Rooster_Ties

Yes, BUT… the two bonus alternate takes still have the missing channel problem — as if it was maybe(?) recorded to 4 tracks, and the track with Tyrone is not audible, except his playing is vaguely audible from having been picked up from other non-tenor mics on the date. But the main album sounds “relatively-phenomenal” by comparison to the previous Black Lion issue — where Tyrone was barely audible on the entire album (not just the alternates). Not thrilled the alts are a bust — but it was amazing to finally hear the main album clearly for the first time in almost a couple decades (I think I picked up the Black Lion of the Cowell back in the early, early 00’s).

Been close to 20 years since I’ve heard “Turkish Women” — and only briefly (must have had a friend spin theirs, I’m guessing — or I sampled it in-store, possibly — and I passed on it). Perhaps I should start an entirely different thread for jazz studio albums that sound noticeably worse than their recording date would suggest they ought to. Live — now that’s a whole different story — and the range of live recordings of every sort of sound quality have been issued (based on the import of the recording, usually). But there can’t be more than a dozen (or perhaps two dozen) studio albums that truly sound way, WAY worse than they ought to. (I mean there’s “not particularly good” — and then there’s “inexplicably bad”.)

Speaking of Black Lion (and Freedom)… …anyone have any insights about this date?? Philly Joe — Mo Joe (as it came out on Black Lion) I used to have the presumably domestic (US) Black Lion CD issue of Mo Joe — and iirc, it might have been the second worst sounding post-1950 studio jazz album I’ve ever heard (#1 being Stanley Cowell’s Brilliant Circles, at least as it came out on CD specially via Black Lion). What’s the deal with Mo Joe? I also vaguely remember the music itself being sorta promising — but the SQ was sure thick and chunky (unless I’m remembering wrong, been 15+ years since I’ve heard it / had my copy).

Me too. I definitely keep ‘em, for historical purposes — but don’t really care if I don’t have them either. Not just obis (obies?), but stickers on the outside shrink wrap, which I re-apply somewhere to the liners or the tray-card, sometimes.

Although I’ve never had much of any interest in Springsteen’s music, I have always had a decent amount of respect for him. Can’t say I’ve heard more than a handful or two of his tunes over the years (just whatever I heard on the radio in high school mosty, in the mid 80’s) — and I literally don’t know that I’ve heard more than a few songs of his since then (in close to 40 years). He’s always seemed like the real deal to me, but his is a style of music I’ve just never cottoned to much. I’ve never specifically disliked what I’ve heard — and I’ve never changed the channel when he was on Letterman, or The Tonight Show, etc. But he just never turns up anywhere in most of the music media I consume.

Fantastic news!!

And what about his comic books? (Not entirely kidding either.)

I think lots of people are trusting it more and more (too much), and they seem to be forgetting the limitations. I don’t trust it. Nothing like legal filings that are citing non-existent case law — if a lazy lawyer uses it. In very controlled cases, it most definitely has its uses, particularly I looking for pattern matching in complex medical results — as long as the results are closely reviewed by a trained/qualified human. But just expecting AI to get “most things” roughly “good enough” generally “much of the time” — and then pretending that’s adequate for many applications — is just a recipe for disaster. ====== I also find it funny that I’ve read that ChatGPT is notorious for using lots of em dashes — like I did in the paragraph right above, and again here now — and how that’s an absolute ‘tell’ for AI-generated results. I use em-dashes TONS in my more colloquial on-line conversations, here and elsewhere. And I use them more than I should in email too. So suddenly I’m open to charges of using AI when I post stuff!!

Haven’t had enough interest or curiosity to try any of them personally. And I try to avoid relying on AI-generated search results from Google — although I will definitely skim them, and then click on the source links it provides to verify from the non-AI source. (And I must confess to being tempted to trust them more and more sometimes.) That said, I have and do browse a several different AI-related subreddits with periodic regularity — about CharGPT, and AI-generated images, and such (even video). So count me as both wanting to avoid direct interaction with AI — while still being a little fascinated with online discussions about AI.

Yeah, didn’t think it’d float your boat — but was still curious what you’d think. Thx!

Do me a favor: Give this track a listen, Dan. The Steve Coleman comparison is subtle, and I might be the person who even hears it that way. It’s not the tune or context that reminds me of Coleman — just something about the way Rouse uses time that does. Humor me, Dan — how does this hit you? Let it go long enough to get into Charlie’s solo a good bit. It’s not ‘out’ at all, just modern, to my ears…

I love Rouse’s Strata-East album. It’s different, and a little weird — and I appreciate that none of it is tepid. I’ve even occasionally thought some of Rouse’s playing (specifically on his Strata East) reminds me a little bit of Steve Coleman — if you can believe it.

I probably wouldn’t say no to a free copy of the expanded version — but this is nothing I really ‘need’. I do really like Charlie’s fast-tempo solos (like track 3) — more specifically, Charlie seems full of good ideas there. But the overall context is a little limp for me. Some of the album might grow on me a bit — but I kinda don’t want to listen to it often enough to hafta get to that point.

Barcelona!

I vaguely remember hearing this too — years after this thread — and also decided it sounded more like Garnett too. Or at least it definitely didn’t sound like Tyrone.