JETman

What was the other part?

How 'bout David Wright? .411 BA, .513 OBP. Zowsa!

Are you referring to Nik Bartsch's zen funk melange? If so, I believe he's Swiss.

You know as much about defending the Alamo as I know about disassembling Big Ben!

I have a ton of Criss Cross too, fwiw. But I've stopped being so obsessive about collecting them because it's all gotten a little too old. One of my faves on that label is Billy Drummond's (former Mr. Rosnes) "Dubai". In case nobody's noticed, a large part of my argument is steeped in devil's advocacy. Just getting tired of people blaming the label for lack of musicality instead of the musicians themselves. I refuse to believe that sonics could completely mar otherwise marvelous performances. After all, people like us obsessively chase every last Bird performance or Miles bootleg whether it can be properly heard or not. I find it hypocritical, to say the least. And then, there's the issue of my being vehemently opposed to bumbleheaded thinking that requires "fallback" to only old reliable sources for musical enjoyment. I'm not saying that I'm unique (especially in places like here), but I am extraordinarily passionate about music. It has played a HUGE role in my emotional contentment for almost all of my life. As a result, the "deeper search" that Jim refers to above is very important to me --- not in a superior intellectual sort of way, but more in a "I absolutely have to find ways to stay interested" sort of way. Such as it is, music is THAT important to me. I too am a big fan of all the old suspects and legendary record labels. But because of this desire to find something new and interesting, you'd usually find me listening to something like a Gerry Hemingway Hat Art release or a Jackie McLean Blue Note like "Destination Out", rather than a Hank Mobley Blue Note recording. Doesn't mean I don't like Hank. It just means that I get bored easily.

Agreed.

In 1964, when I was 15, my Dad, my brother and I went to Chicago Stadium to watch the Blackhawks play the Canadiens. Glenn Hall was tending goal for Chicago. In the third period, Bernie Geoffrion had a mini-breakaway, but the Blackhawks defensemen had the angle on him, so he cranked up a slap shot form just inside the red line. It was in the net before Hall could move his catching glove less than a foot. Not for nothing did they call the guy "Boom Boom". I have also heard a story about Bobby Hull scoring after the goalie caught his shot, but the momentum of the puck tore the glove off his hand and the glove and puck both wound up in the back of the net. That's a helluva way to score. Yes, Alex Ovechkin be damned, nobody in hockey has a slapshot like that today. Al MacInnis was the closest to that in more recent memory.

Teekens flies to NY twice a year to record musicians who are more, shall we say, "vulnerable" to compliance. I've spoken to some people in the know who know that he has a strong say over what is recorded, and how he wants it to sound. That's his perogative, but I'm just sayin'. Manfred is not the only supposed dictator of the bunch. The difference is he tries to avoid same old, same old. And fwiw, you're not gonna see any overlap of artists recording for Criss Cross and ECM. (oh wait, I just thought of one --- Mark Turner recorded for Criss Cross when he was a wee babe). Jim -- never said that music put out by ECM was/is superior. I'm saying that not liking the music is NOT because of the label it appears on. There seems to be an automatic bias there (which could be Pavlovian in nature, but I digress). Also saying, with regard to your Pavlovian theory, that it is much more rewarding (for me at least) to fight through a period of not getting an initial fix of "warm fuzzies" in order to possibly discover something that I might enjoy than to automatically and easily fall back into a comfort zone.

There are, but some of the labels mentioned are just trying to feed off of a ridiculous desire to return to the glory days. Guys like Teekens are just taking advantage of young up and coming American musicians in order to further his own cause. One label's credo "Straight ahead and in the pocket" became laughable amongst many older, more knowledgeable jazz fans I used to hang out with. The guy at Venus in Japan (the great assimilator of American culture) has young and old artists alike recording standards-filled albums. The list goes on and on.

Why do you equate different music to different label? Did you ever consider that it could have been that fact that the musician just happened to be at a different stage of his career? Sound of Summer Running - 1997 Shades of Jade - 2005 Is it really so difficult to believe that 8 years could make a huge difference? Or do you expect Johnson to always sound the same way he did with Blevans in the 70s? The ability to reason this stuff out is NOT rocket science!!! Perhaps not as many of us as you might think. I can't speak for all these labels, but I know that for at least two of them, sales are hardly at a rip-roaring pace, rather anemic, in fact. I'll bet the average ECM release sells at least as many copies as releases from any of these labels. Granted that ECM has stong marketing and distribution. ECM is NOT as big as you think. It's like a 3 or 4 person operation from what I'm told.

What's the acceptable number, and who do we decide to take out in order to get there? That's a good question to which I have no answer. It's a conundrum! If music's a real passion, each one of us will know the answer that is right for them. But, and this is a BIG but (no pun intended), if you choose to follow the older "new" path, you do NOT get to whine about jazz not being popular or jazz not selling well, yada yada yada.

I haven't heard it yet, but I'm sure that if there's no energy, it's all the fault of Herr Eicher and his dastardly plan to suck the moisture out of the sound.

Hey, that's me...and you forgot Reservoir! There are too many of you out there. While on the surface this may simply be a "live and let live" type of world where we each enjoy what we enjoy, this is really where the problem with jazz lies. Too many pining for the good old days of swing, bebop, hard bop, etc. Frankly, most of this stuff from those days has been or is available to us. Why do we need to have more of it which is not done quite as well as it was then? Let's advance the music into new territories (and I'm not talking about jazz meets hip-hop) to try and gain a viable audience which can help move the music forward. If I were a newbie, and willing to do some research, I would infinitely prefer to seek out all the George Coleman that I could, rather than buy another cd where Eric Alexander (no insult intended -- he's technically brilliant) does the same thing differently. Sound issues aside, this is what ECM has always tried to do. It has literally released hundreds of killer, groundbreaking albums over the years.

Be nice to have another parade this year on Broadway! You've just pointed out what I love so much about Yankee fans, and why I still remember the "Horace Clarke years" so very fondly.

I don't care -- I only buy music released by Criss Cross, Sharp Nine (music in the pocket, baby!) and Venus.

Everybody still sleeping on the Rangers?

Back in the 70s, when many more players than now had "heavy" slapshots, this happened more often than you might think. It was NEVER considered embarassing for the goalie.

Musicians age, mature, etc. Circumstances change. We do not live in a vacuum where everything is equal regardless of the time, place, etc. That being said, you're certainly entitled to believe what you wanna believe. Thank god most folks do not share your opinion --- ECM surely would not have lasted 43 years if they did.

It's no secret that jazz live >> jazz studio in most cases!

If I were you I'd wanna be there the next time Strassburg faces Hamels.

As they say, you've gotta be in it to win it!

I'm pretty sure you guys are breaching some copyright laws.

Me no care what he likes. I am not upset. I am just contesting a statement he made which I believe to be false, and which leads people who might otherwise take a chance on interesting music to ignore it altogether. God forbid I were to make a statement like "all Blue Notes sound alike" on a board like this. I would be crucified. I've enjoyed literally hundreds of ECM recordings as much as I've enjoyed recordings on other labels, WITHOUT placing labels on the labels! Read his initial post and tell me if you don't see sweeping, nonsensical statements which read, for example, that the ECM approach produces music which doesn't swing. AFAIC, ECM's approach is similar to that of any other record label that has ever existed since the dawn of time: to make music which is interesting and enjoyable to enough people to stay in business. Since the label has been in existence for over 40 years, I'd say they've succeeded. If people want to restrict themselves to music that swings in the traditional sense, they are severely limiting their options. I couldn't live like that. If I did, all of my cd's would sound alike and I'd have to slit my wrists. Don't make me name the numerous labels which use this credo to cater to such people. There are way too many.

Music does NOT have to swing to be good. Do you really think that Eicher is telling Kuhn, a musician for over 50 years, to cut an album that is ethereal, and not what Kuhn intended? As a matter of fact, I'm almost positive that the Venuses that you so love are the ones where the artists are being told what to play. Avant doesn't swing. Energy music doesn't swing. Hell, most Nessas don't swing. And yet, a lot of you guys are ALL OVER those. More misplaced ECM bias. Your comments have little to do with what I said. I suggest you read what I did say again. I did not say that Eicher told Kuhn what to play. What I did say was a reflection of my personal taste. Of course I realize that the taste of others may be very different. But I do not appreciate having you put words in my mouth that I did not say. With only very limited exceptions, the music put out by ECM does not appeal to me. Whether Venus requests that Kuhn play standard tunes or not is to me, unimportant. it is the musicians interpretation of those tunes that matters to me. I also happen to like standards, and music that swings. How did I misinterpret? How could "This is what to me is the typical ECM approach" be read any differently than "Eicher persuaded Kuhn to play a certain way"? C'mon. Why not just say that Kuhn simply recorded an album which you do not enjoy? You took the opportunity to rag on a label which has given us the opportunity to hear many artists which would've otherwise not been heard. To me, that's what it's all about. If you wanna restrict yourself, that's cool with me. ECM has a catalogue which exceeds 2000 in number at this point. I might go as far as to say that it's been more important in the overall development of music than even our beloved Blue Note.

Yes, but we want someone to blame... The shame is that Fantasy was actually starting to do some credible reissue packages (Stitt's Bits, Red Garland at the Prelude, the three Coltrane boxes, the Miles Quintet box, the Evans VV box, etc.) before they sold the catalog to Concord. So much more that could have been done along those lines. Now we're back to this. This, and "..... Plays for Lovers", and the beloved Andorrans doing the only intelligent reissue packaging. I think you have this slightly incorrect, if I'm not mistaken. Those projects may have been conceived when Fantasy still owned the catalogue, but they were released after Concord bought the catalogue. So, if anyone at Concord still has a brain inside their head, there may be hope yet.