MomsMobley

Ari Eisinger ---> anyone not stunned has never played fingerstyle guitar, right up there w/ Paul Geremia

Sabine Liebner = great great Cage-ian (& elsehwere Feldman-iac)

"Sing Sing Sing" 1983, aspect ratio a bit off, hail Bob Fosse & Ralph Burns, apologies to Sven Nykvist, great great GREAT movie

Is there an ** exciting ** version of the Mozart flute concertos? Maybe I only saw 'em good nights-- symphonies, overtures, maybe Masonic music warm up?-- late '90s but I thought they were fine-- albeit not in the style I most prefer in Mozart. Even taking Ross at face value, a combination of conductor & musician lassitude seems likely explanation. And, not to put Schwarz on the same level but look what "you" (Chicago, not LK personally) did to Jean Martinon & Rafael Kubelik... And, as I suggested, nearly over "major" NYC orchestra except the Met gets ragged on, perhaps deservedly but... *** Sandow sidenote, from his Fischer-Dieskau memorial And yet… strengths can also be weaknesses, and one could say that Fischer-Dieskau’s tricks with volume make his singing fussy, especially in Bach, where often I wish he’d just let the music speak for itself. http://www.gregsandow.com/old/fdieskau.htm even with scores unseen, I suspect that's something ** everyone ** can agree upon: that Sandow's music is best left to speak for itself. (I've run hot/cold DF-D but finally you gotta say he was a real artist, take or leave or choose wisely etc but I'd NEVER use that old (hack) saw against the man in any repertoire.)

Nobody was saying Schwarz was, say, Rene Jacobs, but he's certainly a more than competent Mozartean; is it possible-- even probable there were 'off' nights & on? Of course. But look at the orchestral situation in New York-- who has been pleasing, and who has pleased the musicians, besides Levine? AND you saw what Sandow-- out of nowhere then, the world's great "moralist" (sic)-- tried to do to him. Hint: maybe its "major" institution New York musicians who are as much the problem as the conductors, though, to be sure, I've been less than pleased a # of choices etc.

LK-- Sandow is a fucking crank just more than little embittered that, uh... nobody is playing his compositions. And yeah, good to great composers have also been interesting, sometimes weird, critics also but Virgil Thomson he ain't, let alone Berlioz. I won't dignify Sandow's schtick but running down list of conductors he's ambushed on slim, often fatuous, evidence but Schwarz ain't the only one. Also, no comment, from Sandow's website-- but maybe he'll help Anthony Braxton with his interplanetary aspirations etc?

Yeah, who knows but the question is, how much could he ultimately do with a band like Seattle? I did, years ago, hear him do Mozart etc in New York and he was very good but of course anyone damn well should be. Aside from some quasi-'juicy' content in the NYT piece, I think some motivation stemmed from grief on that side also. But you know what a snakepit etc... Also, this Hindemith recording is excellent-- http://www.amazon.com/Hindemith-Nobilissima-Visione-Pieces-Orchestra/dp/B00KQ31IZ2

Not so much: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/arts/music/16waki.html?_r=0 Times was mostly a hit piece, LK. Schwarz could be a hardass, possibly imperious on occasion, but isn't that his job? Case dismissed btw-- http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/symphony-violinists-lawsuit-dismissed/ http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Case-against-Seattle-Symphony-dismissed-1262642.php Without having examined the medical records etc, if above is the case... is violinist in full time symphony orchestra really the appropriate occupation? And maybe-- just maybe-- any musician who left Seattle would, because of GS, have a # of better-than-previous professional opportunities? Meanwhile, pretty much any GS conducted album is at least worth hearing & if one can snag his American orchestral series' recordings cheap (or find at library), they're estimable if, in my case, I usually prefer more modernist fare. also--

While I share your fascination with this story, I see the biz side the other way: Ornette is NOT a commodity, both for health & asspain reasons. To be blunt, who gives a fuck what Denardo thinks? However faithfully (let's presume) he's carried forth Dad's perogatives, it's done little good for anyone else (but Art)), all the Harmolodic Verve stuff is out of print (new recordings + reissues) despite their presumed ownership etc etc. If Antibalas can make me, as booking agent, festival and/or club owner $$$, let GuardianDenardo & his lawyers have a ball-- even with Ornette in best fettle, by his own choice he was setting himself apart etc & not really a player in the contemporary live music scene. Here's A's current date calendars by comparison-- http://www.antibalas.com/shows/ you think even 1% of their likely audience heard of or would care about this dispute if we could even explain it to them? What power is O's name? How many gigs has he played in the last 10 years? 15? 20? Yeah, sure there are "loyalists" but what's "loyalty"-- and what should it be, really?-- to such a quixotic cause worth when we got tickets to sell? Ornette & Denardo in their loft/castle is admirable as shit, OK, but it's their life & sure is shit isn't a living for the rest of us. And, obviously, assuming Antibalas not suicidal, O's discography is now littered with "questionable" or "questioned" releases.... well-- as I think you & others suggested earlier-- what's the common factor there? You probably have a saner grip on this, but one thing I've learned is to never underestimate the power of Anonymous Art Money when it gets pissed off. You look at all the Art Money (Anonymous & Otherwise) that has been invested in Ornette over the years, hey, Noble Cause Alert, write a check. "Commodity", no. Icon, yes, and deservedly so. But people invest in Icons just as surely as they invest in Commodities. And also, this is true, booking agents/etc. don't give a damn who' s in the band, they just want the name on the bill and on the stage. Antibalas can get a fucking trumpet player, ya' know? And there we go back to the question- if System Dialing Peoples NOT suicidal, whose Anonymous Art Money did THEY get promised if/when shit hit fan? So many angles to this, and none of them particularly savory, no matter how you come at them. There are definitely layers & layers of questions and clearly something was kinda-- if not 'shady'-- then purposefully 'shadowy' about this release. But just on functional level of, yes, people trying to compete, if Antibalas can handle their business, are pleasant to deal with etc... I just don't see anyone but Ornette's very very best personal friends taking sides and I'd suggest the same even if was 10 years & the prospect of 'future' Ornette more realistic. (Ten years ago CDs had greater value, natch; now, with almost everything available somewhere... Except for the obviously higher manufacturing costs, I'm surprised the label didn't do this on vinyl... And actually, in some ways that's weirdest thing about this is the sequal/"homage" to O re: "New Vocabulary" though maybe they see it in line with the provocative Contemporary & Atlantic titles?) Also, I'm not generally an NPR fan-- brought to you by swill beer whose sponsorship I won't repeat here-- but I didn't see their original Kevin Whitehead review posted so... http://www.npr.org/2015/02/20/387772281/ornette-coleman-returns-with-his-unmistakable-sound

While I share your fascination with this story, I see the biz side the other way: Ornette is NOT a commodity, both for health & asspain reasons. To be blunt, who gives a fuck what Denardo thinks? However faithfully (let's presume) he's carried forth Dad's perogatives, it's done little good for anyone else (but Art)), all the Harmolodic Verve stuff is out of print (new recordings + reissues) despite their presumed ownership etc etc. If Antibalas can make me, as booking agent, festival and/or club owner $$$, let GuardianDenardo & his lawyers have a ball-- even with Ornette in best fettle, by his own choice he was setting himself apart etc & not really a player in the contemporary live music scene. Here's A's current date calendars by comparison-- http://www.antibalas.com/shows/ you think even 1% of their likely audience heard of or would care about this dispute if we could even explain it to them? What power is O's name? How many gigs has he played in the last 10 years? 15? 20? Yeah, sure there are "loyalists" but what's "loyalty"-- and what should it be, really?-- to such a quixotic cause worth when we got tickets to sell? Ornette & Denardo in their loft/castle is admirable as shit, OK, but it's their life & sure is shit isn't a living for the rest of us. And, obviously, assuming Antibalas not suicidal, O's discography is now littered with "questionable" or "questioned" releases.... well-- as I think you & others suggested earlier-- what's the common factor there?

Late, if you like Toradze's Scriabin-- which I do-- check out his Prokofiev PCs, also with Gergiev. I'm great admirer of Ahmed Adnan Saygun, roughly 'the Turkish Bartok'-- Here's some ace later Casella --

LK, please consider: Schaap didn't need to "lead" anyone-- he didn't invent the line of inquiry, one or more Ellingtonians told him their version(s). What other possibility is there that Schaap would question the 'accepted' Avakian version? Now I would like to know who first told Schaap this; how (relatively) drunk & sober the various participants, witnesses were, etc. We know Duke's band, like nearly all others, often drank a lot. I know nothing about Avakian's habits. Nonetheless, those who drank with Duke were very experienced drinkers and why, if Avakian a benign, even benevolent figure in their professional lives, would they speak otherwise? Might Schaap have a 'secret' revisionist agenda? Anything is possible, sure, but that seems unlikely. And however much a nudge he might occasionally be, Schaap is a GREAT interviewer because he's both thoroughly prepared & unabashedly loving to his subjects-- not generalized "I Heart Jazz" but that you did this specifically & its wondrous, how did that happen? Here's another thought: besides the Newport question, I see that Avakian was Charles Lloyd's manager for a spell. Schaap is long-time good friends with Lloyd, continuing to this day. I have no beef with George generally but I've never viewed him as any kind of "saint." Who besides Johnny Mathis, maybe, am I to credit him for? And just because he was "classier"-- slicker anyway-- than, say, Syd Nathan?

More Villa-Lobos, starting with Choros 11... Uuno Klami ballets & symphonies ... Milhaud symphonies ... lots of Delius, choral music included... Dutilleux... Messiaen obviously... Casella ... Szymanowski... Tubin... lesser known Profkofiev inc. cantatas... tons of Martinu... MacMillan ... Sally Beamish ... how well do you know-- and I mean really know-- your Ives? Ives lives! There are Spanish composers, Portuguese composers, Greek composers-- Skalkottas !!! (some serial, lots not)... Leevi Madetoja ... How well do you know-- and I mean really, really know-- your Nielsen ? Take a whiff of Roy Harris sometime, not just Symphony #3. ******* LOU HARRISON !!!!!!! *********

LK, I'm sorry to say this but you've been drastically misled & perhaps even swallowed Chris A's poison pill on this matter. I've heard many 100s (of 3,000 or so) Schaap interviews both live & re-broadcast and that characterization of Schaap's Q&A is nonsense, flat out. Q: If I had the honor-- really-- to interview you about your estimable career in journalism, would you have immediate daily, weekly recall of your work from 20-30-40 years ago? And if not, what if I first offer framing devices-- because I have your clips and a goodly # issues of magazines/papers etc-- & then perhaps a few cues, either based on evidence or educated guess? I'm trying to get you to talk... That's what ANY historian or diligent journalist would do, what they should do... Now, I would have to consider those answers to see if you weren't just talking to be heard-- or to shut me up-- but that's part of the process, later, or writing history. Q: what has Schaap gotten with his "reputation"? He's not a writer-- he wasn't taking that work away from anyone, when such work as available. And I doubt anyone writer wanted to take his adjunct teaching positions, hauling ass back & forth from Princeton for a pittance... He DID stay on the radio, yes... and he DID get some reissue gigs... You can argue this 'authority' was part of long range plan that allowed to him hook up with JALC education & finally at age mid-50-something get a job with health benefits* but I don't think it was really that well thought out. Q: Who once used to be on the radio & then wasn't AND who used to produce reissue records & then didn't & I don't know (really) whose choices those were or why but to pretend one's harshest & most obsessive critic is personally 'disinterested'... hardee har har as Mr. Kramden would say. Now once more, what Schaap DOES with his fact gathering is open to question-- he's not publishing papers or books, doesn't footnote his liner notes or Facebook posts etc-- but the criticism of his ** interviews ** etc is utterly fatuous. You (generally, not LK) would fucking shit to hear even a fragment of those interviews-- maybe sometimes in spite of Schaap's Queens-born nudgeiness, fine, nobody says you gotta like him but he sounds like a New Yorker to me & he did it. For those 100s of interviews + the Dean Benedetti box alone I'd hold Schaap in high, if circumscribed, esteem. it's a nice line yes but Al Haig-- Al Haig?!?!?-- as a character witness? * How many years did George Avakian not have health insurance? How many major label record execs have died impoverished or had to draw on the Record Executives Welfare Fund? And-- it's not enough for him to be wealthy & reasonably respected, he had to be loved by Ellingtonians too? Maybe he should be, maybe not but it's certainly well within range of possibility that perceptions, Boss & Worker, White & Black, (Sober & Drunk) etc differ, often greatly.

But none of this is contradictory, is it? Chris A's vindictiveness doesn't interest me in slightest & can be quickly dismissed on # of levels. Avakian v. Schaap, real and imagined, is interesting because it's almost certainly... Avakian v. Collective Memory of Ellingtonians voiced by Schaap or Avakian v. Particular Memory of Aggrieved Elliington(s) voiced by Schaap You gotta think this through deliberately and logically: for whose benefit is Schaap attempting, in his view, to set record straight? There's no $$$ in it, no glory (living people who care = statistical zero), no sex, probably not even one free beer. And again, who spent more hours in more different settings with Ellingtonians 1963-2005, George or Phil? Doesn't mean Phil's "right" but it is 99.9% certain that such assertions are NOT coming out of nowhere. also, I daresay non-New Yorkers don't really get how zany Phil Schaap's life has been: his life, from out of the cradle to present, is almost completely defined by jazz obsession + hanging out with old-- & dying, & dying, & dying etc-- black guys-- and some hep white guys too. There are those who mocked Schaap for the time he put into the Dean Benedetti tapes-- oh, and what a "surprise" Chris A. was among them!* (sense a complementary obsession/theme?)-- but I'm not one of them. re: Meeropol, you remember what happened to W.E.B. DuBois, right? Paul Robeson? Albert Maltz? Theodore Dreiser? (Good people gulled by CPUSA and/or lifetime hostility, oppression, lies etc) * This takes nothing away from the various hep things a swell like Avakian-- or even Chris A. in New Orleans-- did but remember Melville "The Confidence Man" too-- "showing that man men have many minds."

that seems picayune, Chuck. If I had the three hour Truck Parham interview he did (might be more than one) I'd send it over as at least moderate compensation. I don't disagree with someone's objection but can't imagine being bothered by it; it was just "silly" not "offensive." Schaap was just reissue producer in any case-- SOMEONE at Sony Legacy signed off on that & they're at least complicit in any "offense" etc. re: such "Such Sweet Thunder," how many of ya'll have the Stravinsky/Entremont piano concerto that's missing x # of bars from original recording/issue & has been incorrectly reissued multiple times? Schaap had nothing to do with THAT one, obviously etc. (Insert a 1/2 jillion other exampes here.)

I'm adopted myself, not sure what would the potential malice in claiming that about anybody, at least not that in and of itself. As to the other point, not just situation, but music, i.e. - all the gentrefentiled noise about too much bass and all that nonsense. Pay attention caucoids, pay attention and do your homework. Free your mind and your (b)ass will follow. Context was 2005 passing of Schaap's father, Walter Schaap, well-known Ellington Society eminence etc & also, on a personal level, a very racially progressive man (as far from common in NYC as anywhere else) & Chris A. used putative adoption to assert distance between respectable, well-regarded father & son of whom he very much feels otherwise & states it as often as possible. So absolutely, there ** should be ** no malice, only love (I referenced Abel Meeropol above for # reasons) but that was plainly NOT how Chris A. intended it. (This from old AAJ thread btw, I did not and never do look at that site except when someone points me towards or it unexpectedly comes up in search engine.)

Thanks for this, LK, but you've just proved my point. And I take no sides in this dispute but here's the breakdown-- You have one BOSS executive, amiable OK, with his first person version. He lives in a world with other aristocrats etc-- that's life & George did alright. You have Schaap, who wasn't there but is coming up with this composite account based on MANY conversations with MANY of the relatively un-landed & relatively un-enfranchised participants-- some, in fact, effectively dis-enfranchised in their lifetime, which is one reason Koester is in D.C. '63 & George is where?-- In the years since Newport, Avakian and Schaap spent how much time with the Ellingtonians & Jo Jones etc, respectively? If Schaap is wrong-- & again I have no opinion on the matter this moment-- is he stating ** his ** invented opinion or the opininion he was ** taught ** to have? The problem w/ Schaap documenting himself is he spent lots of time hanging with those dudes socially & in some cases professionally; he was not, in real time, creating some Oral History Archive etc though if there are tapes-- almost certanly not transcripts-- of Phil's on-air interviews from 1971 thru whenever... that would be a start. Is it possible that certain Ellingtontonians did not, in fact, love George Avakian the way he believed they loved him or wanted to be loved? Or does that not even enter into the picture and each party, from their perspective, believes themselves correct without rancor? I'm saying Schaap is probably an honest (but potentially sloppy) representative of his otherwise largely voiceless sources. Have black folks and white folks ever looked at the same situation and interpreted, recalled things differently? Nawwwwwwww. Is it possible that Schaap is misrepresenting his sources? Possible, but generally unlikely-- too many long-term intimate frienships with musicians & family. (I've been advised btw that Schaap was perhaps NOT adopted and that Chris A. was either misinformed or malicious. I do not know the "truth" in this matter but don't want to be thought spreading potentially false rumor.)

Adjust your dials appropriately! Joe Albany movie director is brother of Cliff Price mentioned upstream somewhere. And again, what evidence is there that Phil Schaap is a creative individual? Yet we're supposed to believe Albertson and Avakian that Schaap is just making shit up... to what purpose? He may be wrong but he probably has reasons for stating what he does-- And he might be correct or the point may be arguable & one it's one ofay's word versus another's, who was there-- & who perceived & remembers things as they wish-- & who has talked to people who were-- & their view too is subjective. I don't get the surety here over who's right and who's wrong tho' if there are specific disputations, they'd be interesting to review.

Moms -- I have no idea what you mean by these remarks, especially the "where did he come from?" business: 're: Chris Albertson, while I respect what he did, his judgements are... "stern" is a generous way of putting it. And where did Chris come from again? 're: Avakian, a prince of an executive etc, sure, but-- not to make too much of a class argument here-- an executive nonetheless and where did HE come from & how much power he did he wield?' "for better/worse, Schaap is coming from mixed-race middle class Queens, New York, jazz fan parents" Chris comes from Denmark and arrived here under by-the-bootstraps circumstances, I believe. He had a job in radio for many years at a public station and produced a number of important recordings, especially of New Orleans and other older musicians who otherwise might have been forgotten. He's been a freelance music journalist. He wrote one of the best jazz biographies. Avakian you disparage/dismiss as some sort of dabbling aristocrat? More so than the Erteguns? Than John Hammond, for freaking sake? My attitude has always been that "everybody's got to be some place," and it's what you do from then on that counts. Also you seem to be saying that Schaap's "mixed-race middle class Queens, New York, jazz fan parents" background in itself amount to a big plus or a saving grace? How so? Neither disparage nor dismiss Avakian but I don't think an Armenian aristocrat & record industry BOSS is himself in a great position to go after a Queens kid who heard it from the sources, i.e. the black people Avakian hired. Schaap very well might be wrong-- I don't know what specific issue we're talking of-- but of all possible disputes, you (generally, not LK) think Schaap is making something up just to fuck with George? To claim some fragment of "his" "legacy"? (As opposed to the legacy of the music makers themselves.) And, even if "it" is untrue, where did Schaap get the ** idea ** ? I am positing that Schaap is largely not creative and that most arguments against his history are in fact against those men who were his sources, sometimes in public (on air), often in private. Also, I'm not saying Phil Schaap = Billy Taylor or Rex Stewart (say) in his relations with black folks but he's a hell of lot closer and than George Avakian. And I'm certainly not carrying any water for the Erteguns though Neshui had decent taste & Jerry Wexler on his best days was half-a-mensch... though I didn't work for Stax Records either-- they might have a different opinion. Chris A. I wouldn't care to comment upon further but save Denmark, for all its fine qualities, is not Queens & affinity-- i'll even grant empathy-- is not immersion. orphan Q: Abel Meeropol, compared to Ahmet Ertegun or Mr. Avakian. John Hammond Jr. does have a nice collection of Hawaiian shirts.

LK-- I don't think Schaap flawless but fortunately or un- he's overwhelmingly working in oral tradition so we don't know where he's getting x, y, z or how he's synthesizing. But he's definitely done lots of reseeach on certain topics-- Bird most obviously-- and has historical and musical insights to offer. Also, tho' he can be imperious about dates etc, his pushing of interview subjects (moreso in past when more swing & bop players were alive) is generally towards greater good. They played a jillion gigs, might have made hundreds of record dates, memories blur etc. re: Chris Albertson, while I respect what he did, his judgements are... "stern" is a generous way of putting it. And where did Chris come from again? re: Avakian, a prince of an executive etc, sure, but-- not to make too much of a class argument here-- an executive nonetheless and where did HE come from & how much power he did he wield? for better/worse, Schaap is coming from mixed-race middle class Queens, New York, jazz fan parents (ardently so in his father) (ADOPTED the ghost of Chris Albertson will remind us), damn near a surrogate father/uncle in Jo Jones, frequent contact and conversation and later some work, broadcasting with TONS old(er) black guys & their families (he'll shout out the Eldridge family, the Eddie Durham family etc etc), he ** below ** them (Avakian always above, Albertson a functionary on the side or slightly above as radio guy) ... Those are VASTLY different perspectives & I daresay those black men (not exclusively but most importantly) spoke to Phil differently than they did to others. Perhaps-- obviously-- not all the way candid but moreso than not because of familiarity & Schaap's unquestioned adulation (which-- true-- might be annoying at times). Dick Katz came on the air with Schaap damn near six hours on John Lewis memorial broadcast; we can presume Dick knew something about jazz and even for the love of John, wouldn't fraternize with Schaap if he didn't like? "Record Executive" Side Q: Bob Koester, I believe, took a bus east for the 1963 March on Washington. What did George Avakian do? *** SGCIM: I don't have any inside dope on WKCR & it would be dangerous to admit it if I did, i.e. WKCR has always been in a semi-perilous position re: its mission both from above (commercially oriented admin) & below (short-sighted narcissistic students). I believe, however, the 'sign' that set Schaap off this year was the interruption of Duke Ellington b-day broadcast for a regular one hour Columbia sports talk show... when tradition says ALL regularly scheduled programs are pre-empted... I'll also note the kid who was host of that show graduated this year & is obviously a real piece of work: he goddamn well knew what he was doing & if not a decision he could make himself... that someone OK'd it is a Bad Sign. Also, the departure of Ben Young is regretable on # of levels, both his broadcasting & the continuity & seriousness he brought... There are other excellent alumni still there: Mitch Goldman (Ronald Shannon Jackson ex- road manager among things), Sid Gribetz mentioned above (a Bronx family court judge in real life), Cliff Price (his brother did the Joe Albany documentary recently), the beloved Sharif Abdus-Salaam, also long-time dudes who do African, West Indian, Latin music shows etc. Hopefully this was just bad mix of Schaap freaking out & WKCR making bad decision & everyone has calmed the fuck down, the sports monster & others can co-exist (and Schaap not anti-sports, cf. Dick Schaap et al, it's just the world doesn't lack for sports bullshit... Jazz & other vernacular musics & real community news, arts programming... isn't abundant (stating the obvious, I know)).

Ah, but Mr. Lowe! As someone who has yourself spoken to a great many jazz musicians, you know there are very often significant discrepancies between their perceptions of an event & events and what you might know & reasonable piece together from myriad sources. Oral history can be tremendously valuable and it can a mess of delusion, ignorance, invention etc. Think of how much you know or reasonably surmise from unique or largely overlooked sources etc. Now the same goes for Gushee also, of course, and his diligence in the archives. Think back, Pilgrim: where has much of Schaap's "knowledge" come from? If Russell Procope said it happened that way or Aaron Bell or Milt Hinton or Larwrence Lucie or Truck Parham etc etc. That said, Gushee is almost overstating the case out of professional pique and, if not "jealousy" per se-- nobody really wants to BE Phil Schaap though it would have been interesting to know, say, Jo Jones, Earl Warren, Roy Eldridge etc as he did-- than an irritation at his prominence relative to theirs. (Though for sure, tenured Gushee had an easier lot than the vagabond & un-tenure-able Schaap.) Also, yes, Schaap DOES posit himself as authoritative but, if you've ever seen his writing per se, you know he's got, ah... let's call them "clarity" and "concision" issues, so who's to say he doesn't accidentally garble his own primary research x oral testimony? Finally, if you study enough historiography, as I know you and Gushee have, it's actually pretty rare to see real historians (i.e. not slumming journalists though they sometimes do very well) INVENT something, 1) it's too easy to get caught and 2) it's too much work. Far more common, is combination of sloth, arrogance & insecurity that makes them overstate their case to the exclusion of contradictory or 'difficult' but complementary facts. I do not care in the slightest one way or the other about the erstwhile Mahalia Jackson shtick (a schoolboy jape, boring but inoffensive) but I don't think Schaap is in it for-- or capable of-- "inventing" all that much. If Mr. Gushee did or others would care to expound, that would be welcome. To clarify, Gushee was an esteemed academic musicologist-- also medieval music?-- and, I believe, an amateur horn player? Schaap has a BA in American history with ardent interest in same, especially American civil rights, but his primary vocations are discographer, record collector, broadcaster, valet for/acolyte of numerous old black guys, club booker/manager a few years (West End), gypsy educator, reissue producer (Savoy-- the unedited Bird at the Roost tapes-- Verve, Sony). Now, do we want to wonder what Larry Gushee could have achieved with that type of access to people and primary materials? OK, that's fair speculation. But re: Schaap and Duke, say, what is there he could invent that probably hasn't already been mangled in the historic press? Even mangled in the historic record if you've ever seen Census forms where someone starts to accidently transpose #s or names. And if Schaap did claim something that Gushee strongly disagrees with, might he not have a source, however disputable? Make no mistake, I've thought a # of times & even once called someone a poltroon based on their sloppy and /or rube like misuse of dubious sources but I when I did, independently, find their sources... what they had done did make sense.

quartet 8 concerto for two pianos