AllenLowe

when I was in high school and trying to figure out how to play more freely, I figured out that one of the ways to do it was by realizing that any note you play has a relation to multiple chords - so a C is the 9th of a Bb chord, the 7th of a D7, the major seventh of a Db chord, the third of an Ab, the flat 5 of Gb, etc etc - and realzing these relationships allows you to connect things in coherent ways (I think I got some of this from listening to Dolphy when I was very young). so imagine my surprise years later when I was reading some interview with Jim Garrison, and he described Ornette's approach as exactly that - which, also, as I have somewhat determined, is the key to chromatic harmony. be all that as it may, these ideas can also be used in regular changes - as long as you know how to resolve things. So over a c chord you might play Db-Gg-B7- C. Which is also, from what I hear, some of what Coltrane did. And I also remember Charlie Haden telling me, at Slugs in 1969, that he basically followed Ornette wherever Ornette went - and if it required a chord, he played a chord.

you might say that Prez thought horizontally, Hawk vertically.

uhhh,,,,,sorry Larry, but: www.organissimo/org/forum/index.php?/topic/lookaroundfirsttoseeifthere'salreadyathread/youidiots.

well, I did place my basic liner notes essay here a while back, my thing on race and music. I've been a little shy of posting since a recent insult, but I'll be back. Also, overwhelmed with prep for these sessions.

well, things are coalescing somewhat - or congealing? 2 days of recordings set - just talked to Kalaparusha Maurice McIntyre today, and he will be recording with us, I am hoping,,,, others to record over these 2 days: Matt Shipp Noah Preminger JD Allen Ursula Oppens Ken Peplowski Randy Sandke Curtis Hasselbring Lewis Porter Kevin Ray Rob Wallace Ras Moshe Lou Grassi Jon-Erik Kelso Curtis Hasselbrng. Dean Bowman Mitt Romney too much music - the thing should include 6-8 piano solos by Lewis and Shipp.

I think Chris is having internet problems. Otherwise I am sure he would check in to accept your congrats.

we love Joe.

interesting, isn't it? This has been my experience in the music world for over 25 years. It always bothered me. At one conference I used to attend, the organizers used to like to cite me as the poster child for the active, independent jazz musician. So I stood up and said that there were at least 6 organizations in the room who would never respond to my calls or letters and materials. It was the last conference I went to, as they were somewhat less welcoming afterwards.

I think it is strange - it's one thing to ignore me (I'm very ignorable on the new music scene), but it's insulting not to even acknowledge someone of Ros's stature. Beyond that (and I actually had it out with Patricia about this in an open forum) - basic respect demands that you respond to people, let them know you have received their query. She's not alone in perpetuating this kind of disrespect. Not all are like this; many will tell you yes, no, maybe. But most will not even let you know they've received your info. My experience tells me that the nonprofit jazz world, for all its professing of its own worthiness of mission, acts in much the same way as your average, faceless corporation. It's not only frustrating and disrespectful, but it tells me that they're missing a lot of what's going on in the musical world.

to give you an idea of the weirdness of the Visions Fest, I had a group with Roswell Rudd that we proposed to bring in - they never even said "no," just ignored various queries,

personally I prefer human sacrifice with my jazz.

Parker is married to the organizer of the fest.

I'm with Chuck. The hardest thing for non-participating musicians is that the organization is extremely non responsive and cliquish. It's a matter of respect; they don't answer emails or queries and don't seem to go outside of their own little circle.

I'm hesitant to mention his name in public -

I love the sound of those plastic horns, but apparently they are horrible to maintain. Peter King, btw, is an absolutely great player.

1) I've just listened again to the samples on the site - it's spectacular; the amazing thing is that it sounds, at some points, like original masters, as I said above. I'm quite impressed. 2) Davies, let me first say, was a wonderful man and a great transfer engineer - in those days before digital noise reduction, he had a method in which he recorded the 78s onto reel to reel tape, at 7.5 IPS, and figured out how to scrape off part of the tape in such a way that he was able to eliminated a lot of crackle and pop. The problem was that there was real high end degredation when he did this, because of the 7.5 IPS, which refers to the tape speed (open reel machines record at 3.75, 7.5. 15, and 30. 15 is optimum for recording, IIRC). And a lot of Davies' work sounds clean but definitely dark. Digital techniques, used correctly, can be incredible. But, really, the key is the CONDITION of the 78. I have transferred mint 78s on mediocre turntables with good results. Once past this, and using digital stuff, you gotta be careful. One thing that really troubles (no, scares) me is a new generation of hiss reduction programs that appear to leave the high end - but at the expense of a weird acoustical result. Gurgly, is one way to describe it - so you listen, the high end is there - but it has a horrible resonance. There's a crazy and nasty Dutch guy who is doing a lot of this now. also, let me add, that Davies, in his last years, was using CEDAR for click and pop removal. And he was known to have a great collection of mint-condition 78s. Sweetheart of a guy who would make a transfer for you of anything he had -

not really a Bird Horn, than - more like one he just picked up on the fly. The real Bird horns, I would say, are the King Super 20 and the Conn 6M. Though the Aristocrats in the 247XXX number series are considered very similar to the 6M -

sonnymax - thanks for your musical support but I'm a little sick of people questioning my motives, thank you. I continue my work through thick and thin, 'I never feel sorry for myself, and I bring ATTENTION to things because I remain engaged with the things that engage me - should I not complain about the Koch brothers because you'll tell me I'm jealous of the billions they give to Republicans? And btw it doesn't matter whether or not I bring attention to her. She has an audience. she is extremely untalented, btw. And unfunny. There is a certain mediocrity that surrounds a certain type of NPR-styled social observer, which she personifies. though I suppose the things you criticize you criticize on deep principles only. Thanks for letting us know. and just to add, Sonnymax, fuck you.

I don't know if it's the same as the book, but here's a link to a Mandel/Taylor interview: http://www.thewire.co.uk/articles/177/

I liked that guy.

I though it was about Cecil.

well, this one just got a zillion dollars for a memoir. So she's asking for our attention.

Ornette is different than Cecil - he just sounds like he says what he means, no matter who he is talking to. My conjecture is based on Chuck's experience and from having read years of interviews with Cecil. I think his degree of obfuscation is in reverse proportion to the respect he feels for the person he is talking to - little respect, more obfuscation. I am rarely wrong about such things. I've just known a lot of musicians with that mind set.

it's amusing, but in a very ordinary, obvious way, as all of this woman's stuff is. I find these kind of "success stories" very depressing.