Larry Kart

did you? You can be counted on.

Never said that his death had to do with the "other" news item. Just pointing out something that should should REALLY be peeved about. As usual, I see that some others here are all too eager to fall in line and brown-nose their way into the heart of the famous jazz producer. Credibiliity, real or imagined, has nothing to do with the fact that you choose to focus your energies on that instead of what is really the unfortunate travesty -- the death of a nation. Fame, or lack thereof, has no bearing on that. Couldn't agree more. Slurp! Pretty sad if this is the best you can come up with to justify your initial post, which had to do with your feelings and had nothing to do with this thread. What do you know? I pointed out my feelings about the initial "react to me" post. It's really quite simple: should one be more outraged that a jazz figure is unknown and unrecognized and goes unmourned when he passes, or that people (NRA, militia, militants, and other gun lovers) remain silent on a more prevalent problem in this country? What's pretty sad is that YOU don't get that. Why must only thing at a time get one's goat, and why must those those things be ranked in some inflexibly "proper" moral order? If, say, I'm disturbed by the behavior of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, must I be counted immoral, insensitive, what have you if I don't in the same breath speak out about the need for gun control in the U.S.? Right, I forget -- Carthage delenda est. Perspective and relativity are everything. To be upset by the perceived silence over the death of one's friend is understandable. However, to be upset over the silence and unwillingness to bend from a group of people who carry more political clout than deserved in this country takes precedence. That's the silence which not only upsets the families of the victims in this case, but one that should upset each and every one of us who reside in America. As a father of two teenagers who happen to attend schools not 50 miles from where said incident took place, I am frightened not only for my children, but also for the direction this country has taken. Perhaps I was a little heavy handed, and for that I apologize, but hopefully you and others here now see my point. But why must you link the contextual acts of speech or silence on the one topic (the one that was under discussion here) to contextual acts of speech or silence on the other topic -- and do so in a holier than thou, blaming manner? Further, you have no reason I can see to believe that anyone who has contributed to this thread is any less disturbed by what happened in Newtown and what is happening and not happening in its aftermath than you are -- unless, that is, you are of the school that holds that one must say the equivalent of Carthage delenda est every time one opens one's mouth in public.

Never said that his death had to do with the "other" news item. Just pointing out something that should should REALLY be peeved about. As usual, I see that some others here are all too eager to fall in line and brown-nose their way into the heart of the famous jazz producer. Credibiliity, real or imagined, has nothing to do with the fact that you choose to focus your energies on that instead of what is really the unfortunate travesty -- the death of a nation. Fame, or lack thereof, has no bearing on that. Couldn't agree more. Slurp! Pretty sad if this is the best you can come up with to justify your initial post, which had to do with your feelings and had nothing to do with this thread. What do you know? I pointed out my feelings about the initial "react to me" post. It's really quite simple: should one be more outraged that a jazz figure is unknown and unrecognized and goes unmourned when he passes, or that people (NRA, militia, militants, and other gun lovers) remain silent on a more prevalent problem in this country? What's pretty sad is that YOU don't get that. Why must only thing at a time get one's goat, and why must those those things be ranked in some inflexibly "proper" moral order? If, say, I'm disturbed by the behavior of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, must I be counted immoral, insensitive, what have you if I don't in the same breath speak out about the need for gun control in the U.S.? Right, I forget -- Carthage delenda est.

My mother was a lefty, but in those days (she was born in 1912) the Chicago public schools changed lefties to righties and taught everyone the Palmer method of penmanship. She did have nice handwriting.

Best to all.

FWIW: Robert Edward Brookmeyer was born on December 19, 1929, in Kansas City, ... Brookmeyer died on December 15, 2011, four days short of his 82nd birthday.

No -- probably because as a lefty I'm more than a bit left-handed as a typist, and I find that typing calls for more precise movements than moving the mouse does.

Me, too, for the most part. Write lefty, throw lefty, etc., etc., but bat and swing a golf club righty.

Again -- it is against forum rules to link to bootlegs. 7) We do not allow sharing, trading, or linking copyrighted material that is being offered illegally, including bootlegs.

The initial post is from 2007, when it still hadn't been said that many times. The article is available here: http://usatoday30.us...036564388_x.htm OK

As has been said many times, posting entire copyrighted articles (rather than a brief indication of what they're about, plus a link to the article) is a violation of forum rule #9.

Happy Birthday to one of nature's noblemen. :party:

FWIW, "disinterested" and "uninterested" are two similar sounding but very different words. The former means that one "doesn't have an interest in," as in one "is impartial, is not backing a particular side/favoring a particular outcome." The latter means one "isn't interested in" something, as in one "doesn't care about it." Baseball umpires/football referees/judges, etc. should be disinterested parties, but they certainly should not be uninterested in what's going on in front of them.

I'm thoroughly confused now, but what else is new? I apologize to Brownie and Hans. Peace.

Looking back, I see that Hans' message to me about your query to him (not your message to me) did say "Brownie wants this thread deleted," not this post. Again, sorry for the mixup.

I thought that your message to me meant that you wanted the thread eliminated, not just the post. Sorry.

'Tain't the pointless superlatives, it's the pretentious trot Papsrus so neatly parodied. Now, if you want pointless superlatives AND pretension, together with unerringly misplaced puctuation, read some sleeve notes by Dzondria LaIsaac (perhaps a name assumed by Don Robey, for whose labels (Duke, Peacock, Songbird et al) LaIsaac wrote notes on gospel and R&B albums). Those notes are works of real genius. MG Ah, yes -- I remember her contributions to some Bobby Blue Bland albums. Yes, indeed. How do you know Dzondria was a woman? Was she a real person? Did you meet her at the National Association of Music Writers of America, or some such gig? MG Just a guess. Dzondria doesn't sound like a guy's name, though as you suggest she/he/it could have been someone's invention.

Not to be missed is the recorded-in-England Jazz Icons Art Farmer DVD with LaRoca, Jim Hall, and Steve Swallow, where you get to see LaRoca as well as hear him (everyone is in fine form). Only drawback, as a drummer friend pointed out, is that LaRoca is playing a rented set of drums, not his own kit.

Excerpt from something I wrote about Vaughan, though I wouldn't give her use of vibrato a blanket endorsement: In the chapter [Martin] Williams devoted to Vaughan in his book The Jazz Tradition, he pointed out that it is on Great Songs From Hit Shows that “all her resources began to come together and a great artist emerged.” Those resources, he explained, included “an exceptional range (roughly of soprano through baritone), exceptional body, volume, a variety of vocal textures, and superb and highly personal vocal control.... When she first discovered her vibrato, she indulged it. But it has become a discreet ornament ...of unusually flexible size, shape, and duration.” All true, but perhaps more needs to be said about Vaughan’s vibrato, which to my mind is not an “ornament,” no matter how discreetly it is used, but a resource that, for Vaughan, may be the most fundamental of all.... On Great Songs From Hit Shows she swings harder and more freely on the ballads than she does on all but one of the medium- to up-tempo tracks, where she is accompanied by a brass-and-reeds big band or a brass-and-reeds-plus-strings ensemble. In part that’s because most of the big-band tracks have a rather mechanical, neo-Lunceford feel to them. But the key reason the best ballad tracks here are so rhythmically compelling is that Vaughan’s sense of swing begins in her sound. That is, her shadings of vibrato, volume, and timbre are also rhythmic events (rhythm, after all, being a facet of vibration)--to the point where the degree of rhythmic activity within a given Vaughan note (especially at slowish tempos) can be as intense, and as precisely controlled, as that of any of her note-to-note rhythmic relationships. And one notices that so much here because, as the occasionally very sugary strings swirl around her and flutes are left hanging from the chandeliers, control of the rhythmic flow is left almost entirely in Vaughan’s hands. Of course a taste for imperceptibly shading tone-color events into rhythmic ones is not unique to Vaughan; Debussy’s music, for one, is unthinkable without it, as is, for that matter, Johnny Hodges’s and Johnny Dodds’s. But Vaughan’s overtone-rich timbre, the way it and her vibrato interact, and the seemingly spontaneous control she has over every aspect of all this are unique. As Gunther Schuller put it, Vaughan doesn’t have one voice but voices, while her vibrato is a “compositional, structural...element.” Just listen to Vaughan in full flight--say, at the very beginning of “You’re My Everything.” In the six seconds and five notes that it takes her to sing the title phrase, cruising out on the booming lushness she gives to “thing,” it’s virtually impossible to sort out whether, at any point, it is rhythmic needs that are shaping Vaughan’s timbral colorations or vice versa--and that is as it should be. In fact, one way to describe Vaughan’s timbre cum vibrato, inside-the-note rhythmic shapes would be to say that she has drums in her voice--perhaps Elvin Jones’s.

Sent

That reminds me of Ravel's oft-quoted remark, along the lines of: 'I wish people would not interpret my work; it suffices merely to play it', which I like very much. MG Yes, but Ravel's music bears little resemblance to Rachmaninoff's when it comes to the need/desirability of projecting emotion. Also, IIRC, Rach the pianist's own way with his concerti in particular changed considerably over the course of time; only in his late recordings of them did he adopt the approach that some feel is "calculated, cold and mannered."

By the same token, the band that played Manny Albam's charts for his West Side Story album...not real crazy about the charts or the solos, but I don't know that I've ever heard a better ensemble blend between players on an album of that nature. All the usual suspects are in place, and it's obvious why the were the usual suspects. Has that album ever been available on cd? Yes: http://www.freshsoundrecords.com/west_side_story_&_steves_songs_2_lp_on_1_cd-cd-5248.html

The Jazz Soul of Porgy and Bess / Bill Potts (United Artists UAL 4043) Harry Edison, Art Farmer, Bernie Glow, Marky Markowitz, Charlie Shavers (tp) Jimmy Cleveland, Rod Levitt, Frank Rehak, Earl Swope (tb) Bob Brookmeyer (vtb) Gene Quill, Phil Woods (as) Al Cohn, Zoot Sims (ts) Sol Schlinger (brs) Bill Evans (p) Herbie Powell (g) George Duvivier (b) Charlie Persip (d) Bill Potts (arr, cond) NYC, Jan. 13 & 15, 1959

Some Scott Ross Handel. Sounds darn good to me: More Ross playing Handel:

The actual great working bands, of course, from Ellington of several eras, to Basie of the '30s, Hines of several eras, Lunceford, Herman's First Herd, etc. But for bands that were assembled for a specific occasion, I'm very fond of the one that recorded Bill Potts' "Porgy and Bess" settings in 1959 IIRC. Lots of impressive names there, but did they ever play together. And Charlie Persip!