Larry Kart

St. Matthew? They're old, but Fritz Lehmann and Klemperer. Be curious who Moms likes. Do like Carmignola and Marcon in the Violin-Harpsichord Sonatas.

Matt Forte of the Bears

I just ran across what may be the most characteristically nutty/grotesque (mostly in a positive sense) Weinberg work I've ever heard, the 18-minute, 5-movement Sonata op. 108 for solo double bass. There's a version on YouTube, but the one on Spotify, from a CPO disc -- played by Nabil Shehata, principal double bassist of the Berlin Philharmonic -- is much superior IMO.

That was the book that turned me into a Fitzgerald fan. Also loved the one about working at the BBC during the Blitz. Both involving personal experience, as you say. The houseboat one, too, but in some respects I found that it bordered on the too painful.

Chuck, have you listened to these podcasts with one of your Koestr-ite predecessors (think I have that chronology right, pls correct if not) Don Kent? http://www.eastriverstringband.com/radioshow/?p=455 http://www.eastriverstringband.com/radioshow/?p=1214 you can listen there, download directly etc. Estes talk & much much more. Don's recent program on St. Louis is by far the best presentation I've ever heard on that city's guitar blues-- http://www.eastriverstringband.com/radioshow/?p=1449 Named my first kid after this btw-- Gladiolus! Not that there's a huge difference in approach, but I prefer John Arpin's "Gladiolus" to Albright's. The latter seems a bit studied to me.

Have Berman's Ives discs and his Ruggles too. He's a good one. Compare his recording on Bridge of Martin Boykan's "Towards the Horizon" (quite a work) with a concert performance by another pianist on YouTube, and you'd hardly think it was the same piece.

I like the way Parker plays Joplin in general, the "lilt" again, but it says on the cover "interpreted and played by Professor John W. (Knocky) Parker," and boy does Parker "interpret," virtually re-writiing every piece. Listen for example to his take on "Euphonic Sounds," which he calls "Euphonic Rag." Parker also eliminates most of Joplin's repeats, thus significantly altering the form of the pieces.

Of the ones I've been able to sample so far on Spotify, I like Guido Neilsen but prefer John Arpin; his measured "lilt" seems just right to me. Only drawbacks to Arpin are that he doesn't bring out what seems to me a crucial figure in one of my favorites "Stop Time Rag" and that he is said to add his own embellishments to Joplin from time to time.

Again, the Pats were the much better team. If a fair-to-middling hitter faced a pitcher like Randy Johnson who happened to be throwing a doctored baseball, the hitter probably would have little more chance than if the ball wasn't doctored. But if it was, say, Derek Jeter in his prime facing Johnson, then the latter's doctoring of the ball might significantly affect the outcome -- in one AB or even an entire series or season. In any case, no attempt to cheat, no problem.

Cheating is an attempt to give one an advantage. If the attempt was made here by the Pats and it proved not to be necessary because other more significant factors were in play -- in particular, that the Pats are a much better team than the Colts, as they are -- that says nothing one way or the other about the reality of the alleged attempt. Also, the outcome of that game was a one-instance case. Was the fact that batter X did not hit a home run in a particular turn at bat proof that he wasn't taking PEDs or that PEDs have no effect on one's performance as a batter?

Nicely done, indeed. In fact, fairly experienced in listening to lots of so-called "modern music" of many kinds though I am, I just had the sort of experience that Jim is talking about. Bought a new CD of piano music by Martin Boykan (Bridge), Donald Berman performing. Dipped in yesterday and couldn't take it in, though I know and admire several previous discs of Boykan's sometimes spiky, "lyrical, yet atonal" (Berman's words) music. I decided to try to pay closer, more focused attention, listen on earphones and start with the first of four shortish pieces that together make up Boykan's "Usurpations," trying to listen with pretty much the "noticing what's being used to replace the silence" mindset that Jim spoke of, kind of lying in wait for the work's structure/language to reveal itself instead of assuming/guessing what it would be. And zip-o-bang, in the act of listening there it was. Further, and this happens a lot, the adventure (so to speak) of discovering what I found there became part of the musical event.

For many years I've had Dick Hyman's set on LP and always found it a fair bit too peppy and just picked up (for a song, thanks be) Richard Zimmerman's clunky complete set, now on Laser Light. Any recommendations for someone who gets it right? My idea of getting it right? I very much admire the playing of Virginia Tichenor (daughter of ragtime pianist-composer and scholar Trebor Tichneor) and Milton Kaye: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/17/obituaries/17kaye.html?_r=0 who did a fine two-LP set for Rudi Blesh on Golden Crest back in the day, but neither Virginia Tichenor's only solo CD nor the Kaye set contain much Joplin (the Kaye is rich with Arthur Marshall pieces, though).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KN7mFpVqzVY&spfreload=10

Glad that you've come to feel this way, but I don't agree with the implicit dis of Quinichette. Yes, he's very close to 1940s Pres but within that intense affinity Lady Q definitely had his own thing IMO. Don't recall ever mistaking either one for the other. Check out Quinichette on "For Basie" with Shad Collins or "For Lady" with Webster Young (see below). And there's a lot more Quinichette of value on record. Yes, it is quite unusual, perhaps even exceptional, for a man to model himself so closely on another player and still be a creative figure in his own right, but that's what I hear.

Take two scoops of (ideally) freshly ground coffee (or however much it takes to brew a good strong cup for you) cover the ground coffee with water in a one cup metal measuring cup or pot and boil the coffee-water mixture on the stove, making sure that it doesn't boil over. Meanwhile, place a fine-enough mesh strainer over your coffee mug and when the coffee-water mixture begins to boil, pour it through the strainer, leaving the grounds in the strainer as the coffee essence drips into the mug. Then pour enough milk to fill the mug through the grounds that are still in the strainer, remove the strainer, dump out the grounds, and put the mug filled with the coffee essence/milk combo in a microwave and heat to taste -- about 1:40 does the trick with good-sized coffee mug for me. The results are like rocket fuel. Of course, all this only makes sense if you like a coffee-milk mixture. A sprinkle of cinnamon in the bottom of the mug before you begin can be nice. If all this sounds complicated, I do it rapidly and often more or less in my sleep. The idea of boiling coffee, I've been told, is regarded as barbaric by the French, but this method was taught to me by a talented female violinist who spent a good many years in Finland. Interesting, but maybe this is Nordic coffee, as Finland isn't part of Scandinavia. Nordic then.

Let us know if you need more on this go round.

OTOH, thoughts on John Fox from veteran pro football commentator Hub Arkush: "If Fox couldn’t win a playoff game with Peyton Manning, Demaryius Thomas, Emmanuel Sanders, Wes Welker, Julius Thomas, Ryan Clady, DeMarcus Ware, Von Miller, Aqib Talib and so much more, what makes him the right guy for the Bears? "The answer to why Fox is out in Denver is simple. The Broncos broke the bank this year to give him everything he needed to win a title, they appeared to be the most complete and star-laden team in the NFL from Day 1 of the season and yet, after being embarrassed in the Super Bowl last year, they couldn’t win a playoff game at home against a flawed Indianapolis club."

Elway story I heard on the radio today. Some ways back, he installed in his basement at considerable expense an elaborate replica 19th Century Wild West barroom that was built around a gorgeous vintage pool table -- pool being a sport at which Elway considered himself an expert with some justification; since the replica barroom was installed, he had never lost a game there. Then one night QB Bubby Brister dropped by for a visit, pool was played and Brister prevailed. The next morning Elway had the pool table and the whole barroom removed from his house. Print source: http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/03/sports/sp-33599/2

Some comments from various would-be knowledgable folks: About the ‘’60s Nocturnes: Yet it must also be stated that while Rubinstein's approach makes this an excellent reference set, I would not want to be without the more imaginative Nocturnes he recorded in the 1930s, which I frankly turn to more often for enjoyment. Another issue is that Rubinstein, whose hearing was failing by the 1960s, almost never plays a true pianissimo. There's a sense of adventure and discovery [in his ’27-’38 EMI Chopin recordings] that is somewhat absent in Rubinstein's later recordings. The Barcarolle, Op 60 was recorded at Rubinstein's second recording session, in 1928. This performance is closer in tempo and phrasing to the manner in which Rubinstein played the piece "live" than his later studio recordings. Indeed, there is an erotic impulse in this version which is largely missing from his 1957 and 1962 remakes. Rubinstein made three complete versions of Chopin's Scherzos, with this first set dating from 1932. All three versions offer testament to the pianist's solid technique, innate virtuosity, and natural sense of musical architecture. Tempos are breathtakingly faster in these earlier performances than in the later ones. If the nocturnes lull you into a sense of repose, the Polonaises will get you fired up. It is interesting to compare this 1934-1935 cycle with the more renowned stereo version from 1964. While the later cycle emphasizes a rather dignified approach, the earlier version is more spontaneous. The brio, freedom, and swagger of this set simply have to be heard to be believed. True, Rubinstein, like a runaway train, comes dangerously close to running off the rails at times. But the musical rewards the pianist reaps are well worth the technical risks, and the more reflective Polonaises are played with simple, unforced poetry. Rubinstein's innate understanding of the structural underpinnings of Chopin's music comes through in the Polonaise-Fantasie, Op. 61, a notoriously difficult work to hold together. On balance, I feel the 1950s "middle-period" set most effectively balances virtuosity with gravitas. There are actually three periods of Rubinstein Chopin available now, thanks to the new box set, separate components of which will be made available in the new year. His early and middle Chopin recordings are in mono, the late ones in stereo. He recorded the complete Mazurkas, Nocturnes, Scherzos, Polonaises and Concertos three times, the Waltzes twice, the Sonata 2 twice, Sonata 3 once (stereo), Ballades once (stereo), and Preludes once (mono). He made several recordings of some smaller "stand alone" items as well, like the Barcarolle. Broadly, the earlier ones are more imaginative, bold, freewheeling; the later ones are not only slower but progressively more cautious and "subtle" -- some characterize the autumnal recordings as bland by comparison, others find them "magisterial," and point to the superior audio quality, which gives us a better idea of what his tone sounded like. The middle period, from the late forties and early fifties, combines elements of both of those around it, and is worth hearing for admirers of either; these performances are now making its first appearance on CD. I find them a shade more sober and contemplative than their predecessors, technically more impressive than their successors. Rubinstein in transition. As for me, I feel that Brahms was the composer with whom Rubinstein had the greatest affinity (I think AR said as much). His Chopin certainly doesn't leave me cold, but fairly often there's more of an element of reserve than I would prefer.

Scott: I've since been reliably informed that Elway is a difficult-to-work-for near psychopath. So Fox just might be close to solid gold.

Things obviously went pretty well there last year since they made a Superbowl appearance. The problem is Peyton Manning is 38 y.o., and his career is essentially over. Now that Fox has been jettisoned, that will perhaps seal the deal for Manning. Unless Gace stays and takes over the reins. The last thing Peyton would have any patience for at this point in his career is learning a new playbook. And I believe Thomas and Thomas are both FAs this offseason. Losing either would be a pretty huge blow to that offense. From the Denver Post: "[John] Elway had issues over the past four years with the way the team was prepared and its mental toughness. "It was particularly disturbing the way the team performed coming off a playoff bye, with two stunning home playoff losses as heavy favorites in the past three years." Can't be sure, but I'll bet there are some further stories to be told here, on all sides. The Post story adds that Fox wanted more say over draft choices and roster moves than he had had and that he wasn't going to get it. Further, from veteran sportswriter Woody Paige: "The players loved playing for Fox, but he wasn't a forceful enough coach with players when it was necessary."

Don't have the details in front of me right now, but IIRC Arthur Rubinstein's approach to Chopin changed a good deal from the '30s, to the '40s, to the 50s, and 60s, and on.

To this relative novice, Fox does look good on a sideline, but something for sure didn't go right in Denver this year and maybe before that there as well.

Now that's clever and funny.

Today's NY times obit says that the film adaptation of Stone's novel "Dog Soldiers," "Who'll Stop the Rain?" was "mostly forgettable." Couldn't disagree more.