JSngry

Weak. Very weak. What you are left with is yourself, and you are making yourself yourself. Be proud about that and don't make excuses for those who are not doing what you are doing.

Again - nobody's saying you shouldn't be listening to (or enjoying) anything. All I'm saying is that it is a good thing to know what you are listening to and not get fooled into thinking that it is anything other than it is. That's not just true for music either. It's true for everything in life.

Angst? HA! I'm glad to see it coming to an end! Time to move on! What bugs me is the whole "OH DEAR GOD NO WE CAN'T LET IT DIE, WE'LL DIE WITH IT!!! angst. That's when you start arguing Eric Alexander vs Joshua redman like either one of them matter (now or ever) outside of the fishbowl. Hell, George Coleman himself doesn't matter that much (now or ever) outside of the fishbowl. And I'll go to the mat for George, I'm just saying, waiter, reality check, please. Evolve or die, and no I don't claim to have any special take of who what the "evolver" is. but I do know a lost cause when I see one.

You know, if all you want to hear is "good players", well, hey, fair enough. There will always be "good players" and you can always be happy. And happy is good, sure. I like happy myself. But there's a differnce between happy that knows what & why it is and happy that is pretty much some vague, Chauncey Gardiner-esque acceptance of whatever comes alon as grounds for delight. I'd never say that Eric Alexander is not a good or serious musician or that people who like him are wrong or stupid or uninformed or whatever. I would, however, say that about anybody who tries to tell me that Eric Alexander is doing the same thing in his music that George Coleman did in his. George Coleman is in no way a "top-tier player" (as Chuck would put it), but he's a damn fine player who worked his butt off to develop a truly personal voice (and all that that implies, and if you have to ask...by all means do - but only if you want to hear the answer!). Eric Alexander is a damn fine player who worked his butt off to play a style of music as well as he could play it (and all that that implies, and if you have to ask...by all means do - but only if you want to hear the answer!). For some, that distinction has no relevance. Well, ok. But it's an insult to everybody involved to claim that the difference does not exist, and to not recognize that as much as it doesn't matter to those for whom it doesn't matter, it matters every bit that much for those to whom it does matter. I mean, let's have some self-respect here!

Surely this is not a serious statement... Coltrane Quartet, 1965, Half Note recordings, particularly "Creation" = the Alpha & the Omega of what is described above. Those tapes were circulating among players long before they went "public".

More like the Strat-O-Matic era... As a rule, and with rare exceptions,

I mean, what you really seem to be saying is that it's fun to hear "Eric Alexander" (quotes used becuase it's not about him, there's literally hundreds, perhaps thousands of "Eric Alexander"s all over the world, but especially in New York, with unlaquered Selmers and vintage Links stuck on them) becuase he makes music that sounds like what jazz "should" sound like or that if you come to jazz with no real experience in the music it sounds as good as anything else, so why not like it. Nostalgia or inexpereience. I can't argue against either of those, but I can - and will - state that the history of humanity shows that although these are neither preventable nor undesirable traits in and of themselves, they do not make for a healthy & sustainable environment over the long haul. Soooo.... After reviewing the play, the "Eric Alexander"s of the world are making "jazz" into a high quality labor of love tourist attraction, which although a legitimate and no doubt inevitable evolution is not what the music they present "used to be". The Jim Cullum analogy is both apt and perceptive. The ruling on the field stands!

I've heard that record. Sometimes you can judge a book by its cover...

Nice justifications, real nice, and they prove Chuck's earlier point - the game has irretrievably changed. What "jazz" "was" and what it now "is" (or is in the process of becoming) ain't the same thing. It was fun while it lasted, believe me. For those whom it continues to be, follow your bliss. Or your justifications.

Why indeed. Have we not "gotten it" by now? Is there nothing else to invest in? Is investment in perhaps imperfect creation (or not so imperfect) so unimportant that consuming "name brands" trumps all? Are we becoming such devout consumers that we would prefer consuming ourselves to (re)creating ourselves? Is this the best we can do? Or even more to the point - why should I waste my time (and all that comes with it) going to see Shakespeare or Williams unless there's going to be something of value added? Going just to be "seeing Shakespeare" is ok enough, but at some point, if I can see Olivier doing Hamlet on video or some "competent, well-trained, thoroughly versed" actor doing Hamlet in the flesh, it's like, DUH, warm up the VHVD, right? Doing it just for the same of saying you've done it after you've already done it, that's hardly a recommended lifestyle, eh? Although, the jazz equivalent would be having people play "interpretations" of actual solos, which is more or less what a bunch of this type thing boils down to. If that's anybody's idea of a "good time" - interpretations of improvisations posing as improvisations played for people who either can't tell the difference or else don't want to know the difference or else just flat out don't care what they;'re listening to so long as it sounds like what they think they should be hearing because they want to hear something that sounds like that - far be it from me to impede the pursuit of happiness. I mean, it can be "fun" and all that, but so is masturbation. I'd hardly advocate building a sex life around masturbation. Just because people do it because it's the best they can get at any given moment doesn't mean it's "the best way to go"... Then again if it's that or nothing, hey. But really, c'mon....it's over. At this point, what Mr. Stryker said earlier is pretty much true - it's all history. I get a boner listening to the old records (when I still do, which is less and less...I mean, a few, yeah, but...why?) for the same reason I get one listening to Beethoven or some such. It's the real deal as far as life goes, at least in my realm, and the real deal excites me. But damn if that makes me want to go out and pay some whore to sit on my lap and do it and then I leave thinking I've "made love". That's the province of 17 year olds, at least ones with money...

Yeah, well, people still listen to Wagner today, but who goes around still writing like him? It was fun while it lasted, right?

http://learning2share.blogspot.com/2009/12/few-alan-dunn-architectural-cartoons.html

Word, not deed...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBMa43b6ggY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQX1U5dG1mc

Only one LP originally, right? Balance issued in the 70s on a 2-fer.

aka "Down For The Count"...

And it's a choice made even more complicated by the presence of scores of others of the same type!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is9Rzvd_3Jg

Very fine set, on a similar level to London Concert (Wave) , it was my first exposure to Warne and Lee when I picked it up in the early 90s. Sound quality is fine but nothing special. But not the same session, I presume. Thanks. That Pausa album is very, very high on my "must have" list of both Marsh & Konitz. Pianoless quartet, quite well recorded (as if you are inside the band, not in front of them), and free-vlowing playong by all concerned. Not a less-than-on-it note on the entire album.

A great find and a fascinating listen! P.D. (remember him?) was my hookup, and I still feel gratitude.

Original album was released under Buddy Rich's name: http://www.discogs.com/Buddy-Rich-The-Last-Blues-Album-Volume-1/release/1574451

Home is fine, but work PC produces the same result as Bentsy gets. I can't post out of it.

Totally legit, and very fine material. The Hyena label was a short-lived Joel Dorn endeavor. The "Radio Nights" series were reissues of albums originally issued on an earlier Dorn imprint, Night Records. All are worthwhile. Buy & enjoy.