skeith

ON further reflection : I am thinking that while his comments in reply to my negative feedback I think show this guy to be pretty bad and my comments in my negative feedback and in reply to his negative feedback would make it clear that this guy is an ass - the problem is that the comments disappear after 90 days, right? So then I am merely left with a feed back history that shows one negative for me but no one is able to look at the comments to see how unreasonable the other guy was. Again I am inclined to leave it, but this is making me think twice. Everyone who I have asked in person about this says go for withdrawal - but as I said I think this guy deserves the negative and I am pissed about what he put me through. I suppose the issue is my desire to keep my 100% rating versus my responsibility to let other ebayers know about this guy. Any further thoughts are appreciated.

thanks guys for all of your great advice. I think I am still inclined to let things stand.

A few weeks ago, I finally got my refund from this jerk. But I decided to give him negative feedback in which I stated that it took the guy 5 weeks to issue a refund promised in "a few days" and that I lost all trust in this seller. He in turn gives me negative feedback saying that I am too impatient as a buyer and a "liar" and that the first refund check was "lost in the mail" Now I get a message from ebay saying the jerk wants to mutually withdraw the feedback. I am not inclined to do so because nothing I said was untrue. Of course his is all lies. I have only operated as a buyer on ebay and have made few transactions, his negative rating of me dropped me down to 87%. The seller has thousands of sales. Again I am not inclined to withdraw because what I said is true, but will this hurt me more than it does him? Any opinions appreciated.

anyone have any comments on these releases: music and sound quality?

These are Japanese mini lps 1)The Charlie Parker Story CY-78990 2)The Genius of Charlie Parker CY-78991 3The Immortal Charlie Parker CY-78983 4)Charlie Parker Memorial Vol 1 CY-78982 5)Charlie Parker Memorial Vol 2 CY-78984 One big caveat, although these are mini-lps they were cut very slightly and separated front to back to fit inside jewel boxes and that is how they are now (in jewel boxes), so some minimal artwork was lost (about 1/4 inch) from the front covers - although pretty much none of the back covers with the song titles and info is gone. I also have the obi strips. The cds themselves are in excellent condition with no scratches or fingerprints. $10.00 each.

Are you going aloc? I may be in town for that gig.

I picked it up because you guys recommended it. So far listened to the live tracks and they are fine - not earth shatteringi - sort of what I expected. One bit of confusion - the liner notes say that the live tracks weren't issued because Tony's cymbals weren't miked - but I am hearing his cymbals - what am I missing?

Best wishes to you Lon and your wife.

Another great loss

What's the consensus on this one? Doesn't seem to be generating much excitement.

what can be said but the obvious - one of the greatest directors of all time or that there ever will be. what a loss.

I paid via postal money order - so I get no help from credit card.

Thanks everyone for your very helpful suggestions!! I may not be able to use the dispute process because I think it has a 60 day time limit from date of sale, doesn't it. the problem is that I made this purchase with the understanding that it would ship within 30 days and I waited about 45 days before asking for a refund , and then I was told the check was on the way and before I knew it 60 days were up. Am I out of luck there? Although it has not been 60 days since I requested a refund. I think I have 90m days to give feedback however. Now the guy is telling me to call him on the phone.. is that a good idea?

After viewing the video - I have to say that although Jarrett said it in rather over the top fashion I basically agree with him. IT is not clear whether they had already started playing or not, but am I the only one who gets annoyed at concerts by photographers constantly making the clicking noises with the lens shutters and the lights flashing. What about the photographers that think it is ok to get between you the spectator and the band so that they can get the shot. Anyone got the Neil Young at Massey Hall? He says exactly the same thing except no four letter words. I have seen other jazz artists at concerts saying basically the same thing. I think Jarrett's statement while overly aggressive protects the audience.

I ordered some baseball cards on Ebay and the offer said if the cards do not ship in 30 days you can get a full refund. I waited 45 days and the cards were not shipped so then asked for my refund. The seller said it would arrive in " a few days". After about a week when I did not get the refund, I emailed the seller again who said he was waiting for my address. I found this strange since I supplied all of that when I made the order. So I gave it again and two weeks later he says will send it soon. I still did not get it. Now he says it was mailed last week (more than 7 days ago) and perhaps it is lost in the mail. It has been 1 month since I first requested the refund. I have now told the seller I plan to basically give him the most negative feedback and his response was don't threaten him or else he will do the same to me and that I will not be happy with the consequences. MY question is: should I go ahead and give the negative feedback or if I do that will it lessen or increase my chances of getting my refund? Any advice is much appreciated.

You guys may be missing the point. The lady asked "where is the BEST place to catch a cab" As someone who spends a majority of his waking hours in Manhattan and knows how often it is difficult to find an unoccupied cab at times, this seems to me a totally legit question and one I have asked myself. THe club where they were playing is open air and they were practically on the sidewalk. that said, she was clueless in the sense that she was interrupting a performance, but that's no different from what most New Yorker do with their cellphones etc, while attending performances. THe musicians should have just said "go away"

My best wishes and hope you have a great one

Just to be precise, the literal translation in spanish of "me gustas" is "you please me" the verb "gustas" is conjugated to relate to "you" the "me" refers to the speaker ... therefore you get "you please me" for a literal translation, but a less clunky translation would be "I like you". "como" is not translated into "as" but rather sort of "how " or "how much"

If anybody can translate better, please do. But I think that'll gets the point across until something better comes along. FWIW, I am in the habbit of requesting this song from local "mariachis" in the various Mexican restaurants I frequent. Very few of them know of the song, and of those who do, so far I've only found one or two that could actually play it. None could sing it. It's an old song, and quite popular among a certain age group, but definitely "of yesteryear". But damn is it gorgeous! I think the last line is better translated as "how much I love you" or " I love you very much"- there is nothing reciprocal in that last line.

Nat or Joe? I was referring to Canyon Lady.

Yeah, but a very talented one! Come on, if we refused to pay attention to artists who fall into this category, we would be depriving ourselves of a lot a great art. I am a big fan of Jarrett's but must admit this trio has never moved me much.

In my opinion, it is not a bad album, it is just that it pales in comparison to so many of his other efforts.

Sonny Stiit and Gene Ammons

how the fuck so, Guy & respectfully, how well do you really know the history of the American record biz? we can name a handful of exceptions-- Dylan's evolution on Columbia, the Ramones on Sire (which had been indie)... & what else? distribution deals do NOT count!!! Prince? fine, keep going. (& don't tell me Duke on Victor or any such hogwash... the assimilation of the record biz into greater pop cult machine is the worst godamn thing that ever happened, then & now. edc knows it, you should know it too. MG's original statement (which you deleted) said: This is quite clearly false. As you stated yourself, Dylan on Columbia and Duke on Victor (and Columbia) are major exceptions. Sticking to jazz, two of the most important jazz innovators in the past half century (perhaps THE MOST IMPORTANT) did much of their most important work for major labels -- John Coltrane on Impulse!, Miles Davis on Columbia. I'm sure we can come up with other, less significant innovative recordings by other artists for major labels. (Was Decca a major label when they recorded the Basie band?) If we're going to talk about rock, besides Dylan (already mentioned) we have the Byrds, the Beach Boys, Santana, the Band, the Velvet Underground, and Frank Zappa. I'm sure there are other examples. Guy Impulse wasn't a major label. In the sixties, the criterion for major label status was that the firm had to own its own distribution network. ABC didn't. I'm not an expert on Davis. The story I heard was that Columbia did Prestige's manufacturing and the boss of the pressing plant told his boss about how many Miles Davis records he was manufacturing, so Columbia hired him. Sounds to me like Prestige did the legwork, Columbia took over a ready made star. Prior to WWII it's quite difficult to tell which were the major labels. From 1926 to 1938, for example, Columbia clearly wasn't. It went bust in 1926, after nearly 2 decades of financial problems during which it had continually had to sell off bits to keep going. It was then acquired by its former UK subsidiary, then sold to an engineering firm called Grisby-Gronow or something like that, then sold to ARC, who closed it down in 1934. It wasn't reopened until CBS bought ARC in 1938, shut down Brunswick and Vocalion and restarted Columbia and OkeH. Nor am I an expert on rock. However, Zappa (and Velvet Underground?) started up on Verve. As for ABC, MGM, the owner of Verve, wasn't a major. Not sure how innovative these other bands you refer to were but in any case, we're talking about black music here. MG Even if Miles was already a star when Columbia signed him, and that's most likely true, Prestige had nothing to do with the major artistic innovations that Miles achieved while with Columbia. That seems to me to be patently obvious to jazz fans who are not experts on Davis. I don't know that I would give Columbia credit for that, either... at that point in his career, my impression is that Miles did WTF Miles wanted to do. My point was to disagree with MG statement that innovation always happens with indie labels and to agree with Guy's example that Miles's work with Columbia was very innovative - I was not giving Columbia the credit although they probably deserve some.

how the fuck so, Guy & respectfully, how well do you really know the history of the American record biz? we can name a handful of exceptions-- Dylan's evolution on Columbia, the Ramones on Sire (which had been indie)... & what else? distribution deals do NOT count!!! Prince? fine, keep going. (& don't tell me Duke on Victor or any such hogwash... the assimilation of the record biz into greater pop cult machine is the worst godamn thing that ever happened, then & now. edc knows it, you should know it too. MG's original statement (which you deleted) said: This is quite clearly false. As you stated yourself, Dylan on Columbia and Duke on Victor (and Columbia) are major exceptions. Sticking to jazz, two of the most important jazz innovators in the past half century (perhaps THE MOST IMPORTANT) did much of their most important work for major labels -- John Coltrane on Impulse!, Miles Davis on Columbia. I'm sure we can come up with other, less significant innovative recordings by other artists for major labels. (Was Decca a major label when they recorded the Basie band?) If we're going to talk about rock, besides Dylan (already mentioned) we have the Byrds, the Beach Boys, Santana, the Band, the Velvet Underground, and Frank Zappa. I'm sure there are other examples. Guy Impulse wasn't a major label. In the sixties, the criterion for major label status was that the firm had to own its own distribution network. ABC didn't. I'm not an expert on Davis. The story I heard was that Columbia did Prestige's manufacturing and the boss of the pressing plant told his boss about how many Miles Davis records he was manufacturing, so Columbia hired him. Sounds to me like Prestige did the legwork, Columbia took over a ready made star. Prior to WWII it's quite difficult to tell which were the major labels. From 1926 to 1938, for example, Columbia clearly wasn't. It went bust in 1926, after nearly 2 decades of financial problems during which it had continually had to sell off bits to keep going. It was then acquired by its former UK subsidiary, then sold to an engineering firm called Grisby-Gronow or something like that, then sold to ARC, who closed it down in 1934. It wasn't reopened until CBS bought ARC in 1938, shut down Brunswick and Vocalion and restarted Columbia and OkeH. Nor am I an expert on rock. However, Zappa (and Velvet Underground?) started up on Verve. As for ABC, MGM, the owner of Verve, wasn't a major. Not sure how innovative these other bands you refer to were but in any case, we're talking about black music here. MG Even if Miles was already a star when Columbia signed him, and that's most likely true, Prestige had nothing to do with the major artistic innovations that Miles achieved while with Columbia. That seems to me to be patently obvious to jazz fans who are not experts on Davis.