A Lark Ascending

Somebody start an 'Alternate takes you should really listen to' thread. With a few lines as to what captivates the proposer it could be really interesting and send us back to those tracks with fresh ears. The examples mentioned here are likely to get lost as this thread dies.

Yes, I've known a good few of these. The guy I buy organic nuts and stuff from - who turned me on to New Orleans jazz a few years ago, listens to nothing but that and swing bands; in his shop, which is nice. He has a little untidy pile of CDs and K7s there - perhaps 50-100, I never counted. I have NEVER known anyone like this. And I DON'T need to get out more MG Many of the people I knew at college in the mid to late 1970s were like that. They listened to a lot of Yes, Jethro Tull, Jimi Hendrix, Jeff Beck, Emerson Lake & Palmer, Frank Zappa, Allman Brothers Band, and other popular rock groups of the time. They had hundreds of rock albums, and about 20--30 jazz albums, and that was the way they liked it. They also had about five reggae albums, ten classical albums, maybe 20 blues albums--they didn't mind dabbling just a little bit in other styles, but the rock music of the time was definitely what they were mostly interested in. They enjoyed the 1970s fusion groups like Mahavishnu Orchestra, Larry Coryell and the Eleventh House, Weather Report, because these fusion groups reminded them of the most instrumentally oriented rock groups. They did not want to venture into any acoustic mainstream jazz--except that they also thought that ECM was "all right to admit liking"--they had a few Keith Jarrett, Ralph Towner, Gary Burton and Chick Corea albums on ECM. A lot of it was cultural and generational with them--the fusion and ECM were "young people's music" in their minds. They could not identify with older mainstream jazz artists, and the avant garde did not interest them. To them, buying a Dexter Gordon album would have been like buying a Dean Martin album, just a hopelessly square, old fogey thing to do. They could not bring themselves to do it. I have made contact with some of them online in recent years, and they seem to have the same musical collections and tastes as they did back then, or else they don't really care anymore about music at all. You are describing me up to a point there. Except I began to tire of the limitations of the rock format (and above all, the rock rhythmic approach) c. 1975. The appeal of ECM (one of the routes elsewhere; Ogun, curiously was another) was not that it sounded like rock but took you somewhere that did not have the earthbound nature of most rock (Towners 'Solstice' just floated). I never cared for the American version of fusion which seemed to take the worst aspects of rock (rhythmic arthritis) and attach it to the most tedious aspects of jazz (the tendency to go on and on on just a few chords!). I actually found 'proper' jazz very foreign for quite some time and, having decided that there was something there I thought I could like, had to force-feed myself for a while. Exposure to Westbrook, Tracey, Surman, the Ogun-ites, Weber, Towner et al, and following up with Miles (acoustic rather than electric, I was very down on electric for a time), Coltrane, Rollins etc began to aclimatise me. But we should not underestimate how different jazz sounds (or sounded then) to a rock-trained ear. I had the same problem with classical music a little bit earlier and just had to have faith that it was worth persevering. It was. Don't oversimplify the rock audience of the 70s. There might have been plenty who were happy with the somewhat flashy and grandiose names you mention; but there were plenty of others who heard a very rich and different world from the standard blues-rock of the time and sought out the stranger corners. It was also a time rich in exploration of other genres, drawing me into classical, jazz and folk simultaneously. Of course, to old foggies like MG it would have all sounded like greasy kids stuff (I can visualise his disdain selling me a Yes album in the record shop he mentions working in!). But old folks always see it that way.

Oh I will. Interesting to see the Buddhist burning in Saigon in last night's episode. Expecting JFK to be shot any moment; and then Vietnam to enter stage left. They constantly reference genuine companies (or once companies) - Lucky Strike, Playtex etc - as opposed to the usual trick of making them up. Wonder how much that cost them.

An album cover depicting an earlier 'president' of 'the colonies', prior to the usurpation.

No. 9 Funerals = 5:21 Guider = 2.24 + 6.12 + 1.24 (it's presented as a suite of 3 pieces). Maybe the BBC piece is a version of the middle section.

There are plenty of alternate takes that are less than enthralling, but the best ones are as worth hearing as anything else. I'm sure your right. Let's just say that for the casual listener* the waters of good, genuinely alternative takes are somewhat muddied by the record companies strategy of hooking in sales by putting out anything and everything - some are worse than others (calling Verve!). There's probably a very worthwhile thread there - alternative takes that offer something different, interesting or striking. *term used in a positive sense

Not that I can see - There are versions of 9 Funerals and Guider on Disc 1 but these seem to come from private tapes. 'Bee' is nowhere to be seen (though it might have changed name. In the booklet it mentions the 24th April session but has Nirvana for Mice rather than Bee. Mayve Bee was an earlier title). I almost certainly heard that broadcast when it first went out! I know I had a cassette tape of a Peel session with 9 funerals on.

I do like extra tracks of different tunes not on the original...even though there are also reasons why they were not originally issued (not always about the quality of the music - things that went out on singles, things left off for lack of space etc). I also own more versions of Larks Tongues in Aspic Part II than any sane person should possess. So I fall for the hook in other ways!

Just started series 3. How many more skeletons can Don Draper have in his cupboard? And will they all fall out at once?

Generally ignore them. Listening to a/ts has always struck me as being more about study than entertainment. Listening to more or less the same track again with minor variations has never really appealed - though I'm sure there are pleasures to be had there. I think your approach of just listening to the a/ts might be much more enjoyable. There are usually reasons why they are a/ts. Though I do like the a/t of Flamenco Sketches on KofB.

I suspect most of us were in our younger days. One of the joys of getting on in years is knowing that you can enjoy music on many levels and ignore the hierarchies (either the ones decided by others or the ones you invent for yourself!).

True of many people who grew up on vinyl or CDs; but their numbers will fall year on year. Vinyl and CD will probably survive as another form of boutique collecting (like collecting classic cars or antiques) but I can't see the future being other than downloading or the technology that supersedes it. Now whether the younger generation for whom downloading is first choice have any interest in the vast legacy remains to be seen. If they are not, Columbia needs to get this stuff out PDQ because it might be their last chance to make any money from it! Of course, as it falls out of copyright...

I can understand Columbia feeling that catalogue is currently uneconomic to release on CD. But it can't be that hard to get it to download. A few years of people sorting that out and it's done for good. They might find some volunteers to do it for free here!!!!!!! I suspect that despite its current lack of economic value they are sitting on it just in case it becomes an asset in the future.

I think 'serious' listening is way overrated. I can see its application to musicians learning about music, musicologists analysing music, engineers or other technical bods needing to understand their craft. But I'm not sure I'm ever 'serious' about listening. The difference I'd draw is between when it's on and it is going in and out of focus; and when I delberately set out to listen with full attention (i.e. if I'm trying to work out the structure of a symphonic movement or the way a track or album is built up). When I'm being 'attentive' I don't find myself being any more serious than when the music is hitting me subliminally (and I've had some very powerful reactions from music when only half attending). When I was younger I used to find wandering round a darkened room kept me well focused! I'd fall over things now!

"I'd say the majority of my listening is while multi-tasking but I do try and usually succeed in getting some close listening in." Describes me. Probably about 4-5 hours on a work day (including 90 mins on the work run). Most of the evening listening is whilst preparing lessons, marking books etc. At weekends/holidays I can have music going from 6.00 a.m through too about 10 pm if I'm not going anywhere else - ennui is offset by changing genre.

Really enjoying this tale of a divided family in south-east Ireland being forced to rethink their relationships when one member is revealed to be dying from AIDS. Like 'Brooklyn', a very strong sense of place.

Can royalties be wired to heaven? [Come to that, can they be wired to Scotland?]

I'm 'a little into African music'. Don't see why others should not be 'a little into jazz'. British art centres/concert halls increasingly run programmes that broadly mix and match genres in the knowledge that someone who comes for a salsa band might also like a blues or a folk or a jazz band. I suspect there are many people who enjoy music in that way - a dash of this, a dash of that but not caring to commit. I see no problem with that except when you get the occasional loudmouth who pronounces to his companions, claiming expertise where he clearly has a limited experience (it's always a he, immaculately dressed and attached to a designer girlfriend (envious, moi?). It's those of us who go for total immersion who are a bit odd.

Given the choice between a Mosaic and lunch at the Maze I'd go for the latter. In fact I recently was given exactly that choice and that's exactly what I did. Uh, I'm sure your cafe is nice too. I can cook for myself far cheaper. I really do penny pinch on meals out (when I was a kid we always brought sandwiches on days out!) unless its a social thing. A colleague of mine once had her friends categorised as 'musos', 'filmos' and 'foodies'. I know where I fall (but what happened to 'reados').

I'm sure the same was true of many who went to Woodstock...or Newport ten years earlier! Most of my friends in the 70s thought I took my musical interests way over the border of obsession. I recall them instantly re-steering the conversation if it got close to music, knowing I'd go off on one. It's always hard to make these generational comparisons. Older generations usually assume that younger ones are more frivolous. Given how out of sympathy I am with most of the music young adults listen to I find it hard to make judgements on how genuine their enthusiasm is. I get the impression that most the young adults I know are genuinely enthused and moved by the music they go to see or buy as recordings. Perhaps they don't approach it with the same 'gravitas' that was common 40 years ago (I doubt if many worry if it is 'art' or not). I'd say that was partly a result of the demolition job done in the late-70s where anything that dared to be more than pure pleasure or 'street' connected was laughed out of court as pretentious.

He did a really interesting clarinet duo concert with Louis Sclavis at Bath a few years back. The one I saw that blew my socks off was with a quartet including Hamid Drake at Cheltenham. One of the finest live gigs I've been to (matched the night before by a blistering John Surman quartet concert).

Rumour has it that David Murray is about to reissue his entire catalogue in one huge boxed set with free used reed included with every numbered set. No complaining, now. (I like David Murray - lots of variety in what he does. But if I thought I was part of a 'cognoscenti' I'd resign immediately).

Still exploring (new performers (to me), new genres etc). I love that moment when something new clicks and a whole new field opens out. Given that a recording these days costs the same as an inexpensive meal in a standard cafe or a cinema ticket I don't feel any guilt. You can listen to a recording again without paying again (unless you insist on buying the deluxe version in a special edition gold-plated box). I do enjoy hearing new and up-and-coming performers. I've never been hung up on the old masters thing. I play music constantly and very rarely sit and listen to it with total concentration. Still thrills me, even if I probably have precious little intellectual appreciation of it (maybe for me music is more like a train journey through a wonderful landscape rather than an hour spent contemplating a single tree). I hardly ever get rid of music I've bought - I've too many memories of deciding I've gone off a genre only to find renewed interest later down the line. I'm probably a typical child of the post-war consumer culture - programmed to look forward to the next 'new' before I've even begun to digest the last 'new'. So I voted 2!

I started in 1970 with a record player that looked something like this: Portable so I could move it from room to room. Bought with my first wages in my first part time job washing dishes. It drove me mad as it randomly skipped so I sellotaped a penny to the cartridge!!!! I have LPs that still have the aural evidence. On arriving at university (1973) I'd had enough but had little money - I bought a cheap 'stereo'. It too needed the penny treatment. In late 1974, after having a well paid summer job, I bought a Garrad deck (without case) and got a friend to rip out the stereo deck and replace it. This Frankenstein's monster got me through university. A good summer job in '76 got me a reasonable amp which improved the sound...but the Frankenstein fell apart on the train journey to start my teaching course in Exeter. Fortunately I had enough summer money to buy a Pioneer deck which was my first proper deck. When I started real work in '78 I bought some Wharfdale speakers and, a bit later, replaced the Pioneer with a Rega Planer (which drove me nuts for 18 months as everything seemed to be affected by terrible wow....turned out to be the cartridge I'd just moved from the Pioneer...all very Heath Robinson!). That particular tale might explain why I am not a vinyl nostalgic. All I remember is skipping discs, inner groove distortion, flutter and wow and rice krispies. My first CD player arriving in 1985 marked the start of comfortable listening! How I envy the students of today who can carry it all in their pockets and never have to worry about the balance of a tone arm and the effect it might have on the discs!

A subdivision of Columbus-ia, I believe.