (21.05.2001)

After wrtiting my thoughts on the Moody Blues I decided to flip thru another of my favourite bands: Jethro Tull. Jethro Tull is an interesting band led by aninteresting guy. Ian Anderson made this band with his eccentric behaviour. Some of the music is great. I prefer Stand Up and Benefit. And parts of Thick as a Brick and Aqualung. And I know that some of the songs on all of these albums fail. The Band didn't have a diverse enough sound and Martin Barre altho at times a very solid guitar player just overwhelms most songs and Ian Anderson'd unique flute style is tedious.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

I was a big Tull fan in my teens (long time back) and have recently spent some time listening to their catalog again. Conclusion: About ten songs are the work of a genius, the rest is almost always entertaining, interesting, quirky, humorous, well-played and well-produced, and totally idiosyncratic. Sometimes boring, though. But hardly ever unlistenable. Most of their albums are more or less flawed, but almost none is totally worthless (maybe Under Wraps). BTW, I never got why Tull are called 'prog' - o.k., long songs (sometimes), complex arrangements (most of the time), and sometimes intelligent, sometimes incomprehensible lyrics. BUT: no keyboard wizard, no guitar hero, no larger-than-life drummer... In fact, while all incarnations of Tull have consisted of absolutely professional musicians, there is no virtuosity for virtuosity's sake. It's all subordinated to the larger ideas. (O.k., you might argue the same for Genesis or Van der Graaf Generator, too, but those bands always aspired to virtuosity without ever achieving it - witness Banks's shitty synth solos and Van der Graaf's unlistenable jams; there are no such things on Tull records - they might have been virtuosos, but they just didn't really care...) Anyway, where was I? Yeah, you might call Tull anything - blues, metal, folk, synth pop, pub rock - but the only albums that qualify as prog in my opinion are Thick As A Brick and A Passion Play. The rest is Anderson solo with backing band anyway, and Anderson, not unlike Fleetwood Mac, was actually several consecutive bands. Listen to Stand Up and The Broadsword and the Beast, disregard Ian's voice and flute, and tell me if it's the same band -- nah! And as to what you call Anderson's cardinal vice - 'overproductivity': he didn't really put out albums more often than Paul McCartney, did he? Or Uriah Heep (heh!)? Or Elton John? O.k., Tull largely lacked real genius, but I still prefer an album with five filler songs every year to an album with no filler every five years. At least in the case of Tull, cause Tull filler is rarely unlistenable (except on the two or three albums that are REALLY bad...). What would you have wanted Ian to do? Put out one brilliant, flawless album between 1976 and 1979 and keep the rest for those anniversary outtake rip-offs? As it is, we have four perfectly o.k. albums, one each year, with traces of brilliance and a mass of mostly entertaining-though-not-brilliant background music. Maybe that sounds absurd, but I like it that way. Plus, all those whacked-out concepts wouldn't have worked otherwise...

James Hitt, Jr. <odin_the_one_eyed@hotmail.com> (05.12.2001)

After reading many of your Tull reviews, I notice you sometimes talk of Tull's musical complexity as sometimes being pretentious or snotty or whatever. From everything I have read of Ian Anderson (guitar/music magazines, interviews and such), he describes it as simply more fun for him to play. I am a musician, and I agree. It is fine if you don't always like musical complexity, but it would be good for you to know that he doesn't do so to be a pompous ass, or just to piss people off.

<Klippspringer@aol.com> (26.01.2002)

i can`t help. i always liked this band, even in my punk-years,although ian anderson IS a REAL boring old asshole.

Glenn Wiener <GJW0721@aol.com> (16.10.2002)

A good band yes. Ian was a talent and I like several of their songs particularly 'Skating Away', 'Songs From The Wood', 'Locomotive Breath', 'Bungle In The Jungle', and a few others. However, other tracks are just a bit overdone. My greatest hits compilation, Original Masters, suits me just fine thank you.

Gerard Nowak <gero@gower.pl> (13.03.2003)

Thank you, all you Tull devotees. Was almost the most hilarious experience in my life to have read through your comments seething with hatred just because someone dared to question the divine value of a Tull album. And what if I tell you that my favourite Jethro song is "Inside" or "Jack In the Green", and (dare I say it?) I don't like their rockish side, as it simply bores me? Am I gonna be beheaded? I wish the die-hards DID mind the disclaimers. Hot heads spoil this site.

Raghu Mani <raghu_mani@yahoo.com> (04.10.2003)

It's been a long time since I sent you any comments - though I do check yours and other WRC sites quite regularly. I just got myself a bunch of Tull on CD (most of my stuff till now was on tape) and then decided to glance through your reviews of Tull. Of all the WRC reviewers I find that you (and your American clone ;-)) come closest to my taste in music - though we do have a fair number of disagreements. This time, my only places I disagree with you are their debut album which I would rate a lot lower than you do and Songs From the Wood which I would rate a lot higher. I'd probably also take a point from Broadsword and give it to Heavy Horses. That apart, I am in total agreement with you about everything - down to the album rating. What an infuriating band!! So much great music mixed up with so much dull and mediocre stuff. However, what draws me to this band is that it is really unique - nothing in rock music sounds like Tull (except perhaps an Ian Anderson solo album). I pretty much gave up on them in the late 80s/early 90s after their switch to generic heavy metal. I see you like their latest effort - I should check it out sometime.

Sergio E. Bath <risios@yahoo.com> (17.12.2003)

It is a known fact amongst JT fans that Jeffrey was a close friend of Ian´s who could hardly pick up a bass guitar (not base), let alone play it well. As with Boz in King Crimson (that learned elementary bass technique from Mr. Fripp), JH-H gradually developed a very rudimentary playing style that improved slightly over time. Nonetheless, I find it to be rather mechanical in nature (no 'swing' at all), as he knew no musical theory (and did not have much of a sense of rythm to speak of), and all his playing was strictly memorized. That having been said, I have to admit he got away with it!

Lee <LJCDDS@aol.com> (05.06.2004)

George,

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

The summary - "An innovative blues album with some great flutework." - is pretty accurate. And 'Beggars Farm' is indeed the best song here. But the later stuff is so much better that I can't give this one more than a 6.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

This Was review is not bad, especially after your introduction. "Cat's Squirrel" is absolutely empty guitar exercises (more than a noise, less than a filler), so why are you be sorry for the departure of Mick Abrahams? Listen to this and think again... I can't agree that drum solo in "Dharma For One" is stupid, it can't compare to the best drum solos I heard in my life (it's Ian Paice's solos, in a matter of fact), but it's nice short solo and nothing more. Of course, Ian Anderson's flute work is simply, maybe too simple, but it was summer of 1968. Wait just a couple of months and you'll be rewarded. And "Song For Jeffrey" is not a closest thing to the pop hit, 'cause if anything climbed the charts in 60's is pop then "Song For Jeffrey" is pop, and "Hey Jude" is pop, and "A Whiter Shade Of Pale" is pop. There's no pop on This Was, it's a jazz or blues or rock, but not pop.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

Er... I'd give this a 7. It's good, but it's not nearly as interesting as later Tull stuff. 'Beggar's Farm' is a great song, of course. 'A Song For Jeffrey' is great psycho-blues, too. I love Ian's encoded vocals - they give the song a really weird feel. My favorite, though, is 'Serenade To A Cuckoo'. That song really gives Ian and Mick a chance to shine through on their instruments. It has a great, peaceful jazz feel to it. I love it, and I agree - 6 minutes is indeed too short. However, there's too much generic blues for me to really love this record - 'Some Day The Sun Won't Shine For You', 'It's Breaking Me Up', and 'My Sunday Feeling' are ok, but nothing special. 'Dharma For One' is a drum solo... it's pretty good until the actual drum solo starts. I like 'Cat's Squirrel', though. The biggest problem with it is that Mick is in one speaker, while the rest of the band is in the other. It makes the song hard to listen to in headphones - I would prefer it if it were in mono! But still, it makes me wanna hunt down a Blodwyn Pig album - I wonder how Mick sounded without Ian? Anyway, it's a good album. Just not an amazing one. Pretty impressive for a debut, though.

Paul Stadden <paul@stadden.com> (16.11.2000)

Ok, why does no one ever mention that Tony Iommi was indeed a full member of this band? Sure, it might have lasted two weeks, but was still a line-up. Heck, he even managed to appear with the band at the Rolling Stones Rock N' Roll Circus.

Todd Tennant <tennart@mindspring.com> (29.12.2000)

I think your judgement of Clive Bunker's solo ( as "stupid" ) is a little hasty and bit cold, and hope you will consider some counter points from a drummer who both discovered and systematically studied Bunker's style ( and others) from '68 to the present.

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

Definetly bluesy, and it has nothing innovative for me to latch onto. I'm glad Ian got his way and led the band to what they became.... (A law should be passed that drum solos cant last longer than thirty seconds.) 6/10

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

This is a blues album, and I'm simply not too fond of the blues, sorry. Even if it's Ian and his flute that play them. Traces of greater things that were to come ARE there, but it's a good thing Mick Abrahams left and paved the way for Tull developing an individual style. Had they ended their career after Abrahams's departure, they wouldn't be anything more than a footnote in rock history. Of course. That said, This Was isn't offensive or anything. But it's not really that interesting either. The blues-by-numbers pieces ("It's Breaking Me Up", "My Sunday Feeling", "Cat's Squirrel", even "Someday The Sun Won't...") are o.k. and listenable but could really have been done by anybody (yeah, I guess back then Ian's flute sound WAS something new - but then, "Serenade to a Cuckoo" is living proof that Roland Kirk did it earlier). "Song For Jeffrey" is a funny novelty pop number - Ian singing into a bucket and all that -, but it got on my nerves after a few listens ten years ago, and it still does now. "Move On Alone" is marred by a trumpet arrangement worthy of James Last. A really good one is "Beggar's Farm", but even this would be improved upon a year later with all those wonderful new and original blues-influenced numbers on Stand Up. That leaves "Dharma For One", which for some strange reason is my favourite track here. Don't ask me why. Maybe I just love that claghorn so much. All in all: an adequate, often entertaining blues album, but contains very little of the stuff that made Tull special. Great cover, great liner notes.

Ben Kramer <bkramer2000@hotmail.com> (31.10.2002)

Don't like it. This one is really boring, and a chore to sit through. The only song that stands out is 'Beggar's Farm'. The rest is just dull blues rock attempting to sound as good as Cream, and it doesn't. The funny thing is, I don't even like Cream. I can forgive these guys tough. It's their debut album, and many debut albums are atypical of a band's sound, the sound which is associated with the band. This is a different sound, but unlike Genesis (who has one of the most unique debut albums ever), Tull's debut is rather forgettable. Overall, I'd give this a 9/15, but I can see where someone would give it more. If I liked Tull beyond Thick As A Brick, and to a much lesser extent, Stand Up, I might be giving this something higher, but Tull doesn't really appeal to me, so I don't see any reason why one of their most forgettable albums would merit a high grade.

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

You know, it’s so damn fantastic to play this record after A Minstrel In The Gallery or, say, Thick As A Brick (and almost everything else in their catalogue). This was! The time, when every member mattered! (well, I’m joking, of course, but you see my point) Really, they sound like a real band here; and they play humble, simple, amateurish but totally amusing bluesy music. Not ass-kicking, but good anyway. “Move On Alone”, I love that one. But there’s nothing to hate here. Don’t even think of not buying their debut. You will laugh: “Come on, these are the guys who did “A Passion Play” in, like, five years?” Fun.

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

Good review! I would have loved to be around in 1969. The music sounds very fresh today so it must have been quite an experience thirty years ago.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (11.10.99)

Wow ... I must say I'm really, really impressed by this album. I mean, damn ... this is a solid, solid, piece of work. It's better than Aqualung, and that says a ton right there.

Ben Greenstein <bgreenstein@nctimes.net> (15.02.2000)

You're absolutely right - this album is fantastic. It's not progressive rock yet (except for "Bouree," which I agree is a higlight), but it's too complex to be blues rock (except for maybe "A New Day Yesterday," which is still incredibly awesome). My favourites are "Back To The Family," "Fat Man," and "Reasons For Waiting." I give it a nine.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Such an excellent album and such a weird review. First, This Was was finished in August 1968 and Mick Abrahams left Tull in November. Actually, Mick was asked to leave - 'cause he doesn't like gigs, tours etc. Second, Tony Iommi couldn't stay in Tull even if he wanted it to death. Ian always rules Tull by iron hand, so I can't imagine that he agreed with somebody's leadership. Tony "played" with Tull when the group was invited to the shooting of "Rock And Roll Circus", and it means "played" 'cause only Ian's vocals on "Song For Jeffrey" was recorded live, the instrumental parts was taped from studio version, so Tony doesn't played with Tull, not a single note.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

Yeah, I'd have to give this one a 10. There's not a bad song on here, or even a bad moment. The whole record just gets up and goes like This Was could only dream of! I'll go out and say that 'A New Day Yesterday' is the best blues tune I've ever heard - that guitar riff could repeat endlessly in the background for an hour and I wouldn't get bored. 'Bouree' is just as good - it manages to one-up 'Serenade To A Cuckoo' from the last album, which is no easy feat! 'Reasons For Waiting' and 'Look Into The Sun' are great ballads, quite possibly the best Tull ever did (well, among the best - there are a select few others that I like as much). The ascending flute line that opens 'Reasons' is absolutely beautiful. 'Nothing Is Easy' and 'Back To The Family' are fantastic hard rockers, as well. 'We Used To Know' has a blistering wah-wah solo by Barre. 'For A Thousand Mothers' is one of the best album closers ever, too - the combination of that heavy, fast riff and the bitter lyrics. It's perfect. The quick little ditties thrown on ('Fat Man' and 'Jeffrey Goes To Leicester Square') are EXTREMELY catchy and funny. 'Fat Man' can get stuck in my head for days. I don't get how a lot of hardcore Tull fans prefer Benefit to this - I like Benefit a lot, but it ain't perfect. And this almost is. Not as good as Brick, but still, a 10. Easily one of the best albums ever made.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (25.10.2000)

The heavier rock numbers on this record, I think, are overrated. They seem to get the most attention in the live shows nowadays, which is too bad. Because the other tracks are far more interesting. "Bouree" may be a Bach piece, but it doesn't sound like a prog cover of a classical tune at all. It really is unique in the Tull canon. I think you underrate "Fat Man" -- it really is an ingenious blend of English folk and Indian music. It's too bad it would take 25 years for Ian to return to that sort of motif. And "Look into the Sun" is absolutely gorgeous. Why it never made it to all these Tull anthologies is a big mystery.

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

Clear and beautiful. "New Day Yesterday", "Look into the Sun", and "Reasons for Waiting", are all winners and of course "Bouree" which has my faborite bass line of all time and makes classical music cool. A couple sound the same, its only a 9/10.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

I agree with you that this is the best Jethro Tull album. Coincidentally it's also the first with Martin Barre on it. Not that that has much to do with the album's greatness: Barre is a competent riffer alright, but his main addition to the Jethro Tull sound was to get the blues out. Which was good. Other than that, his by-the-books solos and power chords (he got metal-infested way before the Grammy - listen to his crappy solo on "Broadsword"!) are efficient but rarely inspired. Just what Anderson wanted, probably. On this masterpiece, Barre does have a few moments of brilliance - especially on the magnificent "We Used To Know", whose chords famously turned Henley, Frey et al. into zillionaires. Packed into the brilliant cover (ohh.. early Tull covers... I love them...) are a couple of blues-inspired tunes once more, but this time it's innovative, catchy and frankly breathtaking blues. The killer riff of "A New Day Yesterday" still blows me away, as does Clive Bunker's drumming - Tull's best ever drummer, and way underrated to this day. Same goes for "Nothing Is Easy", "For A Thousand Mothers" and the hilarious "Back To The Family", which features Ian musing about whether to go back to the.. er... family, is it? Unlike on This Was, this time we have a few softer numbers, and except "Jeffrey Goes Leicester Square", which zips by almost unnoticed, they're brilliant, too. "Reasons For Waiting" has that rare thing, a tasteful string arrangement, and "Look Into The Sun" is a dream-like psychedelic ballad which is almost too beautiful for words. Cakes, however, are taken big time by the oriental-sounding and incredibly danceable (believe it or not!) "Fat Man" - extra points for the lyrics; is there any other example of obesity as a subject for a rock song? Except "Whole Lotta Rosie", we won't count that - and, of course, the JS Bach cover. As a classical-rock-jazz fusion it's way better than anything The Nice or ELP or Procol Harum put out, and it has one of the most inspired bass solos in rock history. Although you don't have to be Chris Squire to play it. Which is maybe the point. The whole thing still sounds as fresh as if it had been recorded yesterday, and there is not a weak song on it. Pity Ian peaked so early, but there was a secondary peak to follow about ten years later. How soothing.

Ed Falis <falis@gnat.com> (06.03.2004)

I was around in '69 when this first came out. There seems to be a category problem in some of the discussions of this album (eg "before prog-rock, but we don't know what it is" - more or less). It's clear what it is: one of the finest examples of acid-rock ever done (as were its two successors): tight, muscular, full of texture, pulling together disparate themes for resonance. Problem is, noone recognizes acid-rock as a valid label, but there was a lot of music then that fell into the category (and no, I'm not talking about cloying psychedelia). These musics cut across idioms.

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

Their second album is in some way their best. Well, I still prefer TAAB to it, but I can easily see how this can be George’s favourite. No real filler here. The very first song, “A New Day Yesterday” is simply bound to blow you away with its pulsating riff and very professional playing from every member of the band. Every single instrument sounds incredible. In fact, all of these hard rock numbers are highlights in my book. They are all memorable and extremely energetic. Some words about that take on Bach, the notorious “Bouree”. That bass guitar from 2:05 till 2:20 is unquestionably one of the greatest things that rock music has ever offered. That’s it. But I won’t put down the quieter numbers either. Ian’s voice is very suitable to those, I should say. I absolutely adore the acoustic guitar on “Look Into The Sun”. That song is gorgeous.

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

Not as exhuberant and energetic as Stand Up, but every bit as good. 'To Cry You a Song' is probably the best song here, but the beautiful (not dragging and sloppy) 'Sossity ...' deserves to be mentioned as well. The worst track is the boring 'Play in Time'. Not the very nice and moving 'For Michael Collins, Jeffrey and Me'.

Nick Karn <glassmoondt@yahoo.com> (19.10.99)

This is one I owe a few more listens, but to me this record seemed like somewhat of a mostly melodyless bore, with uncaptivating lyrics and instrumental work (both the complete opposite of the following album) - Ian Anderson just ramblin' about things and Martin Barre seemed to "barre" himself from contributing too many interesting riffs or performances period here. "To Cry You A Song" is probably the only semi-great number here - at least in my damn opinion - "With You There To Help Me" and "Teacher" are OK too, but the rest just doesn't do it for me. I give it a 5, but you never know... that could possibly change.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (05.11.99)

Ehgn ... weak. Oh, and the version I got has 'Michael Collins' ... but it has 'TEACHER'!! Why else would I buy this album? I heard this twice on the radio and it instantly became my favorite Tull song of all time. Heck, that twelve note riff may be my favorite riff in all of music!

Iain Langer <broken@operamail.com> (23.01.2000)

This is my second-favorite Tull album. Far from the mediocrity some would dismiss it as, I think it is contains some of their most subtle and intricate songs, and is relatively free of the pretention that was about to sink them on later releases. Every single track is restrained and assured, and every track has moments of beauty to transport the true Tull fan somewhere into the ether. (This is really the last time Ian Anderson was able to sound self-assured as a singer WITHOUT sounding sinister.) I do think this is a harder album to get into immediately than something like Aqualung or Stand Up where the songs are oh so much more accessible from the get-go, but after 3-6 listenings, its true rewards should make themselves known. I might also add, that this is the ONLY Tull album that my girlfriend will allow me to play repatedly without complaining. Anderson at his most charming: "With You There to Help Me"; Best Lyric: "Inside"; Best overall songs: "To Cry You a Song", "Nothing to Say", "Play in Time" (and not a note of pretention in any of them). Rating: 10!

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Benefit is incredible disappointment? Well, if you can played about 100-150 gigs in year around the world and can write and record a perfect albums like a apple pies - so go ahead! I can agree that Benefit is not such innovated musically like its predecessor, but how can be bad album which contains "With You There To Help Me" and "To Cry You A Song"? So who the asshole? I think its somebody who looks on you from the mirror.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

So you don't like the melody of "Sossity"? Am I right? Poor George, I don't even know what to say. "Sossity" is gentle tune with nice acoustic guitar's chords and Ian's biting lyrics. I love it. No other comments required.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

Definitely a step down from Stand Up, but I like it better than This Was. It's very down beat and slow. Kind of dreary, too. There's not much energy here, but I think Ian was trying to create a mood, in which he succeeded. The opening 'With You There To Help Me' is great. I love the way it emphasizes the volume by getting louder and softer at appropriate times. 'Son' is a great rocker, too. And though you think that they're filler, I love 'For Michael Collins' and 'Sossity' to death. 'For Michael Collins' had to grow on me, but I love the chorus on that song and how it blends with the soft acoustic verses. And I've always loved 'Sossity'. It's a very sad, depressing song, and Ian pulls off the intended mood perfectly. Plus, the version of the CD I have has 'Teacher' on it, and that song totally rules! Doesn't fit with the rest of the CD at all, but it still rules. A couple songs aren't as good, though. 'Play In Time' is pretty dumb. 'A Time For Everything?' is better, but still fails to excite. And 'Nothing To Say' is ok, but it never really gets going. I'd give this an 8.

Braxton LeCroy <Autull@aol.com> (24.08.2000)

Tull's most underrated album...a gem. "With You There To Help me", "Sossity...", "To Cry You A Song", "A Time For Everything?", "Nothing To Say".....great stuff....a nine.

Ben Greenstein <bgreenstein@nctimes.net> (15.12.2000)

You're just about right on this one.... although I think that the opening track is one of the more draggy numbers. "Sossity" is pretty lame, too - I don't get how people can stand up for it. Still, there is some great material - "Play In Time" is wierd and cool, "Teacher" is a classic that is on my CD version, "Nothing To Say" has a decent hook, and "To Cry You A Song" just might be the best thing this band ever recorded. I give this a low 7/10.

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

Loved it when i first heard it (on a old warped LP), but realized it just didnt have the orginality of Stand Up. My lone favorite "To Cry You a Song". "Nothing to Say" and "With You There to Help Me" are fine, but after awhile I really couldnt distinguish them. "Teacher" is such a over played piece of crap. Every time I hear it, I quickly turn it off. 5/10

Geronimo Springs <GERONIMOSPGS@aol.com> (16.03.2001)

Maybe I'm too sentimental, but I love this album. It was the first Jethro Tull album I ever heard, and I became hooked on the band because I enjoyed Benefit so much. When I first heard Benefit in 1971, I was just discovering hard rock. Tull's sound at that time was so unusual, so unlike any other band's sound, that it caught my attention immediately. I found everything about the album - the lyrics, the arrangements, Ian Anderson's vocal delivery, and of course the flute - to be intriguing. This was an intelligent band, a group of skilled players whose sound combined the electricity and energy of hard rock with the acoustic beauty of medieval folk music.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

Although I'm trying hard to eschew McFerrinism, I can't help agreeing with you on that one, too. It's a major letdown between two masterpieces. Slightly confusing tracklisting affairs - some versions apparently have "Teacher", which admittedly improves the record, mine has "Alive And Well..." (song titles are getting worse, too) and "Inside", which doesn't help much. Anyway, what do we have? John Evan on piano for the first time, also he isn't featured that much, his work being a far cry from the inspired tinkling on albums like Aqualung and Too Old... (no kidding, more about that later on). Other than that, most of the album sounds like an inferior rewrite of its predecessor with a few ounces of psychedelia thrown in. Pity though that Ian forgot to write inspired songs. There are a few real stinkers like the dumber-than-dumb riff rockers "Son" and "To Cry You A Song", the latter featuring a riff by Martin Lancelot that may be intricate but is also repetitive ad nauseam, and regularly made me turn off the record after about a minute and a half. BORING and NERVE-WRECKING!!! Decent or even good songs come in the shape of "With You There To Help Me" (nice flute-sputtering and traces of catchiness), "Nothing To Say", "For Michael Collins...", and, hey, I even like "Sossity"! Perhaps because it comes like a shining light after the noodlefest of "Play In Time": The synths are shit, I agree, but the organ parts are nice, and anyway the song's problem is its absolut lack of melody and hooks rather than its arrangement. The rest of the record is unremarkable though not exactly annoying. It's also here that Ian started the technique of blatantly ripping off himself: listen to "A Time For Everything" and tell me if it's saying anything that "We Used To Know" didn't say MUCH MUCH better... Since the overall sound of Benefit is more to my tastes than the one on This Was, this gets a better rating from me, but... hm... maybe I should reconsider... but, heck, it has "With You There".! And I like that one better than anything on the first album. And there are no pointless Cuckoo Serenades...

Steve Klauzer <KingWumpus@aol.com> (29.03.2002)

In the Benefit review, you said that there were several versions of the album floating around, and that the US version dropped "Collins, Jeffrey, and Me" for "Teacher". Not quite. The LP I have goes like this:

Alex Bunard <alexbunard@yahoo.com> (12.08.2002)

Although I tend to agree on many points you've made in your analyses of the Tull albums, I must say that I disagree with your overall assessment of Benefit. I'll grant you that it's a hard to understand album, but once you gain a proper perspective, things may slightly change for you.

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

I don’t agree. When I listen to the album I always ask myself why it should be so much worse than Stand Up. Unfortunately, the things get kind of sad at the end, but even those tracks are anything but mediocre. A very good follow-up. Here you get great rockers (“With You There To Help Me”, “Nothing To Say”, “To Cry You A Song”) and beautiful ballads (I absolutely love “For Michael Collins”). Some songs are just good, of course, but Ian’s fantastic singing will get you anyway. A good album overshadowed by two great ones. Don’t make a mistake of skipping Benefit!

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Oh yeah, Carnegie Hall! Those were the days!

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

Theoretically, yes. Practically... it's a roulette. Technological process, George, technological process of original and pirate CDs is not the same. Bootleggers makes it faster (time is money), so some CDs sounds almost completely the same, some is not. For example, Led Zeppelin's pirate CDs sounds terrible. And pirates often shortens songs to put more tracks on single CD. Rainbow's "Gates Of Babylon" lasts 6:49 on the original CD, but some Russian fool cut off the violin in the end of the song, so the pirate version's timing is 6:24. "Rainbow Eyes" lost a few bits and was shortened from 7:12 to 6:51. I didn't hear Tull's pirate CDs 'cause I don't want to touch their disgusting inlays (printed on the used toilet paper), so I cannot affirm that they are not the same, but even if they are the same, buying it is disrespect to musicians and their work in my humble opinion. I'm not a rich man even for low Russian standards but I have my proud. Have you, George? (You don't have a 'proud', Konstantin: you have fanatism, and that's a little different. I'm not a Tull fanatic - I have other bands to pay tribute as well. The Monkees, for instance - G. S.).

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

I'll second that 8. This CD really rocks. It's not as good as Bursting Out, but it's definitely better than A Little Light Music. I love the original version of 'My God' included here, complete with original lyrics! The record company made Ian change 'em, but here they are, unedited. The guitar riff is amazing, and a flute solo from Ian is always something special - he really goes nuts on the thing! He's the only player who didn't merely embellish rock music with a flute - he MADE rock music with a flute. Amazingly impressive. The live version of 'A Song For Jeffrey' rules, too. I love that harmonica solo in there. The 'Sossity'/'Reasons' medley here is stunning, too. I heard 'Sossity' here first, so that may be why I love the song so much. Martin's playing is a little sloppy throughout - 'Nothing Is Easy' isn't as good as it CAN be, and the length guitar solo doesn't really go anywhere. But still, I love the way the guitar solo turns into 'For A Thousand Mothers', which I love more than words can express. It's worth picking up (though the box set is probably best for diehards - the stuff is all pretty good, but it's too much for a casual fan to sit through. Plus, disc 1 is just slightly changed remixes).

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (06.09.2002)

The boxed set is now out of print, so this will be near impossible to find. (I won a free copy, so I got VERY lucky.) Too bad, because it is a marvelous concert. The band might be more professional sounding on later live albums, but they are positively fierce here, and Ian's comments are quite amusing. The only downer is Martin's stupid guitar solo -- I hate it even more than you do. The man can certainly play, but he obviously needed Ian's song structures, because this is just noise. My favorite is probably "Sossity" -- the song sounds quite different without the echo of the studio version.

Mike DeFabio <defab4@earthlink.net> (24.08.99)

A little too pretentious, but as you say, the songs are good. I don't really care what Ian Anderson thinks about organized religion. What I care about is the fact that these songs are phat! Get it!

Marco Ursi <zeppelinwho@hotmail.com> (31.08.99)

I've spent the last few months easing my way into prog-rock. As of right now, this is my favourite prog album, probably cause it rocks. When I first put it on, I was astounded by the amazing title track. What a riff! After about a week of non-stop listening to the first song, I decided to let the rest of the CD play through. And I was very pleased. Ian Anderson can certainly play that flute! The thing I like about this album and Tull in general better than Yes and ELP and the other prog-rockers is that the music is pretty easy to get into (although I haven't heard anything later than Thick as a Brick). An easy 9 for Aqualung, probably a 10 for "best-of" artist, in my books.

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

This album really does live up to the hype. Lots of great songs and no bad ones. Highlights include the guitar solo in 'Aqualung' (one minute of pure brilliance), the intro to 'Locomotive Breath' and the three short acoustic numbers. There are a few minor flaws though. 'Mother Goose' and 'Up to Me' which both seem a bit out-of-place and silly.

Nick Karn <glassmoondt@yahoo.com> (19.10.99)

Definitely agree with the 9. The concept is just a little bit unfocused but incredibly profound and shocking for 1971. A real mind-altering experience here, and one of those albums the kids "shouldn't have been listening to" around that time, along with Led Zeppelin, Queen, Black Sabbath and David Cassidy records. The title track I just can't say enough about - an absolute masterpiece of an opening song, a multi-part progressive ride with that thundering riff and opening, 'sitting on a park bench' lines, the acoustic parts and slower section. It's got it all! The rest of the album never quite matches it, but there's still some convincing great riffing - "Hymn 43" and "Locomotive Breath", and also the expert Ian Anderson flute playing of "Cross Eyed Mary" and the groovy and relaxing "Up To Me". An excellent all around effort.

Valentin Katz <Valka324@home.com> (09.12.99)

From beginning to end this albums is the ultimate experiment of commingling hard rock music with progressive musical ideology and the result is absolute brilliance. From the opening 'Aqualung' riff, the to the extended cd with 'Bouree' (Ian's take on a Bach classic). When finished, you take a deep breath and proclaim, "Damn!, that was good". And after that you're just speechless. 'My God' is the best song on here followed closely by 'Aqualung'. You and all your reviewers are complaining that you don't care what Ian thinks of God and organized religion, well fuck you!, no one cares what you think either! Album deserves a higher overall rating. Classics like this one always do

Iain Langer <broken@operamail.com> (22.01.2000)

Of course this is Tull's masterpiece. Although the previous album Benefit is underappreciated in my opinion, there is no denying that Aqualung was a monumental leap forward. Only "To Cry You a Song" on Benefit supplies any clue to this direction for the band. The songs on Aqualung are unfailingly gorgeous and unfailingly gripping. The melodicism of Benefit is still apparent, but has grown some balls. This album can be soaringly beautiful and deeply profound all the the same moment. Standout songs are "Locomotive Breath"(brutal yet beautiful) "Aqualung" (what can I say) "Wind Up" (deeply autobiographical yet majestic and somehow a universal statement about rebellion against dogma) and the lovely acoustic "Wond'ring Aloud". At one time in my life, this was my favorite album to listen to stoned, and amazingly enough it's still a pretty damn good choice.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

When we says Tull we means Aqualung, when we says Aqualung we means Tull (Russian folk joke).

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

I heard Spirit a long, long time ago, so I can't confirm it. I simply don't remember.

Ben Greenstein <bgreenstein@nctimes.net> (02.06.2000)

Just a wee bit overrated, not as much as Brick, though - in retrospect, I would give that one a really low seven. This one gets a very high eight - lower than expected because a lot of the songs aren't incredibly fantastic ("Wind Up" and pretty much all of the ballads). However, for every slightly lame number there's a song like "Aqualung," "Hymn 43," "Locomotive Breath," and "Cross-Eyed Mary," which are all well written and justifiably radio classics. As for the contreversy (which may not really exist) on "Mother Goose," I don't think it's at all out of place. Just because it's different from the other songs doesn't mean it breaks the overall mood or flow of the album - on the contrary, it makes for a lot more diversity. I dig it - but keep in mind that I also think that A Passion Play is one of the greatest albums ever.

Rich Bunnell <taosterman@yahoo.com> (06.06.2000)

The first time I heard this album, I was blown away, then the second time....eh.....then the third and subsequent times I've really enjoyed it. I really don't care about the lyrics, as usual, but most of these songs are really good. "Locomotive Breath" is the best (great driving rhythm on that one), and nearly as good are "Hymn 43," "Wind Up," and "Cross-Eyed Mary." I like the title track too, but stupid compilation album commercials have made it so that I recognize nothing from the song but the opening riff and then can never remember how the rest of the song goes. It's a shame, because it's a really good song. The only things I don't like on the album are the little acoustic breaks, and though "My God" is a cool tune, I think it's a bit too impenetrable for me to enjoy completely. I'd give the album a high eight.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

There's nothing new to say about this - tons of radio standards and an extremely famous concept. The songs are really great throughout - 'Aqualung', 'Cross Eyed Mary', 'Hymn 43', and 'Locomotive Breath' are among the most overplayed songs in history, but they're all great. I especially love the bass in 'Cross Eyed Mary' during the 3rd verse - now THAT'S a bass line! My favorite cut on here has to be 'My God', though. The way the gentle acoustic riff turns heavy, then jazzy, then disappears during a weird chant session, then comes back. It's one of the finest songs in the Jethro Tull catalogue, and if you ask me, ever recorded. The short acoustic links are very pretty, and the folky 'Mother Goose' is catchy and funny. This album's actually pretty diverse - most of the radio standards are hard rockers, so people assume this is a hard rock record, which it really ain't. I'd give this a high, high 9. And if you buy this, under NO circumstances buy the original CD release - it chops off the last verse of 'Wind Up' and the opening guitar bit of 'Aqualung'. It's hard to find, as it was soon fixed, but it still crops up in used bins now and then. Oh, and the new version has bonus tracks, 4 of which are repeats from the 20 Years Of Tull box set, 1 is an alternate version of 'Wind Up' that sounds exactly the same, and 1 is a length interview with Ian. It seems like they just wanted to cram bonus tracks on, but didn't want to make it extensive like in the Who catalogue. Oh well.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (21.07.2000)

I'm still not totally sure why you're somewhat down on 'Wind Up'. Is it just the fact that it's at album's end? Or is it because it follows 'Locomotive Breath' and thus seems somewhat anti-climactic?

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (16.09.2000)

No one had ever written a set of songs challenging organized religion and chronicling the plight of homeless derelicts before, which is a major reason the album got so much attention in the USA, even though the previous two (I'm not that familiar with This Was) were just as solid, if not as hard rocking. It's hard for American fans to separate the album from the hype, if you were there at the time. It does have an almost perfect balance between acoustic and electric numbers, rare for any album, although nowadays the acoustic numbers don't get nearly as much attention.

David Lyons <d.t.lyons@btinternet.com> (06.01.2001)

Oh no. Oh dear God no. I've just been tootling through the Tull pages again, and I've discovered something truly, horrendously awful. I agree with Konstantin about something. Two things, in fact. Firstly, 'Lick Your Fingers Clean' makes the perfect ending to the album (yes, I know its on the reissue, but then they spoilt it with what feels like a three day interview with mister flute pants), both musically and lyrically (I know it's childish, but I still chuckle at the 'underpants' line every doggone time). Second up is 'Wind Up' - c'mon George, humour someone who's suffered listening to Crest Of A Knave and print a retraction, even if you don't mean it - It's a great song!

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

Overhyped classic. The title tracks fine, but the intro to "Cross-Eyed Mary" set me up thinking "heres gonna be a great one" and boom, theres little creative music being made here, a huge dissapointment. My faves "Wondering Aloud" (sweet simple love song), "Locomotive Breath" (unbelievable riff), and "Wind Up" (deep meaningful lyrics). The CD does the LP one better with the rocking "Lick Your Fingers Clean" (why was this left off? ITS GREAT!!) Sorry all you Tull heads, but a 9/10.

Bob Roberts <freeakinout@yahoo.com> (27.01.2001)

I have been a big JT fan for a lot of years, and Aqualung was one of my first albums ever. I played it so much that I had to put it away for a while - a few years really. I went on to explore all of the JT catalog and found some better, some worse.

Michael and Priscilla Bloom <netsqueech@mediaone.net> (05.02.2001)

I really appreciate your pointing out what a balls-out rocker of an album Stand Up was, because I'd quite forgotten. To me, the difference between it and Aqualung is that Stand Up is still "bluesy" in the same way as Led Zeppelin, while in Aqualung there was a conscious attempt to purge the blues influences from their musical language. (Possibly this effort got started on Benefit and wasn't being done right and that's why Benefit doesn't quite measure up.)

Geronimo Springs <GERONIMOSPGS@aol.com> (20.05.2001)

There has been so much written about this album over the last thirty years, it is difficult to think of anything to say about it that has not already been said. Nevertheless, I will try, as Aqualung deserves the attention of any serious rock music fan.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

Everything, as one of your commentators has, er, commented, about this album has already been written. So I'll be brief. This is of course one hell of a record. It's one of the rare occasions where Barre really shines, as much as I hate to admit it. Add to this a stylistic turn to GOOD hard rock (cp the bad hard rock of latter-day Tull), a well thought-out concept, uniformly strong song material, Clive Bunker's grand finale, melodies and riffs that are built to last, great work by Evan and the master-flautist, and you're in Tull heaven. And the artwork was getting better STILL (and this was still not the end!). I see why "Locomotive Breath" is your all-time favourite; me, I've just listened to it too much in the last couple of decades (ha!), though I still appreciate its grandeur. But the thrill is somewhat gone. Not so with the awesome title track, "Cross-Eyed Mary", "Wind-Up" (possibly my favourite song here), and the beautiful, beautiful acoustic tracks, which I must politely insist, Mr. Starostin, are as far from filler as anything in the Tull canon. IMHO, of course. One point off though for the Gregorian chants on "My God" and the fillerish folk pastiche "Mother Goose". The rest is ace.

Eric Rogozin <erogozin@mtu-net.ru> (30.08.2001)

When I was in Germany this year, I went to the big music store and saw there big Jethro Tull collection. It goes without saying, that this situation drove me mad, at first, 'cos I've never seen all Jethro Tull output put together in one single place before (especially in Russia, where it's not very easy to find Jethro Tull albums), and, at second, because there was a chance to listen to any of these albums through. I have chosen Aqualung, because I heard "Locomotive Breath" and "Wind-Up" before and liked these songs, and I knew, that it's one of the most famous and outstanding Jethro Tull albums. But I never thought, that it would be such great!!! I listened to the whole album through and all I could say was "Wow!"! I was so much impressed! It was really a discovery for me, I mean, of course I knew and liked Jethro Tull before, but perhaps I had not a whole conception 'bout their music, now when I've heard Aqualung I've got it! Great! The title track I remember the best and all I can say, that it's fucking superb! Really great!

Ryan Maffei <chaucer@ix.netcom.com> (30.03.2002)

It may not be their most ambitious or solid work of all time, but Aqualung is a damn good record. And I'm not saying it's exemplary of what a prog album should be-on the contrary, it's just a great piece of work, more streamlined than, say, Genesis, more earnest than the still-superficial soundscapes of Mr. Fripp and his Crimsony Crew. The folk tunes here do little for me, but the bludgeoning, ferocious hard-rock sections, with Ian Anderson blowing his flute away and spitting scathing poetry with the utmost conviction, are truly worth my critical while. Anderson soars like never before with his bitingly personal "Wind Up", while "Aqualung" is a thrilling blend of arty folk and searing riff-rock. And let's not forget the unstoppable atmosphere provided by "Locomotive Breath".a point or two off for throwaways like "Up to Me", "Slipstream", and "Wond'ring Aloud", but Aqualung is an 8 record that's dangerously close to a 9.

Glenn Wiener <GJW0721@aol.com> (16.10.2002)

Easily their most commercial album. However, the subject matter is not so appealing. Like 'Locomotive Breath'. Love the slow classical piano beginning and the way it flows into an edgy rocker. Truthfully I kind of like 'Wind Up'. Nice acoustic beginning then a rocking middle part and then it slows up again in the end. 'Mother Goose', 'My God', 'Hymn 43', and 'Cross Eyed Mary' are other quality tunes. 'Aqualung' I'm just not that crazy about. Some of the other songs are just not that memorable. I think you are right, a bit overproduced.

E <Meldrain@aol.com> (25.11.2003)

My first Tull album, my first prog album, and indeed one of the albums that got me into rock altogether. Prior to it I basically had a rather predictable collection of Beatles and Stones albums. I'd already heard 'Cross-eyed Mary' on the Breaking The Waves soundtrack, a score with a rather eclectic, though glam heavy, selection, including T. Rex, Mott The Hoople, Procol Harum, Deep Purple and Roxy Music. When I first heard Aqualung it simply blew me away. I'd feared it would be a three song album, but while the notorious triumvirate may stand out above the rest, the CD is completely devoid of filler, and tracks like 'Up To Me' are nearly on par with the notorious trio. The album is definitely top tier prog rock, and possibly Tull's finest hour, eclipsing even Thick As A Brick and Stand Up, and I don't believe that this opinion is merely the product of sentimentality. For me Tull are one of the three top progressive rock groups, along with King Crimson and Genesis, and this is high praise as I love the genre and myriad bands in it (Yes, ELP, Caravan, Renaissance, Curved Air, Van Der Graaf Generator and Gentle Giant, just to name a few). While the band would go on to taint its legacy with scores of mediocre to atrocious albums, peak period Tull were truly a force to be reckoned with. Best of all the dream of all Tull fans has come true and a masterful comeback is in progress. Commencing with the best Tull album in ages, Dot Com, Anderson and company capitalized on this breakthrough and made 2003 the year of Tull, with the brilliant Christmas album flanked by strong solo outings from both Ian and Martin Barre. I truly can't wait to see what they do next, and who thought that could ever be said of Jethro Tull again?

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

Well, great, of course. I wouldn’t say that I care much for progressive rock, but I don’t mind excellent rock music. And this is it. The title track is an instant classic. My first track by the band. The song is a multi-layered masterpiece. All the parts work, and that guitar solo in the middle is worthwhile. “Locomotive Breath” is almost as good. Inspired flute work from Ian, as usual. And catchy (that can be said about everything on the album)! The slower numbers are all gorgeous. Who can resist the acoustic beauty of “Cheap Day Return” (written about Ian’s father) or “Wondering Aloud”? And I simply adore the closing track, “Wind Up”. A melodic song that says much about Anderson’s attitude to churches (Sunday schools, whatever). I love it. Very personal and moving. I won’t discuss every song here, but I’d just say that they never fall below “very good” quality.

Mike DeFabio <defab4@earthlink.net> (24.08.99)

I can't stand Lizard either.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (31.08.99)

Ah, yes. I love this album, I really do. It's bombastic, sure, but it is SO catchy. Everything flows in and out of itself phenomenally well, whether it be Ian's psycho flute playing or that wierd organ tone or Barre's guitar, it's just perfect. Of course, that's part of the reason the next bunch of albums are so shaky; this was an extremely dangerous project for him, as he was straddling the line between catchy, memorable songs (which he did well) and overly bombastic, venomous, and unmemorable attempts at prog (which he didn't do so well). With this album, Ian inflated his songwriting and arranging balloon as far as it could possibly go, and alas (predictably, too) it exploded (Passion Play etc.)

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

This review reflects my own views very accurately indeed. If it wasn't for the annoying noises that ruin the first five minutes of the second half I would give it a ten.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Hurrah!!! He did it!!! Now we have the third Jethro Ian's masterpiece and it's ABSOLUTELY CLASSIC, THE BEST ROCK ALBUM I'VE HEARD IN ALL MY LIFE!!!

Ben Greenstein <bgreenstein@nctimes.net> (06.03.2000)

You know, I hate to sound like I'm trying to be the "sole voice of dissent" or anything, but I am NOT blown away by this album. The same guitar/organ interplay gets really tedious, really fast, and most of the melodies strike me as second rate. Sure, side one begins and ends with some of the most beautuiful music I've ever heard, but that "see there a son is born" section ends too quickly (it's like one verse long) and the instrumental passages are just unmelodic noodling. I far prefer the follow-up - it's got lots of memorable, catchy sections (despite what everyone says) and the instrumentation is far more diverse and interesting. Still, Brick isn't bad, just overrated. A perfectly average eight.

Richard C. Dickison <dickison@pacbell.net> (29.03.2000)

I just have to say again, how can anything as long and drawn out as one of Tikhonov Konstantin's reviews be considered a good thing?

Rich Bunnell <taosterman@yahoo.com> (14.06.2000)

The reason that this album is so good isn't because of Ian Anderson's "epic vision" or some crap like that. It's because Ian took the Tull sound and condensed it into its most enjoyable, melodic form and stretched it out over the course of an entire album. Most of the best parts are on the first half, mainly because the second half is weighed down by some rambling sections. I can't understand why some people find this "overlong" or "hard to listen to"-- it's just like any other Tull album, only the songs aren't separated by track numbers and everything's more well-written than usual. The best section of the song, of course, is the opening six minutes, but it's all pretty good. Overall, I'd give it a 9.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

As much as I hate to agree with Konstantin, this is my favorite album of all time, which means that I give it a 10, of course. I bought this record on the way to a Rod Stewart concert of all places (which, by the way, sucked). I got it home, put it in my CD player, and my (musical) life has never been the same. This record was an epiphany, an awakening that "Hey, there's more to music than Green Day!". And I got into prog and art rock and psychedelic rock and all kinds of stuff. And it was all thanks to this record.

Braxton LeCroy <Autull@aol.com> (24.08.2000)

Ditto on your TAAB review.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (30.09.2000)

This goes out not only to George but also Mike DeFabio -- what's wrong with Lizard? It has some of Fripp's most melodic songs ("Lady of the Dancing Water"), Sinfield's most brilliant lyrics ("Happy Family" -- best song ever about the Beatles -- "Indoor Games"), great quirky-Brit vocals by Gordon Haskell, probably Mel Collins' best work ever, just about the only Jon Anderson vocal track I can stand, and some truly inspired free-jazz passages. If you listen to the break on "Indoor Games" side by side with the would-be Zappa/Beefheart-esque segment on side two of Thick as a Brick, the first sounds about as close as any white British guys are going to get to, say, Herbie Hancock, Freddie Hubbard, Ron Carter, and Tony Williams screwing around late one night circa 1966, while the second just sounds like a bunch of white British guys screwing around. If you haven't listened to Lizard since before Crimson became the Fripp-a la Talking Heads-full-on weirdness show, give it another try!

Paul Stadden <paul@stadden.com> (16.11.2000)

Ok, now you can consider King Crimson's Islands as a 1972 album even though it came out in December 1971, but since Black Sabbath released Sabbath Bloody Sabbath in December 1973, they "neglected to release an album" in 1974? [Okay, I give. I give. In this case, Black Sabbatrh neglected to release an album in 1973. I give. Now sue me - G.S.] Ok, enough of that. To the album at hand. I have to admit, that you're right that this is progressive perfection, but for me, it gets a little odd. Such as in Pink Floyd, The Wall and Dark Side of the Moon are just a little too odd. I love Animals because the songs on there are real and individual, not just part of a collective whole. This Was is definitely my favorite Tull album. A Song For Fred is simply the best.

Sergey Zhilkin <sergey_jilkin@mail.ru> (21.12.2000)

My first Tull's album. My first prog-rock album. My first .... Hey, what the hell! I can't even describe this masterpiece, YOU have to feel it with your heart, really. For some strange reason I have three versions of 'Thick as a brick' (song) on my disc plus interview with Ian Anderson (though, I suppose I should ask Konstantin Tihonov about it). The first one is the original 22-minute version, the second one is modified (err.. I wanted to say simplified) version and the third one is live version from Madison square garden.

Jeff Melchior <Jeffmoncheri@aol.com> (28.12.2000)

It angers me that punkers think they have a corner on the anger/social protest market in rock. Although, due mainly I think to cultural difference, it's not always easy to understand exactly what Anderson is singing about, it's pretty obvious he's pissed about something (albeit a bit more subtle than the in-your-face religious bash of Aqualung). Anderson is definitely the star here - I don't think his acoustic guitar and flute playing was ever more inspired before after Thick As A Brick - certainly not on A Passion Play or later, look-at-me-I-am-so-very-rural-England records such as Songs From The Wood or Heavy Horses. Probably Tull's peak as an album band, although they'd continue to churn out pretty good singles surrounded by filler (I guess I can't say that unequivocally as I've never heard the Minstrel In The Gallery album, but if George's review is accurate then it wasn't an excepti! on to the mid-to-late '70s Tull rule.

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

Perfect. Can I say more? The LP cover is one of the best ever made, the concept interesting. The idea of angry English childhoods is overdone, (The Who Tommy, Pink floyd's The Wall) but hey the lyrics cant be beat. Its proggy alright but its the only real progged piece out there I've ever fully enjoyed. 10/10

Bob Roberts <freeakinout@yahoo.com> (27.01.2001)

I started listening to JT when I bought Songs from the Wood in '77. It took me a few years to get all the albums, and I waited to get TAAB until almost the last because I thought the one song concept was a little hard to swallow. Once I bought it I immediately fell in love with it (and Passion Play as well). But as the man said, I had to hide my love away.

Robin Mayor <r.mayor@ntlworld.com> (15.06.2001)

Found the album in a friend's parents' record collection about 17 years ago and I love it as much now as I loved it then.  I don't care to pull things apart to see how they work,suffice it to say that it works like a trojan!

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

This is why hardcore prog fanatics love Jethro Tull. Because it has only one song on it, and man, is it long! Is it complex! But unlike on, say, ELP's "Karn Evil 9" or Yes's infamous Shastric scriptures stuff, there is no pointless noodling, no repetitive riffing, no whacked-out sci-fi lyrics and generally not much obnoxiousness at all. Sure, the lyrics and "concept" are whacked out enough, featuring the ficitious Gerald Bostock's incomprehensible (or is it surrealistic/symbolist?) erotic epic poem or whatever it was, but somehow that adds to the charm. As does the whole St. Cleve's Chronicle stuff. And, wait, there's music as well. Bits and pieces are close to genius - particularly the beginning and the "poet and the painter" section - and even when it's not genius, Thick As A Brick, unlike Benefit, is NEVER boring. Which is no small achievement for a 45-minute song. 'Part from Anderson, the other star of the album is John Evan, who comes up with piano and organ lines that - even if they were written by Anderson - are the equal of anything in intelligent rock music. Nevertheless, why this is everybody's favourite "prog" record - provided we call it "prog" - is somewhat beyond me. Stand Up is better. So is Aqualung. But wait, these are not prog records. These are early Tull records. Okay, Foxtrot is better. And The Court Of The Crimson King. And even two of Tull's later albums (yeah, you guess which!). 10 points for originality, listenability and general brilliance, 6 points for resonance and emotional content. Sorry, I'm an old sentimentalist.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (22.12.2001)

This album works because, IMHO, it is not "one long song," despite appearances to the contrary. Although they have never quite said so, I think Anderson just had a bunch of not-quite-complete songs that, along the way, they turned into a continuous album by linking them with instrumental passages, sound effects, orchestration and variations on the song themes. But it works much better than most such side long pieces, because the band almost never forgets that the sections are SONGS, and show respect for melody and song structure throughout. Brilliant.

Michael Danehy <danehy@ij.net> (03.02.2003)

Perfect progressive rock albums are hard to come by, I suppose. Red has that ugly and dated "Providence" thing. Foxtrot has too many boring songs on the first half. Selling England comes very close yet I don't love "Cinema Show" _that_ much. "Close to the Edge" hasn't got enough melodies. Court of the Crimson King has 11 minutes of idiotic noodling. Etc. Etc.

<bird3000@inbox.ru> (15.11.2003)

Thick as a brick is my favourite Tull album. I like it much better than Aqualung. For me Thick as a brick is the highest point for Tull. Also, you said more than once that Tull released a lot of crap. This is probably so. However, I bet, Tull members do realize that. True, noone can release outstanding albums forever. However, it is also worth to note that noone is required to do so. You don't have to commit suicide if you can't surpass your own creation. You don't even have to stop creating. I bet, Tull had a lot of fun playing with synths during Under Wraps sessions. You've said that music is not like business (when talking about Ramones). However, this here constant complaining about the constant decline of quality in Tull's later works sounds so very much buisness-like.

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

I know I won’t be original, but this is their peak. No doubts about that. All these parts flow into each other in a perfect way. The album is packed with unforgettable melodies. You get your flute right when you need it, you get a guitar solo right when it’s time for it. Not that the album is very sterile (it sure as hell isn’t) or something. It’s just so perfectly arranged! It would be really hard to name my favourite part, but that “Do You Believe In The Day” portion is brilliant. I can’t say anything about the plot since I don’t get it, but as far as I can say, it’s rather interesting. Those noises in the middle let the album down a little, but that’s just a minor flaw.

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

The title track is vastly overrated. It's on every damn live album, greatest hit collection and box set. I hate it I hate it I hate it.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Is Living In The Past a compilation or an original album? I think it's something in between. The album includes unreleased and single-only-released material, but the absence of concept makes it just a good collection, very good for all early-Tull's fans. Here you can listen almost all influences of Tull's music - medieval tunes ("Christmas Song"), hard rock ("Sweet Dream"), jazz ("Living In The Past"), blues ("Driving Song"), naive love romanticism ("Witch's Promise"), bitter social sarcasm ("Wond'ring Aloud"). And don't forget the excellent live side from Carnegie Hall! John's jazz improvisations over Beethoven's and Rachmaninov's themes are pure gold and Clive's highly-energetic drum solo (with group's rather funny background) puts "Dharma For One" between album's highlights.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

I think I must change my rating. Probably I was in bad mood during last listening, but I recorded this album on tape for my friend last night and it was wonderful. My new rating is 8.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

Pretty much absolute agreement from me - these singles are amazingly good! My favorites are 'Living In The Past' and 'Witch's Promise', both of which are absolutely stunning - I especially like the 5/4 time in 'Living'. That one's a classic of classics. The thing is, none of the other material is bad - it's hard to knock 'Life Is A Long Song', 'Nursie', 'Sweet Dream', 'Christmas Song', 'Alive And Well And Living In', or basically any track on here. The CD does have a couple of problems though. The first is minor - a couple of cuts ('A Song For Jeffrey', 'Hymn 43', 'Inside') are taken directly from older Tull albums. Actually, 3 songs get cut off the CD - 'Locomotive Breath', 'Bouree', and 'Teacher' - but who cares? They were all on older albums anyway. The biggest problem here is the carnegie hall stuff. I kinda like the first few minutes of 'Dharma For One', but once the drum solo starts, I get bored. And I don't get the point of 'By Kind Permission Of'. They should have just taken a track from the concert as opposed to cutting them up and pasting them together. Yeah, we know John's good, but he'd sound better in a better context. Plus, there were a few singles and b-sides that didn't make this album - most notably '17', the b-side of 'Sweet Dream', 'One For John Gee', the b-side to 'A Song For Jeffrey', and Tull's first single, 'Sunshine Day' with 'Aeroplane'. They should've been on here instead of 'By Kind Permission Of'. Why weren't they included? Who knows? I give this a 9 regardless - those singles cannot be topped. And here's a weird factoid - on the original vinyl, there's a song call 'From Later'. On the CD, they called it 'For Later'. Which one is the misprint? I'm not sure.

Rich Bunnell <taosterman@yahoo.com> (30.07.2000)

The two long-winded live thingies aren't too good, and three of the songs are repeats, and two of the songs are short one-minute fillerish songs not unlike the ones on Aqualung. That leaves thirteen songs. And they're all ace!! Well, none of them stand out, but that's what makes everything so good-- nothing makes everything else look like crap. In fact, I'm glad "Teacher" isn't on here, because it's better than everything on this collection, and it would somehow cause me to rate it lower. The best songs are "Life Is A Long Song," the title track, and "Sweet Dream." I can't really describe any of them because they all pretty much follow the generic Tull sound, i.e. peppy acoustic guitars and flutes. Luckily, the melodies are topnotch enough to make this fact really easy to overlook. Plus, the collection chronologically is a nice breather between the two long-winded "epic" albums. 8/10

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

Tull keeping it simple. The best are the simple ones. Alot of good stuff and the signalling of the end of the "great" era of Tull. After Thick, they never had the same appeal to me. faves include "Up the 'Pool", "Sweet Dream", "Dr. Brogenbroom" (silly but I find myself liking it)and "Wondring again". Solid 8/10.

Bob Roberts <freeakinout@yahoo.com> (27.01.2001)

I agree wholeheartedly with your review. I really like the previously unreleased stuff, the alternate takes are OK, and the live stuff is almost unlistenable. When I first bought this, I was such a dedicated Tull fan that I forced myself to listen to the live stuff many times in the hopes that I would "get" it eventually, I never did. The only redeeming quality is that 'Dharma for One' made me curious about eastern religions and started me on a quest for knowledge.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

Yeah, those early singles... Most of them are great. The two solo improvs of the Carnegie Hall concert are not so great, unfortunately. Interminable piano wanking by John Evan, and ditto with drums by Clive Bunker. These two are fantastic musicians, but they're supposed to play in a band. If I want solo classical piano, I put on Glenn Gould. If I want solo drums, I put on Les Tambours de Bronx. Or something. And nobody asked for lyrics to "Dharma For One" either. O.k., let's get to the good stuff. The tracklisting is even more confusing as on Benefit, since there are various CD versions and various tracks doubled from the studio albums. I have the original double LP, and it has "Inside", "Locomotive Breath", "Song For Jeffrey", "Bouree", "Teacher", but no "Alive And Well..." But never mind anyway. [BTW: my neighbour has just put on The Wall at ear-wrecking volume. Like every day. Maybe I should move into the countryside. God bless Ian Anderson.] Corresponding to my slight blues antipathy, I don't much like the early stuff like "Love Story" (nice percussion though) or "Driving Song", and not even the title track, but the novelty "Christmas Song" is strangely moving. The ace stuff is on Sides 2 and 4, namely the devilish "Sweet Dream" (heavily influenced by Peter Green's "The Green Manalishi"), the riffy "Teacher", and all that wonderful music from 1972. "Life's A Long Song" is one of the most beautiful Tull moments ever. Very laid back, very British, very catchy and finger-snippy - anything like that on a Yes record, and the world would be a better place. Plus acoustic songs that are by no means inferior to those on Aqualung. Plus a pointless instrumental with an undecided title. What more can I say. Two points off for the live things, since it's a quarter of the whole album.

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

As good as Thick as a Brick. Lots of good melodies. And nice organ and sax stuff. But it is a much darker and more serious album both musically and lyrically. So it was a good idea to have some "comic relief" in the middle. And 'The Story of the Hare who Lost His Spectacles' (narrated by Jeffrey Hammond I'm pretty sure) is quite clever and amusing. But it gets very annoying after the first few times you hear it. And as it isn't given a seperate track on the cd there is no way to skip it automatically.

Ben Greenstein <bgreenstein@nctimes.net> (15.02.2000)

I don't agree. This is easily one of the finest "prog" albums I've heard thus far. Keep in mind, though, that I haven't yet heard Brick in it's entirity, only claimed to, so I don't really have anything to measure this up against. It's dark, though, and has a seemingly endless supply of cool melodies and tricks with guitars (dual channel type stuff, you know?), and so is really intriguing to listen to. The "Lover Of The Black And White" section, I'll agree, is the best, but both the "title track" like part and the closing section. I would rather be able to skip to certain parts, but I don't really dislike any of it, so why bother? A nine. Or a ten. I'm not sure.

Edward M. Lufrano <emlcompserv@erols.com> (23.02.2000)

This was Ian Anderson's masterpiece. A most original and ground-breaking work. As a group Tull has never been tighter. This is Rock Music's version of Dante's Divine Comedy. As grand, ambitious and moving. The problem is: like any form of high art it has to be studied. You can't listen to it once through and condemn it simply because you are unwilling to put in some effort. I was at the 1973 Madison Square garden performance of this opus and I can honestly say that I have never before or after experienced a show that has moved me so deeply and profoundly. Oh! and by the way - It is Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond who narrates 'The Hare Who Lost His Spectacles'.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Well, Passion Play... one of the hardest-to-observe Tull's albums...

R. David Hayward <the_walrus@mac.com> (30.04.2000)

Knowing that A Passion Play is the flashpoint for dissention even among the most rabid of Tull fans, I bought it expecting to agree with the general opinion that it is a pile of pretentious wank. After one listen, I was pleasantly surprised. After a few more, I had to admit that it ranks alongside Thick as a Brick as a true masterpiece. That being said, I can see why so many people fail to appreciate it. A single 45-minute track, a theme of death and rebirth, complex and highly allusive lyrics, even more complex music veering abruptly from one style to the next, and a seemingly incongruous fable in the middle don't exactly add up to an easily accesible work. Even the wit that worked to lighten Thick as a Brick is absent. However, A Passion Play is very rewarding and eminently listenable, working well both as a fresh and pleasant musical piece (even if a bit abstract at times), and as a serious artistic statement. The thought that immediately struck me, reflecting on this album, was "this is what 'The Wasteland' would be like if TS Eliot had been a musician." A Passion Play is, I think, very much like that poem; both are long, complex, very serious, and easy to get lost in. It is for precisely these reasons that both are controversial and often under-appreciated by both the general public and the artistic "establishment". Personally, though, I find it terribly exciting to come across such a thoughtful and reflective work (how often do subtle allusions to Dante and Milton crop up in contemporary rock music?) packaged in one of Ian Anderson's most sublime musical compositions.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

Very few people hold the middle ground on this album - it's usually considered either a masterpiece or complete crap. I don't think it's a masterpiece (it's just an attempt to follow-up Thick As A Brick, and it's just not as good), but it sure ain't crap, either. I'd give it an 8. Side 2 is what really does it for me - I think that entire half is absolutely brilliant, especially the "Well meaning fool/Pick up thy bed and rise" section. I really love it. Side 1 isn't as good, though - it's not bad, and it's well played, but it just isn't as resonant as the stuff on side 2. The "Lover of the black and white" part is great, and I love the main theme (that appeared again has 'Tiger Toon' on Nightcap), though nothing is really bad. I would give it a 9, but I'm docking it a point for one reason - the ending totally blows! At the end of Brick, there was a sense of resolution and climax. Here, the record just shuts down, Ian sing the "Into the ever Passion Play" line one more time, and everything fades out. What's that about? Maybe it's because the main "song" is A Passion Play isn't as good as the main one in Brick, but it really leaves me hanging. Oh, and I actually like the lyrics here - they make all kinda of weird allusions and stuff. Some of them are just weird, though - my favorite is "The Ice Cream Lady wet her drawers/To see you in the Passion Play". What??? Oh well. My copy of this is actually divided into tracks, so I can skip around however I choose! Hooray!

Rich Bunnell <taosterman@yahoo.com> (26.08.2000)

Underrated by critics, overrated by fans, you know the drill. This album isn't nearly as consistent as Thick As A Brick largely because in attempting to branch out musically to escape the one-style trappings of that record, Ian hit on a lot of rambling, incoherent musical passages which really don't work. Plus, too many of the parts of the album start out catchy and promising but either end too soon or turn into something much more annoying. There are still a lot of fun, classic Tull passages though, in spite of what this album's critics say, such as the rocking last few minutes before the soft section that closes the album [yeah, is that the one where each verse begins with a strained 'ughghgh', as if Ian is lugging heavy furniture around? Sure is funny! - G. S.], the first eight minutes or so of the album, and "The Hare Who Lost His Spectacles," though I can't understand the story enough to find anything funny about it besides the hilarious vocal delivery. I'd grant this one a low seven.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (05.10.2000)

In my little comment on The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway, I mentioned that every prog band released an album where ambition outran musical talent and sense. And I neglected to mention Tull's contribution to the hall of infamy, this ridiculous release.

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

AAARRGGGHHH!!! Only one good bit in the entire boring, drawn out, obscured lyric piece. They tried to top perfection and well, they got deservedly burned. 4/10

Bob Roberts <freeakinout@yahoo.com> (27.01.2001)

As much as I love Heavy Horses and Songs from the Wood, A Passion Play is the single Tull album that changed my life. I'll give some of you time to stop throwing up and explain.

Geronimo Springs <GERONIMOSPGS@aol.com> (06.05.2001)

For years I considered A Passion Play to be a baffling, excessively complex prog-rock opus with an annoying cartoon in the middle. After repeated listenings to the MFSL CD (which, by the way, does sound remarkably better than the standard Chrysalis release) I still think it is a baffling, excessively complex prog-rock opus with an annoying cartoon in the middle! But, the album has grown on me to the point that I no longer dislike it. Its savior is in the amazing instrumental passages. As a band, Jethro Tull was blessed with outstanding players who were up to the challenge of this extremely difficult piece of music. As usual with Jethro Tull, it was not the performance of the band which was disappointing. The serious flaw in Passion Play is Mr. Anderson's lyrical meandering.

RTV Maraton <maraton@teamnet.ws> (27.05.2002)

Musicaly, this is a MUST HAVE for anyone who could understand it....and those people are rare...from the begining 'till the very end this album is good,SUPERB,FANTASTIC,ASTONISHING...people who cannot listen to it should stick with Tears For Fears and Pips, Chips and Video Clips for the rest of their notPassionate lives...

DR <drob@oricom.ca> (23.10.2002)

"No melodies", huh? Ok, what IS a melody then? Anyway, IMHO this album has lots of embarrassing structural weaknesses (mostly during part 2) but certainly no lack of melodies! Maybe less "groove" that TaaB, a couple of irritating modulations ("Show me a good man..." and the following instrumental passage) but it's not THAT bad!

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

No, no, no. I really don’t get why this record should be SO much worse than its predecessor. Well, yes, it’s worse. The melodies are not so strong (but enough good ones, anyway) and on the whole the album doesn’t sound that inspired as TAAB. But, still, I like this stuff. Also, I’m a fan of simple acoustic strumming (ha!).

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

Probably their weakest album from the 70s. But still there is much that is good. 'Skating Away ...' and 'Only Solitary' are masterpieces. Really.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

War Child is good, but not strong...

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

This record was pieced together, and it shows. It's good, but it could have been better. There are a few classics here, especially 'Skating Away', which is an amazingly great pseudo-folk song. I really like 'The Third Hoorah' too, though - I actually think it improves on the title track. It's got all those cool sounding harpsichords and bagpipes, and it creates a really happy, jovial atmosphere. In fact, it's my second favorite song on here. I like 'Two Fingers' too, but it isn't as good as the original ('Lick Your Fingers Clean'). The title track is vaguely majestic sounding, and 'Sealion' is really weird, but still good. My main complaint with this album is tracks 2-4. 'Queen And Country' goes nowhere, 'Ladies' is really boring, and 'Back Door Angels' sounds sort of like 'Black Satin Dancer', except while I like the latter, 'Back Door Angels' just drags and drags until the counting at the end segues into 'Sealion', which is good. Oh, and as for 'Bungle In The Jungle', I don't think it's bad, but I don't think it's great - it's simply an average-good song. I'd give this a 7, too. A low one, though - I think it's the worst Tull album of the seventies.

Rich Bunnell <taosterman@yahoo.com> (28.08.2000)

Sorry to be the sole voice of praise, but...uh....why does everyone hate this album? I'd think that a full album of extremely solid melodies and no truly bad songs ("Back-Door Angels" kind of drags) would be given more praise than I've seen given towards this particular collection, but to each his own. It's not my favorite Tull album because nothing besides the two singles really stands out ("Bungle In The Jungle" is so freaking catchy!! Dumb lyrics cannot hinder this song), but the songs which you guys are apparently finding awful, hideous melodies in, like "Queen and Country" and "The Third Horrah," I find no different from other Tull songs and actually quite catchy and charming. Underrated as far as I'm concerned, and a definite 8 for me. If this is the worst Tull of the seventies, as some have said, then bring on Minstrel and Too Old To Rock, baby.

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

Good solid comeback, but just not enough. "Angels" and "ladies" are just plain awful. "Warchild" is the best piece, but ruined by the reprise "The Last Hurrah". "Two Fingers" is fine, that is if you havent heard "Lick Your Fingers Clean". Then it sounds awfully weak. "Bungle" is over played and I just dont like it too much anymore. 7/10

Bob Roberts <freeakinout@yahoo.com> (27.01.2001)

It is a mixed album, still shaking off some of the heaviness of TAAB and PP and moving toward they folksy/medieval sound that I liked on SFTW etc.

Geronimo Springs <GERONIMOSPGS@aol.com> (06.05.2001)

One of my least favorite Tull albums, I was turned off to War Child after hearing the atrocious 'Bungle In the Jungle' on top-40 radio. This truly horrible Jethro Tull song was overplayed when it first appeared in 1974, and it remains so on classic rock stations to this very day. It is one of the very few Tull songs that I really hate. An awful, cynical attempt to placate the critics and win new fans with a radio-friendly pop song. And it was only half successful. Although it was a hit single, the critics still hated the album.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

This is where for some people Tull lost it. Me, I think they lost it a little later. This is a so-so album and the beginning of the long half-brilliant-half-filler sequence that went on, with interruptions, until the early 80s, when the filler either became unlistenable or remained listenable but took over completely. The instrumentation, very similar to A Passion Play, is a bit weird - lots of saxophones and accordions and some crappy synths, particularly in "The Third Hoorah", which is a really annoying song anyway. There seems to be some concept, since this is one of Anderson's countless aborted musicals / operas / stage plays / TV series / oratorios, but except for the reprise of the title track in "The Third Hoorah", and a profusion of songs about groupies and society in general, I'm in the dark as to what it's about. But never mind. Four songs here are excellent, but one of them, "Only Solitaire", is only one and a half minutes long. Three others ("Ladies", "Queen & Country", and "Bungle In The Jungle") are inoffensive filler; "Bungle" is a shameless flirtation with radio expectations, so it was even a minor hit. We can forgive Ian for that. Two are crap, namely the tuneless "Back Door Angels" and "The Third Hoorah", and one, "Two Fingers" is only disappointing if you've heard the original version, "Lick Your Fingers Clean" (it's on the 20th anniversary boy set), before, as I did. That version is way, way, way better. This leaves us with three full-scale gems: the title track, for all its cheesy sound effects, is menacing but catchy, and I dig it. "Sea Lion" is at first listen a cacophonous mess, but gradually you discover the tremendous charms of that over-the-top vocal melody and that frenzied flute and guitar riffing. It's lovely and uplifting, and Evan's accordion phrase in the chorus only improves it. The highlight, however, is "Skating Away...", a remnant of those notorious Disaster Sessions, which packs more ideas in its four minutes than Pink Floyd [he still listens to f***in' The Wall at full volume] packed in their whole career. Love that glockenspiel. Love the way the drums stumble in after Ian's "you're a rabbit on the run" line. It's wonderful, it's unusual, and Ian humming and having tea at the beginning still sweep me. Seriously. And watch out for Martin Lancelot skating away on the thin ice in the right bottom corner of the back cover! And the back door angel up left! And Hammond-Hammond dressing up as "Country" (must be, since the other guy is obviously the Queen)! And Evan keeping "Two Fingers" clean! OOh.. those early Tull covers... Pity that the filler seriously drags the rating down.

chris1arch <chris1arch@home.com> (21.08.2001)

Well, you ALMOST hit it on the head when you dabbled with the Spanish notion (sheeesh!). The thing to me that is most intriguing about this album is the sonic feel of it. It is really quite unique from most of the Tull catalogue that it is sandwiched between. There can be no doubt that the presence of Evan's accordion steals the show and creates the tonal quality present in much of this album. O.K., so it doesn't exactly do for the accordion what Zydeco or Polka (cringe) do, but it does play rather well into the numerous songs in which its features. Spanish?......well, if you say so George. To me, it is more simply a "peasant" instrument (Mamma's got a what?) to drive Ian's Medieval-Brit Pub-style tunes to. Perhaps it plays into the "court minstrel" idea a bit.

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

So, after two monsters, Mr. Anderson gives us a humble album with (not 2, not 1) 10 separate songs. I like that. Despite the fact that I think it’s a bit of a letdown. The overall impression is that it’s a hard rocking album with a number of soft spots (and the soft spots are the best, I should say). My favourite tracks are the unforgettable folkish “Skating Away”, the insanely catchy “Bungle In A Jungle” (Ian wrote those lyrics??????), “SeaLion” (I especially like those quieter parts; aren’t they wonderful?), the short but effective “Only Solitaire”. The hard ones are not that memorable, but Ian (and company???) knew how to make all of his songs sound good. Well, in the 70s. At least.

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (01.10.99)

Down beat and introspective. And not very catchy at first. But boy has this album grown on me. And no, I am not deceiving myself. What an awfully patronising thing to suggest. This is my favourite Tull album. Every track is great. With the possible exception of 'One White Duck'.

Iain Langer <broken@operamail.com> (22.01.2000)

The title song (and opener) is not so much the centerpiece of this album, as the lead-in to its true nexus, which is the 16-minute suite entitled "Baker St. Muse". "Muse" is a culmination of themes introduced in the title song, and is Tull's most crisply expressive, most autobiographical, and most purely British statement of art and intent since the "My God" side of Aqualung.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

I can't believe my own eyes! Somebody wake me! Minstrel had 5?! Man, you really need to go to the psychiatrist!

Ben Greenstein <bgreenstein@nctimes.net> (02.06.2000)

I wouldn't give it a five, because I think even the title track is drivel. It's amazing that this is the same band as on those early albums - there are no melodies here, no instrumental diversity, just a lot of boring, bland, "Jethro Tull" brandname music. A four, on a good day. What an awful self-parody!

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

Hey, I fell under this album's charm quite easily! It was one of the earliest Tull albums I got, and I really dug it my first time through. I still like it quite a bit. The title track is great, as all 3 parts of it are great (my favorite bit is probably still the acoustic part, but it's a close call). But here's where I differ - I think the rest of these songs are good, too! 'Cold Wind To Valhalla' has the strangest feel about it - it really has a rustic, Viking feel to it. 'Requiem' and 'One White Duck' are quite decent ballads - 'Requiem' is forgettable, but still nice, and 'One White Duck' is gorgeous. Plus, I really love 'Black Satin Dancer'. That dark riff that comes in after Ian stops singing at the beginning simply rules, and the solos really help accent it. Plus, the opening vocal melody is tops, too. I think 'Baker Street Muse' is really good as well. The opening bit is ok, but I love the 'Pig-Me And The Whore' section to death, and the acoustic parts in the middle are quite pretty. I'd give this album something between a high 8 and a low 9 - I think it's really good. I agree that Brick is better, but I certainly don't think I'm deceiving myself. This is just another one of those "love-it-or-hate-it" albums that Tull put out.

Braxton LeCroy <Autull@aol.com> (24.08.2000)

"Baker Street Muse" is one of Tull's best pieces. Its structure is brilliant and its lyrical content mastreful. I love it. A great album too. A 9.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (17.12.2000)

This record is ably defended (most impressively, to my mind, by Iain Langer) on many insightful levels here, so even a career-long Tull fan like me doesn't have much to add. But I will say this to George: Do you simply not like acoustic ballads or have you just not listened to "Requiem" and "One White Duck/O...," etc. more than a few times? These are two of Ian's most brilliant and personal songs, light years away emotionally and compositionally from earlier masterpieces like "Reasons for Waiting" and "Sossity..." (which is saying a hell of a lot!) Part of their greatness is that they do NOT merely lean on standard folk progressions but experiment quite boldly with same. Maybe you're just not in tune with the album's central themes, Ian's break-up with his first wife and the downside of rock stardom, which so thoroughly inform both these songs and, of course, the entire "Baker St. Muse" suite.

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

My last favorite tull Album. You cut it rather nastily (you just dont like Ian too much) The title track is great, "Cold Wind" is well done, and "baker Street Muse" has some of the TAAB magic. Dark and personal. 7/10

Geronimo Springs <GERONIMOSPGS@aol.com> (06.05.2001)

At the risk of being accused of marching in lockstep with the fascist element among Jethro Tull fans (and George, after reading replys to your reviews, I know exactly what you meant when you said Tull "tends to attract the kind of people that were rabid Hitler lovers in their previous incarnation") I nevertheless feel compelled to defend Minstrel In the Gallery as a much needed return to form after the previous two Tull albums. After the lyrical meandering of Passion Play, and the cynical attempt to placate the critics and attract new fans with radio-friendly pop crap on War Child, Minstrel In the Gallery does at least sound like what a Jethro Tull album is supposed to sound like.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

Come on, Mr. Starostin, why do you hate this one so much? And Mr. McFerrin, why do you think you then have to hate it, too? Because it's a fan favourite? I don't get it. This is perhaps not the work of a genius (little of Tull's music is, actually), but it's by no means worse than War Child. And WAY WAY WAY better than that embarrassing Broadsword thing. And all in all quite a good standard Tull album. O.k., so you don't like "Baker St. Muse". I understand that. I don't understand why it's a favourite of all diehard Tull fans. Or wait, maybe I do. It's complex, conceptual, long, quirky and all that. Me, I just think it's okay. Nice background music. But not offensive at all. Unlike "Black Satin Dancer", which frankly sucks. But the rest of the record is, believe it or not, rather good. "Cold Wind To Valhalla" is a good one and a much better Viking song than most of the stuff on, you guessed it, Broadsword And The Beast. The title track starts with an interesting acoustic melody and continues with breakneck riffing and - for once - inspired soloing by Martin Lancelot. Plus a great flute riff. If this is the first real glimpse of metal Tull, "Requiem" and "One White Duck" are as good as middle-period acoustic Tull gets. "Requiem" particularly is sad in a quiet, unassuming, shoulder-shrugging way, and I think it works very well. And "Grace" - "hello breakfast, may I buy you again tomorrow?" - this is pure poetry!! Nevertheless, a few points off for ugly Satin Dancers and average Baker Street Musers.

RTV Maraton <maraton@teamnet.ws> (27.05.2002)

Heh...this one recalls tears every time when 'Duck' or 'Grace' or 'Baker st.' or 'Requiem' is played...Jethro plays music which is not for everyone...a person who doesn't like this album probably has some serious taste problem...

Keith Hart <brownhart@sprint.ca> (06.06.2003)

My God, what a column of marchers here. In Canada, Jethro Tull was always the high-minded head of the denim army and this album has always packed a lot of satisfaction. I don't find any overall weaknesses, in fact I'm generally relieved that Anderson and co. applied themselves to the task of creating an entertaining rock album, with neatly developed ideas and some very good vocal performances from anderson. It's one for the fans who may have been dissapointed over the 'about-face' of War Child. There's a polished spirit to the record and artful control over (ah) sectional compositions. I'm never wanting more from any particular song, nor am I wanting less. It's charm lies as well in Anderson's cheeky return to the side-long epic after his partial re-entry into critical good graces and a bouyant single with "Bungle". But he's not surrendering. He's going to try it again, and this time it's light, musical, entertaining and pleasant. Nothing universal. Very English, very grounded. So he finishes well after all. He doesn't gloat extravagantly about it either. His shadow over the band is never wilting, they play well providing thrilling moments and warm atmospheres fertile with suddenness and drama.

NickPulliam@resonetics.com <NickPulliam@resonetics.com> (18.06.2003)

I think you and most other online reviewers missed the key strength and worth of MITG. 1st, to paraphrase the reptile James Carville, "its the mood, stupid" This album, like several other Tull albums, has a mood that is unique and engrossing and very rare among 70's rock albums (Zeppelin had cool created moods too). It is bleak, cold and sad ('Cold Wind', 'Black Satin Dance', 'Requiem') and ultimately uplifting ('Grace', 'Minstrel'). I can always get into the mood of this album. I would also state that although there is not an abundance of melodies on this album, there are many good ones ('Requiem', A nice little tune, 'Pig Me and The Whore', title track and 'Cold Wind'). And I think you are just plain crazy if you can't find beauty and enjoyment in 'One White Duck'. I don't know why this album has become a popular whipping boy of the online reviewing community, I don't think it is merely because it got good reviews before and you want to take it down a peg, no - it is, unfortunately for you, more serious. I think the mood of this album, and in your case, Songs From The Wood and Stormwatch, completely miss you and have no positive impact. I know you can be impacted by a created mood by other artists but for you Tull just can't do it (exceptions for specific songs noted).

Bob Josef <RRJOSEF@aol.com> (03.02.2004)

In the liner notes from the new remastered version, Ian Anderson calls this the most acoustically oriented Tull album that had yet been released. I find this strange, since, to my years, it was the electric album yet. Yes, even more so than Aqualung. I think it has Martin's best playing up you to that point -more polished, more skill and more control and yet more powerful. This helps a lot to compensate for some of the relative melodic weakness of some of the songs ("Black Satin Dancer" and portions of "Baker Street Muse").

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

Well, I quite like this record. Obviously more than you, George. But less than all those fans (certainly!). The record requires many listens to be really appreciated. I like this album a bit more than I should probably because of the fact that I absolutely dig their acoustic guitar sound. Anyway, the title track is a classic with the opening slower part being the best thing on the whole album. Also, the song is catchy after the second listen already! Ha. “Cold Wind” is a nice track with some kind of a hook in the chorus. My second favourite track is “Black Satin Dancer”, a hard rocking song with some great flute from Ian (not from Jeffrey – get that) and a memorable melody. Two quiet acoustic tracks follow and they are very pleasant to listen to (the melodies are not that evident, though). As for the epic “Baker St. Muse”, it’s good. First of all, the lyrics are great. The music is definitely worse, but some parts (especially at the beginning and at the end) are bound to stick in your head. Don’t tell me you can resist Ian singing “You can call me on another liiiiine”, because you can’t. Well, of course, the song is overlong and some parts drag, but still… And “Grace” is simply gorgeous! I love it. What lyrics!

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (02.10.99)

I pretty much agree with the above. There are no bad songs here.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (14.12.99)

I also found this on the same server (see John's comment on Crest Of A Knave below - G.S.), and downloaded a copy. The first time I had ever tried to listen to it was almost a year ago, and for some reason even though I had borrowed it, I just had no desire to sit through it, and shut it off in track one

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

What can I say about Too Old To Rock'n'Roll? A few excellent songs in... hmmm... a not very good album. While pop-oriented listeners loves this album much more than Passion Play or Minstrel, Too Old contains a couple of weak songs ("Whizz Kid", "Big Dipper") simply ruins the album's impressions. After the Minstrel this light-weight album was an almost catastrophe. Yes, Ian and David Palmer wanted to write a parody musical for Adam Faith, yes, after the explosion of punk and Tull's late 80's reborn, the concept of the album is somewhat prophecy, yes, if we takes particular songs, they're not bad, but the whole album is incomparable with anything that Tull did before (even with This Was).

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

I can't believe it! Nobody mention it! I wrote "Whizz Kid" instead of "Quizz Kid" and I wrote it wrong deliberately 'cause I wanted to see how much attention readers pays to George's pages. Hey, Tullers, are you blind? (And I thought the readers just didn't pay much attention to Konstantin's comments:) - G.S.)

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

This album is really underrated. In most Tull-fan polls, this album is usually the 3rd most hated (behind Under Wraps and A, but ahead of Rock Island). I don't get that at all, because I think this album is at least decent. Actually, there is one song on here I detest - 'Bad Eyed 'N' Loveless' is the epitome of tunelessness. Stupid lyrics, stupid music, stupid EVERYTHING! I hate I hate it I hate it. The rest of this album is quite decent, however. The title track and 'The Chequered Flag' are both classics. The title track tells a story in itself, even without the aid of the rest of this stuff. And 'The Chequered Flag' is among the prettiest songs Tull ever did - I especially love how the strings join the chorus at the end. 'Salamander' is great, too, but that guitar lick is VERY similar to the beginning of 'Cold Wind To Valhalla'. The rest is comprised of decent rockers ('Quizz Kid', 'Crazed Institution', etc.) and a pretty ballad ('From A Dead Beat To An Old Greaser'). You're right about that 7 in every way - some great tunes, but not enough excellent material to boost it higher. I like it better than Warchild, though. I just really hate 'Bad Eyed 'n' Loveless'.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (17.12.2000)

Proof of Anderson's genius is that even lesser albums like this one contain bits of total brilliance, like "Pied Piper." If you had to play one short song to give someone an idea of what Jethro Tull was about musically, lyrically, and emotionally, "...Piper" might do the job. It should also be mentioned that this album is notable for a title that has inspired endless variations in the press, often probably from journalists who've never even heard the record. My favorite example: The photo of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky at a public function that was captioned, "Too Old to Rock 'n' Roll, Too Young to Lie?"

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

Once more I give you best, Mr Starostin. You're right. This is better than everybody says it is. And watch out: Konstantin doesn't like it because it doesn't sound like Tull, therefore it's not fifth or sixth or whatever Jethro Ian Masterpiece. As usual for late seventies Tull, there's some average stuff on it, but there are also some highlights that are arguably better than anything on either Benefit, Minstrel, or War Child (except "Skating Away..." maybe). Most of all the title track, of course, which is genuinely moving, features Steeleye Span's Maddy Prior somewhere deep in the mix, and is one of Tull's all-time Top Five, IMHO. Almost as good is "The Chequered Flag", which shows Ian could do a convincing early Tom Waits if he elected to. Other goodies are "Salamander" which confirms that Anderson rarely could do wrong when he stuck to acoustics, and the late-night bar torch song thing called "From A Dead Beat To An Old Greaser" - all of these are not exactly good-time songs, but when he wrote depressed lyrics, Ian was by no means at his worst. It works for lonely evenings. And for those mornings when you check your comb for the number of hairs that have fallen out. Ian is a huamn being with deep, genuine feelings. This album proves it. Pity that the rest of the songs are utterly mediocre: "Pied Piper" is at least funny, but everything else is unremarkable, and in one case, "Quizz Kid", even ugly. What a shame. But we're used to this by now.

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

Sure, it’s not a classic, but it has so many really good songs (almost all of them are, I’d say). I appreciate that the band moved from pretentiousness to simple, good memorable tunes. This record is just pleasant to listen to.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (10.08.99)

Y'know, I really wanted to like this album, I really did. All these hard-core Tullers all over the net kept saying it was so great, and I wanted so much to believe them. But alas .... urrgh. I like the title track, 'Jack In The Green', and 'the Whistler'. The rest of it isn't bad persay, but not interesting at all. I guess a 6 is alright for this, but it really disappointed me a lot

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (02.10.99)

As mentioned above, many hard-core fans are extremely fond of this one. I can understand why, but I don't agree.

Richard C. Dickison <rdick@mag.com> (17.12.99)

Well, I hate to leave the only comment I make about Ian a bad one about that A album (ARRRRGH).

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Of course, Songs From The Wood is not folk rock! It's Jethro Tull's folk rock! But what'd you call a folk rock? Dylan? Byrds? Jefferson Airplane? Fairport Convention? D'you ever listen Steeleye Span's Below The Salt? Alan Stivell's Chemins De Terre? Horslips' The Tain? Clannad's second album? THIS IS FOLK ROCK!

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

You know what? I've always absolutely LOVED this album! It's an attempt at a sort of "folk-prog" that certainly sounds unique. Nobody else put out records like this. I love the title track, 'The Whistler', 'Velvet Green', and 'Pibroch' in particular. I love the way the weird guitar noises wrap around the melody in 'Pibroch', and that flute solo in the middle is breathtaking - it may be my favorite Ian solo ever. 'Hunting Girl' is cool, too - those opening keyboard lines are awesome! The weakest tune on here (for me, at least) is 'Jack In The Green', which is ok, but uneventful. They improved the formula of that one immensely on 'One Brown Mouse'. Really, I'd have to give this a 10. It's my third favorite Tull album (behind Stand Up and Brick). This is another one of those albums that the Tull fans seem to love, but leaves most people kind of cold. I don't even really understand the appeal of the album myself - all I know is that is is extremely pretty, memorable, and consistent. And that's good enough for me.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

Mr Starostin, I don't get you. Mind you, I don't want to say that you deliberately diss fan favourites, or that you have no taste or reviewer credentials, or anything. No, I'm just at a loss when I try to analyse your taste. You like Too Old. O.k., I can imagine why. You like Heavy Horses. Good. You dislike Benefit, A, and Under Wraps. Fair enough. But you hate Minstrel, and you dislike this one, and although you state your case, I don't really understand it. But I don't want to go the same way as other commentators on your site. All I want to say is that I like this album, but then I love folk music anyway. Good folk music, that is. And this is, by the standards of Tull, excellent folk rock. The first time since Thick As A Brick that Ian came up with something entirely original. I'm serious. There is some fluffy stuff here as well, such as "Fire At Midnight" and "Solstice Bells", and "Pibroch" sucks indeed. But "Jack-in-the-Green", "Cup of Wonder" and "Velvet Green" are catchy, romantic minor folk-rock masterpieces, "Hunting Girl" has novelty value, and the title track and "The Whistler" are downright fabulous. The way that, after those jolly acapella and country dance sections, Ian suddenly stutters "Songs from the Wo-hoood / Make you feel much m-bet-taah" just knocks me out. It's scary! You don't really believe him that songs from the wood make you feel much better, do you? Like "Harold The Barrel", this has almost as many ideas as "Close To The Edge", but needs a fraction of the running time. Thumbs up! And "The Whistler" sees Ian once again going over the top, and he pulls off that whacked-out traveling fluteman thing absolutely convincingly. Hats off. But on the whole, sentimental value is probably what makes me like it. I like the countryside, you know. And once again, I love that cover.

Brad Strassburger <bstrassb@nmu.edu> (12.12.2001)

Hello. First of all I'd like to thank you for making such an interesting site. Moving on, I would like to know why you hate the "poisonous guitar tone" in 'Pibroch' and 'Hunting Girl', yet praise 'Cross-Eyed Mary' which contains a far more "poisonous" guitar tone, in my opinion. At the very least it could be classified as ugly. Not that I don't love all the songs in question, in fact I enjoy poisonous guitar lines. Anyway, I was just wondering. Also, I think you underestimate 'Cup of Wonder'. Just thought I'd add that.

Stefan Klauzer <sklauzer@hotmail.com> (18.04.2002)

This album is better than Heavy Horses, IMO. It's basically in the same vein; I can't believe you hate it like you do. Your main problem with it is the "lack of catchy melodies". I find this kind of hard to believe from a Krautrock fan. I know it's probably been said before, but this isn't supposed to be full of hooks. Melodies aren't everything, but it doesn't really matter because this album's got some pretty good ones. [I could expand on that, but since the comment is already so huge I'll just briefly remark that J.T. are a song-based band, and usually get by (or used to get by) on the strength of their melodies, whereas Krautrock bands set out with an already completely different pattern - G.S.]

Joe Campanelli <jcamp45654@hotmail.com> (14.12.2002)

I've just got a few comments about this album. It's always been one of my favorite Tull discs, along with every other reviewer on the net (with the exception of your evil twin -- hell, it's the same story with Crest of a Knave and Roots to Branches as well! Sure they're just returns to form, but so are Magnification and Time out of Mind...). So I guess instead of saying what I like about the album, I'll be the prick and say what I don't like about your review. Just kidding... sort of.

<tgrotvet@inbox.lv> (05.09.2003)

Greetings George,

Alexey Provolotsky <alpro@tut.by> (14.07.2005)

I see no problems with this album. Good to great folk songs with enough memorable moments to be enjoyable. Just like TOTRnR was a good rock album, this one is a good folk album. The two undeniable classics are of course the title track and “The Whistler” (my favourite song here). Both are catchy and very cleverly arranged. Sure, the only two songs that are a bit difficult to get into are the lengthiest ones: “Velvet Green” and “Pibroch”. But don’t skip them. These are very nice cuts that contain amazing playing from the band and very pleasant atmosphere. All the other tracks that I didn’t mention here are very solid and have GOOD MELODIES. Really, a very good album. Get it.

Neil Eddy <steed_and_peel@iprimus.com.au> (15.08.2005)

Of all the Tull albums I have heard and/or owned (and that's a few - but notice the past tense :-) this one is my favourite (and the only one of two I still own). Why? Two reasons: One; It is perhaps one of the most economical of Tull albums - second only to the great Aqualung, with the songs for once being tightly played with little filler or indulgence (as apart from most of the Tull catalogue) - 'The Whistler', 'Songs from The Wood', 'Pibroch', and 'Jack In The Green', being pointed examples of this.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (19.05.99)

Heh. Very cute. Yeah, this is a nice little album. The title track is something, I must admit. I wish 'No Lullaby' was more live the liver version, where he doesn't repeat the whole song, as it's quite a good song other wise. And yeah, there's forgettable stuff, but it's a very pleasant and enjoyable album, unlike, say, Minstrel in the Gallery.

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (02.10.99)

In many ways this is similar to Songs from the Wood. But the tone is darker and thus more to my liking. With a few exceptions the lyrics don't seem very nursery-rhyme like to me. Now go back and reread what George wrote about the title track. It's all true. Except that the final song - 'Weathercock' - is even better. A beautiful melody nicely shared by both mandolin, flute and guitars. And some of Ian's best lyrics ever.

Richard C. Dickison <rdick@mag.com> (21.12.99)

Here is a real peak for Ian in this series of albums, begining with Mistrel In The Gallery and ending with Storm Watch. Now the real reason for this is Ian is finally orchestrating his music appropriately. What I mean is that on many, many of his albums you get the feeling that his schedule of an album a year was detrimental to the music. Listen close to Storm Watch where he brings in heavier rock elements, at times it sounds like the lead guitar and the drummer are over playing what could have been some beautiful passages. While right here on Heavy Horses he held back and perfected the playfulness of Songs From The Wood. The music is balanced more towards the simple strings and less towards the electric. Still, there is an edge and dynamic feel here. 'Acres Wild' sounds fine to me, sorry George, 'Moths' has beautiful guitar parts and George and I agree fully on 'The Rover'. This album is a gem for those searching for a perfect Tull album, this is as close as it gets at this stage of the game.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Songs From The Wood and Heavy Horses are a twins-brothers... Who's for mother-history worth more? (Another Russian folk joke)

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

Actually, I think this is a little bit of a step down from the last one, but I'd still give it a 9. 'Acres Wild' is ok, but not great. Same goes for 'Journeyman'. And 'Weathercock' never struck me very strongly, as it's buried by the epic title track. The rest of this stuff is absolutely wonderful, however. My favorites are 'One Brown Mouse' (which is beautiful), 'Rover', and 'Moths'. However, nothing stacks up against the title track - it may just be the best track Tull ever recorded - right up there with 'Black Sunday' (which I really wish was on a GOOD album instead of A). Every part of it is wonderful - the majestic chorus, the charming verses, the joyous fast part - EVERY LAST SECOND!!! The rest of the album is good, too - 'Mouse Police' is funny, 'No Lullaby' is powerful, and well... that's every song on the album. This record's really hard to find, though. Everyone NEEDS to hear that title track - words just fail me. Great song, great album.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (23.09.2000)

Note to Heavy Horses lovers: Can anyone explain the curiously remixed version of "Moths" that appears on the 25th anniversary box, which for some reason loses some key flute riffs and other nice details of arrangement?

Scott Gordon <majordivit@prodigy.net> (08.01.2001)

I noticed that your rating for Heavy Horses and Aqualung are now identical. You raised Heavy Horses from 11 to 12. I believe both albums are deserving of the excellent rating that you give them, however,  I do not see how your analysis of each record justifies your giving them the same rating. This rating of 12 that you assign to Heavy Horses is either too high or else  your rating for Aqualung is too low.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

This is less original, since it's essentially Songs From The Wood, Part II; but once more I have to agree with you: the song material is indeed more solid. And I also agree with you that the title track is absolutely tell-all-your-friends fantastic. I would even go further and say that this is Tull's best song ever, period. I would gladly throw Eric Clapton's complete works into the trashbin for that violin break and that galloping flute in the middle. I could knock on the door of that dumbass whose record collection seems to consist of The Wall and nothing else and force him to listen to "Heavy Horses" 50 times in a row. That's how good this song is. If you look for genius in Jethro Tull's work, here it is. I think I've made my case. The rest is quite good as well, and except for the "Pibroch" rehash (not a good idea in the first place) "No Lullaby", there is, for once, no filler. "And The Mouse Police" is hilarious. "Acres Wild" is beautiful and as folksy as Tull gets. "Moths" is at least as moving as the "Solsbury Hill" it charmingly rips off, and it would have easily been the best song on Songs From The Wood. Why does everybody hate "Journeyman"; it has a killer bass riff and some ghostly organ lines. "Rover" is pleasant, if not great. "One Brown Mouse" is cutesy. And "Weathercock" is modest, melodious and charmingly unpretentious. You guess what my rating is. Even without the title track it would be an eight.

<WynnePl@aol.com> (10.04.2002)

I just bought The Broadsword and the Beast and I find myself longing for the real thing - this album. Personally, I think "Weathercock" wears the armor that Ian was looking for in "Broadsword". Funny, along with "Acres Wild", in contrast to your picks, it is one of my favorite songs on this album. In fact, they're all good, although I do agree that the attempts to rock out - "No Lullaby" and Journeyman" are the worst - I often skip them. Instead I take in the beautiful, lush, earthy, acoustic -yet dynamic, folk rock present on the rest of this album. This is an album that definitely grew upon repeated listenings - at first I thought it was pleasant - but man it is much more than that - a year after purchasing this one I'm still picking up different little gems finely textured in the music. And an interesting concept to boot. Now, I'm in the mood to buy Songs From The Wood.

Paul Watts <paulwatts@optushome.com.au> (08.12.2005)

You don't see any value in Journeyman, and it seems neither does just about anyone else. My humble opinion is that it's quite easily the best track on this album. Someone described it as bitter and sarcastic- I think this is far from the truth. It is Ian Anderson describing one of his passions, that being train travel.

Tagbo Munonyedi <grimtraveller@hotmail.com> (17.02.2006)

For many years I kept a diary and my entry for May 1st 1980 [ from what I can recall ] was that I listened to Heavy horses and described it as gypsy rock. I was ever so disappointed in it. I'd read a comment in a book that described Tull " laying down their 'sturm & drang' heavy metal " and I determined to catch hold of some Tull if I ever saw a record of theirs. I bought this one 2 days after DEEP PURPLE IN ROCK [in fact,at the time, it was a toss up between the 2 which one to get ] and the experience of that had left me panting for more of the same ! Life is full of little surprizes. I absolutely could not take it ! I totally hated it ! Loathed it ! It's one thing to borrow or "acquire " an album and not like it, but to spend my weeks' bus fare on it and hate it AND still have to work out how to get to school....this was more than I could bear ! So I did the only thing open to me as I could neither return it [ return LPs ? In Enugu ? Ha ! ] or sell it [everyone I knew was into disco which had spread like the plague ]. I listened to it. Again. And again.... and in the process decided that I could allow some exceptions in my heavy metal quest. By the time of my little brother's birthday, 3 weeks into may I was as hooked on this album as one of the salmon on Ian Anderson's fish farm come export time ! Because it was and still is a superlative album. Not one duff track, no filler, not even the magnificent JOURNEYMAN.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (28.08.99)

C'mon, George, be a man! Give it a 10!

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

IDIOTS!!! STUPID IDIOTS!!! How can you say that castrated version of Bursting Out is better? D'you listen the original? Oh Saint Ian, forgive 'em! They don't understand what they says...

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

I'm sorry, man, I didn't know that you have a problems with a sense of humour. Next time I will write something like that: It's a joke, George. You can laugh. Open your mouth and say: ha! ha! ha! Actually, I loved the Trinity idea. The Father is Ian, the Son is Martin, but who's the Holy Ghost? Maybe Mr. Tull himself? (?????? No, it's not me who's going nuts - G. S.)

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (09.07.2000)

I have the 2-CD set, which has a killer rendition of 'Sweet Dream', an ok instrumental called 'Conundrum' which eventually turns into a drum solo, and a cute, short jig called 'Quatrain'. I recommend that one just because I hate it when people screw with original albums and cut material off (like the old Beatles and Rolling Stone American releases). I don't care on albums like Living In The Past because those songs can be found elsewhere, but chopping off songs is kinda dumb - they could have made it a budget 2-CD set, like Yesshows. That problem aside, though, this is a killer live album - it's hard to beat tracks like 'One Brown Mouse', 'Minstrel In The Gallery', 'Cross Eyed Mary' and 'Thick As A Brick'. Plus, that flute solo is amazing, as Ian's solos generally are. I even like 'Hunting Girl' quite a bit. I'd give this a really high 9, just because it's hard for me to give a live album a perfect score (Live At Leeds excepted). This is still the best live Tull album by a good margin - if you see it next to A Little Light Music, PLEASE get this!

Jodok Pedersen <schmuie@bluemail.ch> (22.09.2002)

I just got the Bursting Out double CD. It was very hard to get because it's not anymore in the Tull's catalogue (do they really think Living with the past is better?). Anyway, it was worth the wait, absolutely brilliant. I noticed, you were confused about the introducion of the announcer. I'm pretty sure it's not an overdub, because the announcer begins in swiss german. I was so surprised to hear my own language and found it quite funny (he seemed to be pretty nervous). Then he continues in Italian, English and French, which is not that unusual in our country. I'm just dissapointed about the shortend Minstrel in the Gallery and Songs from the Wood.

Michael Bruun Petersen <mbp@image.dk> (02.10.99)

This is a natural successor to Songs from the Wood and Heavy Horses. I don't think Ian had this in mind, but you could consider this to be the third part of a trilogy. (the woods, the country, the sea).

Richard C. Dickison <rdick@mag.com> (21.12.99)

Interesting how you see him leaving behind this unique style he had created in this series of albums.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Oh, Stormatch... the sad album and the sad story. John Glascock untimely died from heart disease after the unsuccessful surgery (rest in peace, John), so old good Tull couldn't be exist no more. John's close friend Barrie left after the followed tour, Ian began his solo project... well, that's another tale.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (09.07.2000)

I'd slap an 8 on this one. A lot of Tull fans see this as the conclusion of a "folk" trilogy, which I don't see, as this isn't folk music at all - even Ian said that this was never intended to sound like the last two albums. But I still think there's a lot of good stuff on here. I agree that the best songs are 'Elegy' (which David Palmer wrote - imagine, a non-Ian song on a Tull record!) and 'Dun Ringill' (which is one of my all time favorites). I really like 'North Sea Oil', too. 'Home' is kinda pretty too. I don't even mind the long songs on here - they aren't mind blowing, but they're certainly interesting and at least good. My least favorite song on here is probably 'Something's On The Move', which bores me more in 3 minutes than either of the long tracks. This was an important album for Tull - thing were quite different after this one came out (though Broadsword probably could have come out in the seventies minus the electronics).

David Lyons <d.t.lyons@btinternet.com> (16.12.2000)

Okay, okay, right. I 've just about had enough. I've read all these reviews, and all of Mr Konstantins wildly delusional comments, and now he accuses George of being predictable? People in glass houses, really. Or perhaps it ought to be amended, in this case, to 'people in padded cells'. At least, for the sake of humanity, I hope thats where he is. The Ian Anderson Home For The Fanatically Bewildered. What must it be like to adore one single band soooooo much? Makes me shudder just to imagine. And, for the record, I really quite like Jethro Tull, as I mentioned earlier.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (19.01.2001)

Boy, somebody's in a good mood! I mean, I may have underrated this album on my own site, but Jeez M Crow, an _11_? I mean, I guess most of the songs have at least a little positive something here or there that keep it from being worthless, but I still don't hear anything very good or great except for the obvious choices ('Dun Rungill' and 'Elegy'). For me, this is Ian trying to squeeze every last drop out of the generic 70's Tull sound, and discovering that there wasn't much left.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

This, and not A, is the beginning of the end. Contrary to a widespread belief, it has nothing in common with its two folksy predecessors, and I'm afraid it's not as good either. One can hear that the band was falling apart at this stage; there is lots of pessimism (the warm optimism of Heavy Horses just one year back! Imagine that!), little melody, and quite a lot of cacophony. Filler begins to take over. Ian doesn't seem to know where he's heading. Neither does Martin Lancelot, not that that's something new. Testaments of the amazing tunelessness of this album include "North Sea Oil", "Something's On The Move", "Orion" and "Old Ghosts". The epic "Dark Ages" is only slightly better, and "Flying Dutchman" is nice in a "Baker St. Muse" sort of way. This is also the first album in a very long time to feature instrumentals (two of them!!), and while "Warm Sporran" is a complete throwaway, "Elegy" is really quite moving. It says a lot that David Palmer wrote it. In the long run, the only really outstanding song, apart from "Elegy", is "Dun Ringill", and even that is inferior to acoustic songs like "Salamander" or "Requiem", to say nothing of "Wond'ring Aloud" or "Nursie". Ah, and there's "Home." It's nice and sentimental, but "The Chequered Flag" it ain't. On the whole, slightly disheartening.

RTV Maraton <maraton@teamnet.ws> (27.05.2002)

This is definetly THE BEST Tull album of all times, there's virtually not a single bad second on it and in my opinion it's a way for Ian to say good-bye to the 70's.

Richard C. Dickison <randomkill@earthlink.net> (18.05.99)

Let me say this from the bottom of my heart.( A is for) AAARRRRRGH.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

I know, all of you will laughing, but I says that A is not quite bad. OK, wise guys, now tell me about any album from '80 comparable with it. Genesis' pop-crap Duke? Yes' hype Drama? How many progressive and folk bands survived after the punk's crucifixion? How many of them kept their musical creativity in dirty waters of the new wave? Just a couple, right?

Jeff Blehar <jdb3@jhu.edu> (05.04.2000)

Okay, buddy, I'm a wise guy, and I can name about twenty albums great and small that blow your pitiful little Jethro Tull's A out of its diseased water.  David Bowie's Scary Monsters (And Supercreeps), Peter Gabriel's Peter Gabriel 3, U2's Boy, The Police's Zenyatta Mondatta, Talking Heads' Remain In Light, Bruce Springsteen's The River, Steve Winwood's Arc Of A Diver, and yes, even Genesis' Duke.  Need I continue?  Or perhaps you should please GROW THE FUCK UP.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with loving Jethro Tull rabidly (and hey, even though I certainly think more that 50% of their output was tripe, I'll proudly stand by my collection of their 1968-1973 albums), but there IS something seriously awry when you start acting like an uncultured jerk by flaming everyone who doesn't worship Ian Anderson's toenail clippings.  Look at me, I LOVE The Beatles, perhaps more than you like Tull, and I'm quite hard on them.  That aside, there's a fundamental difference between defending the band you love (sure, who doesn't do that every now and then?) and ATTACKING other groups and other people who don't see your way.  Down the road of intolerance lies fascism and authoritarianism, something I should think that you would know something about, being a Russian. Spare us the juvenalia.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

This wasn't supposed to be a Jethro Tull album, and it shows. Some of these songs are absolutely awful - 'Crossfire', '4WD', and 'Uniform' are all total garbage. Worse than the worst stuff on Under Wraps. Awful, awful, AWFUL songs. Wretched. Some tunes on here are pretty good, though - 'Fylingdale Flyer' is amusingly jolly (I agree about that one - what a great song!), 'Protect And Survive' is good (I know you hate that one, but I like it; it's got a really cool flute line and funny lyrics), and 'Black Sunday' is an absolute classic, and one of my all time favorite Tull songs. There aren't any other songs ANYWHERE that sound like that - it's an extremely sad song, really catching you up in it's grey world. Just for that song, I'd boost the rating up to a 5. The rest of the album is passable, but bland. Bland, but passable. Tull's done much better. If you see it cheap, though, I'd get it for 'Fylingdale Flyer' and 'Black Sunday', both of which totally rule. 'Black Sunday' should have been a hit - it may be my favorite Tull song. Why did they bury it on this album?

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (30.09.2000)

Clearly a transitional album and one I won't overly defend, though I completely agree with Philip Maddox about the greatness of "Black Sunday," which also has the distinction of taking a routine (in rock circles) topic like touring and turning it into the stuff of high drama. Note for fans of this song: if memory serves, the live "Locomotive Breath" on the 25th anniversary box is actually a medley of that and this, not surprisingly as Tull closed shows with those two songs for much of the early '80s.

David Lyons <d.t.lyons@btinternet.com> (16.12.2000)

Three cheers for Jeff Blehar. Oh, and Eddie Jobson - Keyboard Virtuoso??? I guess thats why he played the electric violin all those years.......

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

One more thing I can't understand: why does everybody hate this album so much? And why does everybody say it's a synth orgy? It's not, and it's not really a bad album either. Most people probably prefer Stormwatch because its cover looks more like Tull, and because Palmer and Evan and Barlow are on it. I'm not saying that A is a really good album, but I think it's o.k. It's not worse than Stormwatch. Maybe even better. Mind you, I agree with you that the trio that starts with "Batteries" and ends with "4 WD" is abysmal. That's an objective fact, heh, heh. And "Pine Marten's Jig" is berserk in a very nasty sort of way. It's painful to the extreme. And "And Further On" is average. And so is "Protect And Survive." But "Protect And Survive" is not as bad as the rest of Side B, believe me. And we have Side A, which includes at least two songs that are way superior to anything on Stormwatch or Broadsword, to say nothing of Under Wraps. "Working John Working Joe" and, of course, the wonderful "Black Sunday" rank with almost anything in the Tull canon. And the synths (poor Eddie Jobson!! He doesn't deserve all that hatred of those rabid Tullomaniacs. HE didn't kill the band. Ian did!) are much less prominent and much less obnoxious than on Broadsword, which everybody loves. And "Flyingdale Flyer" is good! And "Crossfire" is better than "North Sea Oil"! And I love Ian's demented stare on the back cover!! Spare a dime for poor little A!!!!

RTV Maraton <maraton@teamnet.ws> (27.05.2002)

Heh...when I read tons of hating lines about this album i tought that i will hear only complete garbage on it, but thankfully that did not hapen, the only two really bad songs are...'batteries not included' and '4WD'...but who needs that?...'black sunday' is one of the best Jethro Tull songs ever + something no other bands can even try to play on stage or in the studio, and that's 'the pine marten's jig', 'fylingdale flyer' reminds me of something i lived throught in 1980' when i was hospitalized....+ and further on...what can i say about this....WONDERFUL! This one is worth listening!

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (19.05.99)

A good album. I'd only give a 7, but still not bad. I was extremely miffed when the all-music guide gave it only 1 star. Anyways, this would have been a very solid formula for Ian to follow in future years. Too bad he turned to absolute shit.

Richard C. Dickison <rdick@mag.com> (21.12.99)

Here is the end of the line for me, but what a great revisit to the earlier themes from Minstrel In The Gallery to Storm Watch. It was almost as if he was apologizing for A.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Ahead my impressions of Broadsword I must say that the name of the album is THE Broadsword And The Beast, not Broadsword And The Beast. Almost everyone skips the first "the", but look at the title on the sleeve closely and you'll see it.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

This record really seems to split the Tull fans - some think it's a great return to form after A, while others think it's the precedent of Under Wraps. With the exception of 'Watching Me Watching You', I think this album sounds nothing like Under Wraps. It also doesn't sound much like any other Tull album. It also totally rules. 'Beastie', 'Broadsword', 'Pussywillow', 'The Clasp', and basically every other song here is amazingly great. 'Broadsword' is my favorite song on it - very majestic and "regal". 'The Clasp' is my second favorite - I love those weird rhythms, and the flute line is one of my all time favorites. I'd give this a 9 - a point off because it's too electronic and 'Watching Me Watching You' is a bit weaker than the rest of the material here. I'm glad you liked this one - people who hate it tend to REALLY hate it, some even more than Under Wraps. The All Music Guide gave it 1 star and called it "tuneless drivel". That's worse than Clapton's Pilgrim, which got 2 stars. Please. I HATE the All Music Guide.

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

Synthy tones date this one, but my favorite "Fallen on Hard Times" just makes this a good album. "Beastie" and "Slow Marching Band" are great also. The rest aint so great. I'm glad somebody agrees "Seal Driver" sucks. For some reason I've read alot of Tull-head reviews raving it, but its just dumb. If they'd just stuck to this, maybe they wouldnt of become the forgotten band there are today (for good reason) 7/10

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

This is another one where there is a serious disagreement between us, Mr Starostin. You and most other people apparently think that this is the last good Tull album and the best since Heavy Horses or even Thick As A Brick, and an island of beauty in the horrible synth- and metal-infested 80s and 90s Tull canon. In my opinion, however, this album is very very bad indeed. All those bombastic Viking and fantasy antics don't help when Peter Vettese's synth onslaught is much, much worse than anything Eddie Jobson could ever have imagined in his wildest dreams. Peter's synths are not tasteful; rather, they utterly destroy what little charms the album might have had without them. And why Ian hired Gerry Conway must forever remain a mystery. Conway is one of folk rock's most respected and capable drummers (witness assorted Fairport / Richard Thompson / late Pentangle or Steeleye Span albums), but since he mostly is confined to electronic drumming here, a drum machine would have done the trick just as well. Which Ian realised by the time he recorded the beautiful Under Wraps album. To the songs: they're hardly any better than the arrangements. Okay, "Broadsword" is a good one, but Barre's solo is so ugly that it almost spoils it. "Cheerio" is nice, but it's hardly a minute long. "Watching Me Watching You" is the one piece where the synths sound like they're in the right place, and the song is original, catchy and somehow moving. Ian's short flute riffs here are ace. But the rest... "Beastie" has no tune and sucks. Same goes for "Clasp". And for "Seal Driver". And for "Fallen On Hard Times"; plus, this one has the most banal lyrics imagineable ("Oh Mr President, it's all such a mess" - do you call that social critique?? THAT?). "Pussy Willow" and "Flying Colours" do have tunes, but they're bland to the extreme, and Peter in "Flying Colours" sounds so awful it drives me nuts. Yeah, and "Slow Marching Band" starts off o.k., but turns into a ridiculously bombastic, soulless power ballad nightmare after a minute or so. And that's it. Give me "Protect And Survive" anytime, heh, heh!! "

Coops <C0ops@hotmail.com> (08.09.2003)

I would give this album a slightly lower rating however...I find that the first part of the album (the 'Beast' part) is the most interesting and a hell of a lot better then the second...personally I believe 'the Clasp' is probably the coolest song on the album, as well the most interesting do to the fact of the great, as you said Viking mood. Definitely not one of their masterpieces but its a whole lot better than the album before and the ones to come right after this one. I would give this one a 7.5 out of ten.

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (23.02.2000)

Just got a copy of this from an ftp site and am listening right now ... THIS ALBUM SUCKS. This is exactly the kind of bullshit that I'm trying to AVOID when I'm making myself into a classic rock and art rock conoissuer (sp?). To me, the biggest sign that this album blows is that I simply CANNOT listen to any of the tracks for more than 40 seconds or so before becoming overwhelmingly bored. and I probably have the longest attention span when it comes to music of anybody I know. Ugh. This PIECE OF SHIT is a 1, nothing more. And I've NEVER given a one before.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Oh no! No, please! Oh God, help me! Don't remind me about this! NO!!!

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (30.06.2000)

I picked a copy of this up on Ebay a few weeks ago to round off my Tull collection (though I still don't have Crest), and was surprised to find that it wasn't as bad as it's often made out to be. Of course, it hardly ranks with classic Tull, but it has some pretty good songs (in spite of the awful arrangements). The title track (in both of its versions) is very good, in fact. The melody is good, and Ian's voice is still in its "old" style, so it comes off pretty well. 'European Legacy' isn't bad, either. 'Apogee' is ok, but it suffers from stupid lyrics, as do most of these songs. Ian's lyrics aren't that good here for the most part. The seem to concentrate on Cold War espionage and spies, etc. The lyrics are bad and, at times, ungrammatical (especially 'Saboteur', when Ian keeps yelling "Me no saboteur!" over and over again until I wanna strangle him). Still, I like 'Radio Free Moscow' and 'Nobody's Car' which create an adequate atmosphere of paranoia (like 'Watching Me Watching You' did on Broadsword). The live version of 'Nobody's Car' on the 25th Anniversary Box Set is way better, though, as it's energetic. That's the main problem with this album - there's no energy. Since the parts were preprogrammed, there's no feeling of urgency to the music. Plus, a few songs ('Saboteur', 'Paparazzi', 'Automotive Engineering') totally blow. Plus, the record lasts for a friggin' hour! Anyway, I'd probably give this a 4, but I higher 4 than I gave Rock Island. I STILL think that this is better than Rock Island. You don't have to worry about accidentally getting this, though - it's so badly out of print that you'll probably never see a copy of it in your life. And there's no reason to hunt it down unless you happen to be a completionist (like me). The CD does come with a funny picture, though - it shows the whole band (including Doane Perry, who didn't play a single note on this record!), who all look like grizzled old men, and right in the middle is Peter Vettese, who looks like the kid everybody knows who got stuffed into lockers in high school - he looks totally out of place with Tull (and sounds out of place, too, I might add).

Braxton LeCroy <Autull@aol.com> (24.08.2000)

It's hard for even a Tull devotee to argue with anything negative about Under Wraps.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (23.09.2000)

I don't mean to pull rank here, but as someone who's seen Tull about twenty times (including their first ever U.S. gig, blowing Blood, Sweat and Tears off the stage at the Fillmore East), interviewed Anderson for magazines twice, and held onto to just about every Tull record he ever bought up until the early '90s, I must defend this record. Maybe you had to be there to appreciate it: after the weaker tracks on Heavy Horses, the mostly weak Stormwatch, and the truly dreadful (for Tull) Broadsword and the Beast, it seemed that Ian Anderson had, amazingly, run out of ideas. The better tracks on Walk Into Light gave reason for optimism, however, and when Under Wraps came out it sounded like a whole new start to many of us. The arrangements are brilliantly inventive and the use of drum synthesizer, for once, is inspired; as a drummer, I can tell you that no one could possibly play the double-bass part on "Saboteur," which is the only reason to ever use synth instead of real drums. Most of the words are, admittedly, of the less psychologically-inspired variety that have dominated Tull albums since A. (Hell, you can't write intensely personal genius like "Nothing to Say," "Wind-Up," and "Thick As A Brick Edit #3" all your life, can you?) But I have never understood how any Tull fan who ever appreciated the way this band could play single songs that had more riffs and ideas in them than most other bands' entire albums could not thrill to highly cinematic mini-symphonies like "European Legacy," "Heat," and "Paparazzi." And the simpler songs like "Under Wraps #1" and "Radio Free Moscow" are just pure fun pop for post-now people, something that most critics had been asking Tull to do again since the "Living in the Past" 45 hit the charts. Does everything have to sound like "Aqualung" all the time? (Apparently yes, judging by the next album, Crest of a Knave, which unimaginately regressed to a sludgy guitar-rock sound and idiotic lyrics like those on "Budapest.")

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (20.10.2000)

This LP was another freebie (I used to be good with rock trivia contests) and it was worth what I paid for it. (I'm missing two CD-only songs, but I guess that's no loss.) But it's not so bad that I feel like someone should have paid ME to listen to it (unlike, say, A Passion Play).

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

This is an easy one to agree with anybody. It's as horrible as everybody says it is. The acoustic version of the title track is really very good, and "European Legacy" would be acceptable as okay filler on any other Tull album were it not for the shitty drum machine sound. But everything else is a tuneless, synth-laden, pretentious nightmare. No point in defending it just for the sake of being an unconventional music fan. The "concept" with all those ridiculous cold war allusions is by all accounts a joke that has badly misfired. That Martin Lancelot considers this his favourite Tull album goes to show that he wasn't to be trusted in the first place. And by the time Ian stutters something about "the tall general is definitely crossing", I'm ready for the oxygene tent. But wait, the first 15 seconds of "Heat" are nice, good flute line. Until Ian snarls "get out of the HEAT!" A good lesson for anyone who may have thought that it couldn't get worse after Broadsword. It did. Oh my God. Luckily, after this, Vettese was off in the desert, where he has remained ever since save for a short but very harmful attack on Clannad's otherwise rather nice Sirius album (he seems to get paid for ruining good bands' reputations) and a brief cameo on Rock Island. This meant Tull music got a little better. A little.

Alexander Zaitsev <zaitsev@perm.ru> (31.05.2003)

Under Wraps is a perfect example of a self-indulgent album, even more self-indulgent than Tales from Topografic Oceans (which I adore)."Under Wraps #2" is charming, but it seems to me that Ian made it to please the fans of his earlier work. Sort of a trick on his part(old bastard :).'Lap of Luxury' is decent, as 'Later,the same evening' is. 'Radio free moscow' has ok vocals.Everything else is crap. But the album does have an advantage: Atmosphere.

Steven Marcus <s.marcus1@ntlworld.com> (23.04.2004)

I have been a Tull fanatic since I first heard Aqualung in 1972 at a mates house. So I have every album which slowly over the years I have been replacing with CD's. I saw Underwraps in the shops at £4.99 and thought at that price I had to buy it. Mistake. This album is less than bilge. It is so bad its unplayable. I could not hear the whole album through. I took it back and reinstated the vinyl.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Well, man, I need to completely disappoint you. If you bought this CD three years ago, then it was really last copies of early US release. But around a two years ago this album was re-printed in Germany, so now you can easily buy any quantity of CDs. Actually, the new US release is available too (I saw it in the ordinary record store last week).

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (30.06.2000)

Back when I was back in the high school marching band, my teacher (who was psychotic, by the way) often gave us crowd pleasing instrumental versions of old rock songs to play, which would inevitably get the crowd a swayin'. Of course, these arrangements were hardly very good; 'Smoke On the Water' was particularly tuneless. But either way, we never sounded as good as the tunes we were trying to play were (except for a few wretched late period Elton John songs, which couldn't be worse than they originally were).

Chris Ward <wardicus@yahoo.com> (26.01.2001)

I have A Classic Case early release (Ha!), and its alright. Interesting, but just doesnt satisfy ones soul. 5/10

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (14.12.99)

Ugh ... I found a copy of this at an ftp site, so I decided to give it a listen and ... ugh

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

What are we talking about? Yeah, Crest Of A Knave! Well, lets look at your review... Oh shit! Oh shit, man, I didn't know! I said before that you're deaf, but it was only joke! I'm so sorry! I didn't know that it's true!

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

Nobody's perfect, George, nobody's perfect. Even His Majesty Ian. I don't like synthesisers too, but we're living in technological world, so we need to pay the price. In other hand, synthesisers couldn't ruin the perfect song. Neither you.

Braxton LeCroy <Autull@aol.com> (24.08.2000)

Crest of a Knave won the Grammy & deservedly so. It is not Tull's best but still better than any of the tripe being spun forth in those days. "Steel Monkey" & "Budapest" are two of my all time Tull favorites. "Farm on the Freeway" is a fine peice of work also."Jump Start" is a solid rocker also. This one gets an 8.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (30.09.2000)

A few thoughts: (a) As I understand it, Anderson's vocal problem is of a muscular nature, totally different from nodes of the vocal cords, which are corrected by a simple if anesthetic-requiring opeation. (I had the nodes operation and a vocal coach told me Stevie Nicks and Sammy Davis Jr. had it over twenty times apiece, having never learned to sing properly.) Apparently this problem can come and go without warning and the only treatment is rest, which is why Ian's voice can sound great and not so great even within the same show, much less the same tour. (b) What disturbed me even more than "Budapest's" insipid lyrics (such a total reversal, both in terms of quality and age of the desired object, from "Sossity...") were the constant jokes Anderson would make onstage around this time about fifteen-year-old girls. Rebelling against political correctness is one thing but child sexual abuse is another as, ahem, we heard on "Cross-Eyed Mary." (Besides, this is the guy who many say threw Cornick out of the band because he couldn't keep his hands off the groupies.) Thankfully, Anderson seems to have rallied totally on this score: both "Beside Myself" on Roots to Branches and "Sanctuary" on Secret Language of Birds are thundering condemnations of child prostitution, and one of the best songs he's ever written about women, love, and sex, J-Tull Dot Com's "Bends Like a Willow," is in praise of...his wife! Good on you, Shona! (c) Though there's definitely a bit of a Dire Straits sound to ...Knave, I think this charge mostly stems from people's unconscious recognization of the similarities between the chords and melody of "Farm on the Freeway" and those of the Brothers... track "One World." Confronted with the Straits rap in a Goldmine interview in '86, Anderson countered that Knopfler was originally criticized for ripping off Dylan, then said that he thought Knopfler was the most important rock guitarist since Hendrix and Clapton. (d) To those who love to slam Tull for winning the Heavy Metal Grammy for ...Knave: First of all, Tull is one of the bands that can claim to have been in on the very creation of the genre, which back in the late '60s and early '70s (in the wake of Hendrix and Cream) meant songs like "Whole Lotta Love," "Iron Man" (featuring ex-Tull fill-in guitarist Tony Iommi), "Mississippi Queen," "Cross-Eyed Mary" and even stuff like Todd's "Black Maria" and Spirit's "When I Touch You." Second, Anderson himself has said that the band saw so little chance of winning that they didn't even attend the Grammy ceremony in L.A. Finally, Anderson had the classiest response to winning imaginable, taking out a gatefold ad in Variety and other trade papers that showed an illustration of a flute and the caption, "The flute is a heavy metal instrument." P.S. As if you needed another reason to vote for Gore instead of Bush, the Democratic nominee once claimed to be a Tull fan! (Anderson and Leno joked on the latter's show in '93 about the V.P. requesting -- and getting! -- a signed copy of the "cigar box" CD.)

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (20.10.2000)

Wow.. I'm a little surprised at how much venom this album generates. Because, to me, it really restored my faith in Tull. Granted, Ian's new voice is hard to take (I saw a show on the tour before the I acquired the album, and it was dismaying to hear that new voice on classic material). But, still, the main thing that struck me is how much the album sounds like Dire Straits -- not just Ian's singing, but in Martin's playing (better to sound like Mark Knopler than Trevor Rabin) and even in the songwriting. I could easily see Knopler coming up with "Farm on the Freeway," "Said she Was a Dancer," "Budapest" or "Mountain Men." Intentional or not, this really makes for a good time. There are a couple of exceptions. I actually like "Steel Monkey" -- the sequencer programming is annoying, but the lyrics -- about the construction workers who build skyscrapers -- are good. And I would rate "Jump Start" higher than you do. It's the one track that truly sounds like a classic Jethro Tull song, and was a really exciting live number.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (03.12.2000)

Re this Tull-as-Dire Straits controversy: For what it's worth, I just remembered a quote from that Goldmine interview with I.A. shortly after the release of Crest... In this interview, Ian says (and this is almost an exact quote), "I know for a fact that Mark Knopfler rang up Martin's guitar maker in 1980 and said, 'I want the sound that Martin Barre of Jethro Tull gets.'"

Jeff Melchior <Jeffmoncheri@aol.com> (28.12.2000)

Wow - this has to be the most controversial Tull album ever. The record's Grammy coup against Metallica was the source of major controversy among headbangers back in the day (frankly, though, these days I'd be pissed off if any Tull album were to lose to such modern Metallica crap like Reload). To be honest, I've yet to hear this album, but the disdain for it from Tull fans and non-fans alike is provoking the same morbid curioity as Yes' Tales From Topographic Oceans once did (although I doubt I'll like it as much as Tales - this is an '80s album after all). Note to obsessive fans: negative reviews are not always necessarily a bad thing.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

Opinions on that are fairly divided. You, George, frankly don't like it very much. And all those Metallica fans who are angry because of the Grammy thing don't like it either. Which is understandable, since a Heavy Metal Grammy for Crest of a Knave is a bizarre idea indeed. That said, I think that the album is not that bad. Sure, Ian's voice is gone and he sounds uncannily like Mark Knopfler. And the opening synth riff of "Steel Monkey" wasn't a good idea. Nor, for that matter, the ZZ Top rip-off "Raising Steam" (wait... ZZ Top's Afterburner came out in 1985 - that makes sense, speaking of subconscious influence..). And I never liked "Farm On The Freeway", it's almost as banal and clumsy as "Fallen On Hard Times" (almost!) - but if you disregard the lyrics for a minute, "Said She Was Dancer" and "Budapest" are both quite good. The Eastern lady thing could have been a concept or running theme as well, couldn't it? And the jam in the middle of "Budapest" is better than anybody had a right to expect, to say nothing of that beautiful flute line in the beginning. And once you've got over the opening riff, "Steel Monkey" kicks ass, as you would say. I'm being serious. And "Mountain Men" and "Jump Start" are perfectly acceptable Tull filler. I have the LP version, which lacks "Dogs in Midwinter" and "The Waking Edge", but as far as I remember, these were nothing to write home about. Anyway, far from a masterpiece, and a Grammy for that is really a funny idea, but easily Tull's best album since A. At least. Maybe even since Heavy Horses.

James Hitt, Jr. <odin_the_one_eyed@hotmail.com> (23.06.2002)

I don't really understand why so many people seem to praise this album as one of Tull's new masterpieces, but then again, I likewise don't see why many people at the same time, including George, seem to think it such a piece of worthless vinyl (or plastic, whichever media that one owns it). I like this album. I don't love it, but I think a few tunes on it redeem it. To me, "Farm on the Freeway" is certainly more than the unremarkable song that George describes it as, and it sounds excellent live. "Jump Start" as well is a very good tune with a neat kind of shuffling acoustic/flute bluesy intro. And I consider "Budapest" an enjoyable song. Okay, it lacks almost any exceptional vocal melody (but what about the part "...and she wore a perfect smile..."? That has a nice little melody! Okay, so I'm grasping for straws!), and it is a little lengthy, but, I think those two beautiful flute breaks in the middle at 4:15 and again toward the end at about 7:20 totally make the song worth its not so good qualities. I don't think you mentioned them in the review, but you should really stop listen to them closely; might even change your feelings for the song, if just a little. I mean, they are beautiful! Achingly bittersweet! If Knave ever finds its way in your CD player ever again, you would do good to give these beautiful flute melodies a real listen.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

PRAISE THE LORD! HE'S BACK!!!

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (04.03.2000)

To deflate the other comment on this album a bit ...

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

I thought about the wrong side of CD, now I'm thinking about the wrong CD. You can blame on pirates, George, but the miser pays twice.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (27.06.2000)

I gave this a 6 when I reviewed this on the Karn site. I've since listened to it a few times and have come to the following conclusion - I must have been really high on crack when I wrote that. I'm more inclined to agree with you now, George - it's VERY dull. It's not that the whole record is bad, per se (except for 'The Rattlesnake Trail' and 'Big Riff and Mamdo', which suck horribly). It's all just so boring that I usually turn it off about halfway through. I still think 'Ears of Tin' is pretty cool (even though the fast part has the exact same melody as 'Kissing Willie' - did Ian not notice that?). 'Heavy Water' isn't bad, and 'Another Christmas Song' is ok, except for the fact that Ian used a big, booming percussion sound in that song where it clearly doesn't belong. The rest ranges from really mediocre to insanely tedious (That part in the middle of 'The Whaler's Due' when he keeps on chanting "Will you forgive me?" wears out it's welcome, and quick). These songs sound like they could have been good, but Ian just stopped trying. I give it a low 4, and my opinion that this is the worst record Tull ever put out. I'd avoid it unless you're a diehard. And even THEY tend not to like this album much (and I should know, cuz I LOVE Tull). It is a good cure for insomnia, though. Why should I listen to this when Zappa's You Are What You Is is right next to it? But hey, I think Ian had plenty left to say. I really do love Dot Com (despite it's stupid name). This was just a low point.

Jochen Haug <haugj@gmx.net> (17.07.2001)

And this is where, at the tender age of seventeen, I stopped buying Jethro Tull albums. This album is not, mind you, horrible, but it's a totally uninspired, boring rewrite of Crest Of A Knave. Why not give us a rewrite of Heavy Horses at least, Ian? Maybe it was the - albeit marginal - presence of Peter Vettese that inspired Ian to some more crimes against good taste; but then, it's not the arrangements that are to blame here. At least not primarily. There are quite a couple of tracks with really embarrassing lyrics, such as "Undressed To Kill", "The Rattlenake Trail", "Kissing Willie" ("fillet of sole", anyone?), "Big Riff and Mando" and "The Whaler's Dues", and all these songs have zero melodies and dull hard rock arrangements, "Big Riff" being by far the worst offender. "Heavy Water" is a somewhat better, catchier take at the hard 'n' heavy formula, whatever that's worth. The power ballads / epics are nothing exciting either: the title track drags, the Aqualung reference in "Strange Avenues" is an example of tragicomic humour (the good old days will not return), only "Ears Of Tin" has anything like atmosphere, feeling, and melody. If you don't count the ugly mess in the middle. And "Another Christmas Song" is another novelty thing, and it's not without its charms and easily the best track here. Which is not saying much. I hear that some of the later albums are better (Roots and Branches? Or the new one?). But I'am afraid that the time I spent money on Jethro Tull albums is over. I might make an exception for Bursting Out. Someday. Maybe.

Alexander Zaitsev <zaitsev@perm.ru> (30.05.2003)

Hi! It's very funny to read Konstantin Tikhonov's comments.I didn't know he was SO obsessed with JT :)

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Oh man, I think I'm going slightly mad! I was only joking that you're deaf and you proved it. I was only joking that you're blind and you proved it again. For Christ sake, why did you place 20 Years below Rock Island? It was released in 1988, look at the sleeve! (The "Selection" compilation came out in November 1989 - G. S.) Another (strictly personal) question - where did you see 30th Anniversary box set? (Okay, so it was 'anniversary collection' or something. I don't really care anyway - G. S.).

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

Some sources said November 1988, some said November 1989. For the first time Aqualung was released on CD in 1985 but you didn't place it nearly to Classic Case. Anyway, the original box set was released in 1988. There are few "anniversary EDITIONS" - Aqualung (1996), Thick As A Brick (1997), Tull's first three albums (1997) and there's the only one "anniversa ry COLLECTION" - 25th anniversary The Best Of Jethro Tull 2CD edition. Please, be accurate, George.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (06.07.2000)

This is a pretty good disc, but I've recently come across a used copy of the entire box and was left wondering "Who picked these tracks?!" There are songs on the box a whole lot better than 'Crossword' or 'Part Of The Machine', and songs a lot more necessary than the studio versions of 'Grace' and 'Witch's Promise' which you can already get on regular Tull albums anyway. Actually, I'm not sure who this disc is even targeting - casual fans probably aren't too interested in weird outtakes and live numbers, while hardcore fans would rather track down the box set. Oh well most of the material that IS here is great - the BBC numbers are great, 'Summerday Sands' and 'March' are B-sides that could have made the albums that the singles accompanied (Minstrel In The Gallery and Songs From The Wood, respectively), and the outtakes are mostly good. I still can't understand why numbers like 'King Henry's Madrigal' (a great instrumental) and 'Sunshine Day' (the first Tull single) were scrapped for studio reruns. This is worth picking up if you can't find and/or afford the whole boxed set, as this does have perhaps the best number on the whole set on it - 'Jack-A-Lynn' is quite beautiful, and if it had been placed on Broadsword as opposed to 'Watching Me Watching You' I would probably have given that album a 10. I'd probably give this CD a 7, and a high 8 or low 9 for the whole set. And hey, you can't go wrong with 'Dun Ringill'! They should reissue the whole set, though - demand for it is high, and keeping it locked away is ridiculous.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (30.08.2002)

It is too bad that the box is now out of print, and is unlikely to be back. Besides the numbers Philip and Konstanstin have mentioned, among the better tracks they left off of Selection are a cool rocker called "Beltane" (outtake from Heavy Horses, I think) and a fun number that plays with well worn cliches called "A Stitch in Time" (Songs from the Wood sessions, I believe). There are a number of studio retreads, but most of them are pretty obscure ("One White Duck," "Only Solitaire," "Nurse," "Under Wraps 2"), with the exception of "Witch's Promise" and the well-worn "Bungle in the Jungle" (does a live version even exist?). The early UK B-side version of "Teacher" is OK, but the version from the American Benefit is better. Some quibbles: I really think that "Lick Your Fingers Clean" is one overrated song -- just about everything on Aqualung is better. On the other hand, "Part of the Machine" is another powerful Dire Straits clone along the Crest of a Knave line; "Summerday Sands" is gorgeous; and "Jack-a-Lynn" is really a refound classic. The band even performed it live on the Rock Island tour and rerecorded it for the 25th Anniversary Box.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Catfish Rising? Rock Island little brother, blues' slowness and irony instead of heavy riffing and conceptuality.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

Oh, the question of taste! It's a very funny question, an extraordinary funny question from man who rates Aftermath higher than In The Court Of The Crimson King... (because Aftermath has at least ten great songs where Court has four. And I thought he wouldn't flaunt his snubbiness any further - G.S.)

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (27.06.2000)

MUCH better than Rock Island (no matter what I said on the Karn site), but still not great. Actually, this one has a clean dividing point - most of side 1 is good, while most of side 2 is crap. 'This is Not Love' is a great metal song (complete with an enthusiastic "Yeeeaaahhhhhh!!!" thrown in every now and then - it sure isn't Ian singing it!) I think 'Occasional Demons' is better than you think it is - it's not blisteringly creative, but it is catchy and memorable. I like it. 'Rocks on the Road' and 'Sparrow on the Schoolyard Wall' are classics, which is great (seeing as Rock Island had no classics and only one or two "good" songs at all). They're both energetic and well written, both lyrically and musically. Great tunes. A lot of this record is still stupid, though. 'Doctor To My Disease' sucks REALLY bad. Ian could write a song like that in 3 minutes (and probably did). 'White Innocence' is a lame re-write of 'Budapest'. I actually liked 'Budapest' - this one is almost the SAME STUPID SONG! Why listen to this if you can listen to the original? 'Still Loving You Tonight' goes two or three steps beyond boring. The Weather Channel is indeed the best place for those lame guitar breaks. Nothing else on this album is really bad - and some of it is even good! - but it's still a long way from Broadsword and the Beast. I'll give it a high 5 - not too shabby, but nothing special, either. It's worth picking up if you see it cheap (I paid $5.00!).

David Lyons <d.t.lyons@btinternet.com> (17.12.2000)

I have a strong feeling that Tikhonov chooses his girlfriends based on their visual similarity with a 1970 style Ian Anderson. Either that, or from a mail order catalogue.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

Oh yeah, Little Light Music! The crystal flower behind the titanium armour...

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

A) You're lying, Georgie! Ian sang the whole "New Day" in the beginning and repeated the first couplet in the end. (Okay, so he goes into that lengthy flute solo to recover - G. S.) B) The beer-drunken crowd accepted instrumental version of "Living In The Past", didn't they? (You know perfectly well that "Breath" is a bigger radio staple. If you don't, you're out of time - G. S.) C) Catfish Rising world tour was over in April 1992 (so what? It was still Tull's newest album, wasn't it? - G. S.). D) "From A Dead Beat" is ballad too. Any more fantasies? (it's sung in a lower pitch, far more simple for His Newly-Found Hoarseness to tolerate. Your turn to play the game? - G.S.)

John McFerrin <stoo@imsa.edu> (05.04.2000)

Arrgh, I just noticed that you rebutted Gospodin Konstantin, so now my two cents won't mean as much. In any case, here it is anyways (mind you, I haven't actually hear the album, but I think I can still make an argument)

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (06.07.2000)

An admirable effort, but it doesn't really stack up to other live Tull recordings. The problem isn't Ian's voice, though. the problem is how these songs are rearranged. I HATE this version of 'A New Day Yesterday'. It doesn't work at all. 'Look Into The Sun' is extremely boring, 'Living In The Past' loses all of its subtlety, etc. Some tracks are still great, though - the instrumental 'Bouree' and 'Pussy Willow' are both absolutely great. 'This Is Not Love' and 'Rocks On The Road' were both really good songs from Catfish Rising, so I'm not going to complain. 'Under Wraps' was a good song anyway, so I dig the version of it on here quite a bit. And it's hard to screw up 'Nursie' and 'Life Is A Long Song'. I do disagree about 'One White Duck', though - I think that's a really pretty song, though I wish they had included the 'O^10=Nothing At All' part at the end. Still, few of these songs are better than their studio counterparts - many are significantly worsened! - which makes me think this album belongs somewhere between a 6 and a 7. And Ian's comments are great - especially that intro to 'A Christmas Song'. Poor, poor Dave...

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (03.03.2000)

May I spoil your mood, friends? D'you think that first CD from Nightcap contains the whole "Chateau D'Isaster" material? If you think so, listen Minstrels In The Red House bootleg CD. Here you'll hear few more fragments not present on Nightcap (including the first version of "Skating Away"). In 25th Anniversary interview Ian said that he found only a part of "Chateau D'Isaster" tapes, so some parts remains unfound (not for sneaky cheaters). Also I heard a rumour that Ian's tape was seriously damaged and he was forced to re-record some instrumentation. Anyway, the result is great!

Jason X <fistanarius@hotmail.com> (15.07.2004)

You have 'Silver River Turning' as a highlight on this album, yet you have 'Heavy Water' as a blue on Rock Island. If you listen to both of them next to each other, they're very similar (It happened by coincidence that I listened to Nightcap immediately after listening to Rock Island today). Presumably since 'Silver River Turning' wasn't released, Ian used the basic melody and vocal hook later for 'Heavy Water'.

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (06.07.2000)

I'd probably have to rate these disc separately, as they have little or nothing to do with each other. I'd give the first a 9 and the second a 7, which would make this an 8 from me. I agree that the first discs is better than A Passion Play - some of these songs totally kick! My favorites are the last 3 (which also appeared on the 20 Years of Tull set), 'Left Right' (which has great lyrics and hard rock power), both parts of 'Law Of The Bungle' (both of which are both funny and catchy), and, well, basically everything. I couldn't say it's worth a 10, as it's not structured at all, but if Ian had polished this up, it might have been a good deal better than A Passion Play was. And Martin's comment at the beginning of 'Law Of The Bungle Part 2' made me fall over laughing. Disc 2 isn't as good, though - it has some really great tracks, like 'Broadford Bazzar' (which is beautiful), 'Sealion II' (which I prefer to the original), 'Quartet' (which is funny), 'Rosa On The Factory Floor' and 'Truck Stop Runner' (which should have been on Catfish Rising instead of 'Doctor To My Disease' and 'White Innocense'), and 'Commons Brawl' (a GREAT Broadsword outtake). Unfortunately, some of this stuff is kinda lame - 'Lights Out' and 'No Step' suck, 'Piece Of Cake' is dumb, and 'A Small Cigar' is pointless. The Broadsword outtakes here aren't the best ones - they were already put on the 20 Years Of Tull set. 'The Curse' sounds straight off of Under Wraps (though it's better than most of what made that album). Still, there's enough good stuff here to earn MY recommendation.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (01.01.2001)

Agreement here. The "Chateau D'isaster" part, with a bit more work, could have been a great album along the lines of Thick as a Brick. I don't hear much resemblance here, musically, to A Passion Play, simply because there are an absolute plethora of good melodies here as opposed to the dearth of such on APP. The lyrics of the second half (some allegory based on theater and performance?) seem to be at the root of APP's concept, but who can tell? How could Ian deteriorate so quickly from this is incomprehensible.

Michael Carroll <Michael_Carroll@merck.com> (08.02.2000)

1) 'Stuck In The August Rain' and 'Another Harry's Bar' are the only songs that have at least a tiny drop of genuine emotion (I don't even want to mention the problem of melody). Please mention the problem of melody?

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

Jethro Ian's tenth masterpiece is simply fantastic 'cause it's incomparable with anything that Tull did before and it's 100 percents Tullish. Eastern influences over the Western landscape, Ian's wise lyrics ("Valley" isn't the tale of two tribes' feud, it's about people's separating and reticence) and a touch of religious makes the album's impression absolutely complete.

Adrian Gutu <adigd@hotmail.com> (18.04.2000)

It is obvious that you DON'T understand the whole idea .

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (07.07.2000)

I like this one WAY better than you do. I'd give it a 7 - I think it's several times better than crap like Rock Island. Two songs on here really do it for me - 'Wounded Old and Treacherous' and 'At Last, Forever' are amazingly great tunes. 'Wounded' has a great, jazzy feel, interesting lyrics, and a great flute/guitar duel at the end. 'At Last, Forever' has great lyrics, too. The tune is extremely mournful and sad - it succeeds where 'The Whaler's Dues' failed. The rest of this stuff is at least pretty good (except 'Out Of The Noise', which is pointless). The title track and 'Rare And Precious Chain' open the album on a very high note - they're very interesting songs with eastern influences and ever improving vocals from Ian. Actually, it's not Ian's voice that's improving - he's simply writing songs that fit it better. I don't see why you hate 'Valley', though - it's long, but well played, pretty, and somewhat deep. That may be the best thing about this album, though - Ian's lyrics are much better than on other recent albums - I at least agree with you on that. The rest of the album is good, but nothing special, which keeps the album from getting more than a 7. Still, this kicks the crap out of any other post-Broadsword Tull album (except Dot Com, which really rules).

Braxton LeCroy <Autull@aol.com> (24.08.2000)

Tull's second most underrated work (after Benefit). "Beside Myself" is a beautiful piece, the title track is a damn fine one and "Rare and Precious Chain" is strong also. I'd give it a 7.

David Lyons <d.t.lyons@btinternet.com> (17.12.2000)

Oh my dear God no. Konstantin found someone to agree with him. A Masterpiece?? (Tull's Tenth Masterpiece???? I always assumed, foolishly it seems, that by definition you could have but one masterpiece. Your master piece. The piece of yours that is master. Your sodding best work, outstripping all else. Jesus, I'm going to sue that man for compensation re: increased blood pressure). I ought to shoot myself for two reasons - 1) For persisting in purchasing Tull albums when its clear to any sane person that you really shouldn't bother and 2) For persisting in reading Tikhonovs bizarre outpourings that have no basis whatsoever in the real world. Pissing into the wind indeed....Ian Andersons into his third decade of it.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (04.09.2002)

Well, you're a little hard on this one, I think. I do agree that the melodies are not particularly memorable. I couldn't even tell you what songs from the album they played when I saw them on this tour. But I do enjoy it for a number of reasons: really good lyrics; excellent sound quality and production (maybe the best ever on a Tull album); and Andy Giddings terrific keyboard playing -- the best since David Palmer left the band. The Indian motifs are definitely unusual for songs recorded in 1995. I do agree that "Another Harry's Bar" is their most blatant Dire Straits rip-off yet, but it's a pretty good rip-off. I don't hate "Valley" as much as you do, but this is the one place where the lyrics are quite cliched.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (18.03.2000)

Good album and nothing more. The story of Rock Island / Catfish Rising continues, after the strong and hard-boiled concept album Ian with friends made a simple collection of songs (wonderful songs, actually), while I prefer more complex stories. (And more longer. Four years of waiting... and the album lasts only 55 minutes!)

Philip Maddox <slurmsmckenzie@hotmail.com> (30.06.2000)

Now this is what I call a comeback! I liked Roots To Branches, but this record still blows it away and stands as easily the best record Tull has made since Broadsword. Of course, the title of the album is extraordinarily banal. It sounds like they're tyring to sound up-to-date, but instead sounds like they're grasping at straws. Feel free to mock the title.

Thomas M. Silvestri <cc3000@earthlink.net> (07.10.2000)

Note to Philip Maddox: Anyone who doesn't like Under Wraps is sure to hate Walk Into Light, which traffics in similar ideas but without the full Jethro Tull audio spectrum. While there are some good tracks, the whole thing sounds like it was recorded by Anderson and Vettese over a relatively short time, with the lyrics falling into that mundane A style. (In that October '80 press conference that I mentioned on the A page, Anderson said that the lyrics were inspired by things he read in the paper that morning, wrote up afterward, and sang later that day. He seemed to find this liberating and however he wants to work is his business, but I remember thinking this was a disaster as a working method as it brought to an end the more intrapsychic quality of most earlier Tull lyrics. He merged personal and worldly concerns a little better on ...Wraps than Walk..., I thought.) As for J-Tul Dot Com, there are too many great songs for me to go into at length, too much inspired playing and arrangement. Once again, the son-of-Aqualung cuts ("Spiral," "Hunt by Numbers") are the least interesting but I agree with most folks' comments about the other songs, though I will add that "Far Alaska," "The Dog-Eared Years," and especially "A Gift of Roses" deserve more credit for melody and arrangement than some have given them. (With "...Roses," as with "Bends Like a Willow," it's nice to see Anderson writing sincerely and successfully about his wife, given how many years she's apparently held down the salmon hatchery while he's out touring the world.) Memo to George: you do know that "El Nino" is not about a thunderstorm but rather about the worldwide weather condition that occurs every seven years or so, creating more-than-usually wet weather, right? ('97-98, when most of this was apparently recorded, was the last time it hit, and the reference to its "little sister" is to "La Nina," the drier year that habitually comes afterward.)

No reader comments yet.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (02.12.2005)

Well, Ian is getting positively sentimental in his old age! Especially on "Birthday Card at Christmas" -- even at this point, I'm not sure you'd totally expect that from the old curmudgeon. But since I'm turning into an old curmudgeon, too, that suits me just fine! I really love the atmosphere Ian comes up with for these tunes, even if a lot of them are only, at best, tangentially related to Christmas. I wouldn't say that the remakes of the older material necessarily improve on the originals, but he would have to do new arrangements to make the album sound consistent from beginning to end. The one song that does improve is "Jack Frost and the Hooded Crow" (originally a ..Broadsword.. outtake that eventually ended up on a B-side and on the ..20 Years.. box). The original was sort of hard synth-pop, but "acoustifying" it makes it more like a real Christmas song. The singing (like on "Birthday Card..", for instance) is, like on SLOB, sounding more like 70's Ian than he has in a long time. And he does give original instrumental twists on old Christmas songs like "God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen" and "Greensleeved" that make them avoid seeming cliched and old hat. Overall, this is one of the strongest Christmas albums ever to come from a rock group, although it probably won't ever get the attention it deserves.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (21.03.2000)

Very weird video with an excellent music. Filmed (as one rumour said) in Royal Albert Hall in November 1980, this tape contains the A tour concert (not the whole concert, just a few excerpts) with some bits of clip footages. Ian's imaginery is great, but stupid multicoloured filters made this video an extraordinary strange. "Black Sunday" live version is good, but the edition of the film is bad, in one moment you can hear Ian's flute while he didn't begin to play yet. "Dun Ringill" clip is interesting, "Fylingdale Flyer" is weak musically so the video image still can't help. "Songs From The Wood" and "Heavy Horses" are simply wonderful (I don't understand why did Ian shorten an original versions). "Sweet Dream" Dracula-image is fantastic ("Get out and get what you can while your mommy's at home a-sleeping") and I suspects that the audio tape was taken from "Bursting Out" (Tull didn't play "Sweet Dream" during the A tour, so it maybe "Bursting Out", maybe not). "Too Old To Rock'n'Roll" is a studio recording and the one of the funniest clips I've ever seen (oh those wooden ducks! those wooden ducks!). "Skating Away" is "Skating Away" (I still don't like this song), "Aqualung" is astonishing as always, and "Locomotive Breath" is the strangest part of the video. Yes, George's right, the song lost unforgettable riff, but in the coda you will hear breathless duel between Ian's flute and Eddie Jobson's electric violin, the moment of true revelation.

Tikhonov Konstantin <heavy-horses@mtu-net.ru> (21.03.2000)

A look into the history made for band's 20th anniversary, it contains some interviews with Ian and his faithful fans. Here we have fantastic pieces - Stockholm January '69 version of "To Be Sad Is A Mad Way To Be", videos of "The Whistler", "Too Old To Rock'n'Roll" (from "Slipstream") and "Heavy Horses" (another funniest thing, probably George turned off his VCR before this song, not after) and Tull's all-time peak - their October 1978 show at the Madison Square Garden. "Thick As A Brick"! "Songs From The Wood"! "Aqualung"! Oh, God was in New York that day! I prays that the whole concert will be released some day (there are rumours of the DVD release coming). The late 80's clips are nice, especially "Said She Was A Dancer" and "Jump Start", even "Steel Monkey" is looking good (but only looking). Bad points: some clips are shortened - USA '70 "Teacher" (you will find the whole version from France TV in same year on "25th Anniversary Video"), "Lap Of Luxury" (wise decision) and "Budapest" (and this is the real crime!). Editors of 25th Anniversary Video was much more wiser, they placed whole versions of some clips after the end of the film. Anyway, if you Tull-fan and even if you don't understand Ian's jokes - take it!

Steven Knowlton <knowstev@med.umich.edu> (16.10.2001)

I haven't heard this album, but I'd say the title "In an Olive Garden" probably is a reference to Christ, who prayed in an olive grove on the night he was betrayed.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (28.12.2001)

A tough album to categorize. Who was expected to buy this? Like you, George, I have a hard time differentiating between the pieces. But taken as a whole, the album is a very pleasant, enjoyable listen, calming and soothing. And the combination of all sorts of musical influences is quite interesting and creative, more so than the endless variations on the Crest sound Ian had been engaging in lately.

Bob Josef <Trfesok@aol.com> (23.04.2004)

I like this one a lot better than I thought I would. Simply a delightful record. It has all of the advantages of Roots to Branches -- excellent production,  Andy Giddings' superb arrangements, interesting imagery in the lyrics (if not as direct as RTB), occasional ethnic influences. And it has none of its shortcomings -- namely, the lack of melodicism in that album. The intimate, acoustic approach is also far more suitable to Ian's now very limited vocal range. These are his best vocals since the pre-Crest days (still a long way from the glory years, of course). I do agree that the lack of diversity is the only shortcoming in the album -- but again, RTB was more diverse, so that is not always an advantage. I can say that I enjoy every single song here. The live (in a radio station) bonus tracks are nice to have, too. The stripped down piano-and-flute version of "In the Grip of Stronger Stuff" fits in rather nicely. The Celtic influence is a lot more obvious. The excerpt from "Thick as a Brick" sounds a little bit more out of place (Ian is a LONG way now from that lyrical point of view), but it's not bad.

Alex Zaitsev <zaitsev@perm.ru> (10.06.2004)

Oh my God, did that review make me laugh! No, really, George, you've somehow managed to mix everything up in the funniest way possible! "Rupi's Danc"e is not a song about a teenage vixen! Rupi is Ian's kitten, the very "black angel" that waves its paw to the listener on the album cover. Geez, you calling the song "sleazy" is just so damn hilarious! So, on the one hand, thanks for giving me a good laugh, but on the other hand, try to do your work better when doing such analyses. I know that it's hard, with all those thousands of albums and stuff, but anyway, it's just a minor quibble.

PW (12.06.2004)

Rupi's Dance gets a lot of play for me; though it does indeed take a few listens (rook me 8-10) to begin to full appreciate this album. George's best songs on this are pretty much the ones I declared to be the best after just a few listens ('A Raft of Penguins', 'Photoshop', 'Old Black Cat', and 'Rupi's Dance'); they seem to be more immediately catchy. Not a bad track on the album. In comparison to The Secret Language of Birds, this one has a slightly more fleshed out sound, with perhaps even more flute leads and slightly less acoustic guitar, maybe having more 'rhythm' based songs (which is ironic since this one might have taken more listens to get into), and sounds a tad 'heavier'. Though really, overall, these two albums are much in the same vein. And while I initially rated SLOB a bit higher, I now have reached the conclusion they are close in quality. Both get 8/10 for me. You get your fast instrumental in 'Eurology' and your more relaxed one in 'Griminelli's Lament'. Great heavy almost American Indian sounding flute riff in "Pigeon Flying Over Berlin Zoo'. And while I wouldn't necessarily call this an "old man's" album, it does indeed strike me, like SLOB, as a more 'mature' album. But not boring and certainly fun and realxing. And while some may say this album doesn't push forward any envelopes, it certainly is a unique find in today's musical landscape. No one else that I've heard is putting out music of this nature and quality with good melodies and without the sonic bombast. Hey that's how I like much of my music anymore.