kenny weir

Yes, the book's about the photos. Whacko agendas noted in my earlier post!

Courtesy of the American Music thread, a few months ago I bought the Emile Barnes album with Tocca, and before that the Wooden Joe CD, so know where you're coming from. Allen, a question: Why is Kid Thomas not mentioned in this context, particularly the first recordings AM CD? BTW, for a definitive answer - THE definitive answer - you'll need to ask WM. Blow me down - an Australian and Melbourne link to Coyault! Scandal, selaze, Jim Crow and more!

Like Kites Are Fun, also from the Free Design's first album. Sunshine pop perfection!

Kiwi chick singer has huge smash hit folk pop classic Then records two albums - available on one CD - hippy dippy soft psyche sunshine pop with west coast band. Not "batshit crazy", but another sunshine pop fave: Oh my! Swoon, swoon!

I have three Free Design albums. Will get more. Barely a weak track - much more than a greatest hits band. Heavyweight jazz dudes in the band. Vocals like angels. Goofball humour. Sometimes it's the only thing that works.

New Orleans Jazz - A Family Album by Al Rose/Edmond Souchon For those enjoying this music, as well as earlier stuff from the '20s and brass bands and even '60s and '70s stuff, this book is warmly recommended, a view with which I'm Jeff would concur. If you can find it! Amazingly, Amazon has two paperback copies listed for $270! However, it also lists a number for $35. The book was first published in 1967, with revised editions published in 1978 and 1984. Collectability issues aside, you'll definitely need the '84 version as it appears there was a hefty amount of corrections and additions made post-1967. It being many, many years since I'd even glanced at it, I pulled it out yesterday and got lost in it for hours. The authors - both well-known NO jazz hands - make clear from the outset where they're coming from: Jazz music "must (a) be improvised, (b) played in 2/4 or 4/4 time, and © retain a clearly definable melodic line". And in deciding where to draw the line, who to include, who to leave out: "... the authors feel that such phenomena as rock-and-roll and what is called, in the commercial record field, rhythm and blues, while they have descended from jazz sources, at least in apart, are so degenerate as to to be of no interest to enthusiasts of legitimate jazz as an art form". Degenerate? Blimey! This is bloody silly, hilarious and - to my mind - a comprehensive, willful misunderstanding and misinterpretation of how music works in New Orleans. None of which decreases the sheer magic of the book itself. It is literally set up like a photo album with brief biographical snapshots along the way. The bulk of the book is devoted to individuals but there are also chapters on groups, brass bands, venues, riverboats, graves and so on. Head-turning treasures: A 1929 photo of a band aboard the SS Island Queen with Louis Nelson ... and Ransom Knowling, a bass player I've always associated with Chicago blues. A 1920 photo of Johnny DeTroit's Jazz Band with Tony Parenti as a promo for a gig at Kolb's restaurant, in which I dined many times and which is itself now gone and part of history. Many incredible shots of players mentioned in this thread in pre-fame, pre-recording, pre-1920 groups and brass bands. It's an incredible book!

Ordered last week: New Jelly Roll on Jazz Oracle Ordered a few days ago: Kid Howard/Punch Miller - Prelude To The Revival Vol. 1 Kid Rena/Bunk Johnson - Prelude To The Revival Vol. 2 Raymond Burke - Speakeasy Boys Young Tuxedo Brass Band - Jazz Begins

Low-scoring, but I thought it was a great game - just not one you'd use to convert people!

Blimey, can't help but compare Allen's opening salvo with the overwhelming content of subsequent posts. I don't see much rock and roll being discussed here.

Two guys I've always been interested in knowing more about regarding how they came to hook up with players with jazz tendencies, and making albums that had a jazzy - not outright jazz - feel: Boz Scaggs and Van Morrison. Also: Bll Champlin.

Agree totally. Australia or NZ will win the cup. The send-off was within the letters of the law but not much else. While I applaud the growing stature of the minnows, the overall standard has been far from great. Even NZ and Australia haven't really fired. In fact, Wales has been the form team.

Funny thing is, in the form of Hawaiian guitar stuff recorded in Paris in the '30s or vintage 20s-30s cajun, I've been listening to music with French lyrics all day.

Ha ha - classic! It's pissing down with rain!

An hour until Wales v France semi-final. Full house in Auckland ... but apparently there's going to be MORE watching it on a big screen at Millennium Stadium in Cardiff! I hope the Welsh win.

Thoroughly enjoying it so far. There's been a couple of upsets, but the most heartening thing is ... only a few blowout scores, with the rise in standard of the minnows really noticeable. They faded as games wore on, but seemed to hold their own prior to that and even did some righteous scoring. Go the underdogs! Maybe it's like pro sport worldwide, where even Canada, Russia, Georgia etc have top-line coaches, resources and players participating in good leagues.

Sounds like a motto! Words to live by!

That pretty much sums up the attitude of many Australians to US football - in which only one sidebar player on each teams puts foot to ball. There's a stack of rules, Goody, but it took me many years to get to grip with them.

I don't have a dog in this race - far more interested in the following day's National Rugby League final between the NZ Warriors and Manly. We'll for sure be cheering on the Warriors. AFL Grand Final: As far as I can tell, it's too close to call. Could be a ripper! But I'll be cheering for Collingwood. I work as a sub-editor for the Geelong Advertiser, which is normally a Mon-Sat rag. But we'll be doing a Sunday edition - if the Cats win. So I'm on standby, and may have to head down the highway and to work if the Cats get up. Geelong is the only regional city with an AFL team. It's hard to describe the sheer craziness of it all. Despite player drafts, salary caps and professionalism on so many levels, people really do live and breathe it.

Yes, all too weird. fasstrack, I was agreeing with you.

Someone who spends more time finding sustenance of various sorts on this forum than just about anyone else, spends quite a lot of that time diminishing the enjoyment of others in participating ... and finds comfort in it. Says it all, really. Yes, I hear you. So I don't.

Different criteria for me, I guess What Jimmie has that his brother didn't: A real sense of taste. I think they both had taste, I just think Jimmy was/is more of a "band guy" by temperament, Stevie more a soloist. Today's music sensibilities, most all of it, is so focused on the individual highlight(s) that it's hard to remember what being in a band means/meant. Whole 'other thing, that. Yeah, you're right. And I KNOW I'm more of a band guy, hence my preference.

Different criteria for me, I guess What Jimmie has that his brother didn't: A real sense of taste.

Far as I can tell/hear, this very definitely means they ARE listening to the Beatles. And the Byrds. And the Velvet Underground. And ... well, you know ...

Britain, perhaps France and other parts of Europe, too, seem to have some sort of (genetic?) pre-disposition to reverence for the past. Think about the teddy boy/rockabilly thing, for instance. Whether it is reverence, respect, plain ol' nostalgia or something else, I know not. No matter how many tacky TV shows, talentless celebs and kids who don't care about music there may seem to be, and no matter how dominant such may be, seems to me there's there's always things bubbling along that're funky, righteous and adventurous - including checking out years gone by.

I suspect what he's mostly referring to as the past is still way in the future for me. I reckon the reason I'm exploring way old music so much these days is because, simply, I can.