JSngry

I heard about them both at once. The Profar story was going out locally last night as one of those "sources are reporting" things, with all the sources for the sources being proven reliables. All I see are dead people. I need to learn to look away from that.

Hellyeah YES. And this "Patanjali" thing, hezeuscristo man, this is PARTY music of the highest order, I mean my mind and body are both reeling in ecstasy from what is happening here. People wonder aobut how come Sonny don't have "real bands", hey - HERE'S a real band, and real band music for your ass (and for your mind), right here!

Right now, I'm thinking...fuck baseball. Funny how little hopelessness borne of unrelenting random acts of physical failure of a collection of human bodies it's taken to get me here. I'm a wuss.

Got my copy today. imo this is the best of the Road Show series, and interiorly reinforces my interiorally generated theory that maybe sonny didn't make such records in the studio because, hell, would you like to have that on records and then go play a gig with everybody expecting that every time out? It kinda happened to him once before and I think it had an effect on his long-term thinking as far as what good were records for vs. why do i really play? Of course, that raises the question, is he really opening up in his last years (hopefully many many more) or is he more or less certain that live playing is no longer going to be an ongoing concern, so hey, now I can relax about what my records are? No matter what, though, I love Sonny Rollins, an imperfect hero is the only kind of hero worth having, imo. Otherwise, it's not a hero you got, it's an idolatrous relationship, and no thanks for all/any of that. And oh by the way - "Patanjali", holy shit, yes, holy shit, take the The Cutting Edge band at it's best, tighten it up and better record it (and Cranshaw on wood?!?!?!?!?!?) any multiple of times over, and yes, he was right then, and provably right this time. And that was just July of 2012. less than two years ago. Coltrane had the better career strategy by dieing pursuing sainthood, but downside, real, is that he never got to work with rhythmics like this. Ok, peoples who don't like dance music because it's all drum-machiney and shit, ok, here it is not, here it is real people doing it, real people plus Sonny Rollins who is so TOO real as to render everybody else gradable on the curve. Yes, buy with confidence. Indeed!

No, you don't suck, and yes, we've all done it. But also yes, a moderator can, will, and has merged the threads.

Born? In what sense?

Well, it's a great session, "The Way You Look Tonight" would be on my short list of suicide prevention musics if I had one (or even wanted one), but the article itself seems like we're supposed to believe that history only happened on records or some such, which is good for an industrial paradigm, not so much for a reality-based creative life...well, these days, maybe, but back then...hell no. The one thing that doesn't get mentioned is how close Rollins at this time was to Bird, not superficially, hell, so many people were that then, but how close to Bird he was, in terms of sheer looseness, freedom of rhythm, the ability to start anywhere, end anywhere, and turn back and forth anywhere in between. Eventually he got at least as flexible as Bird, maybe even more flexible than Bird, I mean, unfettered 60s Sonny is like, ok, what Trane did to harmony in jazz improvisation, Sonny did to swing rhythm, there's just no place left after those things, gotta make a move (somewhere) or else just accept it, accept that you are a lesser rhythmichuman than these guys, pretending anything else is just a grandiose fantasy. Either way, it's something to be dealt with, not casually skipped over, like, yeah, let's swing "like that" and/or yeah, let's just not swing like that, anything will do as long as it's not that. No, that's a joke, ok? But before that, you can always, always tell Bird by how many "there's" there were in one solo. Nobody else had that many (and let's also consider timral variety, not "tone", but how much color-shading you can put in your line, you'd be surprised how many flatliners there are in that regard, and today, hell, it's a fucking plague, I cannot listen to all these people who flatline their way throug a bunch of theoretical twists and turns and not one really vary their timbre of even their interior pulse, just FWEEDLEEEDLEEEDLEEEDLEEEDLEEEDLEEEDLEEEDLEEEDLEEEDLEEEDLE STOP IT, MUSIC IS A LANGUAGE PLEASE STOP MONOTONEDRONING ME TO PAST-DEATH, YOU HAVE MADE ME HATE JAZZ!!!!!)., but Sonny was getting close on these records. And Monk was directing traffic, like only Monk could. Monk could comp like a freakin' genius composer/conductor, uh, wait, he was a genius composer/conductor. And let's do a little homework before telling everybody how history go, ok? During this time, Monk & Sonny were hanging, seriously hanging, playing together a lot (but wait, Monk didn't have very many-hardly any gigs during that time, how can that be? Because most of the music in those days was not made at gigs or in clubs, it was made by cats hanging out and jamming, 24/7 if you wanted it, they say, always somebody playing somewhere, always). So no, this is not a manifesto or whatever, this is a sample of a lot more life that was going on during this time, life that we will never know unless we were there and living it in real time. Sonny's on record with all of this, btw, as was Trane. What was it Trane called him, "a musical architect of the highest order"? As for Sonny, read the Joe Goldberg book, everybody with even the slightest interest in the music and people of those times should read the Joe Goldberg book. Lot of little nuggets in there, useful nuggets. Don't start with Marc Meyers, or Joe Goldberg, or any written word. Start with the music, use it to get to the people who play it, learn what they are saying and then, maybe then, start with reading about it. But startling, you say, startling, hey, this startled me.

No real interest in this set, but she was a damn good singer, period, and I bet it's going to be nothing but a bunch of good songs well sung. But not this, please. No innocence with cereal in its ear. This record was in the house growing up and thinking that this was what I was there for creeped me out. On the other hand, hey, adopted, I was, so...ok, I get it. just not THIS, ok? OTOH, Love is one of the greatest records anybody ever made of songs, period. The woman could sing when not interfered with, and the impression is given that it was a long time into her life before she was not interfered with. Props to her for keeping it on the road until the road cleared up, not everybody does. Like I said, no real interest in this set myself, but I can totally understand why its being done, have every expectation that it will be damn good, and I hope it sells out before I do get the urge for it.

A fair enough point, but keep in mind that when it was released, you could easily play it in terms of 4 individual LP sides, not one continuous album. That was the way I heard it for many years, one side played over and over before going (or not) to another. Maybe a consideration, maybe not.

Duke Ellington Jimmy Grissom Gus Triandos

That's Joan Watson. Hell yeah.

I've got FIOS & can't remember the last tim3 speed was a concern. So I'm sold on that, the fiber-optic thing.

Rebel Without A Clue Colonel Mustard Moritz Plochman

And there was an episode with Buffalo Springfield!

I'd be careful..."up to" often means that you'll get that if and when the internet is lonely all over the world all at once.

Gerry and The Pacemakers Gary Lewis and The Playboys GENE and DEBBE

The raw materials of this book are fantastic. And Crouch occasionally has something good to add of his own, like the comparison of opiate Bird to opiate Sherlock Holmes (although for the role of Watson, hey, it's the 21st Century, Lucy Liu is more than ok with me, hubbahubbayehyehyeh). But then just this morning, I read about something like the musicians in the balcony listening to movie soundtacks and how that's the democracy of technology or something like that, and I'm like, ok, time to get up, see you later. But I tell you - the raw materials are fantastic. As is Joan Watson.

The Blakey St. Germain stuff is hot. Buy with confidence, I would say.

Looks like the mournful moment occurred after this thread began, title edited accordingly.

National Velvet Emil Frey Clark Monroe

Has the question been answered yet? I really haven't been paying attention.

See, the thing is, if the book was really compelling, I would sit on the toilet way longer than usual, and finally get up and take the book with me. When I was reading John Litweiler's two novels, hell, I stayed on the toilet until my legs started going numb, and then, oops, that's not good, so I got up and took the books with me. This Parker bio, it's like Bird is a secondary character in his own biography, sometimes tertiary, he gets pushed so far back into the background/relevancy, and I'm like, well, ok, this will be here when I get back, and sure enough, it is. I mean, it's not a drag opening it up, but it's usually not been a problem coming to a stopping point, either.