Rooster_Ties

That Oscar Peterson ad for Bud, OMG. I guess, if nothing else, it certainly was a product of the time (early-to-mid 80's).

If anything, I'm really looking to downsize my collection by about 20%, maybe 25%. Best thing I ever did was thinning the herd (the "heard"?) by 30% back when I moved to DC in 2011 -- and I'm really due to get rid of more. And I liked what I kept a lot better, honestly, because it was "diluted less" by all the stuff I obviously didn't need, that I got rid of when push finally came to shove. Yeah, I've bought back 6-8 individual titles that I wished I'd kept, but that pales in comparison to the 3,000+ CD's I got rid of (and don't miss one bit).

Was this query ever settled?

Of course the very best thing about such a "collections comparison thread" -- would be to convince my wife that there are plenty of others here who are WAY more obsessed with this stuff than I am. Bring it on!! And needless to say that the various "post a photo of your collection" threads on the Steve Hoffman Forums are automatically shared with my wife.

Infinitely more, and then some.

Probably as good a place as any to inquire about this obscure 1976 Detroit jazz album (with you, Mark!!) -- which, of all things, saw a CD reissue in 2013 (which is when I got wind of it). Phil Ranelin is on it, which I'm sure is how I even found out about the thing in the first place. But it's really more of a "cast of a thousand" kind of thing, covering a number of different styles, though I think it all hangs together as an album surprisingly well. Any more story to this release, by any chance? https://www.discogs.com/The-Hastings-Street-Jazz-Experience-Detroit-Jazz-Composers-Ltd/release/1089572 The Detroit Jazz Composers Ltd. - Hastings Street Jazz Experience (Midnite Records, 1976)

I've yet to be particularly moved by Bruckner's symphonies (any of them, really) -- but I've always liked (just shy of "loved") singing his various choral motets -- which are lovely, and very well written imho. I'm not sure I've really tried hard enough to get into orchestral Bruckner, to be honest -- but for whatever, he and I have just never clicked. But the one and maybe only Bruckner piece I'm really ga-ga for, is his string quintet -- which I really clicked with a good 20 even 25 years ago.

.

That'd be me, the OP (in this case). Sure, I'm definitely still curious. Such an incredible tune!! Geez, I just looked, and this thread that I created is 15(!) years old!! So it predates all of the 5-6 times I've heard Billy since I moved out here to D.C. (in 2011), most of those times with you, Michael. My how time flies.

4 copies arrived here in DC on Saturday - one already distributed. I've only had the chance to read half the chapter on Joe Henderson (busy week at work!) -- but I'm certainly liking what I'm seeing. Bravo!!

There was a thread Q's jazz channel, that I know I've read/followed somewhere. Not sure if it was here, or on the Hoffman board -- or maybe something on Reddit. Somewhere around the time the channel started streaming, iirc.

Wonder if that version of Mombasa had Carmell Jones in the group? I'm guessing not, as the only Mombasa record that Jones is on, is from 1980 (here).

Yup, my box-boxes are all in a milk-crate (save for a couple that won't fit), and all the jewel boxes are integrated in with the rest of my collection in their various areas -- all the Blue Note stuff alpha by artist on one shelf, and everything else (non-BN) on another shelf, alpha by artist. I don't dig out the big booklets all that much, so they're all in the big boxes -- but they're not hard to access when I need to. My 15+ Selects are all filed similarly, in with the rest of the collection, and actively listened to. My only "safety" copy is a still-sealed duplicate of the Andrew Hill Select, which I felt was a reasonable precaution when I saw it was going OOP (a set I *definitely* didn't want to be without, in case one or more of my regular discs got scratched, or somehow went sideways).

My wife read the Washington Post article over the weekend ("Hey, have you heard about this Kenny Burrell guy?"), and she thought the whole thing was beyond weird, to the point of being suspicious. Suspicious of what specifically, it's hard to know. But I completely agree, it's beyond weird.

I was only "especially interested" in about 1/3rd of the Bee Hive box (on paper), but once I got it -- almost fully another 1/3rd is nearly as good as the 1/3rd I really wanted most. But your point is taken -- as there's a good (last) 1/3rd of it I'll probably hardly ever listen to.

I hate to say it, but I agree that the whole thing is just weird, weird, weird. I'm not going to make any pronouncements, or level any charges (whether they're baseless, or not, who knows). I will say that I'm glad the press is continuing to follow up on this, and presumably will further-continue to. After all this drama, and all the weirdness, I do think the donors (at least) deserve more solid, verifiable information. I'll continue to hold my tongue, and not engage in too much speculation (at least in print), until more facts are known.

Last time around they had one Tyrone Washington photo (at least that they mentioned in their email blast about it), which I sort of wished I'd inquired about getting via email. If anyone sees another TW photo for under $100, I'd be very tempted.

About all I ever buy at the one baseball game we go to most years is a tall 16oz hard cider, which usually is at least $9. About same at the Caps hockey games we went too a few years ago (when a friend got us free tix about once a year). I'm half ok paying those kind of prices, but it definitely limits me to just one per game.

I thought the Federalist Papers author(s)/non-author question was the hardest, and I'm sure I would have missed it.

My wife got 9/10. We took it collectively with my Dad. I think I would have gotten at least 8/10 (but maybe not 9, and definitely not 10).

So other than when I was a kid. I've only had my one (current) pair of perscription glasses, which are actually *progressive* lenses. Got 'em about 6 years ago, and their actually clear glass up top (my distance vision was great), and simple 2x magnification down at the bottom. And cuz they're progressive, the magnification is smoothly increasing between 1x in the middle (no magnification at all), up to 2x down towards the bottom. The ONE part of the process I really didn't exactly trust then (and I have **NO** idea how it's accomplished if you buy glasses on-line), is that the eye-tech person in the store had me put on the frames I wanted to buy with plain/clear lenses, and then marked on the glasses where the center of the pupil of each of my eyes was, when I had the glasses on. Presumably so they could place the "beginning" of the progressive magnification right in the center of where my eye is looking out (which I guess isn't always exactly in the enter of the lens, depending on your own eyes). What really bugged me was this was done -- pardon the pun, but how else can I say this? -- this was done *entirely* by the eye-tech person "eyeballing" it. VERY unscientifically too, by my take of the process. "Yeah, that looks about right" does not invoke a lot of confidence, let me tell you. So anyway, how in the hell do they do that part when you buy on-line?? That's probably the biggest part of my hesitancy in getting new glasses -- which I actally need to do this calendar year -- is how in hell do you insure that "good enough, yeah I guess that's close" really is "good enough"??!!! We've socked away extra in our home health savings (which avoid being taxed) specifically for me to get some new and probably stronger glasses this year (which has to be spent, use-or-lose, by Dec 31 -- so my question isn't academic. EDIT: To clarify, at least 6 years ago, my distance vision didn't need any correction, and I could technically get away with wearing cheap $5 reading glasses when I needed to (which is 100% of the time now, when I need to read/see up close). My "reader" magnification needed back 6-7 years ago was 2x, and probably needs to be about 2.5x now. I really didn't "need" to get progressive lenses back then, but I hated forever needing to put readers on, and take them off, 30 times a day. And don't like "looking over" my cheap readers either. So I got the progressives purely for convenience and aesthetics too (I'll admit).

Yup, I'm *sure* that was the one. You(?) started a thread about the general topic of city-specific jazz books. Not sure how long the thread got here, but I do remember there being a very nice (long) list of books.

Without adding specifically to the discussion here (now), isn't there a "city-based" jazz-book thread somewhere around here? I remember a good discussion of books specifically about one-city-each's jazz history. Anyone have a link?

Szwed's Miles biography (So What), is really my go-to Miles bio, and beautifully written. Highly recommend.

Also could mean that the disc itself was manufactured outside of Japan, and the liners and packaging were printed in Japan. I think(?) I got a disc or two like that from CDJapan once, but I couldn't begin to remember which one(s). I'm not remembering any that didn't (still) have Japanese packaging, iirc. Either way, as Jim said, it means pretty much what it says at face value.