JSngry

Ok, this is all good to learn. Now I know that the "quirks" I hear are part of the intent. It makes a difference knowing that, because, yes, very striking performances, a worthy addition to anybody's Janacek exploration. Thanks to everybody for sharing their knowledge!

Who is this "The Austrian String Quartet" anyway? They have a timbre that is as evocative as their pitch is, uh...equally evocative? Was this a real band? I only see them on Vox/Turnabout, and even then on just a very few records, none of which talk about the band at all. Like, ZERO. Either way, I like this record a lot, comparing this to the Emerson version is quite the immediate contrast. I'd just like to know if the pitch is interpretive or simply casual. Either way, it's attention-getting!

not a damn thing. but wouldn't it be nice, maybe? didn't Roy Eldridge spend a long time at Jimmy Ryan's?

Because if they sell out of stream you're SOL? Not being anything but the most casual streamer, I don't see what they're offering here?

or Eddie Condon's or Jimmy Ryan's!

Here's another good one that is off too may radars: The leader has made a series of solid dates with varied and interesting personnel. But this one is tops, imo.

Seconded! Masters also did an album of/with grachan Moncur III that is more than a little worthy.

I think there was not small bit of tongue-in-cheek with the Kay Kyser picture and caption. There's a lot of that on that site, actually. "Academic" he may be, but humorless he definitely is not!

Wasn't it Kay Kyser that did "Three Little Fishes"?

I've heard that Candy solo in so many clubs, with so many dancers...if you played on a Cameo record back in those days, your audience was guaranteed. And huge. I don't know how many people knew that it was Michael Brecker playing it, but I can't tell you how many times I hear people say hey, you play sax? can you play like that guy on that Cameo record? And shit...on any given Saturday, you would find MASSES of people jamming to that record. I've had nights where I'd play it with the band, and then the DJ would play it again on the break. I mean, Cameo in general should not be overlooked, that was a great band that made KILLER records for a good long time. But if it's a race to "most heard Brecker solo" between the JT side and this one...I don't know if I'd bet one way or the other. Cameo, y'all, CAMEO!

Well yeah, the difference is driving the split business models. Different people have different ideas about what this music "is", not just in terms of music, but in terms of product. Just think about this - unless you stumble across a neighbor practicing, if you hear ANY music anywhere, you're almost certainly hearing it because somebody put it there. club, hall, record, radio, download, streaming, anything. Somebody saw to it that that product got made and placed. And sure, yeah, everybody wants to make money, to get paid. That's not the point either. There are wildly and widely different models in place today and of course they vary to meet the markets (real or potential) that go with the musics. Who is doing what to get their product to who, how are they doing it, and why are they doing it as they are. That's the whole point of the point. That, and if the tail of the commerce is wagging the dog of the music (and if the dog has by now become all tail...that's one fucked up dog!) So if you want to consider that, then this guy is giving you his considerations (focused on, it seems, the JALC model, of which he is not a fan, I would guess) for your consideration. And if you don't want to consider that, just walk away from the discussion, because it's not something you want to consider, and won't be. Finally a true binary choice!

Not talking about music, talking about business. Where the money comes from to generate the places and ways that these musics get heard. Newport used to be able to book New Orleans bands & Gospel & Benny Carter & Miles & Cecil Taylor & damn near anything else. You could have a lot of feeders into one overall business model. There was a point at which they could all do business together. And they did. Today, not so much, if at all. It's going to be interesting to see what the business model(s) look like, say, 50 years from now, when all the "last remnants" of anything from the old models are dead. That's what the JALC model has been good at, creating interchangeable placeholders, they got that shit going on really good now. They've got their system and they've sold it to their public. It's what any business wants to do, create a stable product that can be sold into, possibly, perpetuity! Now, when Braxton or Roscoe or Wadida goes (let's go out 25 years for them), or Halverson or Sorey (let's go out, say, 75 years, they'll be dead by then, certainly), or anybody in that world dies...having interchangeable placeholders ready to step in is sorta NOT the aim of that business model (at this time, anyway). But people like Roscoe & Braxton have shown they'll get people to work with them who can carry on their ideas, and add their own thing along the way. And if they're so inclined, they can grow a market of their own as they do. Craig Taborn been doing this for a while, starting to get leader profile, finally. But those worlds are not doing any real business with JALC. I'm sure there's a gig here and there somewhere for somebody, but that is not where they get their main business support. Now, do the worlds reunite at some point, or is the deed done, the musical/business mitosis? I'll likely not be alive to see how it plays out, but my guess is that they don't, unless and until the corporates at JALC decide it's time to move in and feed on this other stuff. If the "Big Ears world" continues to grow...they'll smell that money and proceed accordingly.

I got a Japanese reissue of The Believer a few years ago. Watch for it to come around again at some point and carpe diem. Here's another two "must-haves" to get: There's some more "deep catalog" items to get, more than you might think.

I hear that, but still trends emerge, whether guided or not (I think you gotta look at that on a case-by-case basis), and once a trend emerges, you can be 1000% certain there will be forces who make every effort to co-opt, guide, and eventually own whatever they can out of those trends. And I don't think that's a uniquely "capitalistic" behavior either, it's an essentially hard-wired human behavior, we will always have those whose goal it is to in some form or fashion "own" the rest of us. As much trouble as you can get into by over-generalizing about it, you can get into at least that much more trouble by not recognizing it as it occurs.

Hardly, it's Elizabeth Warren!