JSngry

I think he generally did his best playings outside of his own groups. Ok, maybe not "best", but definitely the playing of his that I can engage in more. Tony Scott, George Russell, Oliver Nelson, Miles, etc.

One Taylor Swift Tweet reaches a bajillion times more people before they get out of bed than will see one billboard in a week, and with more information. And that's just one Tweet. Nobody does just one Tweet. At some point, I could see Taylor Swift becoming to the music industry what Mary Pickford and her cohorts became to the film industry, a brave surge of independence that make a new day and a new way and eventually becomes pretty much the same thing it declared independence from. That's just the way things go.

And that is more likely to hurt whom - Taylor Swift or Spotify? All Taylor Swift needs to do is be in the place where people are looking and she'll get her money. If Spotify's not that place, it ain't gonna hurt her. I sincerely do not believe that "selling records" is going to be a viable primary survival strategy for anybody of any stature in any kind of music. At best, they're promotional tools, calling cards for whatever means of sustainable monetization are out there at any given time. I mean, in today's world, this shit here is laughable right here, Flintstone-ly analog, but that was the "music industry" at its rip-roarin', nostril-snortin' absolute peak. Again - Inevitably Emerging Paradigm: Record Industry = Gentleman Farmer Music Industry = Monsanto I hate Monsanto, not only have they skullfucked agriculture, but they also invented Astroturf, thereby skullfucking sports. So I'm ok with the gentleman farmers of the world having this new opportunity to sell to their neighbors. But both "they"s in this equation, the gentleman farmer and their neighbors, should view this as an opportunity for mutually beneficial/reliant protection, not a loss, and for damn sure not an "opportunity" for anything other than a stay of execution for the termination of their Utopic independence/survival/protection. Because if/when Taylor Swift can destroy Monsanto, then good for her, even if the likely outcome is that she'll become her own Monsanto, or partner up with those who will be. Tell me again how United Artists came to be?

Was Roy Cohn at all an inspiration for Thurm?

No, I'm not confused. There is music, the business of music, the music business, and the music industry. This thread is about the music industry, and the emerging "new" music industry is increasingly going to be all about, as you put it, "celebrity", which is all about being seen. Not who or what is being seen (much less heard, even much less listened to), but just about having somebody in that place that is being looked at, for however long there is a hook to have that particular occupant looked at. Am I enthusiastic about this? Not particularly. But the decision is being made without my input. Idol, Voice, all that stuff, that's your music industry today. It sure as hell ain't the unheard 99% just needing that one big break to get heard. That's now, at best, at the level of the music business. Wait another 25-50 years when all the old-schoolers, players and audiences are dead, see what's left, who, and how. It's gonna get a whole helluva worse before it gets better, if you want to look at it in those terms. "Industry" is built on mass, masses demand "content", and the more interchangeable content becomes, the easier it is for industry to thrive. So if the discussion is genuinely about the "music industry", I think we have our answers right in front of us. Resistance might be advisable, but nevertheless remains futile. This is not really new, but the level of efficiency might be, and the people figuring it out definitely are. And yet/so, the beat goes on.

Ok, whoa, didn't pay any attention to the Glick thing when it was going, but I had to stop after the first ten seconds of this to catch my breath, even before the talking began: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrZXdjcKnss#t=15 throwdown harpist left-handed trombonist trombonist holding instrument sideways trombonist playing with trumpet mouthpiece at first I thought the harpist was the guy who;s the Letterman announcer, but apparently Michael McKeon? This E. Lowe guy, whoa.... My favorite Short character is Nathan Thurm. Woulde love to see Glick interview Thurm.

Gene Weed? Seriously? Apparently so! http://slick.org/deathwatch/mailarchive/msg00517.html

I remember Lorne Michaels offering the Beatles $10,000 or some other small amount to perform on SNL and said they could split it anyway they want if they didn't think Ringo should get a full share. Funny corollary to that story, both McCartney & Lennon were in NYC watching that show when it was on, one called the other, and for a quick minute they entertained the notion of hightailing it over to the studio to do a surprise walk-on on to call the bluff. That would have been the end of non-shit upon pants for SO many people.

Hello, salient point. The "music industry" is no longer about "records" in any form. It's about....industry. Getting heard is not as important as getting seen. The emerging "industry" is gonna be happy as hell to let all the "artists" own their own material and sell it to a few handfuls of people who still buy stuff. They're going to want to own the images, because that's where the money will be. Hit song = gateway to Imageland. Hit album = Rotary Phone, still works, but really? Inevitably Emerging Paradigm: Record Industry = Gentleman Farmer Music Industry = Monsanto Either way, though, hold on to your publishing.

Paul Weston Paul McCartney Mike McGear

Piqued by what I saw of The Comeback this pat Sunday night, I went to HBO GO & started watching Season 1, from 2005. Good god, what a never-ending walk with the demons that is. Comedy of the darkest type, and although we're supposed to think that the main character is a vain, clueless desperate woman (because she is), she's virtually heroic compared to most of the men around her, who are all that, plus despicable pigs. I can see why it didn't get its audience the first time around, but here's hoping that this time, it does. Strong, smart, and dark. And yes, funny. But not comfortably.

Haven't been to the Meyerson that many times, but have sat in various locations and have never felt aurally cheated. They make a big deal about how much they spent to ensure perfect acoustics, and maybe they did and they did get it right, but when people say shit like that in Dallas, it's like, yeah, ok, thanks for your economic stimulus and job creations, now where's my seat?

That Sirone thing that came up on the vinyl thread the other day.

Peruse this list: http://www.robertronnes.com/TheSoloContrabassoonList.html

That's a recurring line I've heard applied to a lot of different musics over the years, that it's just a series of events...and it's a complaint that in principle I do not understand, as that's true of uninspired music of pretty much any ilk. Having said that, the instances that in my experience would lead me to voice somewhat the same dislike would be if the events themselves are sort of "exercises", that is, working with devices that are not presented with anything to further them past being just that, basic delineations of standard formulae/math/orchestration/whatever. But that's a matter of content, not of architecture. I find that if these perceived individual "events" have enough substance within themselves, the macro-logic will eventually reveal itself, perhaps in a more "subjective" manner than more indeed "classical" forms, but nevertheless, sense is made and communicated, mission accomplished, etc. Of course, that comes back to the basic dichotomy of Power To The People vs The Creator Has A Master Plan, but such is life being lived in real time, I'd say.

Maybe he was worried that Branson was planning on putting them on one of his rockets. Can't blame him for that!

Watched episode 4 last night (Maggie in Uganda) One of the most compelling pieces of TV I've seen in years. The slow drip tension as her tale was unpacked was brilliantly done. Yeah, that one was major. Up until then, the Alison Pill character epitomized in the extreme everything about this series that I disliked. Then in this episode, it epitomized everything I applauded about it. No spoilers, but what happens to her afterwards is pretty much minus the pre-trauma cuteness, although in last night's season opener, there are signs that she might be getting it back. It involves serious-looking glasses, and music and camera angles and....that's too bad. But in real life, it would be ok.

Ok, Newsroom premier tonight - loved/hated it. Loved - serious, relevant subject matter, impact of commerce on news media, impact of social media on news media, impact of pre-cyber thinking on progress of news reporting in general (pro and con), abilities to gain multitudinous amounts of relevant information at once by any means, etc. These are things that I like to see brought to the floor and not just glossed over or stipulated to in sound bites. More of this, please, and I know there will be. Hated - heroic camera angles b/w complimentary uplifting super-hero move underscoring (was not Jeff Beal at one time some sort of "jazz musician" sorta/kinda?), overtly choreographed dialogue, "snappy" repartee that further nothing but its own snappiness. Playing to the balcony, if you will, albeit a very smart balcony. I just do not like that kind of thing. It might be brilliant, but many things are. Can't like all of 'em. Less of this, please, but I know there will be...or won't be...whichever is not the other. Sorkin could no doubt phrase it right, but the odds are that I would be equal parts grateful and irritated for/with the result are 50/50...seems fitting, somehow. In that regard, manipulation failing on at least one intended target, I'm reminded of the story where the aspirational pimp says to the unattainable woman he was trying to turn out, "Damn woman, I try everything on you and none of it works. I never had none of it not work on at least ONE bitch. What's your problem?" To which the lady coolly replies, "Could be that I'm not a bitch." Anyway, the show is a rare, unlikely, and quite possibly unintentional triumph of substance over style, so what am I complaining about? Also, The Comeback immediately following...missed the original run, and not sure if this new one will sustain interest, but I kept waiting for the point where I could walk away and just say ehhhh with real certainty, but that point didn't really come, so we shall see. One real LOL line for me, though, was, "That happened 10 years ago...well, not really 10 years ago...technology moves so fast these days..." Hello, chronohumor, HELLO!

Understood. Point was just that I hear Wayne as a point-of-reference/listening/familiarity/whatever for a lot of this music. Whether that's "correct" in any way outside of my own mind...probably/definitely not? But it's working for me.

Hello, what? But seriously...the rumors about Thad's sudden departure from the US and his unfortunate accident, hello that, hello no-show for interview between sets, hello, that, as well as hello, motherfuckers sometimes DO be crazy, and their behavior/lifestyle choices follows from that, and sometimes crazy motherfuckers actually DO be geniuses (or at least brilliant), not a connection AFAIC, hello that, too. "Discredit" has nothing to do with anything here, at least not as a part of what my value-system views as discredit, anything but that.