lipi

OK, I'll buy Chick. He recorded "After Seben" that same year, so it makes sense. And the trombone player could be Jimmy Harrison, then. And...Elmer Williams on clarinet, maybe? I've never seen a great picture of either Elmer Williams or Jefferson Hilton (or if I have I cannot remember).

But that *is* what conservatism is, whether you agree or disagree with the current American president, or Republican party, or whatever else: conservatism is wanting to cling to old values and modes of living, regardless of consequences. I admit I made the (entirely reasonable to me) stretch that mostly people want to cling to the-way-things-were when the-way-things-were was beneficial for them. And don't be silly. Nazism and conservatism aren't the same at all. If you're trying to troll a discussion about the GOP and their general lack of response to certain demonstrations, I'm game, baby, and it's on like Donkey Kong. This thread is unlikely to last long if we go down that road, however. As an aside: I think it's an intellectual crime *not* to debate politics in this climate, but it's not my website, so I don't really have a say. Which, amusingly, circles right back to a radio station deciding not to play a song and a large group of people starting to shout about bans and but-it-never-bothered-me. As an aside to an aside (back in front, I guess?): I have a melancholy feeling that I have posted this picture here before, in a Weinstein-inspired thread.

I love that bit of film. It's from a 1929 Fox Movietone news reel. The University of South Carolina Libraries website has the source file, which includes nearly 20 minutes of footage: outtakes of the intro, musician close-ups, etc. First 50 seconds is random stock footage, so you can safely skip that: https://mirc.sc.edu/islandora/object/usc%3A47584 I never actually tried to figure out who plays in it, but I'd love to know.

You, my dear, need to pick up a dictionary and look up the meanings of the word "conservative." Then, you must pick up a history book and determine when it was that the "we don't want to change anything, because I've got mine" crowd won in the long term. My point was that by definition conservatism is a losing battle.

I think you'll find that my statement, if anything, implies that social and moral conservatism (which is not the same as political conservatism, though the overlap in the US today is great) is the deluded side. Standing on the wrong side of history would mean you got it wrong when you predicted the future. [*] Whether it is absolutely good or evil is a moral question that is quite a different matter—it gets into an argument over absolute versus relative morality very quickly. [*] Yes, this is ignoring the possibility that you could be predicting the future just fine but are trying to delay it as much as possible. That of course leads to the question, and a fascinating philosophical and psychological one at that: why?

No, I mean the future should not be the shameless patriarchy that the 20th century was. And if you fail to see that, I cry for you, but smile in the knowledge that conservatism has never stood on the correct side of history.

Hey, oy, hold on there kiddos: that's textbook slippery slope fallacy, both of you. (Not that I would expect any better from Fox.) OK, I honestly don't mean to just pick on you, Steve (this whole thread is just a bunch of old men whining about how the patriarchy really isn't what it used to be, so imagine my ranting at (nearly) all of you), but WTH is that first sentence? You're rhetorically asking, in other words stating, "they're not upset about this other music because they don't know this other music exists, the philistines!" It's a bit difficult to be upset about, or have any opinion on, something you have not encountered, so it appears like you think lack of musical knowledge makes someone ineligible of having their feelings hurt. I hope that's not the case. And the second paragraph I'm quoting is another textbook example of a logical fallacy: this time it's a fallacy of relative privation, with a bit of false dichotomy implied. That there is rap music that is or is not offensive is irrelevant here. (As to your implied "but the same people love rap" statement: onus probandi. As to the "it's about alcohol Seriously, though, I'm embarrassed to be a male of the species after reading this thread.

In a bizarre alignment of the stars, I have an extra copy of Stompin' Volume 3, which I also received in error when ordering another volume. Free to a good home, free postage in the US, first PM gets it, batteries not included, action figures sold separately.

My package also arrived today, and though the post office had managed to punch a hole through the outer box (?!?!!), thanks to Scott's absolutely immaculate packaging, everything was unharmed. Thank you!

I think that's a great suggestion.

I think 12 year olds need melodies, not random notes. *ducks for cover*

Before I give my highly-subjective picks: do kids that age use CDs? Do they even have a CD player? Wouldn't it be better to buy them some downloadable music from their service of choice, or a Spotify subscription (if they don't have one already) and make them some playlists? None of the kids I know use CDs, but I'm in the heart of Silicon Valley. Then again, we more or less agree with Portland on everything, so... Agreed on the Casals. Anything by du Pré (like the Brahms sonatas or this compilation) or Rostropovich is also worthwhile. And everyone else will get him Yo-Yo Ma, so no need for that. (That said, the Bobby McFerrin-Yo-Yo Ma collaboration Hush is probably great for a ten year old.) The most entertaining jazz cello I have is Mike Karoub's playing on the first CD by the Royal Garden Trio: allmusic, amazon. They have two newer albums, but I have not heard them. Finally, you've seen these two Croation guys, right? 2cellos Their YouTube channel has a bunch of things kids would love, I suspect. Alto sax...do you need recommendations? I suspect you have jazz favourites in that realm already, but just in case I'll recommend the Ellington & Hodges albums. I have nothing to suggest for that third so-called instrument, except that I have too many friends who think it's oh-so-cool to pull the thing out randomly. It's like it's the guitar of the 2000's: "Yeah, I play"—proceeds to strum two chords, one of which is wrong. I assume there's worthwhile music, though, so I'm actually kind of curious to see what people recommend.

Do you have a source on this?

Huh. OK, next theory: command-I on a song (Get Info), File tab, date added & date modified. (Alternatively, right click the song list, and select Date Added and Date Modified as columns to show. Or use View->View Options and enable the same two fields under Stats.) Are all the songs with missing artwork similar in their dates, by any chance? As to what can cause artwork to not be addable, it could be any of a hundred things. It all boils down to this being a complex piece of software, and, worse, one that has to maintain data from release to release. QA for something like this is a nightmare and 100% coverage of user scenarios is simply impossible: you aim for 80% and are relieved if you make it. It's a freakin' miracle it works as well as it does!

Considering both Amazon and Google (and, I wouldn't be surprised, Apple, too) are working on getting their respective digital assistants in cars, you'll soon have your dream: "Alexa/Google/Siri, I love that song" and boom, added to your playlist of favourites. Did you have a look at what the tag version was before you converted to 2.3/4? Was it, by any chance, ID3v1 or v1.1? If so, I think I can take a stab at what happened. Before ID3v2, you could not store album art as a tag. Like Steve Gray mentioned above, iTunes used its own database to keep track of your artwork (just like it still does today with your ratings and playlists). There is a folder named Album Artwork in ~/Music/iTunes. My best guess is that apart from losing your .itl and .xml files, the upgrade also lost your Album Artwork folder. The only files that would be affected are those that do not store their own artwork, which will (at a minimum) be all files using ID3v1.x tags.

Unless you're using MP3 encoded files, it's not gonna be the ID3 versioning. [*] Select a file, then File->Convert->Convert ID3 Tags... I don't know what "the wrong" version is according to Kevin. I suspect v1, because artwork was not supported in ID3v1, but that was also, you know, in the 20th century. ID3v2 was introduced in '98, so any file you are likely to have lying around will have ID3v2 tags. Where was I getting with this? Oh, right. If you want to screw around with the versioning, set it to 2.3 or 2.4. I have no idea what happens when you turn it from v2 down to v1, but I highly encourage you not to try. v2 added a lot of fields, and changed the sizes of fields. Turning v2 tags into v1 tags has the potential to be very lossy. [*] Yeah, yeah, I know. Wave files, despite what is claimed earlier in this thread, can also take ID3 tags, and so can MP4 files. Whoopdeedoo. You're using ALAC or AAC like a good boy, right? No ID3 tags there (at least in iTunes...but this story is complicated enough as is).

Can confirm Bay Area air quality is pretty bad. On the plus side, we're totally ahead of the curve on the whole menthol cigarette thing.

The day she socked it to the Harper Valley PTA! Also, as much as I enjoyed the earlier mention of Lunceford on 8-track, Lunceford goes on a two-sided 78 or 45. Clearly what you want on 8-track is boogie woogie. Another useless thing I'll contribute to this thread is the observation that IT BLOWS MY FREAKIN' MIND that the shimmering-fairy-dust-moon-rock-cables-aligned-with-true-North-are-better-for-my-bat-like-hearing patrol did not comment on Kevin's post. Either someone was not paying attention, or we've all grown up a bit. In either case, cause for wild celebration: pointy hats and RIAA-eq-curve-adjusted party blowers for all!

Pshaw! Turk over Windingbats and Jones or whatever those funny modern trombone people are called. Not representative, but my favourite Lu Watters album is the 1964 "Blues over Bodega" he did with Barbara Dane (I couldn't find it as a download, unfortunately). More representative are the three volumes of "Live at Hambone Kelly's," which are available on amazon as downloads. Can't go wrong with "Shake That Thing," "Sister Kate," or "Love Me or Leave Me." (Though that last one is hardly representative of the repertoire.) There's a recording of St James Infirmary by Turk Murphy in 1957 that I like a lot. It's on the Jasmine double CD called "New Orleans Stomp." Here it is as a download: https://smile.amazon.com/St-James-Infirmary/dp/B00GGVQBL4/ Leon Oakley, who played with Turk Murphy, still plays in the Bay Area regularly, often with Clint Baker's band. There's a 2005 album where the two of them join Duke Heitger, Evan Christopher, and some others to play the Lu Watters/Turk Murphy repertoire: "Duff Campbell's Revenge: A Live Concert." Looking forward to hearing the show!

<3

Looks like those three tracks were encoded at a different time/with a different tool/something. They're 192 kbps, while everything else is 320 kbps. aparxa or Thom Keith: if one of you can grab tracks 7, 15, and 19 and convert them to either 160 kbps or 320kbps, they'll play as a stream in Chrome, too. (The latest builds of Chrome, for reasons unclear to me, do not like the 192 kbps bitrate. A play() call to a file with an unsupported bitrate will return as if the file were absent from the server.)

Perhaps of interest, previous thread about Skeets where Elvin is also briefly mentioned:

What a great record. <3

What you are seeing are the death throes of a confused industry.