Jethro Tull without Martin Barre: Where's the justice?

**StevegSr** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by paythesnuka

But it is not a reformed Tull. It is Ian Anderson and his band performing Tull songs in tribute of its 50th Anniversary. There is a difference, ever so slight.

Are there any other former Tull members in IA's current touring band?

And that makes Barre asked to perform as a special guest (the special guest) out of the question?

**aith01** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by StevegSr

And that makes Barre asked to perform as a special guest (the special guest) out of the question?

Do we know with any certainty that he wasn't asked to perform?

**StevegSr** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by aith01

Do we know with any certainty that he wasn't asked to perform?

Nothing was specifically mentioned on Barre's FP page and the Barre Band Website, except that Barre and Doane Perry are still pissed for not being asked to join Ian's TAAB/TAAB2 tour.

**bRETT** · 12-01-2017

Far as anyone can tell, Martin is having a much better time as it is. He makes no secret in interviews that he wasn't happy in Tull anymore-- didn't like the fact that the setlists never changed, or what was happening to Ian's voice. I've enjoyed the heck out of the MB Band shows I've seen, and though there's been no update lately, it seems he is still planning an anniversary tour with some ex-Tullies.

**progcd54** · 12-01-2017

Grand Funk Railroad without Mark Farner........The Guess Who without Burton Cummings........Blood, Sweat & Tears without David-Clayton Thomas (actually without ANY original members).......YES without Jon Anderson (AWR doesn't count as good as they are)......Carl Palmer's ELP Legacy (doing ELP material and without keyboards)...Bad Company without Mick Ralphs (he wasn't on 2016 the tour for health reasons) and the list goes on. Aren't these artists/bands entitled to play and make a living?

If they all got back together with the missing people (even if some of them could), then the complaints would flow that they can't play/sing like they used to. Changes and getting older is inevitable. Granted it is a very sorrowful thing that younger folks (even older ones who never got the chance) didn't see these bands in their glory days.

Since 2012 Ian has toured under different names but made it clear that "Jethro Tull" was dead. He wanted to distance himself from the "brand". But apparently seeing that financially the "Tull" name was a money-maker (no kidding) he is now using it again. Very frustrating and confusing. We forget that Ian is a very shrewd businessman. But it's too bad he can't make up his mind what to call himself and his band. I saw Jethro Tull's Ian Anderson (tour for Homo Erraticus) and it was not so good in some ways. Indeed...his voice was shot and the new guitarist was NOT Martin Barre by a long shot. But with the "lead/back-up singer" Ryan O'Donnell (now gone too) it was tolerable.

And as to Martin...he's having the time of his life touring with his own band doing old Tull tunes much better than Ian can these days!! Kudos to Martin!!!

**Mister Triscuits** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by paythesnuka

Are there any other former Tull members in IA's current touring band?

David Goodier and John O'Hara were members of the last incarnation of Tull, and Florian Opahle had already depped for Martin Barre at a few shows when Martin was suffering from a hand injury.

**BarryLI** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by StevegSr

Yes, we're still talking about this because a reformed Tull minus Barre has much more impact that Anderson touring solo without him. If Barre was not deeply hurt by being thrown out of Anderson's projects and just went on his own way, then fair enough. But actually reforming Tull without him is the ultimate insult and really hits home with the actual reformed Tull concerts soon coming to fruition.

As the old adage goes Frank, if the topic is old to you, just pass it by. It will never be old to me as I know that Barre's role in Tull was extremely diminished by Anderson over the last 20 years and Barre still wanted to play in that diminished capacity, and in fact was happy to do so. He still enjoyed it. As for praising Anderson, you've found much more of his recent output to appreciate than the average fan. His time of greatness was well over years ago. As his muse failed, treating his old band mates well was the last act that would have ensured his greatness as the group's leader. Sorry for my late reaction to this dissing of Barre, but time has not made it palpable to me or acceptable. Only worse.

Except nothing has been re-formed, you know? The musos are the same as for the past decade or so.

**mogrooves** · 12-01-2017

Did Barre quit JT or was he pushed? What were the circumstances?

**StevegSr** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by mogrooves

Did Barre quit JT or was he pushed? What were the circumstances?

He got pushed. (From the top of a building.)

**aith01** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by StevegSr

He got pushed. (From the top of a building.)

That implies Jethro Tull continued to exist as a band without Barre, which it didn't. It's not really the same.

**StevegSr** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by aith01

That implies Jethro Tull continued to exist as a band without Barre, which it didn't. It's not really the same.

What's the mystery? Anderson dissolved Tull to persue a solo agenda and now plays Tull music with a surrogate band. Sounds like a plot for a Floyd concept album. Hey..what a minute...!

**BarryLI** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by aith01

That implies Jethro Tull continued to exist as a band without Barre, which it didn't. It's not really the same.

Did Jethro Tull continue to exist when Mick Abrahams got pushed? How about Glenn Cornick or Clive Bunker? Or when Jeffrey Hammond left or John Glascock passed away or Barrie and John and David got pink-slipped? Asking for a friend.

**StevegSr** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by BarryLI

Did Jethro Tull continue to exist when Mick Abrahams got pushed? How about Glenn Cornick or Clive Bunker? Or when Jeffrey Hammond left or John Glascock passed away or Barrie and John and David got pink-slipped? Asking for a friend.

Tell your friend that Barre played on 20 straight Tull studio albums where as the other never played on more than 5, and that Anderson thought Barre so indispensable that he dragged him along on his aborted solo album A, which later morphed into a full blown Tull album. By his longevity, Barre became almost as much identified with Tull as Anderson was. The same can not be said of Abrahams, Cornick, Bunker, Hammond, Glascock, Barrie, John, David, Tom, Dick and Harry.

**BarryLI** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by StevegSr

Tell your friend that Barre played on 20 straight Tull studio albums where as the other never played more on more than 5 and that Anderson thought Barre so indispensable that he dragged him along on his aborted solo album A, which later morphed into a full blown Tull album. By his longevity, Barre became almost as much identified with Tull as Anderson was. The same can not be said of Abrahams, Cornick, Bunker, Hammond, Glasscock, Barrie, John, David, Tom, Dick and Harry.

The same friend wants to know if Mr Barre had any songwriting or arrangement credits? Or was he a you know guitar player?

**infandous** · 12-01-2017

I think Barre is over it, and I don't think he wants to play with Anderson anymore. There's no indication he cares about Anderson's latest 50th celebration tour one way or the other (and he's doing his own, anyway). I base this merely on what I've read from Barre in interviews over the past few years, but of course only he knows for certain how he feels about it.

Personally, I've always thought Anderson IS Tull, though I certainly wouldn't want to work with him myself, based on how it seems he's treated band members over the years. That said, even if all the songs weren't really 100% his, they were largely his (and most of them entirely his), so I don't really get the feeling Tull was a "band" so much as Anderson's backing band since the 2nd or 3rd album. Just my opinion, which is just about as accurate as everyone else on this thread.

Then again, I'm more of a minor Tull fan, as I like a lot of the 70's stuff but have never seen them live and haven't ever really thought about doing it. So I don't really have a dog in this "fight".

**StevegSr** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by BarryLI

The same friend wants to know if Mr Barre had any songwriting or arrangement credits? Or was he a you know guitar player?

Not often, but Barre composed and arranged an incidental piece of fluff which became the killer instrumental opening section to the song Minstrel In the Gallery. If your friend has any more inane questions, then he/she should buy a book on Tull, read it, and leave you, and by proxy, me alone.

**BarryLI** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by StevegSr

Not often, but Barre composed and arranged an incidental piece of fluff which became the killer instrumental opening section to the song Minstrel In the Gallery. If your fiend has any more inane questions, then he/she should buy a book on Tull, read it, and leave you, and by proxy, me alone.

Well I'm pretty sure that the entire Tull catalog would have gone down had Tull's management (Terry Ellis, Richard Wright) seen to it that a different guitar player other than Martin (not Tony Iommi, lol) got hired after Mick Abrahams' ouster from the band. I'm 100% certain that none of them would have happened without Mr Anderson so he can call them anything he wants in my book. PS: I'll tell my friend.

**Dan Roth** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by aith01

Do we know with any certainty that he wasn't asked to perform?

This is a quote from Ian when asked about the personnel that will be performing the Tull songs for the 50th Anniversary shows:

"There have been over thirty two band members in the band, so it's a little impractical to factor in some without leaving out others. The four guys with me for the last twelve years have their marbles, their own instruments and their boarding passes. Many of the past members gave up music a long time ago or are not able to play anymore. A few, sadly, are no longer with us..."

It is kinda sad that he looks at Barre as just one of the 32 band members.

**eporter66** · 12-01-2017

I think it's sad that after all the years of playing together, it seems Martin deserved better treatment. Why can't two people just sit down, talk things out, shake hands and move on?

If Ian wants/wanted to play with other musicians, that's fine. But, do it the right and respectful way.

**Score2112** · 12-01-2017

Saw Martin's band recently at a small DC area club, he sounded fantastic, hasn't lost a step. And as great as his band was, couldn't help but think what a shame he isnt still playing with Ian as official Tull. Oh well.

Also, think this has been stated before. but according to a Prog magazine interview, Martin himself will be celebrating Tull's 50th next year, and apparently intends to incorporate former members, a cant miss.

**chalkpie** · 12-01-2017

Originally Posted by StevegSr

T Barre became almost as much identified with Tull as Anderson was. The same can not be said of Abrahams, Cornick, Bunker, Hammond, Glascock, Barrie, John, David, Tom, Dick and Harry.

I disagree sir. Martin is no more important on albums such as Aqualung, Brick, Minstrel, Too Old, Wood, Horses (plus more) than other fellow mates like Barlow, Glascock, Hammond, Evan, etc. They ALL were an equal and vital part of the Tull sound for each respective period of albums they played on, yet as the music progressed and morphed into something different, they could be replaced (and often were). Here's an example: if Ian decided to go with a different guitarist starting around 1982 for Broadsword, then Tull would still exist as we know it, and the mystery guitarist would have fit in just fine to the new sound. I firmly believe that due to logic and just plain common sense. Ian never hired any terrible musicians that were incapable of performing his music inadequately, they were all great-to-stellar. The only person that couldn't be replaced is the man who wrote and sang the music, wrote the lyrics as well as the album concepts, as well as played the flute, acoustic guitar, mandolin, harmonica, etc.

Going with the idea that Tull isn't Tull without Martin, then theoretically you're saying if Martin passed away in 1984 (or thereabouts), then Jethro Tull would have ceased to exist from that moment forward. I find that ridiculous, frankly. However, if Ian croaked at that time, then its a different story altogether. Correct me if I'm wrong here - because what is the difference of how or when Martin left the band, or John Evan, or Dee Palmer, or John Glascock, or Barriemore Barlow, or Peter John Vettese, because they all contributed to the Tull sound at one point at one point or another, yet when you boil it down to the core of their roles within the music, they were really just hired side-men for Ian's music, which just so happened to go by the name of Jethro Tull. Tull can and does exist with just one person singing and playing an acoustic guitar, always remember that. You don't need me to provide examples if you are a true Tull fanatic, because there are numerous song title that can be mentioned here.

Ian wrote "Jack-in-the-Green" in the morning one day, then drove to London to record ALL of the parts himself - no Martin needed, or anybody for that matter. He is and embodies Tull, plain and simple. These days I personally don't give a frogg's fatt can what bands or artists call themselves on stage or an album sleeve, or quite honestly getting into the nitty gritty of a very personal social history that I was in no way, shape, or form privy to regarding said circumstances, so who am I to judge? What I can do though is to be grateful for the amazing music that these gentlemen afforded me and leave it at that. When the memoirs come out, then I'll be happy to read about it, but it will not change my absolute adoration of the music one bit.

**arturs** · 12-01-2017

^^^ Do you honestly believe Locomotive Breath or Aqualung would have been the classics they are with any other guitarist? Can be debated, of course, but I find it hard to imagine. The monster riffs. The sweet, hard rock solos. IMHO Martin had a rare intuitive sense of how to push all the right buttons on those tunes. Sure, they were Ian's tunes, and he deserves credit for that, but I think Tull would have never broken out of the blues/hard-rock pack with anyone else on guitar. Can't say anything similar about any other Tull members (well, maybe Jobson...).