jasonguthartz

Can you post videos? This may disappoint you (in several ways):

FYI - you can now order the box set via the Firehouse 12 Records site: http://www.firehouse12.com/firehouse12_rec...se.asp?id=25389

I just got this message:

I was in no way trying to silence you, Mr. Kart. I was merely pointing out that, in the context of a (side-)discussion about KV's dedications, it was revealing that half of your response was devoted to an explanation of your dislike of KV's music. And, in a public forum such as this one, there's something to be said for staying on the topic of the thread for those who are searching for discussions on particular issues. So if you want to start a discussion about KV's music, start a new thread or reopen an old one. I probably should have done this as well in my response to "Clementine"'s sucker punch. As for the "s/he" stuff -- I have no idea whether "Clementine" is male or female, and do not want to presume even though I have good reason to assume (s)he's a he. I asked what (s)he does because that seems to be a preoccupation of this "Clementine", e.g., what Ornette does or doesn't do beyond the concert stage, and what (s)he presumes is my motivation for participating in this forum ("selling stuff", or rather, "SELLING stuff"). No, anonymity online is neither novel nor (necessarily) dubious. It is, however, often cowardly, especially when the anonymous take sucker punches at non-anonymous people, especially at non-anonymous people who have chosen the difficult road of beings artists who get out there and "do something". Anonymity is often an easy way of avoiding the need to make coherent arguments, a means of expressing someone's oh-so-unique individuality and oh-so-important opinion, while denying the reader the benefit of context which identity provides.

In Ken's own words: Yikes - this guy sounds really disingenous and evil.

OK, fine - you don't like the guy's music. But that's not the issue. (KV wasn't even the topic, but this "Clementine" person threw a sucker punch.) Surely you're aware of Anthony Braxton's practice of dedicating his compositions. I believe that was what inspired KV, whose curiosity was piqued by those names on Braxton's records. Do you have a problem with Braxton on this issue as well? Or is it just that you like AB's music better? (Or is it an aesthetic thing -- you'd prefer less text on the CD tray card or booklet.) I suspect your extreme dislike of KV's music is leading you to over-analyze this whole dedication thing. OK, if that's what you want to spend time thinking and writing about. But it is not "rather harmless" to engage in unfounded speculation about KV's sincerity or integrity -- it smacks of "I don't know that he beats his wife..." And given your background in journalism, Larry, I would expect you to be aware of that. (As for "Clementine": well, I don't even know who (s)he is, or what (s)he's "doing" other than posting anonymous messages to this forum. (S)he expects me to examine the archives on the topic of KV's dedications, yet (s)he can't be bothered to check some basic facts with regard to my own history in this forum. In any case, maybe (s)he'll post a copy of the Vandermark Directive, which seems to cast a hypnotic spell on those exposed to it.) Back to Ornette... True -- he ain't Peter Kowald. But consider this comment by Ornette in the Apr/May '07 issue of Wax Poetics: "I never hire any specific combination of instruments to play with me. When someone wants to study with me and asks to play with me, I always let them." So I guess either few people are asking to play with Ornette, or they're just not playing together in public. btw, I love this: "The only reason you need a key is to lock your house when you go out."

Well, if he went that way, I'm sure there'd be folks saying "KV is just stealing ideas from X, Y & Z, and presenting them as his own without giving anyone any credit." The record is out. I have confidence in your ability to listen to the music and figure out the influences for yourself, or not. Who is demanding you care about anything other than the music? If you don't like the music, fine -- stop at "beyond asinine". But to assault his integrity by saying he's "attempting to bask in other's glories" is totally unfair and uncalled for. We all know how omniscient you are, Don C., but I guarantee there are lots of folks who will come across Powerhouse Sound who never heard of Perry, Dodd, et al, do a little digging, and be hipped on to some hip shit as a result. So while it obviously annoys you for some reason, in reality it's all good. ps - please tell us (1) the names of the musicians from whom Ken may borrow, (2) the concepts and traditions you would permit Ken to draw upon, and (3) how much Ken is allowed to talk about (1) and (2). anyway, this is Ornette's thread...

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it..." The Beatles stopped playing in public. Glenn Gould stopped playing in public. And for heavens sake; Ornette is 77 years old. Hasn't he earned the right to work as little as he choses and can afford? As for saying that he should play for free-He's not a volunteer musician. He's a professional and professionals get paid. How many workers do their jobs for free? Ornette certainly has "the right to work as little as he choses [sic] and can afford" -- as does everyone else on the planet, regardless of age. Putting on a free concert does not necessarily mean he would not be paid, e.g., a public arts program could pay his fee. (And, btw, lots of people do lots of work for free, which isn't to say Ornette should do anything for free; also, "he's a professional and professionals get paid" is tautological.) "Art" is neither an object nor a material, but a process set in motion by objects and materials. And that can't happen when those objects and materials -- the works of an artist -- are stored in a closet, unavailable for engagement by a public audience of one sort or another. The artform of jazz, IMO, begs for a less 'precious' approach to public engagement, since recordings are poor substitutes for the live experience. The interesting question is how much of the difference between 1959 Ornette and 2007 Ornette -- six weeks at the Five Spot vs. infrequent concert hall or festival gigs -- reflects a change in economic/financial factors (self-imposed demands/restrictions being one factor among others), and how much reflects a change in his attitude towards his art. Though I suspect the 77-year-old factor trumps either question. I don't mean any of this to suggest that Ornette is anything less than a great artist -- I'm just responding to WD45's general question on the issue of public performance. Well, I've seen Ornette twice: in Battery Park in NY, and at Symphony Center here in Chicago. Yeah, I was knocked out by both shows, but I can only imagine how much better each would have been at a smaller venue with decent acoustics. (And as for paying attention & paying top-dollar: a lot of folks walked out of that Symphony Center concert.)

Please elaborate.

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it..."

Their corporate office # is (612) 291-1000

It is now available directly from Firehouse 12 Records, and from online retailers like amazon.com, jazzloft.com, and downtownmusicgallery.com.

If they don't care about pissing off a lot of customers, they'll rely on the legal fine-print of their "Conditions of Use": Canceling these orders is bad business, esp. for a big retailer like Best Buy for whom the lost profits on this presumed pricing error are inconsequential. I'd encourage not only those whose orders have been cancelled, but everyone else who knows about this, to call or email Best Buy and express their opinion 'cause There's A Riot Goin' On!

I'm gonna wait for Bologna in October.

"Shhhhhhh.... (For a Little While)" (available here) Game over.

A year ago, posting to the Braxton Yahoo group, Gino Robair explained: and:

Hmm... don't know what you're referring to specifically. But this 12+1tet music is indeed "bad" more Why do you ignore the rest of my message?: "God save us from perfect performances (they will arrive for your children). " I love this shit. You are "too sensitive X 2". Chuck - I know you're generally on-board the Braxton Express. But the difficulty in conveying facetiousness online made it easy to mistake your 2nd sentence ("God save us...") as being facetious rather than the first. Sorry.

OK, sorry for misreading your comment. But YES! "glancing around for cues, etc." -- this is exactly what occurs during these performances. In fact, it was my experience watching this ensemble perform at Wesleyan in fall 2005, that led me to decide to videotape these shows. There is a lot to see during the performance which helps you understand how the music is put together, e.g.: Each musician has a stack of Braxton compositions to draw from, which can be cued at any time by anyone via hand signals (Braxton has several sheets worth), white boards, and other gestures; language music improvisations are conducted via physical gestures; and musicians use signals to select other musicians with whom they want to play.

These musicians are extremely familiar with Braxton's music. About two-thirds of them have studied with Braxton, and a quarter of them (Fei, Lehman, Bynum) have been studying with and/or performing with Braxton for over a decade. Nicole Mitchell was the only real newcomer, and you will not be surprised to hear that Braxton said she was playing "as if she'd been with them for 10 years." “Being on top of this music as much as Braxton himself”? That’s a tricky issue given the tri-centric, multi-hierarchical methodology I mentioned above. (For more insight into the tri-centric approach, check out the liner notes to 4 Compositions (Ulrichsberg) 2005.) Plus, Braxton himself claims to understand only 40% of what he's doing! But in all seriousness, these musicians in the 12+1tet knew what they were doing. And they did it incredibly well. (Unfortunately, I missed that Never Enough Hope project.) Are having fun and “really playing” mutually exclusive? Others have commented on the level of musicianship in the 12+1tet: Pat Frisco: http://taylorhobynum.com/applications/word...=34#comment-927 Steve Smith: http://nightafternight.blogs.com/night_aft...an_from_ut.html http://nightafternight.blogs.com/night_aft...t_stand_a_.html http://nightafternight.blogs.com/night_aft...haunting_r.html and a certain trumpet player you may be familiar with: http://www.greenleafmusic.com/#/blog/200611102640.php In any case, this is all premature since you presumably haven’t heard the recordings. I look forward to your thoughts after you hear them.

As I mention above, "Besides the option of playing the main composition, the musicians (individually or in sub-groups) have the freedom/responsibility of choosing to perform any (part of any) other Braxton composition, to conduct language music improvisations, to improvise freely, or to not play at all (this last option provides some fascinating moments, which I hope the DVD helps illustrate). Multiply these options by 13 musicians and you can imagine how differently each set sounded." So while the entire 12+1tet was on stage for all nine sets, not everyone played at all times -- you get everything from the full ensemble to a single musician playing at any given moment within a set.

some comments: 1. Each set is an continuous, hour-long (give or take) performance, an entity unto itself. Same as Bill Dixon's "Shrike" (< 1 min), or Morton Feldman's "String Quartet No. 2" (> 6 hrs). 2. Not only does each set feature a different composition -- the final batch of Ghost Trance Music compositions, Comp. 350-358 -- but the tri-centric approach to the material results in a wide variety of paths taken by the musicians as they navigate through each set. Besides the option of playing the main composition, the musicians (individually or in sub-groups) have the freedom/responsibility of choosing to perform any (part of any) other Braxton composition, to conduct language music improvisations, to improvise freely, or to not play at all (this last option provides some fascinating moments, which I hope the DVD helps illustrate). Multiply these options by 13 musicians and you can imagine how differently each set sounded. So, to my mind, just as Braxton's tri-centric approach rejects the notion of a "definitive" performance of these compositions, it is nearly impossible to identify one or two "definitive" sets from these performances. Each individual will have his/her preferences for particular sets, and while I expect others will share my experience of having their "favorites" change with each listen, perhaps a critical consensus will develop to help guide your purchasing decision. Which brings me to... 3. Individual sets will be available for purchase via download, so those with a more casual interest in Braxton's work, or with a more restricted budget, will have access to this music. 4. The DVD is intended to be an audio-visual supplement to the CDs and liner notes. It was not designed to be seen outside of that context, nor as a "best of" compilation of clips. It will hopefully provide information which can be useful to the "friendly experiencer" while listening to this music, to enhance the listener's understanding of what is happening, how it is happening, and why it is happening (not that there is a single, definitive answer to any of these issues). -Jason ps: Larry - I'm working on a response...

Again, I have to ask: what are you referring to specifically? And who are you calling "kids"? Nicole Mitchell? Jay Rozen?

Individual sets will be available for purchase via mp3 downloads; per the Firehouse 12 website: The DVD will not be sold separately - at least not right now - who knows what may develop...

Hmm... don't know what you're referring to specifically. But this 12+1tet music is indeed "bad" more

Correct: The Firehouse 12 website will soon start taking orders.