Rooster_Ties

Then I think it might be fair to say we agree more than we disagree (you and I, DrJ), at least on the important part of this issue - which (I think) is the part about reaching out to a racial group different than one's own. I think the "getting paid $5 to go to church" thing is just a publicity stunt (and a pretty creative one at that), and the fact that they might actually pay a few people here and there, is really far less important than the gesture being made in the name of fostering more interaction between people of different races. Actually, it was just that -- the "reaching across the racial divide" thing -- that made me start this thread in the first place. Yeah, $5 to go to church (but only if you're white) is really weird, and probably 'wrong' on a number of levels. But since the offer is only for one month only, and the monetary amounts are relatively small - I can overlook much of the 'weirdness' of the 'getting paid' part. Would this whole thing be any easier to take, if the Bishop had offered to donate the same amounts of money to a charity of the white person's choosing??? This would remove the "direct payment for going to church" aspect of the offer, and still be a gesture that might say something similar (about "welcome"-ness) to the target audience the Bishop is trying to reach?? Then again, if the Bishop had done this (the "donation to a charity" suggestion I just made), then would it have gotten nearly the press coverage it's gotten?? And would we even be talking about it now?? For that reason, I think the "publicity stunt" aspect of the gesture -- the outrageous notion of paying anyone to go to church -- is nearly justified.

I think I've bitched about this one before, back on the BNBB... But Greg Osby's "Symbols of Light (A Solution)" only get 2-stars, whereas I think it's easily one of the most amazing jazz albums of the last 20 years. Obviously the reviewer didn't have any "fun" listening to this album, but I certainly do. I still hear new things in "Symbols..." every time I put it on. I should mention, however, that a couple of Osby's very earliest albums only get 1-star each. Still, "Symbols..." is way better than a 2-star album.

And if the thread doesn't turn up, might I suggest... http://www.hookedonphonics.com

Actually, just after I started the thread - I also looked at Patton's AMG entry too, and they only give 2 stars to Patton's "Understanding" - which is totally whack!!!!! Hell, "Underststanding" and "Boogaloo" (both from 1968) are my all-time-favorite John Patton albums. Harold Alexander (who's on both of those albums) is da bomb!!! B) B)

What does it sound like??

Jazz, Rock, Pop - pick any genre. Go to the AMG, and sift through several of your favorite artist's/band's bios, and take note of which album(s) of theirs get the very fewest number of 'stars' of any in their entire output. Presumably that would mean that the AMG considers that album (or those albums) to be that artist's/band's "WORST", out of their entire recorded output. (And let's stick with actual "albums", and not mess with compilations ("Greatest Hits" and such) ---- although 'live' albums do still count.) Anything stand out to you as just being plain "wrong"??? - in your own opinion, of course. Or are there any that you really like, even though it appears nobody else does??? I'm sure there are many. Here's one of mine... R.E.M. - Monster (1994) The AMG only gives it a measly 2 stars, the least of any R.E.M. album. And yet, "Monster" really is my all-time favorite R.E.M. album. Do I think "Monster" is R.E.M.'s very 'best' album?? - well, probably not. But "Monster" really is my favorite (and to various degrees, I really like most of R.E.M.'s output). "Monster" seems to me, to be the one that is least full of clichés, and it has the most 'left turns' in it for me, of any R.E.M. album. ========== By the way, the actual AMG review of "Monster" isn't all that bad, really - though it isn't exactly 'glowing' either. So, my guess is that the AMG "star ratings", however, are not solely determined for each album by the critic who reviews each album. In other words - we all know that the AMG "star ratings" are supposed to indicate the relative importance and/or "goodness" of each album within an artist's/band's entire recorded output. And thus, my guess is that there is some sort of editorial review done for the "star ratings" of each artist/band (beyond just each reviewer of each album assigning their own "star rating" for each album they review). The purpose of such a review would be to make sure the "star rankings" truly reflect their opinion about the relative ranking of each album (with a particular artist's/band's output). I have no idea if this is how they actually do it, but it would make sense for them to do it that way, so perhaps they do. IN ANY CASE, it's probably a safe bet that whichever album gets the least number of stars, is an album that certainly isn't "beloved by many", at the very least. SO, the purpose of this thread is to identify who here loves an album that appears to be universally underrated, at least based on the AMG "star ratings", which -- I know, I know -- many of you don't think are even worth two cents each. (And neither do I, which is also part of the reason I started this thread.) ========== One more thing. If an album doesn't get any stars at all - then that doesn't necessarily mean that that really is a "no star" album. I suspect 99.9% of the time (on AMG), "zero stars" just means that an album hasn't been given a star-rating at all, or at least not yet anyway. So, what you should be looking for is the album that got the least number of stars (but still got at least half-a-star).

I haven't heard the "Trumpet Evolution" disc personally, but if this helps any -- I've heard nothing but 'mixed' reviews of this disc, at best. Again, what I've heard is 2nd and 3rd hand, so I'm not personally doggin' it -- but, I haven't heard of anyone really liking it a whole lot either. Anyone here actually heard it??

Man, the posters from this site are amazing!! Some random samples...

I agree with most of what you've said, DrJ -- and yet, I also think the Bishop's idea is an interesting one, and one that appears likely to bring a small but measurable amount of increased diversity to his church -- even if only for the month of August. First, let me say that I don't suddenly think every mostly 'monochromatic' church should suddenly start literally paying people from other racial background to attend their church. I think what the Bishop is trying to do was make a bold statement, that people who look different then him are 'very' welcome at his church. So much so, that he is personally willing to make a small payment to those 'different looking people' who actually will attend his church (in August). And, let's not forget that it appears that a majority of the 'white' people (however they're defined) are not even accepting the payments. (I think I heard this on CNN this morning, or at least they implied as much.) I think where some people are getting caught up in this whole issue (the whole idea of 'paying people to go to church') is that they forget that for the most part, it appears that the payments being offered are really much less important than the statement that is made by reaching out to a race other than what the vast majority of the church is made up of. As a statement -- in effect saying "we really want to have some different kinds of folks join us in worship", and they want to create a little publicity by putting a really rather tiny amount of money behind it -- as a statement, it does a rather good job of pointing out the sincerity of the offer of welcome. Yeah, the literal idea of paying people to go to church -- and only paying 'white' people (what ever that is defined as) -- is pretty weird on the face of it. I think it's helpful, though, to look beyond the literal offer, and see what's behind it.

circa 1982-83, somewhere in there - so their first "farewell tour" was over 20 years ago.

Glad to see you back AB, post when you can!!! If I lived in his community (anywhere within an hour's drive) - I'm sure I'd be one of the white people who would accept the Bishop's invitation, at least for a service or two, and there's no way I'd accept the $5. Sure it's a publicity stunt, but not all publicity stunts are bad. In fact, I think there's some chance that this could cause some more discussion - perhaps in other churches (both white and black), in other cities - about race. Sure, not LOTS of churches, but lets say just 20 churches in various cities across the country attempt to do something similar - or different - to specifically invite people of other races to their own 'monochromatic' church. Well, then that's 20 more churches doing something like that, than might have otherwise.

Any relation to Norah Jones?? Seems like I heard somewhere before that she was related to some other musician.....

The "planned rust" idea is all well and good, I suppose - conceptually speaking at least. But my biggest beef is that I end up getting red rust all over my hands, and often a little on my clothes, every time I open up the set. So, for this reason, it gets the prize for dumbest box-set packaging concept.

Well, I think I'm beginning to like this bishop's idea more and more -- the more I read about it. It seems like a genuine effort to reach across the racial divide, albeit through some rather unconventional means. I had my doubts at first, reading only the first article from ABC and also another one from AP. But then when I saw that it was an offer only good for the month of August -- so we're talking only four Sunday's here -- I thought this was kind of a cool idea to say to whites "Hey, you're really welcome here, and we're not kidding". At the very least, it certainly is a creative idea, and I gotta give some props for that!!

A preacher in Shreveport, La., says he's willing to pay whites to attend services at his predominantly black Baptist church. (ABCNEWS.COM) Paid Parishioners Preacher to Pay Whites to Attend His Predominantly Black Church S H R E V E P O R T, La., Aug. 1 -- Bishop Fred Caldwell says Jesus never intended for his Shreveport, La., church to be exclusively black, so he plans on paying whites to come to mass. "There's a need for diversity in the body of Christ and especially on Sunday morning, we need to look like the kingdom of God. I don't think at this point we're there." Caldwell says he will pay whites $5 per hour to attend Sunday services at Greenwood Acres Full Gospel Baptist Church and $10 an hour for the Thursday service. "People get paid to go a lot of places, we might as well at church," Caldwell said. Caldwell said the idea to encourage whites to attend his church in exchange for money came to him while he was looking out at his parishioners during his Sunday sermon. He says the predominantly black community at Greenwood Acres is largely supportive of his unconventional attempt to expand the diversity of the congregation. "We have a few that are not agreeing with it, don't necessarily see the vision. As they stick around they'll probably see the vision," Caldwell said. "We need to reach all people." Since news of his plan got out, the calls started coming in from people interested in finding out more. Caldwell says some of the calls were from people who didn't want the money, but were just happy to be invited. Caldwell says he expects those who come for the payoff to return for the word of God and not a five-spot in the future. "When they get here, they will hear the word of God, which brings faith because faith comes by hearing, and hearing the word of God," Caldwell said. "It will get the audience I believe that really needs to hear the gospel and they will go out and in turn, tell others," he said The white visitors who want to be paid will have to register when they attend Greenwood Acres. Caldwell says he will pay them from his pocket and enlist the help of the congregation if needed. The preacher says he plans to put out more chairs in his church this Sunday. ========== Another good quote, from another version of the story... And another quote, from yet another version of the story, from the same local professor... And leave it to all the national media outlets to leave out one important detail... Which I found on-line, in a version of the story from the Sydney Morning Herald, Australia. ========== Bishop Fred Caldwell is offering to pay white people to attend his church in Shreveport, Louisiana. Criss Williams is one of the few white members. Bishop: I'll pay white people to attend my church Friday, August 1, 2003 Posted: 12:04 PM EDT (1604 GMT) (CNN) -- Bishop Fred Caldwell of the Greenwood Acres Full Gospel Baptist Church in Shreveport, Louisiana, has a pretty radical idea to diversify the largely black congregation of his church. This month, Caldwell is going to pay white people to attend his sermons. It's five bucks for a Sunday service, 10 for a Thursday service. And the idea is already stirring up controversy. CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien spoke with Bishop Caldwell from Shreveport on Friday morning. Joining him was one of the few white members of the church, Criss Williams. O'BRIEN: Bishop Caldwell, let's begin with you. How is the attendance right now in the church, overall, black people and white people? CALDWELL: Well, attendance overall at Greenwood Acres Full Gospel is great. We have very few white members, but overall it's a super great church. O'BRIEN: How many white people are in your church? CALDWELL: In attendance on a regular basis maybe about five or six. O'BRIEN: Five or six people; and you have a couple thousand members, right? CALDWELL: Well, five or six white people. Basically, predominantly 99.9 percent are black or African-American congregation. Only about five or six white people on a continuing basis. O'BRIEN: So it sounds like you've got great numbers in the church as it is. It's obviously not a filling the seats kind of thing. Why would you want to pay white people to come into the church? CALDWELL: Because this area basically is polarized and we need to mix it up. And so $5 is good fishing bait. O'BRIEN: Criss, did you get paid $5 when you came to the church and do you think it's going to work? WILLIAMS: No, I didn't get paid, not monetarily. I've received spiritual blessings ... that benefit my life in much more valuable ways to me. I think that it will work. They will come. I think that a lot of secular organizations and businesses already use incentives and promotions to draw people in to hear what they have to offer. Once they're there, then it's up to them to determine whether or not they want to receive what's offered. And I think it's no different from that. In that light, God made everything. He made money. And for a bishop to utilize that resource to draw people to the kingdom of God is a wonderful thing. O'BRIEN: Bishop Caldwell, we don't have a ton of time, but I've got two quick questions for you. First, why is Thursday more valuable than Sunday? CALDWELL: Well, Thursday is more valuable than Sunday simply because people are working and it might take a little bit more extra effort. And then on top of that, they'll probably get paid, $10 an hour is not bad. It's probably better than maybe McDonald's or Burger Kings would pay. O'BRIEN: Finally, you've heard the criticisms, right? I mean at the top of the story here we played some tape. And there are some people who say truly there are a lot of people in your area who could use that money or you could take it and help out poor people who really need it, not paying off white people to come to church. How do you answer that? CALDWELL: I answer that, Judas Iscariot said the same thing to Jesus, that money should be taken and given to the poor. That argument is always out there. The people that are saying it I doubt very seriously if they're taking their weekly paycheck and giving it to the poor. So let's just cut to the chase. America needs to come together and the kingdom of God especially needs to look like the kingdom of God on Sunday morning and that's what we're striving to do.

We miss you, AB. I know you're busy, busy, busy - probably with work and such. Just wanted to post a pubic note here, to say that we hope all is well with you, and that we're thinkin' of you.

Hmmmmm...... Maybe I guess I'll hafta reconsider getting the Blackhawk box (or maybe borrow yours for a spell?? - 'Free For All'???). I never much cared for the early 90's CD issues of "Friday Night" and "Saturday Night", and frankly - I found them kinda boring - as compared with the "Miles in Stockholm" discs with Trane (in March of 1960), and with Sonny Stitt (in October of 1960). I thought that back in the early 90's, when I first hear then, and borrowed the single CD's from a friend about a year ago, and had the same reaction. It wasn't so much whether Hank fit in of didn't fit in, but there was something generally lackluster about the whole thing. Could the prior CD mastering have that much impact on the music itself??? I kinda doubt it, but I guess stranger thing have happened.

WAIT - BIG AL - I can get one here (brand new) for like $16 plus tax. Or, I can get one on-line for about $13 (including postage). What I need is someone who already has an extra one they'd like to trade.

Hey 'couw' - FYI, Big Al is gonna trade me an extra "Solid" he has, for an extra Hutch "Components" that I have. So, that takes care of "Solid" (which Al is gonna send to me, and I'll include in the package I'm sending to you in Germany), and also "The Kicker" (which 'rockefeller center' is gonna send you directly from Austria, and I'm going to send him an Organissimo CD, when I get the 'volume discount' on the batch being sent to Kansas City). To everyone else: STILL LOOKING TO TRADE FOR "Africaine". Can this get any more convoluted????

Just sent it to the new address you provided. To everyone else: STILL LOOKING TO TRADE FOR "Africaine".

That story (about the fake album cover) is simply priceless. Thanks for sharing the cover, and the story.

I might naturally be inclined to alpha everything "all together" as was suggested above, but then my wife would scream bloody murder cuz she'd have to wade through hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of discs she has no interest in at all (never!!), just to browse the 300 or 400 that she would be interested in. I've got everything split into the following categories... [*]Pop/Rock (everything) [*]Classical (that my wife will listen to, 19th Century and before, and select 20th Century composers) [*]Classical (that my wife won't listen to, basically all my weird and/or atonal (often serial) 'classical' music) [*]Jazz (the 90% that my wife won't listen to) [*]Jazz (the 10% , mostly piano trios and similar jazz with no horns, that she will listen to) Oh - as far as the question about where to file "donald fagan", definitely in "Pop/Rock", without any doubt.

That's totally wack!!!

Afraid I haven't heard (nor even heard of) a "Jim Mair". Not sure if he's still on the KC scene or not. I first moved here in the Fall of 1994, and our time in Kansas City may not have overlapped. I'll check around, and see if he's still playing. "Free For All" - You ever heard of "Jim Mair"??? Was he a tenor player, or alto???