pryan

I agree with B-3er; my congrats on even trying the stuff, I certainly wouldn't have.

I'd be inclined to get all three eventually, but I guess, in this case, I'd choose the one that's most likely to go OOP first. So, go for the JJ.

I'll write one today, just give me a few minutes to wake up/ get rid of this hangover.

Thanks Lon!

Jim, who are the other people in the Pres picture?

Very cool, RT. What was it like to meet Andrew Hill?

I haven't seen a doc in about three years, but only because the last time I was there I had to wait more than two hours! I know I should get a checkup but it pisses me off having to wait so long. Maybe it's better in the States where people have private medicare (I seriously doubt it, though).

OK, I realize it's no longer June, but I'd like to nominate mgraham333 for his awesome avatar depicting the "main characters" of Lou Donalddon's GOOD GRACIOUS album.

Some "new" stuff I picked up yesterday: Clifford Jordan & John Gilmore: BLOWIN' IN FROM CHICAGO Gerry Mulligan: CONCERT JAZZ BAND, WHAT IS THERE TO SAY? Eric Dolphy: LIVE AT THE FIVE SPOT, vol. 1

Yeah, that catalogue really does take up a large portion of the actual magazine but still, there's some damn good albums in there, especially stuff that's more obscure. The first issue I received (just started my subscription in June) did sort the cds in alphabetical order, while this month's issue is sorted by label. Unlike you (or the you of ten years ago ), I like Cadence for the very fact that they do review albums/have interviews with musicians I otherwise wouldn't have heard of. I actually ordered a couple of discs solely based on the reviews (although that may come back to haunt me) in Cadence.

I only buy a couppla DB's a year, and the crazy price scheme is much worse for the newstand editions at almost $8 canadian, including taxes. Rooster, subscribe to Cadence instead; almost no advertising and far more reviews, although no fancy imagery or color photos.

Isn't it Don Patterson?

What Chuck said.

Thanks all for the interesting comments so far. I'll try to respond to some select comments below. Couw, I don't see how that study could be true, but, hey, I could always just throw that one out there and see what she says; I'd bet she'd just laugh BUT you never know now do you..... B) Dan, I think she dug that I was into jazz, although I don't think she really knows how MUCH I'm into it. I think she'd know "jazz" if she heard it, although that's just an assumption on my part; possibly if she heard Kenny G, she might also consider his stuff "jazz". She's open to lots of different kinds of music, but her passion is Hungarian folk songs, as well as Hungarian dancing (her parents are both Hungarian). So far she makes me go And, I find myself humming tunes (or thinking about titles of tunes) like "I Thought About You" and "I've Got a Crush on You" (I know, that's just lame). B3-er, good points about the innondation of music all around us. The vocal parts seem to be the only thing can immediately identify with (if they don't know something about musical theory) because it's just like speaking, at least in their minds.

So I met this girl recently and we've hit it off pretty good in terms of conversation, related interests, ideologies, etc (and I hope we get some kind of long-term thing happening). BUT, I digress, one thing she said kind of made me chuckle and it was not unlike what BFrank (I think it was him) heard someone say regarding the correlation between "relaxation" and jazz. I told her I was really into jazz and improvised music and she said something like, "Yeah, I can tell you're a jazz kind of person". So I said, "What's the definition of someone who likes jazz"? and she basically said she found me to be "laid-back" and "relaxed" kind of guy and hence, that corresponds, in her mind at least, to jazz. So, I'll leave the floor open to your opinions surrounding this perceived relationship between relaxation and improvised music.

I'm not really into the upgrading thing either; I'd rather hear stuff that I've never heard before instead of "re-buying". BUT, I'll probably still pick up BLUE TRAIN, because I have the mid-eighties version that doesn't have any alternates. Hopefully the upgrade will be worth it sonically as well. I didn't vote because I only have the last two (from the list) on cd, but I guess I'm most intrigued by the Horace Silver trio set. BTW, I didn't think these were coming out so soon; it seems odd that BN would have two RVG "batches" in back-to-back months, followed by the October Conns. But, hey, I don't think any of us are complaining.

I've really neglected Mulligan completely, but I'm gonna change that today and pick up one of those Concert Jazz Band Lps (if those originals - I think - are still hanging around in one of my local haunts).

It was close between the Powell and ADAM'S APPLE, but I chose the latter because I've held off buying the "crappy remaster" for so long and I've heard really good comments in general about that session.

I agree; now to decide which Mosaic to get. I'm thinking either the Gerald Wilson or Tristano/Konitz/Marsh. Probably the latter cuz it will probably go OOP first. What do you guys think?

I chose the Hill also, mainly because it's never been issued, but also because there's some damn fine musicians on it. I, like RT, am particularly intrigued by the two-trumpet combination of Shaw and Reece. However, it's hard to say how solo space they get in a larger ensemble setting. Still, you'd think at least Woody would get a bunch of solos. Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

This is great news, indeed. If the rapport between Max and Bird is ANYTHING like it is on the club date from the WASHINGTON CONCERTS disc put out by Blue Note a couple of years back, I'm giddy with anticipation. And it sounds, according to Jim's description, even better.

I'd like to echo Dave's comments. A release obviously well-researched and commendable both in its musical and historical content. Love the first broadcast with the Dick Twardzik trio!

About a week ago I finished reading a book called Guns, Germs, and Steel, a book about the human world history of the last 13000 years. It won the Pulitzer Prize a few years back and is quite readable even for those who aren't history buffs. It seeks mainly to discredit racist historical theories surrounding colonization, conquer, and why certain societies are more "advanced" than others. The title of the book certainly points to the most of the major factors, but suprisingly, a lot of how people live has to do with geographic location and topography. A most interesting read and is highly recommended. I just started a book entitled, A Short History of Africa because I was intrigued by the last chapter of the other book (Guns, etc), which dealt with African history, and I hardly know anything about the continent. Hopefully it's a good starting point.

Glad to see your trip went OK, Chuck. Dammit, you had to change your avatar back to that AEC box again. Now I'm tempted even more! Within the next few months I'll get it for sure.

I read this one a few months back and have read a bunch of other books since then, so it's (Lester Leaps In) not really fresh in my memory. I did enjoy the book a lot, however, but yeah, Brad, I do seem to remember the author making numerous "leaps", if you will, in his reasoning/conclusions. Still, I'm glad I read the book.