Brad

I'd have to disagree with you about being a corrupt system. I've been on there for six years now and that's not my experience at all. I do think people participate in it and when dealing with sellers I look not to see if they're in the 95% range (tha's bad) but in the low 99s or high 98s. If they are, I try to avoid them. I think it's a self policing system and I think it works reasonably well. As a rule, I'm very loath to give out negative feedbacks. It's just something I don't like to do. I've done it but probably not more than 3 or 4 times in six years.

I hate to get legal on this but the basis of your argument is that Hal had promised him to refund his money and that therefore he couldn't have bargained the buyer's money back for the promise not to leave negative feedback. However, any deal or promise to be binding must have consideration. If there's no consideration, it's not enforceable. If Hal had said, I'm not going to refund your money, the buyer would have no recourse. It wasn't part of the original transaction and Hal's offer to refund the money was just a mere promise or offer on his part. For Hal's offer to become binding, the buyer would have to have offered something in return, either positive or negative. To be binding, there must be something flowing both ways. It doesn't look to me like the buyer did. Therefore Hal's initial offer is not enforceable. However, when Hal made his offer with the requirement that the buyer not leave a negative feedback and the buyer agreed, then you have an agreement because there was consideration. Consideration can be both a positive act (e.g. paying money) or surrendering a right that you would otherwise have (e.g. agreeing not to leave feedback). Regarding leaving feedback. As a seller, I always give feedback. I feel it's my obligation and a courtesy to do so. However, as a buyer, I won't leave it until the seller does. If he doesn't have the courtesy, why should I? I recently bought a cd and the seller said that he doesn't leave feedback unless I ask him to. My feeling about that? Screw you. It's your obligation to leave it and I shouldn't have to remind you to do so.

How is that extortion. That's called making a deal. You want your money back, here's the deal, etc. He doesn't have to agree to it. It's not blackmail or whatever. He just won't get his money back.

99.99 % is not strong enough. I'll go for the whole 100%.

Tom's list doesn't really any sense because they all belong in the Hall of Fame. Perhaps we should turn the question around and say who is the most influential person in the history of jazz (or perhaps three people)? That's a very easy answer: it's Pops. Again, if you choose the top 3, it's also very easy, Pops, Ellington and Bird. After that it gets harder.

I'm not as crazy about Some like it Modern as their earlier BN stuff and can't comment on the other cds but it could also have something to do with Alfred Lion's influence since he was always looking for a certain sound out of his artists. This is probably a question for Dan Gould who has more of an extensive collection than I do as I only have the pre 66 material.

I've got three of the sessions that are on this set and while they're nice, I'll have to be the one dissenting voice here and let this one go. I'll get probably get slammed for this but these guys overall don't excite me that much.

I'd also have to agree with the Moose. Once you offered the refund, which you didn't have to do, and he accepted, that was it; you have to follow through. Dan also raises a good point in his last post. With ebay (and I sell things there to support my jazz habit), it's not worth getting hassled or a negative feedback. I try to go out of my way to make sure I keep my perfect feedback. If a buyer is unhappy (rarely happens), I offer a full refund. Better to follow the high road, as Mark says.

I'll upgrade if I have a circa '87 BN, either with a TOCJ or an RVG. Invariably, it sounds better. I just upgraded Cape Verdean Blues. However, if I have the TOCJ I will not. I don't think it'll sound better than that. Sometimes, I'll upgrade the OCJs with a VICJ if the price is right. However, it's not an automatic knee jerk reaction anymore. I didn't do it with Sweet Honey Bee. It's an ok session and didn't feel the need to do it.

David, I'm very sorry to hear about this. She was obviously a very distinguished person and I'm sorry I never had the chance to meet her. Our best to you and your family.

Reinier's comment about McMaster is quite revealing. Capitol probably wants to use him not because any great love for him but because it's cheaper to do so. Sending out masters to Malcolm Addey involves extra expense (shipping, insurance, etc.), which they can avoid with McMaster. Why McMaster is used now makes a whole lot more sense.

That is truly sad and tragic. I recently picked up the magazine after having not read it in a very long time. I was not impressed (not that I think Jazz Times is so hot either). Except for the British magazine, Jazz Review, there seems to be a paucity of good jazz periodicals out there.

What a fucking travesty, man

I'm well on my way to achieving my 12 step before Thursday. I received the following cds today via ebay: Dexter Gordon - A Day in Copenhagen Here Comes Frank Foster Cy Touff - His Octet and Quintet Lem Winchester and the Ramsey Lewis Trio Not to mention that courtesy of Garth, I just bought and received Marshall Stearns's The Story of Jazz. It's like Christmas in March (at my expense )

My 12 step program is to buy at least 12 more CDs before Thursday

This was the correct approach. As a general rule of contract law, when someone makes an offer and you accept it (e.g. his posting and your bid), the terms should be frozen and a seller can only change the material terms (such as shipping) only with the buyer's permission. Otherwise, there never was a deal to which they agreed.

His service is very fast. It even amazes me. I usually get his package in five or six days. I can't recommend him too highly.

I love Bud, ergo my avatar.

It's been a long time since I listened to the Morgan - Shorter set but I remember when I listened the first time to the Chambers-Kelly set that Jimmy Cobb's drum set felt like it was right next to me. The sound was truly impressive.

Reinier, I don't think it's a question of people not believing you or doubting your word (you are a well respected member), it's probably more astonishment that these sets won't be available soon, that's all.

Fair enough. We all have our preferences. I like Wendell also.

"It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing."

I don't have the originals to compare it too but just the other day I listened to the K2 of Everybody Digs Bill Evans and the sound is exquisite. You can really hear down to the deepest levels. I've also just picked up the Monk one and have been listening to it in the car but that's not a good test. Lon, I'm not sure I understand why you don't think Oscar is not good here. I understand why you like Wendell but not necessarily OP.

I guess my point is that it's more important to get the music out than worry about the remastering although obviously it shouldn't be garbage either. I'm not an audiophile although I have a good system but based what I know of Lon's not as good as his. I'll also admit that if I hear crappy sound it'll drive me a little nuts. I remember somebody saying a long time ago that because they didn't like who remastering the Fantsay reissues they wouldn't buy the cd. That to me is the center of the debate or the crux of the problem. And to me that's plain nuts.

sjarrell raises a really good point. If the guy sucked so bad, do you think Michael would continue to use him. I don't think so. Others may do this but I don't look to see who remastered it before I buy. I buy when I see a new unavailable session comes out. That should be the test for purchasing.