JSngry

mjzee included this link, but let me highlight it. The article and, especially, the comments go into more than enough detail for me: http://www.earlevel.com/main/1996/10/20/what-is-dither/ As I understand it, the point is not to increase the dynamic range, but to "blur" the quieter ranges to create just enough "fuzziness" to make them more easily processed by the ear. The auditory/visual equivalencies might not be exact, but the basic idea seems right to me. In both worlds, "fuzziness" is more difficult to ignore than "transparency". I would like to hear Chuck's or Jim A's thoughts on the matter, because it (dither) seems to be something more relevant to higher end source recordings of a wide dynamic range than it is to any duplication of existing recordings.

I still think that Stravinsky having a road band would have the coolest thing ever.

It's a 45, same take as the LP. I think the mix is hotter, but the take is the same.

Dippin'' been better to me than I been to myself.

Mission accomplished, then, and thank you for that!

Consistently great organizations don't necessarily field consistently great teams every season. Too many variables, some of them totally unpredictable/controllable.

Here ya' go:

Not "museum pieces" as much as "known quantities". For the most part, not exclusively. Nothing wrong with known quantities, I mean, I love good things, period, really love them. I think anybody who has any character knows what they like and why they like it. But knowing what you don't like and why you don't like it, that gets a little trickier, because what you think you don't like about something may not be what that thing actually is! So there's also the part of me that wants to keep getting myself poked with the unfamiliar, especially when it's the type of unfamiliar that sooner or later (sometimes much sooner, sometimes much later) reveals itself to be a lot more familiar than first impressions might suggest. That's the part of the spirit of this particular BFT, kind of an "objects in the mirror might be closer than they appear" type thing. I started to collate another type of "here's some more free tunes, everybody, see if you can guess what they are!" mix-tape, but just was not feeling that. Really not feeling it. So....this. Perhaps strange, unfamiliar, odd for many, no doubt actually unpleasant for some. And I don't expect anybody to "try" to get it if they're not wanting to, who has that much time? However...there are melodies here, if not actual "songs" (and there are those), then definitely themes and motifs that get worked all kinds of ways, all kinds of, in my opinion, interesting, ways - and ways that are more familiar to the known quantities of "jazz and blues" than might be readily apparent. One example - the vibes on George Crumb's "Lonesome Road", they're Lionel Hampton for one second, then before the phrase is over they're something else entirely, and it keeps going in and out like that. Discombobulating at first, maybe, but then fascinating, how do such combinations get to be made? Voices moving through the air, changing/shifting perspectives, are they moving, or are we standing still? Or are we both moving in such a way that we'll keep passing as strangers until we recognize each other, after which we can move together as friends and neighbors, mind in mind? The Afro-Eurasian Eclipse Effect, Duke was a prophet recognizing another prophet, the Ellington-McLuhan axis, things just spinning all kinds of around it! There's another two cuts on here - consecutive cuts - where the same lick is heard on the same instrument. It's fleeting, but very definite. So, what's up with that? If nothing else, language moving through the air and landing where it lands. And then after it lands, does it keep moving? Or does some of it land and some more of it keep moving? Or, does anything ever really stand still as long as it's alive? Music can do all kinds of things for you, to you, with you. All kinds of things!

Never heard him live, so maybe it's just an accentuation of mixing, but I'm really struck by how hard of a touch Garner had. Love it!

A few made it out on Inner City's Classic Jazz label.

This is one funass record! Don't know how many times I'll listen to it, or need to listen to it, hell how many times did Errol need to play everything the same way, right? But jeesus, this guy comes off like the missing in plain view in front of your face missing link between Earl Hines & Monk, I mean, fuck I've got this playing in the car & LOL-ing the whole way, hell yeah!

Hopefully so! Billy's done a few things for various non-American labels (as leader and as sideman) that are still under the radar for most collectors here. Hopefully, you've got the good radar! This is the one that most readily comes to mind: https://www.discogs.com/Billy-Harper-Quintet-Billy-Harper-Quintet/release/3761335

I like music, period. I like hearing how people do with it. Same things done different ways, different things done the same ways, etc etc etc. Of course, jazz has been my "soul" music for all of my adult life, going back to early adolescence. But before, during, and after that, there were other things that engaged me. Many many times I've gotten all "identity"-y about it, but life is too short, and a musical univision is not something to be desired, at least not for me, especially as it pertains to jazz/blues/etc. So much of that world is no longer with us, except as artifact or other signifiers. And so much of what remains is re-creative above anything else, which is cool if you dig that, and that's a big "if". "We" "have" "this" how, exactly? On records and in memories, inside ourselves. It was of its time, just as we are of ours. We already have our re-creative mechanisms, how many more do we need? "Legacy" lasts, yes, but "immediacy" does not, can not. I say this not about "worth" or "timelessness", just about vocabulary and accent, about communicating in real time in today's world with people who are in the same space as us. I like the notion of bringing experience to the table and then moving forward with it instead of bringing it there and sitting down to wait for...for what, really?

Looks like locking the thread is the way to go, then.

Probably best to let this one go, everybody.

When Larry's an outlaw, only Larry will have books.

Let's talk about this one for a week.

Ah, Colby. You are forever loved.

I think a piece of my brain fell out on it.

Not just serious jazz fans, but series collector jazz fans. Like I said, maybe that's all that's left. Still, I've met all kinds of people at gigs, they like jazz, they buy some records, they know some names, and they don't collect, and the really don't know about Mosaic. And, if you have a good crowd, you'll want them there. If you depend on just Mosaic-aware people to be in the house, you'll have a hip room that you can afford to buy a round of two of drinks for even if you're playing for free.

Oh, serious collecting jazz fans do, and maybe that's most of what's left.

I got next, then.

Well, yeah, there is. Don't care if you don't like it, don't expect that, but that's opinion. On that you can't be wrong. The presence of melodies, themes, all that stuff, it's there. Singable, writable, provable, concrete existence, not abstacted impression. That's kinda the point, to follow those melodies where and how they go. As long as I can remember, the unfamiliar has been met by people who claim there's no "there" there, be it rock & roll, psychedelic, jazz, free jazz, on and on and on and on. Just a lot of racket, no point to it, silly wankers, makes no sense, blahblahblah, same reactions no matter what the musics are, if I don't recognize it, it's not real. And yet musics keep happening, being played and being heard. For things that supposedly aren't there, there keeps being a lot of things there, more and more things, more and more theres. So, all those people staying at home thinking that that was the only place that could ever, possibly, be real...looks like they were wrong. I get "I can't hear it", I really do. Track 3 on this set, it took me 6 weeks of intense listening for all the detail to finally even begin to really pop out. And no, I don't expect anybody to do that unless they really feel like it. But - the detail IS there. If anybody goes looking for it, they will find it. If you don't want to get to it for whatever reason, fine. I don't like to work that hard myself unless the inspiration moves me. So , yeah, that much I get, not motivated to pursue. Believe me, that can come from over-familiarity just as easily as it can from total unfamiliarity. Signing off... Past that, thank you for participating. If you should so desire, your purchase price will be cheerfully refunded, minus a small deduction for shipping and handling. But first, would you like to try for the Charlie Parker to Carol Burnett in four easy steps bonus points? That'll get you a full refund, including the S&H. Your complete satisfaction is our only goal, so please call now to take advantage of this offer. Operators ARE standing by!

There's melody out the ass on all those things. Songs, not so much. But melody aplenty.

Well ok. It was sounding like you had an idea about what was actually happening in it and THAT was what you didn't like.