David Ayers

I can very much relate to that ... also to your previous post of course - about need (or lack thereof) to hear stuff at home vs. in concert. I play less and less contemporary avantgarde-leaning music at home. Tough I keep buying some kinds of. My Leo discs get few spins only, and honeslty I've not heard all the ten I ordered in last year's sale. Still I am tempted to get a few again this time ... filling some Taylor, Sun Ra, Art Ensemble gaps, maybe. Will have to inspect that list a little closer first though (and check if I still have my wantist from last year somewhere - probably not, so it's going from scratch again). Taylor is a case in point. I was present at the Rome stop of the tour that yielded Bologna and Vienna discs. I bought the lps as soon as they came out - and still have them, new and unplayed, waiting for the right day....

I heard the Ganelin trio on their first UK tour. I loved them but it was one of those cases where the impression was so vivid I never felt the need to buy or hear recordings. Hm, Topic for a thread there.

How does he produce (and stock) so many? He must lose money hand over fist. Most of those in the sale are older titles I have already mostly decided to pass on. I'm not too enthusiastic about some of the artists although I will happily hear some recommendations, even if I am not likely to get much further than Spotify. Correction: the artists are fine, I just don't feel the need to be able to access their work outside the context of their gigs.

Thanks for posting that - in fact I was about to go for some more Leos so the timing is guuud.

Which Rivers is in the set? I didn't manage to work that out... Ah. Got the LP. On CD ages ago right? Thanks.

Which Rivers is in the set? I didn't manage to work that out...

Well no way will this set be an upgrade on those!

Re. the remastering, I'd be more worried about getting the crappy old GRP remasters...

Also now listed with a (slightly higher) price on amazon.fr....

Noise fest. Yeah.

Corrected. Why didn't somebody say something about this earlier ... Sorry. I just thought that "Surpreme" was beyond Supreme, what with it having one more letter, and figured, hey, Mark knows what's up, so like, hey, right? Mark does know what's up, but sometimes he's a sloppy speller. You cats gotta keep me honest. It was better before! Change it back!

Glad to see 'Surpreme' spelt correctly in the thread title, sorry to see a sad lapse on 'Luurve'.

Shovelfuls of this stuff on spotters, for those interested. I started a list a while ago but never got anywhere close...

???? Been there many times, and they have always been good to me as a customer. A weak joke - I mean the mind games over whether they have that disc in stock...

Seems they're about to be renamed the Bravehearts, anyway. Which just leaves us with the issue of antisemitism.

And the parallel with antisemitic hate speech is? I couldn't defend it with the same pride that some here do. Be nice, the world will get nicer.

Agreed. I mean, we can't sanitize everything. Look how watered down Saturday Night Live is compared to the 70s and 80s. Like everything has to be politically correct these days? Does that also apply to the name of the football team? I made the same point in one of my posts. In the meantime the callow logic of the Onion hurls around hate speech and Jews are supposed to suck it up just like the Native Americans are supposed to put up with 'Redskins'. And here, supposedly liberal people defend the use of this speech instead of concluding, more reasonably, that as it is profoundly offensive to some it should not be used. Be nice. It won't hurt.

I'm not going to DMG either way. I'm done with their mind games.

It doesn't matter what the Onion's rationale is. Even on their implied terms they are saying there can be legitimate reasons to use offensive racial epithets. But all they are doing is using hate speech and people have to stop. It's just manners, really. Why defend it as if it were the product of genius? And a deeper question here about why people look for an excuse to express antisemitism. Try to be nice. Just stop.

Really? You think it's correct to prosecute a satirical publication for racism? Yes. Here the question of interpretation lies in the offence given. In this article, an individual is slurred with racial epithets. That offends Jews, not just him. Otherwise the excuse for racism becomes 'oh I was only joking'. In any case, what happens in a joke? This joke focalises racial aggression. There is no point in dignifying it by analysing its layers. In my book this is actually classic anti-semitism. The message to Jews is: look, you have to put up with this language, one of your kind has stepped out of line - watch out, there's plenty more where this came from. That's completely absurd. This joke does the opposite of focalize racial aggression and the only way to figure that out is to understand the context -that is, to analyze its layers. The whole point of this joke is to lampoon the patronizing attitude of most Americans (and particularly Dan Snyder) who keep saying that "Redskins" is not racially offensive even though this is the easiest and cheapest opinion for those people (since they are not themselves Indians) to have. It does this by setting up an analogous example that's OBVIOUSLY AND INTENTIONALLY racially offensive to point out that these same people would never stand for it if their ethnicities were caricatured like this. It has nothing to do with making Jews "put up with this language" and everything to do with illustrating the ways in which powerful people make others put up with the same kind of language every day. No. I understand the supposed layers, and I am saying the layering is deeper than that, uncontrollable, rests on and reproduces prejudices which the 'wit' of a jejeune copywriter cannot shape. Why should people have to listen to this language. This is easily understood if we reflect that the equivalent language would not have been used if the supposed offender were black. A key to getting out of racism is to show people that what they thought was humor is in fact just racism. I can't even say that those who wrote this or find it funny have no ill-will towards Jews, but lets say that the perpetrators and defenders of the remarks as they see it are 'in good faith', it is exactly that sense that one means no harm that is at stake, here, in the question of the Redskins name. That is, it cuts both ways. This style of remark would only ever have been aimed at a Jew and not at any other race. '

Really? You think it's correct to prosecute a satirical publication for racism? Yes. Here the question of interpretation lies in the offence given. In this article, an individual is slurred with racial epithets. That offends Jews, not just him. Otherwise the excuse for racism becomes 'oh I was only joking'. In any case, what happens in a joke? This joke focalises racial aggression. There is no point in dignifying it by analysing its layers. In my book this is actually classic anti-semitism. The message to Jews is: look, you have to put up with this language, one of your kind has stepped out of line - watch out, there's plenty more where this came from.

Ha ha! What i want to know is, if I ordered it, would have been sent to you?

Should we start a poll and vote on which one goes? Damn you, Chris Pearson!

Are Poll Winners Spanish or Andorran or what? They don't appear on the Fresh Sound website, and in fact not all these PD labels do. All a bit impenetrable.

Then it's me or him! One of us has to go!