John L

Yes! I certainly consider Compulsion to be one of the great ones. For the later years, I recently stumbled on some live recordings from 2004-2006 in excellent sound that (IMO) go well beyond the official releases of the time. Brilliant music! For anybody interested, King Ubu can probably fix you up.

Importing your library back into iTunes is not a problem. Just select "add folder" and then select your iTunes music folder. Restoring your playlists is a more complicated matter. Somebody else might know more. I would search around for your iTunes library file. iTunes stores them by default in the iTunes folder. For some reason iTunes might have lost reference to that file. It should have all your playlists on it. A similar thing happened to me once when my iTunes library file became damaged (I have since learned to back them up every now and again). If the playlists exist on your iPod, however, I believe that there are programs that will allow you to transfer them from your iPod back to iTunes. I don't use one of those programs, but others might know something about it. Good luck.

(a), except that I was already listening to older music before I got into jazz, particularly blues and R&B. But I came to jazz first through contemporary music.

Count Basie made those celebrated recordings in the 30s with Jo Jones and Walter Page. Technically, it was a quartet, however, as Freddie Green was also in the mix. But I imagine that the Basie example might still have been influential on the subsequent development of the piano trio. No?

I came mostly from R&B, and expanded to jazz in the 70s out of curiousity. When I got to Coltrane, I never turned back. My story looks something like this:

Interesting, although I do not understand why or how Rich believes that Kelley's book is having an impact on how jazz is being played today.

I'm afraid that I draw a blank with Bruckner. I've tried to sit with the 8th and 9th symphonies, but I just don't get anywhere.

This is one of my favorite records. Haidara is one of the most beautiful and hypnotic pieces of music that I have ever heard. Thanks for this thread, MG. I have year initial post copied in my music database.

So much for the theory that Alan Freed invented the term "rock and roll."

Satan in High Heels is indeed the sh#t, and not because of Lowe's playing.

This is also this one: Mezzrow/Ladnier Quintet : Tommy Ladnier (tp) Mezz Mezzrow (cl) Teddy Bunn (g,vcl) Pops Foster (b) Manzie Johnson (d) New York, December 19, 1938 030450-1 Royal garden blues 030450-2 Royal garden blues 030451-1 Everybody loves my baby 030451-2 Everybody loves my baby 030452-1 I ain't gonna give nobody none o' this jelly-roll 030452-2 I ain't gonna give nobody none o' this jelly-roll 030453-1 If you see me comin' (tb vcl) 030453-2 If you see me comin' (tb vcl) 030454-1 Gettin' together 030454-2 Gettin' together

Yes, sorry.l

The Jazz Tribune series that Brownie is talking about consists of 5 2-disc sets that release all of Bechet on RCA I have it too. Brownie is talking about volume 5 in this series. There are actually only a handful of tracks by Bechet on it. The Panassie sessions with Ladnier, Newton and Mezzrow comprise the rest.

J.R. Monterose playing All the Things You Are on live recordings from the 80s. J.R. really playing that one beautifully.

DON'T just say "King Records" - this might too easily be confused with THAT real KING label from Cincinnati! The "King Jazz" records from the 40s were something different altogether. As for the musical merits of MEZZ on these - ho hum ... I've long had some of the LP series of those King Jazz recordings released on the Storyville label. In my book these are one of those cases where the put-downs of Mezz, stating he essentially only noodled and doodled scales up and down on his clarinet, were not THAT far off the mark . And stating in the "LP" liner notes something like "I am a giant and Sidney Bechet is going to help me to prove it" ... aw, c'mon. Bechet actually is the one who pulls it all together, and Mezz is just an also-ran. Anyway ... let's face it, Mezz was and IS overrated, and vastly so, yet it's amazing to see how Hugues Panassie's pet dog Mezz Mezzrow seems to gain more and more accolades again the longer the earwitnesses of the era are dead. ;) Yes, King Jazz records. While I agree with your assessment that Mezz is certainly the weakest link on those records, I don't find his playing to be terrible or distracting. I just take him in as a foil for the rest of the band. And what bands! Sidney Bechet's blues playing on those records goes beyond all superlatives. Then you have that first precious session with Hot Lips Page, Pops Foster, and Sidney Catlett. Beautiful music, if you ask me.

It is interesting that Chico Freeman hardly recorded at all before making records as a leader (like some of the future "young lions") and somehow managed to assemble Muhal Richard Abrams, Henry Threadgill, Cecil McBee, and Steve McCall for his recording debut in 1976. To put together a band like that, I would think that Chico must have had some serious credibility in Chicago at the time that went beyond his connection to Von. No?

Speaking of Bechet-Mezzrow, there are also the King sessions - some of the most low down blues in jazz ever recorded (IMO) with a LOT of slow tempos.

Those two were issued most recently by RLR as bonus tracks on the Sonny Rollins Tokyo 1963 CD. I've never heard the first two, but I'm not planng to pay this guy to make me a 15 minute pirate CDR.

Damn right! He still had it going even after his accident. This one on Electra, in particular, is a beauty:

Looks like another love TKO for R&B. Rest easy, Teddy, and thanks for the music.

RIP

Dorn also let Yusef be Yusef. But was that a good choice?

Great! I never got to see them together, but I did get a chance to see Muddy a few times in the 70s. He is an absolute favorite of mine.

Yes, she deserves a better one.

Let's face it. The golden years of jazz were not an ordinary, but an extraordinary, musical phenomenon. The fact that it came to an end was as inevitable as it was for other great musical movements in the past. I think that it is very understandable that many musicians today who were not even alive back then are nevertheless inspired by the golden years of jazz, even to the point of devoting their own energies toward finding a voice within the older styles. That makes just as much sense to me as the fact that 1000s of young musicians today still decide to devote their pursuits to baroque music, or 19th century opera, or classic flamenco, or Chicago blues, and so on. I think that it is very unfair when these people get accused of being some sort of malaise or the cause of the decline, like if these people didn’t exist, we would be back in the golden age of jazz again. If anything, I think that it is just the opposite. They can even provide part of the springboard for other musicians who are more forward looking. I agree with Bev, Peter, and others that there is plenty of room in music for both.