mjzee

Amazon Marketplace currently has a used copy for $3.60 + shipping.

Vivendi shares got a 3 percent bump on Thursday after the chief executive of the Paris conglomerate said it is weighing a public listing of its Universal Music Group. “We have started work that will allow us to present the benefits of a potential listing of UMG to the supervisory board,” Chief Executive Arnaud de Puyfontaine said at Vivendi’s shareholder meeting. More here: https://nypost.com/2018/04/19/vivendi-considers-listing-universal-music-group/

He's on one of my favorite albums ever:

My guess is that Universal now owns the piece of Mosaic formerly owned by EMI. IIRC, in the past Mosaic would sometimes send out emails from @Capitol-EMI.com. So if this indicates a friendly relationship between Mosaic and Universal, that's all to the good. I also don't think it would cause a problem with Sony or Warner - those guys live for licensing fees, and Mosaic's boxes are limited editions, i.e. short term. I had a chance to chat with Michael and Scott during their recent in-office sale. They seemed genuinely upbeat about the future. They indicated that some aspects of their business model may have to change, in ways unspecified to me (and perhaps yet to be fully-figured-out by them), but it was clear they were very focused on cash-on-hand and how much cash is tied up by unsold sets. I took it to mean either shorter production runs, fewer total sets produced per title, or perhaps prepays (again, just guesses on my part). But they were definitely looking forward to creating new sets in the future.

BTW, did anyone notice the email address it came from? Mosaic@capitol.umusic-mail.com

Mosaic posted a link to a 1976 interview with Dexter Gordon (it can be found here). I found this passage fascinating: Berg: Many people have mentioned your influence on 'Trane. Did you know ‘Trane? Gordon: Not really. I knew him, but not well. He was from Philly. He was younger, of course, but I had met him here and there. Philly Joe reminded me recently, a few months ago when we were on tour together in Europe, of the time that Miles' band came out to Hollywood. 'Trane was playing his shit, but it wasn't projecting, he didn't have the sound. So one day we were talking and I said, "Man, you play fantas­tic, but you have to develop that sound, get that projection." I gave him a mouthpiece I had that I wasn't using. I laid that on him and that was it. That made the difference. Berg: That's incredible because there are many things in 'Trane's sound that are reminiscent of your sound. Gordon: He was playing my mouth­piece, man! Again, it's the same line— Lester to Bird to Dexter to 'Trane. There was evolution, of course, but really the same line.

I don't think it's horrible news. They don't want to tie up cash for a box that'll be sitting on their shelves for awhile, so they're sounding out their customers. If not enough people respond, they'll put their money into a new title. (I really liked the Beehive box, btw.)

Weird that people get so twisted out of shape because I said I don't like the 2nd quintet. Not my loss at all; I don't hear anything there to lose. I think here's a key sentence: Not true (just my point of view, but I'm discussing what I find appealing in music). You can play the tune, but then, if you play free, you're no longer playing the tune. You can come back to the tune after you play free, but document it as it happened. The Grateful Dead did that as follows: Playing In The Band>Jam>Not Fade Away>Playing In The Band. When they jam, it begins as a flow from the tune before, but they're not playing the tune anymore. If they jam within a tune, it's pretty apparent they're playing within the tune. When Miles transitioned to more riff-based music (Filles and after), it seems he considered the tune (composition) as a vehicle for improvisation to be problematic. Why get stuck with a tune, chord-structure and such, especially if you're just going to wind up ignoring it? Instead, just go with a riff and improvise over it all you want. There's your freedom, but it's also tonal and enjoyable - yes, it's got a good beat and you can dance to it. More power to him. But if you're going to improvise within a tune, I think it's important (for a performance that's coherent to the listener) to respect the chord structure and stay within the tune. Otherwise, you're just doing whatever the hell you want, and who's to say it's enjoyable and successful? In fact, why bother with the tune if you're just going to discard it? Just do whatever the hell you want and see if you get an audience. A really good example of this tension is on Albert Ayler's First Recordings (I heard it on GNP-Crescendo many years ago). As I recall, the band starts an innocuous standard ("I'll Remember April"), Ayler gets up and immediately starts farting all over the tune. He's not even pretending that what he's playing has a congruence with the tune. I hear it as a simple act of aggression - against the tune, against tonality, against melodicism, and maybe against bourgeois society. He's making the point he intends. I don't want to hear it again. But hey, enjoy the music you like. The 2nd quintet's music has been consistently in print since first released, with more seemingly added every few years ("Bootleg Series" and such). So there are lots of people who enjoy what you enjoy. I was just presenting my point of view, pointing out the qualities I don't like in the music.

Ah. Well, Stephen Hawking's dead, so I'll leave this to the ether.

I never liked the second quintet. Never. Consistently never*. Never saw the attraction. And I've tried: I have the studio box, the two "Bootleg Live" releases, and a one-disc compilation of the Plugged Nickel box. Unattractive melodies, rushed tempos, Tony's grandstanding cluttering up the beat (give me Billy Higgins any day!), and when it comes time to solo, Herbie's a gooey soft marshmallow who seems to be saying "what am I doing here?" I've been listening to a lot of the second quintet recently, courtesy of the shuffle functions on my iPod and iTunes. Just yesterday I heard Madness (from Nefertiti). A head that's barely a head, Miles noodles, Wayne cobbles together an interesting solo (an achievement, considering the dearth of melodic materials he has to work with), then Herbie comes in with...what? The beat stops, the tune goes out the window...Teo could've spliced this solo in from an entirely different song. Or how about Prince Of Darkness (from Sorcerer)? It's not that the band is tight, it's that the tune is constructed to accommodate when the beat disappears and Tony gets lost in his drums (like for about 10 seconds beginning around 45 seconds into the tune, and again around 1:50 into the tune), then Wayne gives a strong solo, and Herbie's solo is somewhere between playing scales and a bore. It's not basic physics, it's just personal taste, and this doesn't do it for me. (Ornette Coleman doesn't do it for me either, and all the spit takes in the world won't change that.) It's interesting that I start to like Miles again with Filles De Kilimanjaro, where he's moving on from the second quintet. *with two exceptions: Freedom Jazz Dance and Gingerbread Boy (both from Miles Smiles). But even there, I much prefer the Eddie Harris and Jimmy Heath versions.

A Springsteen wannabee. And I never liked Springsteen, either.

I had to vote for Takin' Off, for Dexter and the great tunes. Herbie showed his gutbucket side, which he sadly discarded soon after. He has never been one of my favorites; to these ears, he often sounds too soft and tentative. I much prefer strong, propulsive pianists who push the groove. But never say never. I've been seriously contemplating the current Italian BN box, to give his oeuvre a relisten.

2018 inductees announced: Bon Jovi, The Cars, Dire Straits, The Moody Blues, Nina Simone, Sister Rosetta Tharpe. https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Bon-Jovi-Simone-Dire-Straits-to-be-inducted-12834223.php

Yes, of course, good luck on the move! And enjoy Buffalo.