Jump to content

What vinyl are you spinning right now??


wolff

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 55.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • sidewinder

    5276

  • paul secor

    4123

  • clifford_thornton

    3855

  • jeffcrom

    2810

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

On 8/14/2020 at 11:02 PM, HutchFan said:

R-3409143-1454273785-1784.jpeg.jpg

Is that not one of the most #MeToo cover/title combinations ever? I mean, I want to think there was an innocence of degree to it, but I don't think I can ever be sure about that - or others like ever again.

Barring that, who is "everybody", where are they supposed to be in this image, and just what kind of "happy" and what kind of "make" are we talking about here?

And also, have you noticed how staright teeth used to kinda NOT be mandatory? Whatever else bad there is to see here, that is not one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

Is that not one of the most #MeToo cover/title combinations ever? I mean, I want to think there was an innocence of degree to it, but I don't think I can ever be sure about that - or others like ever again.

Barring that, who is "everybody", where are they supposed to be in this image, and just what kind of "happy" and what kind of "make" are we talking about here?

Sheesh, Jim, it doesn't have to be all that, does it?   

As for the "everybody" in the title: Isn't it the folks who might listen to the music on the album -- one of whom (theoretically) is the woman pictured on the cover? 

... I don't mean to be obtuse.  Am I missing some sort of obvious sub-text?  

 

 

 

NP:

R-1570668-1229227349.jpeg.jpg

Incredibly soulful music.

 

Edited by HutchFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

Am I missing some sort of obvious sub-text?

That would depend on your life experience?

In a world where golden showers and bukkake are borderline mainstream in term of "everybody" at least knowing what they are, how do you not at least wonder what they were thinking if you don't know who they were, meaning the art director and photographer, and/or maybe even the model? That photo is really tightly cropped, so, what's going on past what we can see? Maybe she's just washed her face in a fresh mountain stream? Or maybe that "smile" looks more like a borderline grimace? Maybe "make everybody happy" is the job description, and once again, if you don't know wh they all were, you really don't know what kind of a job is being desccribed. People get hired to work parties, all kinds of people, and all kind of jobs. ALL kinds of jobs.

But maybe it was just a lo-budget shoot all the way around. I mean, unless you know who "they" really were and what "they" were thinking, there is always going to be doubt, because dammit, I don't care how upright you and everybody else is, there is money to be made by not being that, and THOSE people are everywhere - all the time. Maybe not in quantity, but how many does it take, really?

Really - how many does it take?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JSngry said:

That would depend on your life experience?

In a world where golden showers and bukkake are borderline mainstream in term of "everybody" at least knowing what they are, how do you not at least wonder what they were thinking if you don't know who they were, meaning the art director and photographer, and/or maybe even the model? That photo is really tightly cropped, so, what's going on past what we can see? Maybe she's just washed her face in a fresh mountain stream? Or maybe that "smile" looks more like a borderline grimace? Maybe "make everybody happy" is the job description, and once again, if you don't know wh they all were, you really don't know what kind of a job is being desccribed. People get hired to work parties, all kinds of people, and all kind of jobs. ALL kinds of jobs.

But maybe it was just a lo-budget shoot all the way around. I mean, unless you know who "they" really were and what "they" were thinking, there is always going to be doubt, because dammit, I don't care how upright you and everybody else is, there is money to be made by not being that, and THOSE people are everywhere - all the time. Maybe not in quantity, but how many does it take, really?

Really - how many does it take?

 

O.K.  I hear you.  I really do.

That said ... I'm just gonna go on thinkin' the cover shows a woman who's just enjoying music a whole damn lot.  ... Or more precisely, it's nothing more than some graphic designer at VeeJay knowing that Harold Mabern wrote a tune called "Make Everybody Happy" and that's what they're gonna name the record, so he got a photo of a really happy woman -- because dudes buy jazz records, and (most) dudes like to look at women -- and he put her face on the cover.  Happy music.  Happy face.  Just that simple. 

That's how I want to think about it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I hear tat, too. But....she doesn't really look happy.

Maybe she just wasn't a very good model. #sometimesacigarisjsutacigar

But she looks happy, Supremes wig and all:

R-3224953-1483073295-6862.jpeg.jpg

If not happy, well, at least her eyes are open, and we can see what all is within a couple of feet of her on all sides?

"The Male Gaze"...maybe not a thing of the past (if it will ever be), but, jsut sayin' now that we know what it is and all the forms it can take....etc.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JSngry said:

And I hear tat, too. But....she doesn't really look happy.

Maybe she just wasn't a very good model. #sometimesacigarisjsutacigar

But she looks happy, Supremes wig and all:

R-3224953-1483073295-6862.jpeg.jpg

If not happy, well, at least her eyes are open, and we can see what all is within a couple of feet of her on all sides?

"The Male Gaze"...maybe not a thing of the past (if it will ever be), but, jsut sayin' now that we know what it is and all the forms it can take....etc.

 

 

 

Hey, I've never seen that record before.

Is it any good? 

 

 

:g 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's DAMN good. Buy with absolute confidence.

My copy has thumbtack holes on all four corners of the open gatefold, though. I was sharing a house with a rather..."indigenous" aspiring jazz pianist who fucking demanded that we pin the cover up on the wall, because dammit, THIS was what a "jazz woman" looked like, THIS! Healthy, Black, and maybe not as nice as she looked (and that cutting in all directions).

This was the same guy who hear, like 30 seconds of Ike Quebec, laughed out loud and said, "yeah, this is one of those pool hall motherfuckers". I had to learn exactly what that meant, and that took some, uh, experiences, but yeah, he was right about that.

About what a "jazz woman" looked like, though...I'd not want to be quite THAT specific about it, but he was right as far as he went, or at least he was not WRONG, let me put it that way.

But that was a while back. The world has changed, even jazz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O.K.  One more for the list!

 

 

 

Speaking of weird shit. 

Here's what I think is weird: Nine out of twenty-five people who rated Gene Ammons' Got My Own on discogs gave it a rating of one or two stars.  What?!?!?

The breakdown looks like this:

Gene-Ammons-Got-My-Own.jpg

I don't understand.  Are we listening to the same music?

To me, Got My Own is a five-star record.

What the hell?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, JSngry said:

And I hear tat, too. But....she doesn't really look happy.

Maybe she just wasn't a very good model. #sometimesacigarisjsutacigar

But she looks happy, Supremes wig and all:

R-3224953-1483073295-6862.jpeg.jpg

If not happy, well, at least her eyes are open, and we can see what all is within a couple of feet of her on all sides?

"The Male Gaze"...maybe not a thing of the past (if it will ever be), but, jsut sayin' now that we know what it is and all the forms it can take....etc.

 

Turns out that I have seen that record before.  But I'm familiar with a cover that looks like this...

416GJP74RNL.jpg

 

Which, of course, raises the question:  Did they (Collectables? VeeJay?) change the cover because they thought the cover with the buxom, bewigged woman was sexist?

Either way, I'm listening to the music now via YT.  You're right.  It sounds really good. 

 

40 minutes ago, JSngry said:

It's DAMN good. Buy with absolute confidence.

My copy has thumbtack holes on all four corners of the open gatefold, though. I was sharing a house with a rather..."indigenous" aspiring jazz pianist who fucking demanded that we pin the cover up on the wall, because dammit, THIS was what a "jazz woman" looked like, THIS! Healthy, Black, and maybe not as nice as she looked (and that cutting in all directions).

This was the same guy who hear, like 30 seconds of Ike Quebec, laughed out loud and said, "yeah, this is one of those pool hall motherfuckers". I had to learn exactly what that meant, and that took some, uh, experiences, but yeah, he was right about that.

About what a "jazz woman" looked like, though...I'd not want to be quite THAT specific about it, but he was right as far as he went, or at least he was not WRONG, let me put it that way.

But that was a while back. The world has changed, even jazz.

Nice back-story.  Very illustrative.  

 

Edited by HutchFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, HutchFan said:

 

Turns out that I have seen that record before.  But I'm familiar with a cover that looks like this...

416GJP74RNL.jpg

 

Which, of course, raises the question:  Did they (Collectables? VeeJay?) change the cover because they thought the cover with the buxom, bewigged woman was sexist?

No idea when that cover got changed or why. The Exodus issue was the original (Exodus being the label set up by "exiled" VeeJay ownership).

What I can see is that there is now a motorcycle, a solid blue background, and a woman of ambiguous ethnicity wearing a helmet that obscures her face holding a second helmet, which I guess is presumably "yours".

Quite a change, and I can't see it being thumbtacked up onto the wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, HutchFan said:

O.K.  One more for the list!

 

 

 

Speaking of weird shit. 

Here's what I think is weird: Nine out of twenty-five people who rated Gene Ammons' Got My Own on discogs gave it a rating of one or two stars.  What?!?!?

The breakdown looks like this:

Gene-Ammons-Got-My-Own.jpg

I don't understand.  Are we listening to the same music?

To me, Got My Own is a five-star record.

What the hell?

 

Last time I checked, all Gene Ammons records more or less are five star recordings.

Edited by kh1958
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...