jasonguthartz

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

Firehouse 12 Records is a new label, co-run by Nick Lloyd (of the Firehouse 12 performance space & recording studio in New Haven, CT) and Taylor Ho Bynum (composer, cornetist, and frequent Braxton collaborator). The DVD I put together for this box set includes a documentary (or an audio-visual essay/supplement) which juxtaposes clips of the Iridium performances with clips of a Braxton lecture/talk at Columbia University. Also included on the DVD is my video footage of the entire last set (aka Comp. 358). As far as Ghost Trance Music goes... let me just say that if you think you've heard everything you need to hear, listen again, listen anew. This is "state of the state" tricentric "Accelerator/Whip" GTM: post-Ives, post-Ra, ultra-Braxton. (btw, it's "Anthony", not "Tony" - we must give respect, yes, Elder Don?) -Jason

I know you're all eagerly counting down the days & hours until the April 3 release of the Anthony Braxton 12+1tet's "9 Compositions (Iridium) 2006" box set. Here's a video preview: Stay tuned for news of when orders will start being accepted at the Firehouse 12 Records website.

Well said. And of course there's the tautology in Crouch's claim that Cecil hasn't "influenced any real jazz today, either": If Cecil isn't "real jazz", then anyone building on his aesthetic (e.g., Fred Anderson) couldn't be "real jazz" either.

Was your source Ahmad Chalabi? (i.e., that claim is false)

Yeah - can't figure out how it'll sound. I'm sure that two guys with such vast musical personalities and integrity, however, will produce something at the very least completely fascinating. In some ways, musical success would be a happy by-product of seeing/hearing the two of them work something. True. Cecil's pairing with Derek Bailey produced one of the most fascinatingly unusual items in either musician's catalog. But maybe Taylor & Braxton will just do Brubeck tunes

Actually, the group this March at Iridium will be a septet (or Sextet+1) - the lineup: Anthony Braxton (reeds) Taylor Ho Bynum (brass) Jessica Pavone (viola) Jay Rozen (tuba) Carl Testa (bass) Aaron Siegel (percussion) Mary Halvorson (guitar) And here's the press release for the box set 9 Compositions (Iridium) 2006 (for which I've contributed the DVD).

The liquidation sale started this weekend, apparently at 10% off all stock - but expect that discount to increase over the coming weeks: "Great American Group is deploying representatives to Tower's 89 stores to facilitate the liquidation, which is expected to last about six weeks, said [GAP president Andy] Gumaer, who used to shop at Tower." http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/la-...1,6919218.story

In addition to the above, check these calendars: http://www.savagesound.com/ http://www.umbrellamusic.org/ and for any late-breaking announcements: http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/chi-improv/messages

Velvet's grand reopening is scheduled for Aug 10-14 (groups tba); a couple of shows later in the month have been announced: Aug-17: Fred Lonberg-Holm/Lasse Marhaug/Paal Nilssen-Love/Anton Hatwich Aug-24: Territory Band Open Session: ad hoc groups built from members of the large ensemble perform later that night at the Velvet Lounge. Territory Band-6 with special guest Fred Anderson (I've heard about that guy somewhere...) is playing a free concert in Millennium Park earlier on the 24th - sharing the bill with the Anderson/Bankhead/Drake trio! Territory Band-6 will consist of: Axel Dörner - trumpet Fredrik Ljungkvist - reeds Dave Rempis - reeds Ken Vandermark - reeds Lasse Marhaug - electronics Jim Baker - piano David Stackenäs - guitar Fred Lonberg-Holm - cello Kent Kessler - bass Paul Lytton - percussion Paul Nilssen-Love - percussion and though Jeb Bishop (trombone) was originally listed, I suspect Per-Åke Holmlander (tuba) may be filling that brass chair (based on the fact that Bishop isn't listed among the various small-ensemble concerts that week, while Holmlander is)

Today is the 42nd anniversary of the recording of "Spiritual Unity"! Reminder: Albert Ayler 70th Birthday Marathon Thursday, July 13 5am-9pm Central 89.3 WNUR-FM Evanston/Chicago streaming live at www.wnur.org

Both/all. Dust off your green leather suit...

I can confirm - I'm helping prepare for it and will likely be DJing for part of it. Ayler would have been 70 on July 13. Listen online at wnur.org

Is Braxton contemplating the effect of different gravitational fields and atmospheres on those vibrations we perceive as "music"? Perhaps. But I think it's better to think about his restructuralist ambitions in terms of the positive forces associated with creative activities, in a holistic context which treats music as a part of (rather than apart from) everyday life experience. For Braxton, music is never just about sound-for-sound's sake. Excuse the long excerpt below, but I think it can provide some insights. After mentioning Stockhausen, Xenakis, Sun Ra, Sousa, Joplin, Brant, and Monteverdi in a discussion with Graham Lock about his multi-orchestral musics, Braxton says: Braxton's 1978 liner notes to For Four Orchestras (Arista) provides this outline for his multi-orchestral pieces: In Blutopia, Lock quotes Braxton's description of the impact of hearing parade music as a child: "It is as if the whole of the universe were swallowed up - leaving us in a sea of music and color." Lock states that Braxton "hopes to effect this phenomenon literally," an ambition consistent with the notion that, "to paraphrase Sun Ra, the impossible is in the music, and the music is real." With regard to the interplanetary musics, one can therefore imagine a situation where inhabitants of Earth would be able to look up to the night sky and hear "the music of the heavens" as played by 1000 orchestras on Mars, 10,000 string quartets on Venus, and a guy riding an asteroid playing a kazoo. PS - During the "Braxton at 60" events at Wesleyan last year, Braxton was again asked about the status of these works; his response was that he was even further behind.

You answered your own question elsewhere: Years ago people spoke about the possibility for musicians on different continents to collaborate in performance - a possibility which has become reality due to technological advances. So if Braxton has written music for orchestras on different planets, why should this be taken as a joke? (It should be kept in mind that space exploration has taken a different course since the last moon landing 30 years ago.) To the extent Braxton's tricentric system is focused on extending the traditions of human creativity, why would the notion of an interplanetary music (post-Ra) be "scary"? (Which is not to say there aren't elements of "fun" within Braxton's work.) In other words, not all music has to be written on commission.

The wonders of Braxton's (Comp. 58, 1976) for creative marching orchestra (on the Arista and hatART Creative Orchestra recordings) hints at what the experience of (Comp. 19, 1971) might be like: Sousa-through-the-looking-glass!? Marching onward, marching onward, Marching to that lovely tune. Marching onward, marching onward, Happy as a bird in June. --from Act III of Scott Joplin's "Treemonisha"

No - but it probably helps to be corporeally balanced, i.e., open to experiencing the non-mental aspects of sound (e.g., tactile listening) - which are typically not captured (well) on recordings - and certainly lost when listening via headphones. Air vibrations (sounds) affect bodily organs other than our ears; music has a value to senses other than the rational/logocentric mind. This article on "avant-metal" group Sunn0))) provides some insight in this regard: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/28/magazine/28artmetal.html

Alexander made one album as a leader: Blue Jubilee - Jazzland JLP-23 During WKCR's celebration of Sun Ra's arrival day, Ra mentioned Joe Alexander in an interview with Phil Schaap. Robert Campbell lists Alexander as a member of the unrecorded Sonny Blount Orchestra, perhaps during the late '30s or early '40s.

Really? 40+ hours a week are "limited hours"? Once again: Different criteria apply based on the realities of the situation. Responsibility is proportional to power. If WNUR and WBEZ had similar resources (money, equipment, space, transmitting range, etc.), then we could begin to talk about a universal standard. But they don't, so we can't. You keep skirting my main point - that the scope of what WBEZ played under Heim was incredibly narrow by the standards of mainstream consensus (e.g., Down Beat, Chicago Tribune, Penguin Guide, et al). It's not about jazz likers vs. jazz lovers, or "inside" vs. "outside" - it's about a reasonably proportional representation of the histories and realities of this artform, on a radio station that has unique responsibilities given the unique circumstances of its position in Chicago broadcasting. WBEZ under Heim failed miserably. Just because you happen to dislike the traditions of post-Ornette, post-Ayler, post-Taylor, post-AACM musics doesn't mean they should be completely excluded. No room for a couple of hours a week out of 40? (When I said I didn't listen to BEZ often, I meant I've only been capable of enduring a half-hour here and there in recent years, due to its aesthetic myopia. When I came to Chicago about 10 years ago, I used to listen for a couple of hours each night before bed - then I decided to ween myself off of sleeping aids.) As a side note, WNUR does not systematically ban any particular tradition from its jazz programming - I defy you to find one (though I'll admit it would be hard to find examples from the post-Kenny G tradition). NUR may de-emphasize certain styles and traditions which anyone within its broadcasting range can hear on BEZ. But - and this goes to your "equal criteria" argument - it doesn't work the other way around: most listeners within BEZ range can't pick up NUR. We agree! But who's dreaming now? We were having a discussion among jazz likers and jazz lovers about WBEZ's decision to cancel its jazz programming. The question was raised by GregN about why Heim was disliked. I provided my perspective, which I believe fairly represents the perspective of more than a "dozen other stridently vocal self-appointed spokepeople for the 'jazz community'," as you put it. Jazz Institute of Chicago executive director Lauren Deutsch said the following on the chi-improv group (which has over 900 members - rather substantial for a Yahoo discussion group with such a narrow focus): I guess you consider Deutsch and the Jazz Institute to be among the "self-appointed spokespeople" as well. But who would you expect to care about BEZ's programming flaws? Casual BEZ listeners unfamiliar with the musics they weren't allowed to hear under the Heim Mandate? Anyway, speaking of realities, I just don't have time to remain engaged in this thread. Malatia has spoken, despite your wishes or mine. We can all enjoy whatever Wal-Mart-sponsored talk shows they'll be putting on instead of music. Happy listening, Jason

Absolutely. Dick Buckley is a Chicago treasure. Nice of BEZ to let the newspapers notify him about the station's changes, wasn't it?

Deep Blue & Vonsky have most definitely been played on WNUR - I can't say how often (too much Vonsky? impossible!) but the DJs would honor a listener request to play them. re: Arbitrons -- So what? What's the point of referring to statistics used for commercial marketing purposes when talking about a noncommercial station? WNUR is run by students, not the university. Most of the station's operating budget comes from its listeners, not the university; this budget is sufficient to carry out its mission. In any case, I don't know what this has to do with the discussion about WBEZ. No one was asking for BEZ to transform into NUR. Those of us critical of BEZ's programming policies had asked for what amounted to fairly modest changes - basically to use their 40+ hours per week to present a range of music similar to that covered by mainstream jazz journalism outlets such as the Chicago Tribune or Down Beat (not known for privileging outside/avant-garde/radical/progressive/hot/bebop/fusion/new-thing/experimental/anti-jazz/fire music). Throwing the baby out with the bathwater was certainly unfortunate. But I guess the news from the last few days put me in a more hopeful mood about the possibilities for positive change. Silly, I know.

I don't know whether the smiley-face indicates facetiousness, but just in case anyone takes you seriously: Serving the public is not the same as responding to what is most popular. Otherwise, what difference would there be between commercial and (nominally) non-commercial radio? Non-commercial public media - in this time period as in no other - has the responsibility of providing information systematically ignored by the commercial media. (This can lead to a much larger discussion about culture, political economy and citizenship, about art and entertainment, etc. etc., but suffice it to say that we need *some* forum where commercial and entertainment values are not the exclusive criteria by which decisions are made regarding what information and experiences may be useful to us as individuals-in-communities.) Yes, almost everything WBEZ *does* play is not played anywhere else. My point is that (due to their unique position in Chicago-area broadcasting) BEZ could and should have used its substantial resources (incl. 40+ hours of weekly "jazz" airtime) to present a broader spectrum of what is excluded from commercial outlets (i.e., jazz). (Indeed, it could be argued that BEZ should have cut back "jazz" programming to better represent other neglected auditory arts, but we're talking about what BEZ has (not) done within the context of its jazz programming.) Again, my argument is that BEZ has a unique responsibility to be more expansive in the context of its "jazz" programming given the resources at its disposal and its uniquely powerful position in the Chicago broadcasting arena. This isn't an abstract, philosophical argument - I'm talking about Chicago broadcasting as it exists. Of course in an ideal world, 1000 radio stations would bloom with every type of music made available to everyone everywhere (a day perhaps not too far off as technology progresses). But the unfortunate reality at the moment in Chicago is that there are *no* commercial FM stations that play jazz (other than WNUA's laxative-jazz) and there is *one* public radio station. This reality places a burden on Chicago Public Radio to be as comprehensive as possible in order to give the listening public an opportunity to be aware of the broad spectrum of musics neglected by commercial media. An incredibly difficult burden to be sure (impossible, really). But instead of doing as much as reasonably possible given its resources, WBEZ Jazz under Heim never began to try, never gave any indication it cared. Heim's legacy to Chicago culture has been the notion of "jazz" as a music unrelated to contemporary society except in its capacity to provide easily-digestible entertainment; she did little to reflect the tradition of "jazz" as a living artform. (No aspersions on Organissimo intended.)

No - it means that NUR is doing exactly what it is supposed to do, "to provide a forum for underrepresented music and ideas" and to promote music "often overlooked by major media outlets." Unfortunately, in present-day Chicago, what BEZ plays defines what is "represented" in terms of jazz on major media outlets. The fact that BEZ played/plays your stuff is therefore a significant factor that goes into the decision on what discs to add to a library that has limited physical space. That said, any DJ at WNUR can play virtually anything they want (within FCC limits) -- they are not restricted to what is in the NUR library. Untrue. Take a look at the playlists and you'll find lots and lots of "non-outside" stuff. In fact, the range of aesthetic traditions within jazz - which can't be reduced to specious "inside"/"outside" labels - is much better represented on NUR (though the composite blend changes somewhat as the DJs vary from one academic quarter to the next). Despite its much more comprehensive scope, WNUR's mission is to be supplemental, not definitive. This is appropriate, given the disparity in broadcasting signals between BEZ and NUR, along with the fact that BEZ is "Chicago Public Radio" with a large budget and paid staff, whereas NUR is a much smaller, all-volunteer, student-run station. Therefore, whether BEZ likes it or not, their definition of "jazz" effectively becomes the public's definition of the music in the current time period. For them to ignore entire traditions that have developed within the music of the last 50 years has been a severe disservice to its listeners. see above And if you want to further understand the problem with BEZ's jazz programming, try this: Take a look at a few weeks' worth of the Chicago Reader's music section (or a few months' worth of coverage in the Chicago Tribune or Down Beat). Note the names mentioned in the jazz performance listings (or in the critical reviews). Compare these names and their aesthetic traditions to those played on WBEZ, and see whether BEZ is fulfilling its mission to be reflective of "the distinctive and diverse Chicago area."

Are these the top 20 picks of the DJs, or the top 20 in terms of playtime on the air? In any case, those lists make my point - an extremely narrow sampling of the wide range of aesthetic traditions which fall under the "jazz" umbrella. Here's another list of theirs - presumably the current "top ten jazz albums heard on Chicago Public Radio": Beyond lists, I know what I've heard whenever I've tuned in - which admittedly has not been frequent: a frustratingly bland listening experience. With due respect to the above-named artists, there is a definite imbalance in favor of a conservative aesthetic. (Giving artist names and album titles does not mean much if they choose to play only those cuts with certain tempos, structures, timbral qualities, instrumentation, etc.) No one was asking BEZ to play five hours of Last Exit or Takayanagi Masayuki & Abe Kaoru or The Thing every night. The criticism focused on their unwillingness to present a more accurate picture of the broad range of the jazz world's aesthetic traditions, within and beyond Chicago jazz, within and beyond American jazz (i.e., AACM records of the '60s shouldn't be considered "avant-garde" to anyone who's been paying attention for the past 40 years). By contrast, check out some playlists of what's heard on WNUR, a much smaller college station with comparable quantity of weekly "jazz" programming: http://www.wnur.org/jazzshow/reports/playl...ists_Index.html No one has asked BEZ to mimic NUR, but the comparison clearly shows the types of artists and aesthetic traditions that have been systematically excluded from play over BEZ's airwaves. We asked BEZ to uphold it's mission as a *public* radio station, meaning to present what is actually going on in the community and in the world - to program with cultural enrichment and exploration in mind rather than commercial marketing. (I know, I know, considering public radio "non-commercial" is pretty much a joke at this point.)

I wouldn't say that out loud. She might be the most disliked person in the Chicago jazz community. This is an interesting statement. Why is she disliked? She is disliked because of the severe restrictions she placed on what DJs were allowed to play, insisting on a very narrow and skewed representation of "jazz" past and present; she caused several of their best DJs to leave the station (e.g., Neil Tesser). She restricted the types of "jazz" heard on WBEZ to a mind-numbing stream of cocktail jazz - mid-tempo stuff with lots of vocals, guitar & piano. One listener's account is representative: Impossible for a Chicago jazz program to ignore Fred Anderson and other AACM-associated musicians? Impossible for any jazz program ignore Charlie Parker? Chris Heim was there to prove the impossible. read more in the messages posted in this discussion thread: http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/chi-improv/message/4726 here's a message I sent to the station at the time: http://www.restructures.net/jcg2u/misc/wbez_jazz.htm