Jim R

Dan, I think my idea was pretty straightforward, and would have been a good solution, but... I think Al's point makes complete sense. I now feel like an idiot for calling this thread to your attention, too. (sorry about that). Thanks to Mike's excellent "BFT Master List" thread (which I have rarely opened for some reason), all one has to do is open that and click on the "answers" link for whatever BFT they want info about. It's actually easier/neater/tidier than trying to put all the actual data in one thread, IMO (now that Al made me think about it ). Thanks, Al. Unless John and Dmitry (and whoever else) disagrees with Al's suggestion, I think this thread can be put to bed (although if people want those pdf booklets, then by all means keep it going...). My 20 cents.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............................ Okay, maybe Glickton's not brilliant, but he still looks like a genius compared to the joker who wrote the article.

But... um... ... hey, YEAH! As far as answer threads that don't have complete info (I haven't really paid close attention to that), one could just contact the person who posted those answers in the first place, and complain.

Ancient history. B-) Not if you still have a dial-up connection. Anyway, I tend to agree that it wouldn't be a huge job, but then again, my idea spreads the task around fairly...

I've been following this thread, and wondering all along whether this idea of Dmitry's shouldn't be so difficult to pull off. With all respect to John and the pdf approach, I think it would be great to have a thread here that's convenient for everyone to access. With that in mind, I just had another idea, which would distribute the task evenly and fairly, and with perhaps an occasional tweak and some teamwork could be done in fairly short order. What if each BFT leader simply posts all of their own data (sequentially) into one comprehensive answers thread? Rather than one or two people trying to transfer all of the data from 21 (more actually, since some people did 2-disc BFT's) different answer threads, each test leader would simply post their data, one after the other. We have the ability to contact everybody, so it should be fairly simple to have each person transfer their own data into one thread. Once Dan started this new thread, he could contact Tony to add his data, Tony could contact me, etc etc. Seems fairly simple. I'm sure there may be a minor wrinkle here or there, but nothing we couldn't overcome, I'm sure. If all went smoothly, we would have one (or two) posts per person, sequentially organized. Just a thought...

Mentioned

This is funny on so many levels, but what really cracked me up was how the writer kept alternating between calling the guy "Glickman" and "Glicknian". Pure sketch comedy. Just be glad that none of us has a frequently present banjo... we all know how painful that can be. I hope that Glickerson finds it in his heart not to murder the person who wrote that piece... come to think of it, maybe that's why nobody took credit for it.

I really don't want to appear as being nitpicky here, but it was this comment in particular that raised my curiosity. Perhaps the sound on the original LP's is equally as imperfect as the (Celluloid) CD, and the rumor therefore somewhat misleading. At any rate, I too find it listenable, but I suppose I tend to listen to recordings with subpar sound a bit less often than those that sound quite good.

Disc arrived, thanks.

After reading this thread last night and again this morning, I have been listening to the Celluloid CD. First of all, let me say that I've had this CD for nearly 10 years, but have not played it very often. I would have sold my LP copy when I got the CD, so my memory of the sound quality on the vinyl version is practically nonexistent. After reading brownie's post, I played "well you needn't" (track 8) first. It is pretty bad, with intermittent noise/static. I don't know exactly what caused it, but it's irregular/inconsistent and fairly distracting. As I continued with tracks 9 and 10, I realized that the noise continued on those tracks (no wonder I haven't played this so often). I backtracked to tracks 7, 6, and 5, and although the severity of the noise varies from track to track, it does occur. So, it's not just "well you needn't" that is faulty on this CD version. The first 5 tracks seem to be relatively noise free, although the sound quality (especially noticeable in terms of Klook's cymbals) is not great. I see in EKE BBB's post that Fresh Sound mentions that the sound is "imperfect", so it's no great surprise. I suppose my question is... for those who still have the vinyl, are the noise problems on the latter tracks very serious? Are they there at all? I don't plan to go out and buy back the LP's, I'm only curious.

Yes- originally 2 LP's, then on one CD.

Unless I missed it, nobody has mentioned Marian McPartland in this thread. Does anybody out there listen to her "Piano Jazz" show on radio? She isn't necessarily high on my list of favorite players, but she certainly has earned my respect (and not just as a pianist). The lady can play.

Once again, Oh Great One, you have shined on us your great sun of enlightenment and my soul basks in its warmth as a beagle in a field of black-eyed Susans. Wait a sec... You're saying that my posts make you feel like a dog with a fever in a shelter for battered women? I'll nominate that for post-of-the-month.

Argo on Savoy? Are you sure it wasn't Savoy on Argo? Thanks for the info, brownie. Is Jo Basile not a very familiar name to you, then? I had gotten the impression that he was quite well known, but I don't know how highly regarded.

--- this track, of course, not on the original lp... does the cassette list the date of recording? According to the 1986 Clef/Verve discography by Ruppli, "sugar hill" was recorded in the second session (October 16, 1969) that produced the album (the first session was recorded on October 8). It shows the tune as being issued on both V6-8773 (ACS) as well as MGM SE-4737 ("CORE OF JAZZ BOTTLED BY MGM"). Only Burrell, Hanna, and "Brass orchestra, Johnny Pate (arr, cond) are listed in terms of personnel, and the notation for "sugar hill" at the bottom of the listing says "Brass out. Unknown (p) replaces Hanna".

brownie, I haven't yet heard Galliano. Can you talk a bit about the history of the accordion in jazz? Are there certain names we should be aware of? I wonder what you would have to say about Jo Basile. I have one CD with Basile, recorded with the brazilian piano trio, Bossa Tres (in NYC in 1963). I love this- in fact, I wish the tracks had been much longer (they average only about 2 1/2 or 3 minutes each). I know that Basile recorded quite a few records... were they mostly forgettable pop albums, or is/was he highly regarded? I recently bought the Gus Viseur CD from the Jazz In Paris series. It's okay, but so far hasn't impressed me too much.

Well, I have to say that Mike does have a point- although it's more of an issue with some folks more than others. I'd rather not see all bold, or all caps, or even all lower case, but as long as the person has something to offer and a good attitude, I'm glad to have them join in.

Hi, welcome to the board. Since you're new here, you should try the "search" function first. There are tons of discussions about Grant. He probably gets more attention on this board than any other guitarist. I'm a fan, since buying the NIGERIA LP back around 1981 or so.

Brothers, let's focus on the positives here. Neal, nice to see your name here. I have enjoyed using your 1992 book as a handy reference guide for many years (I rarely even look at the prices, actually, but I haven't been an LP collector since the book came out). Bottom line, it's been a very nice resource. Thanks.

Wasn't there a thread like this back on the BNBB that parodied such reviews? Seems like somebody dug it up and re-posted it here after the Big Exile... Ah yes, the old DG "Mad Libs" thread. Paging Dan Gould...

"Overlooked guitarists"... Holy shit. They've got a SPY here on the board!!

So far, this is the only BFT where I haven't had a confirmation that my PM was received, either by a PM/e-mail reply or a list of names posted here in the sign-up thread...

Eddie Higgins

I owned #'s 3, 8, 10, 12, and 17, and only got two (and 12 was the ultimate "gimme" for me). I still can't believe I missed #10!! Oh well, at least I got almost all 91 tracks correct on the short attention span disc. Al, you'll be glad to know I'm out another $20 thanks to you (picked up the Ellington and that Silverish guy ). Oh, and another $20 for a couple of other Moody CD's. Some friend YOU turned out to be.

I'm pretty much with Tony on this one. I let go of the LP years ago and never picked up the CD. I don't think it was terrible, I just don't think I would play it very often.