Chas

So this will be just like that indoor plumbing voucher you got Seriously though , without cable or satellite how do watch all those CFL games ?

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php...st&p=662329

Any respectable stealth marketing simply must include 'articles' about the ad campaign . Such advertisements for advertisements also really help stretch that advertising dollar

That's a reissue of this Columbia album : along with three bonus tracks ( making their CD debut ) featuring Evans with Don Elliot from this Verve album : The Brandeis material is terrific . Bill Evans takes one of his best ever solos on All About Rosie , and Mingus' Revelations is essential listening as well . This music was out earlier on a Columbia Legacy CD combined with another excellent album called The Birth of the Third Stream : That CD had to leave off two tracks , so this Gambit reissue is the first complete issue of the Brandeis Festival music .

Well , I was speaking normatively not descriptively of course . The Sonny Bono " Copyright Term Extension Act " was such a shameful sop to the big media corporations , that it was passed by voice vote , by congressmen too craven to have their individual votes recorded . What's worse is that it's not just citizens and congressmen who have lost sight , willfully or otherwise , of the public good , but also the Supreme Court justices who voted 7-2 to uphold the Bono retroactive copyright extension .

My whole thesis in this thread (and previous ones) has been about illegal copies of the music, not the buying and selling of used cds. I buy and sell used cds in person and on this board, and don't have a problem with doing so. But buying a used CD DOES deprive the artist of a sale. If the used CD didn't exist (as has been pointed out elsewhere), the potential consumer would HAVE to buy new, and the sale of a new CD is a benefit to the artist. Take5 may not be "entitled" to his copied files, but I don't see how the mere existence of those files constitues an actual injury to the artist. Now, if Take5 is making those copied files available for download via a file-sharing service, then I can see how this hurts the artist. It does not merely deprive the artist of one sale (as the sale of a used CD does), but potentially deprives him of hundreds, possibly thousands of sales. For this very reason, I personally condemn illegal file-sharing. But if Take5 is simply keeping the files for his own use, his actions affect nobody, not even the artist who remains competely ignorant of the files' existence. Alexander , as discussed a few posts back , the existence of the copied files constitutes an injury to the artist in the sense that a ripped CD is more likely to end up in the used CD market with the result being more used CD sales at the expense of new CD sales . There is no inconsistency in sanctioning the existence of a used CD market while wanting to minimize such a market's impact on new CD sales . I guess I should have started my own thread , for my attempts to steer this one towards the REAL issue behind all this has failed .

The public good in this context is unfettered access to music without which a particular form of cultural deepening through accretion cannot occur . The public earns such free use by the grant of an unnatural monopoly to the copyright holder for a limited time. Musical copyright protection is only justified to the extent that it promotes the greatest amount of creative musical expression for all to enjoy . It's a measure of just how firmly the United States has been in the grip of individualist ideology recently , that people don't understand what public goods are anymore . I don't believe in "unfettered access" to music, then. Being able to "own" music isn't for the public good in the sense that access to health care is, and I don't see how that can be argued. Music is the creation of individual artists, not a public right. Justifying illegal behavior by saying it's for the public good is just as much an individualist ideology as anything. In fact, it's a copout. You don't seem to understand that copyright protection exists to benefit the consumers of art not as a recognition of some pre-existing natural right that artists have in preventing others from copying their work . Even if you believe that artists have some such Lockean right in their original work , it doesn't follow that they have the same type of right to prohibit copying of that work . It is for this reason that The Constitution says , " Congress shall have the power " to grant copyright protection , not " Congress must grant copyright protection " . A society is free to strike any deal it wants with artists , calibrating copyright durations to ensure , not the greatest amount of creativity per se , but the greatest public enjoyment of that creativity . Copyright protection grants time-limited privileges to artists only as a means to this public good and never for their sake . Retroactive extension of copyright protection is particularly egregious , for there is absolutely no public benefit in such an extension , given that it can't possibly result in retroactively increasing the amount of creativity to be enjoyed by all .

The fact that used CD shops are disappearing is not evidence of a decline in the volume of used sales , but merely a consequence of those sales migrating online . I'm willing to grant Quincy's claim that the ability to make digital copies results in a greater volume of used CD sales relative to new sales , than would otherwise be the case .This despite the fact that similar misgivings about home taping weren't borne out . They weren't borne out largely because most people saw value in the music's packaging , a packaging which was not easily reproducible . Today this is simply no longer the case . That being said , I cannot understand the continuing fixation with second-order empirical questions when the first-order question viz. , whether current copyright durations can be justified , goes unexamined . Especially with respect to older recordings , you can't fully understand the willingness of people to engage in illegal behavior without exploring that question .

The public good in this context is unfettered access to music without which a particular form of cultural deepening through accretion cannot occur . The public earns such free use by the grant of an unnatural monopoly to the copyright holder for a limited time. Musical copyright protection is only justified to the extent that it promotes the greatest amount of creative musical expression for all to enjoy . It's a measure of just how firmly the United States has been in the grip of individualist ideology recently , that people don't understand what public goods are anymore .

I'm asking you what time limits you think should be placed on musical copyright protection , and how such limits serve the public good that copyright protection advances .

What you are doing is effectively the same as the people who are downloading it illegally. You've created a copy of the music that is just as illegal to possess (since you no longer own the license to have that digital copy, which you sold with the CD) as the one that is downloaded illegally. I'm sure the artist that produced that particular album would see that he's sold one copy of the CD, and yet you AND the person who bought your used cd now both have a copy of it. So he's sold one copy but two are out there. Is that o.k. from the artist's perspective? Do you care whether the artist gets what he's due for those two copies of the music? Because he/she is not. Erik , how can you talk about artists getting their due without taking into account the age of the music in question ? Your blanket condemnation suggests that you feel that there shouldn't currently be any jazz recordings in the public domain in the U.S . If so , then you need to argue for that position , not just keep asserting that current copyright law makes the practice take5 described illegal . As I suggested in my first post , why don't you make your philosophical commitments explicit ?

Severson actually led two dates both with Soderblom and one with Eddie Higgins , both recorded in 1956 , and both featuring numerous short tracks . Rare ? Obscure ? You bet ! :

To answer the original question as to why people have become scofflaws with respect to the copyright laws , it is because they have come to see copyright laws as nothing more than corporate welfare , and that as such , they feel the law is without a moral foundation . I am broadly sympathetic to the view that the public good is no longer being served by current copyright durations . The U.S. Constitution outlines the public good that is served by copyright protection : " to promote the progress of science and useful arts " . Copyright protection for the fine arts including music is thus extra-constitutional , from which one might reasonably infer that it serves a lower-order social good , after all is it not reasonable to think that the economic welfare of a society is more important than its artistic or cultural richness ? And yet currently , patents for things that create economic prosperity for all expire after twenty years , while music copyrights can extend well past a century . As to the proper duration of copyright protection , the Constitution is unhelpful , as it only states that such protection be secured for , " limited times " . This imprecision allowed the Supreme Court to rule that retroactive copyright extensions are permissible , but it's hard not to view this as the triumph of corporate interests over the interests of the people . Clearly if the duration is too long as it now surely is , creativity will not be maximized , as there is little incentive to create anew or build on the work of others . Given such considerations , even copyright protection for the life of the artist is too long , let alone a duration which extends beyond death . We must remember that copyright protection is granted in service of a public good , not as a guarantee of lifetime income for artists or their descendants . One's answer to the question of whether it's wrong to keep MP3 copies of albums one no longer possesses implicitly rests on one's answers to the foundational questions outlined above . I think this thread would be a whole lot more interesting if people laid their philosophical commitments on the table .

Looks like a dodgy reissue . MSI Music ?? Six tracks - what about the two unissued tracks ? I would love to see a legitimate reissue of this . Very good date , with excellent Decca sound quality too . Don Ellis shines . Had another listen to this one today . As much as I'm partial to early-period Ellis , it would be wrong to give the impression that he towers above the other soloists on this record . Everyone gives a good account of themselves on this recording . The record opens with a David Baker composition whose arresting , dramatic A section makes it the perfect opener . There follows a subtle , beguiling Carla Bley composition , the seamless hand offs between the short solos serving to emphasize that this music is about collective storytelling . A second Bley composition follows , one whose playful , West Indian-like melody gives way to less thematic blowing . The longest track on the album follows , a version of Brownie's Sandu . This " Blues In The Space Age " showcases Russell's blues playing , with his use of trills and dissonant clusters and his harmonic choices in general , making any Byard or Monk fan feel right at home . Next up is a version of Tune Up , which not atypically , becomes a Cherokee-style chops demo , especially Ellis' Harmon-muted solo .The last track on the album is a real headlong swinger by Russell featuring Dave Young's tenor . Young , who is fine throughout the date , uncoils one of the best solos on the whole record . Maddeningly , the track gets a fast fade out after three minutes , leaving the listener to imagine the solos Ellis , Baker and Russell might have taken with that much swinging momentum having been built up .

Looks like a dodgy reissue . MSI Music ?? Six tracks - what about the two unissued tracks ? I would love to see a legitimate reissue of this . Very good date , with excellent Decca sound quality too . Don Ellis shines .

The best one of all is the Bobby Hutcherson with Woody Shaw which was out on CD in '94 , but now very expensive on the aftermarket . That one needs to be re-reissued ! The others ( not on CD ) were one by vocalist Marlena Shaw , one by Bobbi Humphrey and one by Donald Byrd that was never issued at all .

By web-based do you mean streaming or downloadable ? Several BFTs have been downloadable , including one you can still get in on if you're quick about it >>click<< That's one option, another would be a web-based player. I guess I was thinking of the latter. I know most folks (myself included) don't have their "A" system hooked up to the computer, and I just wasn't sure how much of an issue that'd be. For BFT purposes , I don't see streaming audio offering any advantages over downloads , especially if sound quality is a concern , since streaming audio on the web is highly compressed . That said , the fidelity of BFTs is a non-issue ; I can't remember anyone complaining that poor sound on a BFT interfered with their ability to ID or enjoy the music . I do think all BFTs should be made available for download , not only for reasons of cost , but also to encourage the widest possible participation in them .

I like that one too , especially the title track which starts out with a loping , bluesy groove before modulating into a densely percussive deep funk . The band is tight . The Heatin' System* was the follow up to Who Knows What Tomorrow's Gonna Bring which to me was a misstep , with this record being a quick return to form . The original double-lp is now on a single , pricey ( ~ $30 ) Japanese CD . *Like Weather Report with their two self-titled records , McDuff had two albums titled The Heatin' System , this one for Cadet from 1971 , and one for Concord from 1994 .

However, I did not know there was a live date in Montreux. Do you have any details, personnelle, etc? It's one of five concerts recorded at the Festival on July 5 , 1973 , four of which were issued on Blue Note LPs . It's Ronnie in a trio with Gregory Miller on guitar and Marvin Chappell on drums . Four tracks , including a version of Chunky from Freap , and a cover of Seals & Crofts' East of Ginger Trees . Has not been reissued to my knowledge .

By web-based do you mean streaming or downloadable ? Several BFTs have been downloadable , including one you can still get in on if you're quick about it >>click<<

I suppose the fact that the two unissued tracks from this date aren't on the CD tells us that Fresh Sound didn't have access to the original tapes . Chances are though , that even if Denon had got round to this one , their 'exact replica' fetishism would have yielded the same result anyway .

I was just listening to Jack McDuff's To Seek a New Home and wondering why this has never been out on CD ( even in Japan ?) . I was disappointed when Water put out Who Knows What Tomorrow's Gonna Bring instead of it . To Seek a New Home , while not quite as singular a recording as Moon Rappin' , still occupies it's own space in jazz organ-ville , and I think it would have been a better choice for Water sales-wise than Who Knows What Tomorrow's Gonna Bring . There aren't nearly enough orchestral organ records ( let alone those with wordless vocalizing ) as far as I'm concerned . Another candidate for a Rare Groove-type release is Ronnie Foster's Live at Montreux from '73 . When it comes to the Foster Blue Notes , the earlier the better , unless your tastes run to Stevie Wonder knock-offs or synthesized fuzak in general . I guess I'm saying I liked him better when he was just a freap , whatever the hell that meant....

That's the one I had. I believe though that Zoot Sims is an unlikely choice. Not sure it sounds like him. Somehow Seldon Powell seems more likely to me. Any other views. John , I would have thought that Melle's recollection re: the tenor player settles the matter , especially as the aural evidence ( to my ears ) doesn't contradict it . That same aural evidence does however make me think Lord is wrong about Cinderella being on the January '57 tracks . As for Duvivier and Wilson , they can't be ruled out I suppose , since they recorded Quadrama with Melle just three months later .

Lord lists the personnel for the January 18 , 1957 tracks as : Art Farmer (tp) Hal McKusick (as) Zoot Sims (ts) Gil Melle (bar) Teddy Charles (vib) Joe Cinderella (g) Vinnie Burke (b) Ed Thigpen (d) Lord appends this explanatory footnote : "The above personnel listing courtesy of Noal Cohen from Rudy Van Gelder historian Dan Skea. Following from Dan Skea: "A few days ago I spoke with Gil Melle at some length in seeking answers to some questions about RVG. Among the things he told me was that there are errors in Ruppli's Prestige discography concerning his session of January 18, 1957. He says the personnel listed is partially wrong, and that Teddy Charles is on the date, although no vibes player is listed. The trumpet is Art Farmer, NOT Donald Byrd; the alto is Hal McKusick, NOT Phil Woods (Gil says he never recorded with Phil in his life); and Zoot Sims is present on tenor, although no tenor is listed. Mel says he is especially upset about these mistakes because Teddy Charles was one of his heroes, and Zoot Sims was a close friend."" Gil's Guests is my favorite Melle recording , for his writing , his playing , and for the supporting cast . Poor sound on a couple of tracks is the only blemish .