Rooster_Ties

I have nearly the complete E/O catalog on CD, and they are all really outstanding. They're kinda near and dear to my heart, cuz one of my first few "real" jazz experiences was hearing the E/O live while I was in college, back around 1991 or '92. The version of the band I heard probably had both Medeski and Matt Wilson in it, back then -- before either of them were any kind of names in their own right. Hell, back then I didn't know Monk from Ornette from Dolphy.... But I did know enough to know that the E/O was really something that kinda blew my mind at the time. I've heard them live a couple times since, and have always been impressed.

WARNING: My knowledge (both “book” knowledge and actual “ear” knowledge) is pretty damn thin for stuff recorded before 1960, and these Blindfold tests are sure as hell gonna expose that about me. With that cat out of the bag, here goes... Track #1: No idea. My knowledge of jazz guitar is very, VERY limited when it comes to cats before 1960, and I'm probably not any better with cats after 1960, with the exception of a few big names. So, I won’t even guess, cuz I’d be so wrong, it’d make your head spin. 3 and a half stars. Track #2: First time I heard this I thought this might have been something stylistically very similar to the Thad Jones late 50’s recordings on Blue Note (which surprisingly, I’m not very familiar with, only from having borrowed a friend’s Mosaic set once). As to who the players are, boy - I really have no idea. The trombonist is very fluid, but I’m quickly showing my ignorance of even a basic “who’s who” of pre-Moncur Trombonists. I could mention some random names, but I’d only be making wild guesses. As to the tenor player – my thought was that it kinda sounded a little like maybe Tina Brooks, but I’m not aware of Tina recording in this kind of context. 4 stars. Track #3: My first thought was early Stanley Turrentine, but that’s just a guess. (But whoever it is, they sure have the fluidity of an early Stanley Turrentine.) 4 stars. Track #4: I was fairly proud that I figured this one out (with my ears) before I remembered that the biggest name on this recording had ever recorded this tune in this kind of context before. There were several moments (quickly) that I was both pretty sure of who the biggest name was, and I also thought that the textures sure as hell reminded me of his other work on stuff like THIS. Then, after the second time through the Blindfold disc, I suddenly remembered what this was (and that it even existed in the first place). Suprisingly, only 3 and a half stars. Track #5: No real idea, I’m afraid. Maybe Johnny Griffin?? That’s the first name that pops into my head, even after listening to this track 6 or 8 times. My backup guess is Clifford Jordan, but I really don’t think it’s Jordan – cuz my brain still says Johnny Griffin to me (even as I’m typing Jordan’s name). 4 stars. Track #6: No real idea, although a strange name keeps popping into my head – one that doesn’t at all fit any kind of logic. How about McCoy Tyner?? I’ve heard very little of McCoy’s Impulse material (’62-’64), but what I have heard I kind of remember as being somewhat different (less modal, with less of the voicings in 4ths) than his BN material from ’67 and after. 3 stars. Track #7: No idea, and nothing really pops into my head. I mean, whoever it is has the fat alto tone of Jackie McLean, but this is WAY more conservative than Jackie ever played (at least from the Jackie I know – I’ve never heard his really early stuff – I think ’59 is as early as I’ve ever heard from Jackie). Whoever it is almost gets a “soprano-sax”-like tone out of that alto. Wish I had even a half-ass guess, but I don’t even have that. 3 stars. Track #8: As I mentioned up above, I was about half-way convinced that it was Claude “Fiddler” Williams, and THIS recording in particular. But then I listened to it on a real stereo (with real speaker separation), and BAM – there goes that theory (since there's two violins - I thought is was just one, when I was listening on a cheap boombox). So, I guess I got no real guess even, other that some obvious names already mentioned. 2 and a half stars. Track #9: WOW!!! What a killer track!!! I have NO idea who this is, but I damn well better find out before this is all over – that’s all I gotta say!! Absolutely no names come to mind for the guitar player or the organist. But some general names come to mind, in terms of vibe. Is this a Byrds tune??? One other name that kind pops into my head is The Doors, and also (only a tiny, tiny little bit) how about “More/Obscured-By-Clouds”-era Pink Floyd. Ok, not really – but every once in a blue moon the organ reminds me of some of the moody “Floyd” organ of the immediate “post-Syd” era. (Really, is this maybe a tune by The Byrds?? I think know this tune from somewhere.) 5 stars!!! B) (OK, really probably only 4 stars.) Track #10: Two names pop into my head: Clifford Jordan (as the tenor soloist), and Gerald Wilson (as the band leader) - but those are both pretty wild guesses. Cool track!! (My lack of knowledge about big-bands will also show quite a bit from these Blindfold tests too.) 4 stars. Track #11: Well, I was pretty darn sure it was my favorite tenor player when I first heard it (and it is). For the first couple times through I thought it might have been THIS, which I had a tape of many years ago, but haven't heard since about 1995. But then I quickly changed my mind, and thought long and hard about what I knew (no AMG cheating from me on this one) about this tenor player's catalog (including his sideman dates), and I quickly came to the conclusion it was probably THIS, which I heard a couple times several years ago (but I don’t own the disc). I didn't remember the tune at all, but the overall sound and feel of the date seemed vaguely familiar. For those still guessing about #11, the hint is that the trumpeter on this one is someone that Dmitry really likes (and probably for more than one reason). 4 stars. Track #12: No real idea, but I’m going to hazard a wild guess and say something by Chick Corea and Gary Burton. I’ve never heard any of their stuff (together) before, but there’s something about this that’s both relatively cool, but not really as cool as I’d like it to be – all at the same time. (I think someone up above said that this sounded like something Rooster would like – and they’re right --- although what I’d really say is that this sounds like a good (but not quite great) attempt to sound like something Rooster would like. ) Since I often feel this way about some of the stuff that Chick’s done, (especially in the 70’s and 80’s) then I guess that’s part of the reason for my guess of Chick and Burton too. 2 and a half stars. Track #13: Somebody said Metheny-esque, and I would have to agree. But I don’t think Metheny’s the leader. So, I came to this next conclusion without looking anything up on-line.... How about THIS??? (I borrowed this CD from a friend a few years ago, and skimmed through it once – liked half of it, and found the other half wanting -- and it was the tracks like this that left me wanting, if you must know.) 1 star. Track #14: Probably a Monk tune, but no idea who the piano player is, let alone anybody else in the trio. 2 stars. PS: DAMN this was a LOT of fun!!!!!

I've been listening to the Blindfold Test CD mostly on a crappy boombox in the kitchen and/or living room, so I really haven't been listening to it with much stereo separation. And thus, until I just read this thread (about track #8 anyway), I was fairly convinced that track #8 was THIS. Any thoughts??? But NOW that I know there are TWO violins (now that I'm listening closer, on a stereo with decent separation), I guess there's no chance it could be what I just linked to. Damn!!! ===== Oh, well, I'm gonna post my thoughts on the entire Blindfold Test #1 later tonight. I've listened to the whole thing about 6 or 7 times now, and I have some ideas about a few tracks, and NO idea at all about some too.

Yes, welcome!!!!!

I've never been particularly blown away by this disc, so don't pay an inflated price for it unless you absolutely hafta have it. It's probably "good", but not any better than "good" in my book. 3-stars out of 5, at best. (IMHO)

I've only unintentionally purchased duplicates of titles I already have a couple times. The ones that get me at the Naxos "American Composers" series, where I'm not at all familiar with 1/3rd of the composers' names, so I've duplicated a purchase or two there. But I have purchased two different books about Frank Lloyd Wright, two copies of each book, without intending to. May have done the same thing with a couple other books as well, come to think of it.

Well, I've always gone by a scale of zero to five stars, in half-star increments. Makes the most sense to me.

This just in from www.CNN.com!!! Milk with bubbles reaches market Sunday, August 31, 2003 Posted: 8:42 PM EDT (0042 GMT) "Refreshing Power Milk" MILFORD, New York (AP) -- Adding bubbles to milk is tricky. Pump in too many, and it foams over. Add too few and why bother. George and Mary Ann Clark, husband-and-wife entrepreneurs, have spent the past seven years trying to find the balance. Last week, they started production on a carbonated milk-based drink called Refreshing Power Milk -- RPM -- and they already have orders coming in from school districts. Mary Ann Clark, a registered nurse, said she was pained to see children drinking cola and shunning milk when she worked in schools so she decided to do something about it. "If you take water and add carbon dioxide to make soda, why can't you do that with milk?" she asked. She and her biochemist husband started work on a carbonated milk drink in 1996 and founded Mac Farms Inc. in 1998. The company already sells eMoo, another carbonated milk drink. On Wednesday, in a factory with a barn-red roof and purple-and-yellow cow out front, the first batch of RPM was bottled. The Clarks combined water and powdered milk to create a slightly fizzy, mildly milky-tasting drink with the nutritional value of skim milk and 40 percent of the recommended daily amount of calcium. Each 12-ounce serving contains 90 calories and 12 grams of sugar, compared to 150 calories and 40 grams of sugar in a 12-ounce can of Coca-Cola. RPM contains 9 grams of protein compared to none in a can of Coca-Cola, but is higher in sodium: 115 grams to 52 grams per 12-ounce serving. The flavors: vanilla cappuccino, Brazilian chocolate and chocolate raspberry. Researchers at Cornell University had been looking for ways to extend the shelf life of dairy products using carbonation when the researchers teamed up with the Clarks several years ago. Joe Hotchkiss, chairman of the Department of Food Science at Cornell University, said the drink was designed to attract people who like soda. "People consume food based on their sensory properties, taste, what kind of emotional feelings it gives them," said Hotchkiss. "Our role is to provide that similar kind of satisfaction in foods, but also couple that to foods that are more nutritionally sound."

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Facing Left" - his 2nd BN release, might be a good place to start. It was his first trio-only disc, and featured some very mature playing and tunes. Although, really, any of Moran's discs are well worth picking up. They're all fantastic in my book. "Black Stars" features the great Sam Rivers, if you like him - perhaps also a good place to start.

Oh, yeah... Uh, that's right!!! ( I almost forgot about this myself!!!! )

I agree - I think we need a separate forum for the Blindfold Test threads, and threads discussing the logistics of the Blindfold Tests and such. Make it so!!!

See, this is a great example. I haven't given enough of a list to these tracks, and I am successfully resisting the urge to click on the links. If you know what something is, especially if you know (for sure) that you're right... ...then providing links like this is the way to go (at least so early in the game).

How about this... If you know (or are 98% sure) about what a track is, then only provide a link to something like the AMG review, or some other source - in order to divulge the answer. I mean, I figured out who track 11 is (both the tenor player and trumpeter), but I'd rather not say who until more people have had a chance to guess some more. (Well, other than maybe to say that Dimtry is a big fan of the trumpeter.) I think it would be nice to do this is a way where people who are still trying to figure things out can skim this thread, without any actual answers jumping out at them. It's not very hard to provide a LINK to an answer, without revealing it visually (literally) in the this thread, at least so early in the game. Just an idea to keep this more fun, while people are still guessing. Open to other ideas, of course. This is a lot of fun!!!!

I think you misunderstand their offer. They sell you a brand new CD for $17.99. Burn a copy if you like, since you own it. Then bring it back within 3 days, and they'll give you $13.00 in credit back towards another purchase. (That's $17.99 minus $4.99 in profit for them, and THEY get the disk back, to sell again.) And then, odds are that they're rewrapping that very same CD and selling it again as "new" at $17.99. I'm pretty sure they're rewrapping the returned discs and selling them as new, because in the past (at least at the Troost store) - I've seen dozens of promo CD's being sold as brand-new product, at full list price ($15.99, $16.99, $17.99). I don't know where they're getting their promos from (or is was a practice only done in the past), but I observed this on multiple occasions, with multiple promo-copies of multiple titles. I was even told by one of their managers (a few years ago) that selling promos as if they were new didn't matter, because "their customers wouldn't and/or couldn't tell the difference, so who cares???". So, in other words, they have the potential to sell the same exact disc (one CD, not multiple copies of the same CD), over and over and over and over again, charging $5 each time that someone buys it and presumably burns a copy of it (as they say in their ad), and then return it. At no time in this process does the distributor, record label, or artist see one penny of that $5 from the "rental" process they're advertising.

From my perspective, I think Jim and others are doing this a good way... If you know who it is on one track, without much of a shadow of a doubt - then early on in the game it's probably good to keep that to yourself. If you're uncertain, or only think you kinda know (but don't know if you know, for sure), then it's good to put your thoughts out there. I haven't posted my thoughts on the test yet (probably will on Tuesday), but I was planning to do the exact same thing for the few tracks that I am already 98% certain of.

Hey Jim, Joe, and Randy, I just found a couple dozen more people here in Kansas City who are all really interested in your Organissimo CD, and great news!!! - they're each thinking about buying it!!!! But, I've decided to "rent" each of them one of the extra Organissimo CD's I have (one by one, in succession), so they can each burn a copy for themselves. Hope you don't mind. I'm only making $120 out the deal (and you're not making anything), but after all - I did pay you for the one I'm using to loan to them. Thanks a bunch guys!!!! -- Rooster T. PS: If anybody else in KC wants a copy, just say the word. I won't copy it for you, but for $5 you can "borrow" it from me, and it's all yours. And remember, I need it back in 3 days, or else you gotta pay me $17.99 for it. Sorry, that's the rules. And don't forget: "STOP ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING!!!"

Never heard "Turning Point" before today, not until just a few hours ago actually. (Just got it in the mail today -- a TOCJ from Lon - thanks Lon!!!) Although I've only been through it twice (while I was doing other things, and was in and out of the room), I have to say my first impression is that I think like "Turning Point" better than "Think!". ( Hard to nail down exactly why, since I haven't listened to "Think!" in several months, and I'm only just now ever hearding "TP". I'll listen to both, and get back to you... )

It sounds like "fair use" to me, or at least pretty damn close. In any case, it's a hell of a lot different than renting CD's and suggesting that people copy them, and then turning around and selling those same CD's again as new (or renting them again, and then selling them as new). Light-years difference.

I would guess in most cases that the music being distributed by the Blindfold Test are from albums or CD's that are out-of-print (at least that's what's gonna be on the one I put together). But technically, you might be right. BUT, I think there's a BIG difference between 1) our Blindfold Test where no one is making any money out of it (and if fact, people are loosing money), and individual tracks are being burned (not entire CD's), and usually from out-of-print sources (often LP's that have never been released on CD, or possibly other non-CD sources) --- and 2) a company making $5 profit selling (and reselling, multiple times over) brand-new CD's, and encouraging people to duplicate those same CD's rather than paying for them (other than to paying for the use of the CD's for 3 days, in order to copy them), with no income going to the distributors, record companies, or artists. Big difference in my book, and I suspect also in the eyes of the courts.

Bagpipes????????????????? Anybody know if he was also wearing a kilt on the gig that night????

If they want to let people rent CD's, fine. But the implied reason for their "rental" program is to encourage people to violate copyright law. How much clearer can they be??? "Buy It... Try It... Burn It... Or Return It!!!" Or do they need to say... "Buy It... Try It... Burn It... AND Return It!!!"

Can't imagine how even one penny of it would. In theory, they could "sell" the exact same CD four times, each time having it returned for $4.99 less than they sold it. And then, at the end of the day, they would have made $20 in pure profit, and still have the very same disc they started with. And knowing that they routinely sell promos as if they were new, they could make that same $20 profit off of "selling" the same promo-disc four times in a row. "STOP THE MADNESS! STOP ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING! DO IT THE GUILT-FREE WAY!!!" What utter and complete bullshit.

"STOP ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING!!!" What bullshit...