Jethro Tull / Джетро Талл

Ё! Завтра будем решать вопрос с билетами!

По секрету всему свету: на партере дешевле!

Приколитесь на билетик. Скульптурная композиция как вам? А шрифты-то славянские.

2Primal Scream:

>Приколитесь на билетик. Скульптурная композиция
>как вам? А шрифты-то славянские.

Красиво! Надеюсь до того времени, когда мы соберёмся покупать билеты, они останутся!

Не знаю, не знаю, дорогая Draupadi. На вашем месте я бы не тянул с билетами.
А вообще было бы любопытно взглянуть, как оформлены тикеты в Вильнюсе, Киеве и Питере. Здесь дизайн, понятно, московский. Если у кого-то есть возможность сканировать, то плиз.

Primal Scream ***
Коль, так тебе ужедоставили заказ?

Партер от 2200, амфитеатр(центр) от 1500. Кашмар!

Alex Red
Я сам себе доставил!

Видимо сегодня поеду за билетами. Те, кто желает присоединиться - пишите!

На Вильнюский концерт очень простые билеты.
60-150 lt (что-то 17-48 euro)продаются везде, тетка опешила при названии, но помогла с информацией.
Мест бери -не хочу, что очень пугает-как бы концерт не отменили((

andre
А что за пугалки? Почему??!!!

Ник,

Свят, свят.Типун мне на язык.

То-то же:((((

Jethro Tull 2005
случайно узнала, что есть ещё люди, не подозревающие о приезде весной Jethro Tull. Да и тут в расписании концертов админы почему-то ничего не говорят.
Посему "спешу" обрадовать тех кого обрадует.
22 в Москве а 24 в Питере.
Читать также http://www.greenwavemusic.ru ну и
http://www.jethrotull.com/tourdates/index.html

Это сообщение было перемещено из темы "Jethro Tull 2005".

Кто идет на концерт в Питере, отзовитесь!!! Самый дешевый билет - 600 р. Дороже бедный студент не может себе позволить. Посоветуйте куда лучше: на последние ряды или на балкон? (БКЗ Октябрьский)

Позволю себе полностью привести ревью, написанное и опубликованное на сайте Старостина (см. продолжение далее)

Jethro Tull were once an amazingly good British band that used to suffer from just one single terrible problem - overproductivity. On one hand, their main driving force - Ian Anderson (vocals, flute, harmonica, acoustic guitar, electric guitar, occasional everything) - was extremely talented (close to being a genius, but not a God - hear that ye rabid fans?), prolific, professional musician and composer, absolutely unique in his total fusion of classics, folk, jazz, blues, rock and pop. His songwriting, playing and performing abilities really astonish me. He has created an original image - that of the mad one-legged flute-playing long-bearded satyr - which you may like or you may despise, but you cannot deny the talent, man! You cannot deny the talent!
On the other hand, he was also stubborn, despotic and hateful (at least, towards most of us humans), and his desperate need to release at least one album per year led to the appearance of tons of crap which everybody said was crap, but he thought everybody said it was crap because everybody hated him so much that everybody wanted to say all of his stuff was crap even when it wasn't, so he just kept pouring out more crap, occasionally alternating it with a couple of great tunes. If he'd only wait patiently for these great tunes, hell...! Maybe everything we'd be hearing on the radio right now wouldn't be Led Zep. Then again, who can guess?
All right, let's get serious. As much as I despise hardcore Tull fans - my experience has led me to the sad conviction that Jethro Tull tends to attract the kind of people that were rabid Hitler lovers in their previous incarnation - I have to admit one thing: Jethro Tull are really like no-one else. I can't even really lump the band together with the general prog movement of the early Seventies, because in the early Seventies Jethro Tull weren't really prog; they played a special type of 'folk meets blues and crosses it with medieval stylistics' music which was particularly convenient for everybody because their songs were (a) melodic and catchy, (b) 'intelligent' and (c) relatively understandable and unpretentious. In this way, they managed to hit the big time and I mean REAL big, dragging albums with complex multi-part suites onto the top of the charts and gaining immense critical and commercial success. The fact that both Thick As A Brick and A Passion Play, the band's most complicated opera, had both hit # 1 on the US charts, is probably one of the brightest events in the whole art-rock history.
Things went downhill, however, as Ian Anderson started getting 'seriouser' and began to neglect both point (a), going away from catchiness into the world of complicated boredom, and point (c), inflating his lyrics until they ceased meaning anything and inflating the songs until they sounded positively universalistic and became absolute put-ons. This all culminated in a lengthy string of 1973-1979 albums that are incredibly patchy; I often call them 'one song albums' because most of them revert around (usually) one solid composition that provided the album's main single and, quite often, its very title ('Minstrel In The Gallery', 'Songs From The Wood', 'Heavy Horses', etc.). Of course, hardcore fans usually claim that this was Tull's best period, but you know these hardcore fans - judging an album by its level of complexity is ridiculous. The main problem, like I already said, is that Ian was just over-over-overproductive; while the other prog bands around him were either disbanding or extremely slow on the move, he was able to sustain the formula 'one album per year' all through the decade!
As a result, the band had lost pretty much all of the respect and credit it had gained in the late Sixties/early Seventies. The cirtics now hated Ian, and Ian likewise hated the critics - his petty anger led to him lambasting the poor Pen Workers on pretty much every record he made since Warchild, in some way or other (thanks God he doesn't know about the existence of this site!!). The sales gradually declined, too, and the number of fans gradually decreased. Since the Eighties, most Tull albums are always drifting steadily around the 100-150th position on the charts, and the Tull audience has been stabilized, being limited to 'rabid fans' and a bunch of old nostalgiacs who still frown at the band's newer efforts but are always ready to buy a ticket to go see the old Satyr churn out a 'Locomotive Breath' or a 'New Day Yesterday'. As for the 'newer efforts' themselves, it only got worse - anybody who's not a rabid fan of the band's Seventies catalog should steer clear of their later products. The first half of the Eighties passed under the sign of Electronica - where Ian had some relative successes with surprise albums like Broadsword And The Beast but also complete failures like Under Wraps - and since then the band had degenerated into a third-rate heavy metal outfit with next to no creative skills and nothing but nostalgia to back them up.
Although, truthfully, their latest release is surprisingly good. Unless I was just too tired of endlessly bashing late period Tull albums, of course.
OK, the lineup now. It's very hard to get a good line-up going here, 'cos Ian kept hiring and firing people at his own will, until this became just some sorta maniac thing in the eighties.

Just wait and see: the original lineup (1968): 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), Glenn Cornick (base) and Clive Bunker (drums; best drummer they ever had, actually). In 1969 Abrahams replaced by Martin Lancelot Barre (guitar). This fellow is the only one who had the chance to last till now, and deservedly so. He may be one of the finest playing guitarists on earth, and also just an overall nice guy. His guitar forms the perfect counterpoint to Ian's flute.
In 1970 John Evan (keyboards) was recruited for the Benefit sessions, and officially joined the group next year. A fantastic keyboard player: his Bach-like piano was a wonderful acquisition for the band. In 1971 Cornick quit, replaced on base by Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond - the "ultimate" base player, in my opinion, sometimes sounds better than John Entwistle! So the line-up of 1971 was the most professional one - maybe that's why Aqualung sounds so great.
In 1972 Bunker quit, replaced on drums by Barriemore Barlow. This line-up was the longest, still, it lasted only till 1975. 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 session players stayed for just one album and in 1982 were replaced by Gerry Conway (drums) and Peter John Vettese (keyboards; interesting fella but no John Evan, and he is also responsible for 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. Let's see: altogether that comes to... hmmm... eleven line-ups, and there were still more after 1984! OK, cut that out. All you need to remember is that Ian guy, of course, and Martin Barre, and maybe John Evan - after all, he did play like god in the seventies. To the albums, now.

2Марат:
Пардон, что не по теме, но...
А сайт Старостина ожил (он,вроде, закрывался)?
или это из "сундучка"?

Из сундучка. Я периодически бываю на Music Babble, к сожалению, получаемая мной информация не дает никакой надежды на скорое возвращение сайта. Да, если Вам нужны какие-либо материалы - пишите. Н-ая часть (весьма внушительная, так между прочим) хранится на моем жестком диске.

Vilnius 19.03.05
Ticket