Christiern

This one is my favorite, so far.

You appear to have problems, If it's any consolation, you also have my sympathy.

Sputtered not so big wheel today: "For someone who's 79 years old, sometimes you need to grow the fuck up, man." I ask a perfectly natural question and you reveal your bigotry. I wonder who has to grow up?

Why re you such a staunch defender of FB, BW?

I agree that alternate takes, if we must have them, should be a separate set of tracks, a coda of sorts. To me, recording sessions are generally a bore, especially if I am present as a no-function visitor. I find myself anxious to get on with it and hear the next selection. Being there as the producer/A&R man is quite a different matter. As for the which is which aspect, I see absolutely no excuse for including alternates that aren't readily identifiable as a different performance. That sort of thing is for completists like Schaap, who won't omit a single cough or the squeak of a chair. We all know how ludicrous his Benedetti tapes boxed set was—the Mosaic people should have put their foot down and not allowed him to include, say, a 23 second track of nothing, compounding the idiocy by such identification as "possibly Lover Man." Keep the superfluous stuff out and charge the customer less, I say. Of course, the music is truly secondary to the bottom line, which may be why the recording industry is in such bad shape and—I suspect—on its way out. Need proof? Run a recent Grammy show.

When I found—tucked away at Columbia—a 16" acetate of the session that included Benny Goodman's Breakfast Feud, there were several successive takes on which Charlie Christian's solo was in each case different. It was a great opportunity to study how he progressed, so I decided to splice them all together in the order of performance. It made sense, because there is not a lot of Christian around and his improvisations were an influence on many. Larry Hiller, my engineer at Columbia, did an excellent job of making it seamless, and there was not a single complaint, that I know of. I also used an alternate take of a Billie Holiday side (from another acetate), because Lester took an extra chorus. This take was rejected only because it was too long for a 10" 78rpm side.

And, perhaps, the not so stable take that demarcation line to a level of absurdity?

So now two people I never before heard of have died—what is this world coming to? Conrad, do you suspect a Democrat? Some damn Liberal? Keith Olberman? The French UN delegation? Nancy Pelosi? Inquiring minds want to know.

Perhaps, but it ain't Nessasserily so.

One session was measured as either 15 minutes of usable sound or 3 hours of studio time. Anything beyond that called for another session. Most jazz albums were reported as two sessions, even if they went over. The musicians knew this, but most just wanted to see a good album out there. So, if there was 30 minutes of issue-worthy music and the album featured 40 to 45 minutes (as many of them did), chances are that the artists only received money for the 30 minutes. Then, when alternates were issued as "bonus tracks" on CD, the rip off was compounded. Quite apart from the monetary short-changing, many artists did not really want the public to hear their slip-ups or uninspired work, so there is also an ethical consideration to be weighed. Right, Chuck?

As you listen to alternate takes, bear two things in mind: 1. They were originally rejected by the artist or producer, usually for good reason. 2. The artists who worked for scale (which is most of them, including leaders) did not get paid for alternate takes.

If you still think Mother Goose runs FaceBook, check this out. That other sites are equally devious does not mitigate what FB is doing.

I would report this to the authorities

The Washington Square Outdoor Art Exhibit's website is an .org Lieberman's web site is a.gov So much for that, Moosie. -_-

Is this pop-up a scam? Sure looks like it to me. BTW It popped up when I accessed a jazz blog's global location map.

Hmmmm, let me see....I think I'll create an identical thread. That way, my post count will move even faster, and they'll never notice.

Thank you, Tom So, once again, I went through the step by step instructions Bill Barton posted. Now I will wait the required 14 day and check some time after that. Thanks to you, too, Bill.

An unfortunate situation, but almost certainly an oversight rather than a deliberate exclusion of "Palestine" as a location. (As weird as Mark Zuckerberg is, are we really so paranoid as to think the guy wants to insert himself into the Middle East conflict too?) I suspect one of the following happened: 1) A Facebook engineer built a new database of locations himself or herself and forgot to include several locations in there, or they neglected to vet their country data thoroughly with a product manager who might have caught the error. 2) Facebook imported a location database from a third party, and didn't realize that it had inconsistencies with what they'd used before. This wiped out some options that were previously selectable. Sloppy? Yes. Deliberately excluding the OT? No. These kinds of stupid little data bugs happen constantly on the internets. The question is: whose assumption may have a basis in fact?

I certainly hope that what Facebook is doing can rightly be termed "unusual." If we all just shrugged, as some here do, I hate to think what the FB'ers might do.

Wilson and Keppel were head of the game... Check them out andhere

I think you are being naïve, BW.

Not slightly creepy, BW

I recall Everest going as far as to Xerox and paste the original liner notes of the album they were pirating. Somehow, Gloria Lynn and Monk )separately= come to mind. Now, back to honoring piracy and bootleggery....

Thank you for the correction, 7/4. Pluto, indeed.