MomsMobley

A GIANT! And one whose life, career and artistic legacy shames that of many many lesser lights we're supposed to mourn. And to think a sept- then octogenarian-- did it without resorting to jive "tribute" albums! That Sam could kill on "A New Conception" AND "Into Somethin'" AND do all the other tremendous things he did from solo to trio to big bang is staggering. Only his near-contemporary Jaki Byard approaches that range and Jaki had a harder time of it after the 1960s. adopted hometown Orlando Sentinel obit (where I saw the big band 5-6 times (had to leave early once))-- http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/music/os-sam-rivers-dead-122711-20111227,0,7009901.story unless even a little flute is too much, Sam's disocgraphy is damn near flawless-- only sides I can think of being even slightly lesser is that Reggie Workman on Postcards (which I recall sounded like crap-- is that correct?-- a shame because you can't say enough great things about Reggie otherwise) and the Jason Moran tho' Sam does sure ELEVATE the proceedings. The Miles sides are OK but no better-- dudes were "beyond" each other in unsympathetic ways though props to Anthony for trying. Everybody's seen this right, Holland (before he was boring)/Barker/Rivers-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J83DsYQJ_D0

within certain bounds-- '60s big band-- yes, it's continually inventive, superbly realized; go back to "Dilemma" especially. which i'll rate that as hot as any Jones/Lewis chart (say) even without Billy Harper present to elevate it. Ray Reed (alto) and Jay Daversa are themselves especially impressive. whether or not certain ideas repeated-- but isn't that "style" too? how many Riddle/May/Paich/Nelson charts could we cut/paste on different tunes? who says we need "go" anywhere? this goes back to classical dialectic of "thematic development" versus "sound" btw. if it's a hair pie, YOU are the filling! Masterpiece? Really? I've had that one for about 40 years now, and it's pretty much the same handful of somewhat slight ideas over and over. He makes it all "sound good", but there's a not a whole helluva lot of filling in that pie. As many as there need to be. Maybe more! Also, as Konitz' time with the band goes on, you can hear the changes in his tone...it gets harder and brighter. Don't know if that was by choice, out of necessity, or a bit of both. Lennie said it (Konitz' tone) was "ruined", and I can see why he would think that, but hell, Lee would go on to play with the Varitone, so, so much for that!

lesser known (?), later Kenton masterpiece: Plays The Compositions of Dee Barton-- http://www.amazon.com/Jazz-Compositions-Barton-Stan-Kenton/dp/B000RPCEQQ I can't speak on the alleged differences between vinyl and cd masters but the latter sounds fine; I knew Barton's work with Eastwood but not really followed it back. Q: how many accomplished trombonist/drummer/composers are there? Also, the great importance and achievement of Kenton + X, Y, Z is his insistence on the potentialities of jazz composition + musicianship: that Braxton could get endless inspiration from Kenton is plain; that listeners experienced in 20th c. classical idioms are more likely to be interested in this than pop/rock people is also self-evident. Villa Lobos lives! Also, re: the great Johnny Richards, Adventures In Time is a mind-fuck, still http://www.amazon.com/Adventures-Time-Orchestra-Stan-Kenton/dp/B000005H8M Is it still LOUD also? Sometimes. It's a climax!

Bird was a Kenton admirer too. Hajdu-- though he's had better moments among the worse-- is often an idiot; check out his inane moralizing in the Dylan/Farina/Baez book for ample evidence. Stan Kenton-- or the Kenton Project, if you will-- is fantastic, a high point of American popular ** and ** art music 1940-196x... not sure when the cut off point is yet. For * Pete Rugolo * Bill Holman * Bill Russo * Johnny Richards * Lennie Niehaus * Bob Graettinger * Gene Roland (whom I had the pleasure of meeting in the late '70s) alone Kenton would be a giant; that he supported ALL of those and dozens upon dozens of terrific-- sometimes brilliant-- musicians-- is astonishing. The anti-intellectual criticism of Kenton is nauseating but plainly ignorant-- is everything by Stravinsky, Hindemith, Schoenberg, Ellington equally achieved, even given vagaries of performance practice? But it is nearly all interesting, though I think we can agree the jazz/pop guys spun their wheels more than composers had to because exigencies of gigs, radio, records, show biz... So perhaps Milhaud is better comparison. Kenton/Christy "Duet" is no small masterpiece either. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftypZJpZ_Kw

Steve-- I didn't but someone damn sure should have. For a guy-- for a native Philadelphian, long-time New Yorker who's spent how many decades butchering Bud and Monk, the vast vast VAST majority of his sidemen have all-- ah, isn't this rather interesting-- been of a certain range of complexions? maybe it was coincidence. maybe it was cultural empathies. maybe there aren't any black or latin or _____ folk-- young, avant-, inside/out or otherwise-- whom he could have hired. that's "fine": white music is music too but please don't be surprised that a certain # of people ** noticed **. and for the record, Wynton's Monk is as bad or worse than Motian's so it's not a race thing re: interpretive nous. maybe after black Texicans Dewey Redman and Charles Brackeen there was nowhere to go but down? yet he made a jillion records with Lovano? so much for mentorship! (Or George Clinton's "Mothership.") i'm not proposing any answers but you gotta be deaf, dumb & blind not to ask the questions.

would you care toe elaborate TTK? i'll listen but right now i don't hear it-- and still have to turn off WKCR when the horrible Lovano/Frisell group comes on. as I said, Pau Motian was a terrific musician but, unless one really means it (one might), it's silly to pretend every direction he went in was a worthwhile one, except, presumably, to him and the musicians he hired. and again, that Monk "tribute" (travesty) is utterly loathsome on every level, the drummer/bandleader's included. to read this thread, however, you'd think Motian was the white Baby Dodds, Jo Jones, Max Roach, Ed Blackwell all-in-one.

Terrific drummer, sometimes ** HIGHLY ** questionable bandleader. Granted, dude has to work but how you go from Charles Brackeen and David Izenzon to... ...effin' Lovano & Frisell (& speaking of Monk, that group's Monk album is TERRIBLE-- Paul included-- I dunno. Besides the Brackeen sides, I'll put on some Bley or Liberation Music Orchectra to remember.

workman like musicians are fine-- if they are workmen, as i said: section player, reliable gig making, pleasant enough personality, etc. also younger musicians figuring stuff out or local, regional players providing some % simulacra of the ultimate, rare thing... live music making has its own set of conditions, critical parameters but we're talking RECORDS, and one's life as Listening Artist. clearly and at often painful length, Rouse is in no way up to the implicit and explicit demands of Monk's concepts; this is everywhere painfully evident. I ** DARE ** anyone spin "Monk In Tokyo"-- or the horrideous Keepnews-ance version of "Straight No Chaser"-- and not wanna hide all Rouse's mouthpieces & reeds and put on an Eddie Miller, Sam Butera or Billy Harper record instead. (Billy is Overlooked Giant of course.) also please listen, by comparison, to nearly any performance of Hugo Wolf "Goethe Lieder" and/or read the score. cornpone anti-intellectual sports obsessives will likely cry "Foul!" but those of us deeply interested in the myriad forms of compositional genius can both hear/see the (coincidental) links between Wolf and Monk, Monk and Wolf. Some have compared Monk's sense of compositional compression to Webern but there I disagree. The hyper-aware play of voices (try also Wolf "Italienesches Liederbuch")-- hot damn! Charlie Rouse is great for piss breaks but otherwise, in the wide world of music that anyone with a library card or posting to an internet message board now has access to, his dreary bleating is less "necessary" than ever and no "better" than it ever was.

ah but Jeff is not that how it nearly is? there's nothing wrong with being gigging musician, a section player, a performer of trauermusik-- but would you ever say Rouse was even half the musician Robin Trower? is such speculation what our cratered culture of affluence has led us to? I'm staying out of the drums thing though yes Ben Riley has issues but the point is, contrary to the original poster, Rouse doesn't "make" Monk's music in any way except nearly fucking intolerable. And ** NO ** other contemporary of Monk's did that, that I'm aware of. I'm sure some ** did **, natch, but I haven't heard those records or tapes. But the scarcity of their suck isn't reason to NOT recognize Rouse brings ** nothing ** unique to the table but undemanding reliability (which ** is ** important, professionally, esp. given the Monk's matrix of 'issues.') had i more time and razor blades i could edit Monk session tapes-- remove Rouse-- 'punch in' in solos by x, y, z over whatever Monk auto-comping-- and there we are-- no need to suffer, no need to pretend. Charlie Rouse is the greatest symptom of Monk's decline as a composer, conceptualist. That sometimes, in a flash of self-recrimination, he blazed the fuck out of that self-inflicted musical torpor ** can ** briefly reaffirm one's faith in Our Hero but then comes another cloud of goddamn Charlie Rouse spittle-- don't get any on you, please!! there is no antidote. Lark-- Mal can make almost anyone "listenable," dramatically, because you wanna hear more Mal and he teases you (something Rouse-- and dreary auto-tooter Sonny Stitt are nearly incapable of-- but you get way more bounce to Curtis Counce! compare Buell Niedlinger "Jackie-Ing" to any version with Rouse and tell me who got it better.

apologies for earlier typos. two things got me started again on Rouse-- 1) "Think of One" master + alt w/ J. Watkins, S. Rollins, P. Heath, W. Jones 2) "Monk In Tokyo" mind you, i have had all Columbia Monk for decades and though I liked much of it, as soon as I could listen critically I realized Rouse was... off? The more you listen, however, the more you realize he kinda sucks. More than kinda, in fact, given the context: he does NOTHING but stir the air with "Monk-ish" muzak and there is NO worse contemporary "interpreter" (a word that gives Rouse too much credit) of TSM. (I once heard Wynton's Monk "tribute" in a record store and until an intellectual nullity like Joe Lovano or an insipid whore like Bill Frisell get to it, it remains "non-pareil.") THAT-- yes, Monk himself comes in swinging hard is true-- if you make it that far! AND-- what other choice did he have? Rouse kills-- deadens that is, puts to sleep-- EVERY solo, EVERY song. In that sense Monk is doubly shrewd-- not only is Rouse "reliable" (important) but he makes everyone sound better by lowering the overall standard at a time when the boss' interest in his own work was flagging. And yes, EVERYONE should grow up already and admit that in this case, hep consensus was correct and 95% of the Columbia material represents a diminution of Monk's powers and that, if Charlie Rouse never existed, our common adulation of Monk would remain as great. As it stands, nearly the only later Monk I can stand is solo or big band. Renaissance for a Record Industry: instead of "extended" versions of "It Club," "Jazz Workshop" etc how about CONDENSED editions-- Music Minus One, the absent one being the futile finger flapper with the insufferable tone... Rouse.

Rouse is hack-- a moderately "talented," if that, "pro" who made the gigs. Big deal. A comprehensive list of inspired Rouse solos with Monk follows: _______________ _______________ _______________ etc etc The guy was a zero (rhymes with NULLITY, not little rooty tooty or jackie-ing) and the fact that was can all name 4-5-6-7 others who rocked Monk hard(er) is evidence, as well as numerous non-Monk covers where, if one does miss the pianist some, NOBODY misses... Charlie Rouse? Please. There is NO-- repeat NO-- Monk session elevated by Rouse's presence; no solo that enriches the composition, etc. I dare anyone listen to "Monk In Tokyo," to name one of way too many time-killing dates and explain what the fuck Rouse was doing besides filling space before they could all get paid? That Rouse is such an exemplar (if not archetype) of the well-meaning jazz blowhard that's effectively killed the genre both mainstream is eloquent testimony of self-obsolescence and that's about it. Charlie Rouse: the 434th most interesting black tenor player of the years 1956-1968? Top 1000 counting all ethnicities/genres? Even ** that ** might be generous. That the Uptown records are listenable have to do with the groups not Rouse and I'll take ** every ** Ira Sullivan record of any Charlie Rouse.

p/s-- maddeningly expensive but excellent-- that Max Harrison on the genius of Rachmaninoff-- use inter-library loan, it's slow sometimes but works-- The pb, like most Brit paper, is pretty cheap-ass, making the premium price especially galling; publishers were dipshits, they'd have sold at least THREE times the # at half the price and presumably made more money; I was lucky enough to find a copy with cover crease for $20 but I'd much prefer the hardcover. http://www.amazon.com/Rachmaninoff-Works-Recordings-Max-Harrison/dp/0826493122

right, Lebrecht's flogging dead horse because that's what he knows and that's what people recognize; also there are (were) stories there... what's he gonna write about the REAL major-in-efftect, Naxos? but the vast majority of their artists get only self-serve publicity, beyond the cd being made and in the few stores in the U.S. that still stock them. as memory of how things were, here's a hep Complete Faure Chamber w/ Strings set on Virgin-- don't have it yet but all involved are hep elsewhere, Brahms esp. http://www.amazon.com/Faure-Complete-Chamber-Music-Strings/dp/B0057JWUVG classical music in America is stronger than retail profile suggests, alas because look at all the university music programs (not just elite music schools) where people attend concerts, probably support their probably lame NPR station (NPR itself is despicable, as is most classical programming on local stations, but something like "Performance Today" is nice), etc-- the vast majority of those people have to go mail order only now, nothing even worth browsing at Barnes & Noble unless you need a pilates ball or some shit.

]Mandrill & Lebrecht are both correct-- Lebrecht (in his regular columns) mostly followed the major label classical racket, which today is nearly fucking irrelevant, with the exception big box reissues, a few star turns and a genuinely excellent artist from the tail end of the era, Hillary Hahn. (Someone like Murray Perahia is an abomination, despite making a few records which didn't stink.) French-based EMI/Virgin might be the last 'major' doing anything valuable on a regular basis-- alas! Especially because I want Chabrier "Le Roi Malgre Lui" on cd. Oh, the labial majors-- in conjunction with Euro tv-- do valuable work with opera dvd but that's a rich pill to swallow and motherfucking netflix stopped (or nearly so) acquiring opera and most other classical DVDs years ago, the jerks. That said, as regular reader of "Repertoire" (RIP), "Classica," and "Diapason," with the exception of Harmonia Mundi, those are all VERY small businesses-- CPO, which I revere in dozens of ways (JC Bach, Herzogenberg, Hindemith, Milhaud, Pfitzner, Reger, Telemann, Toch, Villa Lobos etc etc) is subsidized by their retail side-- much like Bear Family. MMMMmmm, add Hyperion and BIS the very important indies but how many cds a year does Alia Vox release? Goldberg mag went under though that might have had as much to do unsustainable production costs as lack of interest. Ophelie Gaillaird's Bach is superb, good call. And you might be the first person to mention Blandine Rannou here though I hope that's not the case.

and in Aug-Sep 1961, there was Kid Howard "La Vida Band" (AMCD 54)-- http://www.amazon.com/Vida-Band-Kid-Howard/dp/B00005YOAL Israel Gorman (cl), Eddie Somers (tb), Emmuel Sayles or Homer Eugene (bj), Louis James (bs), Eddie Sommers (tb). Your Moms will personally buy it back (for $5-6) from anyone dissatisfied with this astonishing release. (note bizarre error in Amazon listing above though WARNING is right; you might not ever tolerate jive 'avant' splatting again]

Lebrecht is fine and necessary if not always 100% inspired-- but if you're Brit 1) I'm sorry you have to claim goddamn Paul McCartney as your own (not just insipid pop 'legend' but a classical "composer" too!) and 2) you know the wages of Limey journalists and their tendency, among the talented, towards high level hackwork. Lebrecht's biz writing is better than his musicology... I've not read the book you mention-- http://www.amazon.co.uk/Maestros-Masterpieces-Madness-Shameful-Classical/dp/0141028513 but if you dig it 1) check his sources and 2) read ** EVERYTHING ** by Nicolas Slonimsky and ** NOTHING ** by scumbags like Richard Taruskin and his ilk. I'd ignore glib hack Alex Ross too and gobble instead any/all Ernest Newman. however "old-fashioned." Don't forget Berlioz and Debussy either. Use the library for academic/specialist press monographs of what you're interested. Oh, Harold Schonberg makes some riotous fuck-ups but his books are mostly still worth reading for base-line view of American classical establishment. Read everything by Virgil Thomson also, even the "wrong" parts. Also, if you read German or French semi-decently, your musical life will be greatly enriched. Of musicological types, Paul Griffiths is very good, as are Peter Yates' two books--

For $20 it's worth having, maybe, but not much more-- Casals is vastly overrated, more important historically than musically though the Bach gave some a baseline to work from-- the further the better in most cases though sure, there are some brain dead 'virtuosos' who've proved it otherwise. Casals/Thibaud/Cortot is more interesting and not for the cellist. GREAT GREAT bargain-- Victoria box cond. Michael Noone (hero of x # of Guerrero recordings), Americans should get it from .co.uk, more revelatory, brilliant music/performances than every non-Nessa "jazz"/Mosaic Lunceford reissue of the past year-- http://www.amazon.co.uk/Victoria-Sacred-Ensemble-Plus-Ultra/dp/B0050F6JQE/

On a heavy Punch Miller revival, "Delegates of Pleasure" (AMCD 57) from Aug-Sep '62 gets ****** six stars, with Gorman (clt), Warner (tbn), Guesnon (bj), Tillman (bs), ALEX Bigard (dr). Worth it for a goddamn crazed "Gate's Blues" alone. http://www.amazon.com/Delegates-Pleasure-Punch-Miller/dp/B00004T1YT

Read the book-- the author is very clear about its contemporary existence; the book isn't about that, however-- it's about the ** business ** and culture of black road music from the early swing era (inc. terrible Natchez fire that killed Walter Barnes)* invention of hte circuit through electric r&b '60s or so, though picking up stories of folks who were on the circuit and are still around. WSJ writer Eddie Dean is, at best, a well-intentioned schmoe; some people have very sound arguments for thinking he's at least part schmuck too, see esp. some of the crap he let Ralph Stanley get away with in Stanley's "as told to" autobiography. Folks who think Stanley is just some cuddly old coot who's gonna die on the road like the gods Willie and B.B. (a big character in Lauterbach) are sorely mistaken. That "Chitlin'" was published by Norton and not 'just' some university press is both deserved and heartening; the only major gripe is it could have been longer, even sticking to the south. That x generations of frauds writing about "rock" and "blues" and "soul" have been allowed to get away with straight bullshitting is evidence of both Yankee ignorance (including Californian) and more trickster evasions, diversions-- the latter of which which I approve of. The book is better than ALL the reviews I've seen; shows again what a po' faced trudger Peter Guralnick and though there's an argument that says Guralnick has gotten some decent interviews because of that doesn't make his books any more 'insightful' (there insights are modest at best) or poetic (which they ain't at all). http://www.amazon.com/Chitlin-Circuit-Road-Rock-Roll/dp/0393076520/ * Howlin' Wolf The Natchez Burn

Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Dal, please! And notice even JBaseball did NOT defend your absurd assertions about the Beach Boys as a band/business, nor your completely and factually wrong interpretation of their music. Again, what are your sources for these statements? There's a not inconsiderable body of non-just-journalism on the BBs since David Leaf's book-- tho' of course contemporary journalism is important too, even if-- or especially-- it contradicts the fantasy world of non-understanding + strong opinion you seem to cherish. As for the Beatles "White Album," that's just laughable but yeah I guess when you're a kid, and you've heard maybe even DOZENS of albums in two-three of genres, it might really trip you up. As an ** ADULT **, with all the combined resources of all Texas public and university library systems at your disposal, your limited cultural/historical reference is truly astonishing. You can like what you like, nobody cares, but to pretend your inherited prejudices are HISTORY is ludicrous. I know people who've written/published/are recognized as the authors of highly acclaimed books of Beatles history/criticism and even ** THEY ** wouldn't lean back in self-satisfied surety and call "The White Album" a great work of ART; like if that's great art, what the heck was Charles Dickens or Arthur Waley? Basho or Lady Murisaki? Machaut or Brahms? Aeschylus or Schiller? Wagner or Webern? Charles Ives or George & Ira Gershwin? Emily Dickinson? Frederick Douglass (as writer, not 'just' activist)? Jimmie RoDgers, country? Jimmie RoGers, blues? etc. Totally, totally unnecessary. Always appreciate someone covering my back. Moms/Clem/whoeverthehellyouarethistime, save your bloviating and your feigning me with damned praise. YOU are incorrect, if not incoherent. And yeah, I think the White Album is a great work of art. So what? It's a testament to your own small worldview that you can't accept people who dare have an opinion different from your own.

And your ten favorite Schubert compositions are? You have zero credibility as a musicologist or cracker ass cracker barrel ethicist until you up your history game considerably. But hey, tell us something about baseball, since that-- not musicology-- seems to be a more genuine passion. TTK-- there ** are ** surprises and if the box isn't everything possible... we couldn't keep up with that, and ALL the variants & (subjective) edits... in time i'm sure we'll get a concordance of some kind (I ** think ** I hear a few new old lyrics but...)

1) you won't regret it 2) Big Al is a big guy, he can take sharp statement. Name me your ten favorite Schubert compositions and then let's talk about how "incredible" "The White Album" is-- or ** any ** Elvis Costello. Elvis C. is a dude who truly loves music-- not something that can be said for many pop stars, true-- but Elvis Aaron Presley-- and the composer of "Moses Und Aron" was the gifted one. (Schoenberg was very hard worker too, which is the best that can be said for Elvis C. lyricist or-- ooof, really?-- 'composer.') Besides showtunes (and jazz versions thereof), I grew up on Carl Perkins on one side, the Platters and Bacharach-David via Gene Pitney on the other; explain to me what I needed the Beatles for, ever, except to imagine Dennis Wilson balls deep in Charlie's girls? I gave up Buck Ram for Bobby Bland and never looked back. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjiSevkuKYY

which box, you mean disc five of the box set or some underground comp of sessions? either way, i'll tell you this DESTROYS every extant reconstruction and i've had plenty-- most impressive being a three-lp "Smile" set on green vinyl with poster from late '80s. i don't buy into any of the 'purple chick' crap, which is worth about what you pay for it... you likely know the most of the endless BBs sessions tapes right? i'm ALMOST sure there's yet stuff here you haven't heard and not in this sound quality... ... if i had to choose, i'd say you'll find more-- MUCH more-- of interest, of startling invention in the big "Smile" box than in the Miles bootleg which-- face it-- isn't all that special, just five dudes doing the pretty much the same thing you knew they did elsewhere at a fairly high but not staggering level. but, as you know, BW was pushing everyone way beyond mere "execution"... you're correct, btw, the transitions etc in the myriad reconstructions just don't make it. this isn't ENTIRELY pure of post-'67 editing but I'll eat your copy of David Leaf if can't dig it.

This is incorrect, save your own preference, with which I strongly disagree, especially if you think the "White Album" is an "incredible work of art." Really? Really? I pity you your very small world but otherwise, in the history of western art music, that's an asinine statement.(But wait, wait, lemme turn my back so you can tell us what an "incredible" work of art some goddamn Elvis Costello or REM album is while I guard my classical, jazz, blues, c&w, vaudeville, ethnic, "blue," Broadway show etc records from your mitts once "Big Al" gets hungry for genuine musical nourishment, which I hope for your sake happens soon... ... BW "Smile" is okay but soft; his voice is half-shot even with studio trickery (more saddening than 'moving') and the harmonies adequate. As far as simulacras go it's fine, glad it exists-- -- but it's not a goddamn patch on the original BAND, whose abilities and working relationship(s) you evince precious little understanding of. Care to source your statements "it's no secret that nobody was on Brian's side during the original sessions"? Nobody's a big word pardner. This statement too is utterly fallacious (and don't try to fellate yourself, Big Guy, it's easy to hurt your back)-- "the Beach Boys as a unit stood for everything this album isn't: sunny, simple, direct pop music." You ever listen to "Summer Days (And Summer Nights!!)"? Do you think "That's Not Me" is fucking party music? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYJJHSk0bnA

This is correct, Beach Boys "In Concert" is a fine document of a great band, tho' it misses "Okie From Muskogee," which I saw 'em do in '71 both at Fillmore East-- with ladies & gentleman the Grateful Dead!!-- and at Central Park-- "is that a request or a demostration?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRyD-biu7mQ also, of course, >>>>>> the combined careers of Eric Clapton, Bill Frisell, Joe Lovano, Sabir Mateen-- You Need A Mess Of Help To Stand Alone Listened to a lot of Beach Boys today. After a relisten (first time in many years) I agree on 'Friends', to me it is the best of their post-Pet Sounds albums by a good distance, truly charming. I also enjoyed parts of '20/20' quite a bit (realize it is a collection of scraps, not a proper album) and Wild Honey held up well for me. 'Sunflower', on the other hand, has not held up at all for me, just sounds fussy and troubled and weird, in the same way that so much of 'Smiley Smile' was so bizarre sounding. The "Surf's Up" album hasn't held up either for the same reasons, but the title cut and "Til I Die" are gorgeous (if inscrutable lyrically), and I got a retro kick out of silly old "Student Demonstration Time". I'll go through the rest of the early 70's stuff on Monday, but don't expect a lot of revelations after the letdown of 'Sunflower'/"Surf's Up" (though it will be good to hear "Sail On Sailor"). 'Holland' is where I get off the train, I never cared for 'The Beach Boys Love You', and have never known anyone to care for any of the other later albums (featuring Mike Love,mystical musical genius). Everything from Smiley Smile to Holland has 2-4 good to great tracks. Lots of stuff not so great also. I love Surfs Up though for Long Promised Road, Feel Flows and the great tile track. Even Holland has Sail on Sailer and Trader. I probably like 20/20 the best which has the two great Smile tracks in Our Prayer and Cabinessence. Finished relistening to the early 70's stuff. The live album from '72 was really good, best of their live recordings I think. The rest, as you said, had the occasional standout song amidst a bunch of gloop. I actually sort of liked 'Holland' OK, not sure why it has such a bad rep compared to the previous albums. I thought the production on it sounded good. But I think I basically get off the train after 'Friends' and '20/20', the end of their Capitol/60's era. I do see myself revisiting those two titles a good bit.