The only "problem" I have w/recommending Riot as part of a compilation/anthoogy is that it's one of those albums that stands alone, and is best experienced like that in order to get the full impact of it as an album. But maybe that's just the opinion of somebody who's always heard it that way.
Of Course, Of Course w/o Discovery! is unfortunate. What the hell, make it a double.
That said, it's a fine album in and of itself.
Now, where does all this leave a Lloyd/Columbia Select which would include the Chico Hamilton albums?
Depends on if they're being presented in the context of "bonus material" or "session reconstruction".
If it's the former, I usually prefer them at the end. If it's the latter, I like them sequentially, and I like the whole session presented likewise, in recording order.
You can learn a lot either way.
Of course, all of us who are able hear music. But can we feel music in the things we touch? Can we see music, smell it, taste it?
There are times when I can, and those are good times indeed. That's when the senses are firing on all cylinders and the perception is unhindered by the distractions, arbitrary or otherwise, of "neccessity".
Again, tell me what music isn't, or can't be, and then we can try and figure out what it "is".
"Intent" has much to do with the perception of the receptor as it does anything else.
Is a bird's song its way of talking? Probably.
Are there people whose speech sings? Definitely.
Was Bird's song his way of talking?
You tell me.
"Definitons" are finite by, uh, definiton. Music isn't.
What is music not? Tell me what it's not, or by any criteria can't be, and then we can get on with the business of talking about what it is.
I don't think I know enough to do that.