nail75

Jimmy Giuffre is dead, your dad thankfully alive. There is a difference there. Of course it is great if an artist receives the royalties he is entitled to, especially because too many do not. I am bit partial about "estates" receiving royalties. I could not care less if children of an artist receive royalities. Spouses are a different story. It is nice, if you are able to contact people and find out, if someone is receiving royalities. However this is not practical for most releases. I bought an Laura Nyro live recording and of course I have no idea if anyone is receiving royalties. To base your purchasing decision on something you cannot influence is a bit strange. Who knows what deals artist may have signed in their lifetime.

Jimmy Giuffre's widow managed to buy a can of ravioli and two spoons due to the immense royalties that this set created. Really: what world do you live in? Or was this just an abysmal attempt at a joke?

How are people supposed to pay you? Western Union?

Well, I don't like WCSB very much and I am not the only one. (scroll down) The material is just not up to the standards of the better EH-studio releases. The purple box is superior by miles and even some Dagger releases offer better quality material. As the guy says in his review, EH are scrapping the bottom of the barrel - and they continued to do that with PH&A.

Thanks!

Thanks for the review. I am pretty sure, I don't need this new edition, although you made a good case for it.

What a dumb thread.

Is this still available?

I am still grinning from ear to fucking ear when I think that I was at that show. Me and a friend sat next to an middle-aged couple who had no idea who Ornette Coleman was. They probably heard that he was a legendary musician, but not more. They mostly went to see musicals and stuff. I thought: "Uh, oh, you are in for a surprise." They stayed pretty long but not until the end. I am not sure, but several years later, Ornette was here again with a band that was much closer to "fusion" than to the music on Sound Grammar. I do not remember three basses, but I remember thinking that this apparently was Coleman in jazz-rock mode.

Yeah, we know that you have all albums by Cassandra Reeves and Dianne Wilson and still you keep coming back for more.

The Andrew Hill Mosaic booklet is nice, because it contains a complete list of all of Andrew's Blue Note sessions including personell.

What is the total for these discs including shipping to Germany?

I think so too, though sometimes master tapes re-appear. The pressing is really excellent too. And the essay serves as an interesting introduction. I would also like to add that Oliver Lake provided the record that was used for mastering this reissue.

Quite good, actually. I have nothing to compare it to though. Interesting record, I played it three times so far, and I find it intriguing.

Unfortunately, Yarde and Siegel do not play in Mannheim, but if anyone went to any of the other concerts, please let me know, what it was like.

Thanks for starting this thread, king ubu. The guys who put out these records (Rank Records) are passionate music and vinyl-lovers and they will make sure that the vinyl sounds as good and the records are pressed as possible. All of their previous releases achieve this high standard. So buy with confidence. I am in no way affiliated with Rank Records, but music lovers should support small labels that do a great job.

I have only a couple of Ware releases: Live In The World is a great 3-CD Set that can be found quite cheap. Even better is the vinyl-only release "Live In Vilnius". Fantastic concert, beautiful sound and an excellent pressing. Maybe one of the best jazz releases of the new millenium.

Interestingly I gave my CD of Conference Of The Birds to a friend recently, who is a casual jazz listener. And he said that he thought that it was too noisy and that it annoyed him at times. Next time I will meet him, he will get "Extended Play" and it will be interesting to hear what he says. Interesting to me at least. The difference with your question about "level" is that "Conference Of The Birds" is unique in the sense that the presence of Braxton, Rivers and Altschul he made a record that is pretty far out by his standards (and ECM's standards) than his remaining output. I do not think that Holland ever was very much into free jazz, so to say that everything that came later was a disappointment is a judgment that is more based on one's wishes than even a faint notion of reality. In terms of musicality, I would argue that his current small group is as good as the band that recorded "Conference". I certainly enjoy them as much as I enjoy "Conference". Read more about it here: http://www.regioactive.de/story/7477/gefeierter_auftritt_das_dave_holland_quintett_live_in_ludwigshafen.html The difference that I see between his studio records and the live album is that the live album is much more lively, much more "on fire", much more enthusiastic. It seems that the band loses some of its energy and passion in the studio. I do not know why, but maybe it has to do with ECM/Eicher or with the fact that Holland needs an audience to get him going.

Nobody has to like what Holland does, but I think there is a fairly large difference between the aforementioned live and studio albums. I am glad that you agree with me on that.

I think if you saw Peter Brötzmann a dozen times live, there would be a certain sameness too. I have seen him live once just for the record (both Brötzmann and Holland that is). So my question to you is: Have you listened to studio and live versions of the same songs, like for instance on "Extended Play" and on "Prime Directive/Points Of View"? If so, would you argue that there is little difference between the respective versions of the music live and in the studio or that there is a significant difference

Have you listened to studio and live versions of the same songs, like for instance on "Extended Play" and on "Prime Directive/Points Of View"? If so, would you argue that there is little difference between the respective versions of the music live and in the studio or that there is a significant difference? I am still waiting for an answer! You cannot argue that Holland has not been "innovative" and refuse a discussion about the definition of "mainstream" and "innovation". That is a pointless argument and you know it. I think that there is a huge difference between his live concerts and his records and I originally wanted to discuss that. Unfortunately most people here seem not to be interested, but instead are fond of displaying their prejudices. That is fine, we all have our prejudices.

Oh, you thought you could elegantly bitch-slap Holland by misrepresenting his performances and then slip away like a thief in the night? Tough luck!

I think Chuck is perfectly capable of answering himself. Or did he ask you to respond to the question that I asked him? Your statement suffers from a very narrow perspective and is extremly one-sided. It would take considerable effort to examine all the problems in detail. In short, your understanding of "mainstream" is silly, your concept about "innovation" is seemingly unrelated to place and time and your idea about commercialism in jazz does not really merit further discussion. Worst of all, your ignorance about David Holland and his music is spectacular. Your attack falls flat, because it bears no resemblance to what Holland is actually doing on stage. Your statement only exhibits your prejudices, which is fine for you I guess, but does not make for an interesting conversation. I doubt that you have seen him live during the last 10 years. If I am wrong, I would like to know where you have seen him. I actually have seen him and I totally agree with Stefan Wood that Holland is not on stage to play "digestible and safe" music. He does not play free jazz, if that is what bothers you, but he really never did as a leader. However if he attempts to be as middle-of-the-road, he is doing an awful job, because his playing and his music are quite demanding, which probably explains, why he has not make it to the top of the UK-charts. And finally, I would be very pleased, if you told me, where the "big middle-of-the-road in contemporary jazz" can be found. Especially the "big" one. Which jazz act today is big? Now, I do not know how the situation is in England, but I would consider a jazz concert with 500-1000 people to be pretty big. There might be a handful of jazz musicians that can draw so many people, usually the familiar big names. Dave Holland is not among them.

Have you listened to studio and live versions of the same songs, like for instance on "Extended Play" and on "Prime Directive/Points Of View"? If so, would you argue that there is little difference between the respective versions of the music live and in the studio or that there is a significant difference?

Yeah, what is this about? Mental retardation? Temporary insanity? Envy? Something in the water?