JSngry

It's not the medium, that bugs me, not at all. It's the application thereof. A little propriety is called for, and I don't think that hanging somebody else's schlong out the window for anybody and everybody who walks by to suck on as little or as much as they desire exactly qualifies as such.

Actually, the term "inside/outside" might be fallacious. at least in some respects. There's probably some Fundamental Law Of Physics that dictates that Nature abhors a vaccum, and that once a new "outsice" is discovered, it's all but inevitable that the "inside" will sooner or later come to it to one degree or another as a matter of basic inevitablity. In other words, the window for being truly "outside" is a relatively small one, and once it's closed, that's it. After that, it's all "inside", no matter how long it takes to be percieved as such.

Yeah, the "traders" who gloat and hoard and who won't share w/o getting such&such in return are pretty much pigs. Usually, not always. But that's not what I'm talking about. There's a reason why most artists (and their labels) don't record and release everything they do, and it's not just economics. It's a matter of "presentation", of offering up a "vision", if you will. An "official" recording is usually an attempt by an artist to present, to the best of their ability, the truest portrait of said vision. The rest, the outtakes, aborted/unsuccessful sessions, live dates, etc. are definitely of interest often enough, but it could easily be argued that their "purest" interest should be to "deep" fans, scholars, etc., and that such material really was/is not intended to be heard by anybody else. An artist's vison is their most personal possession. To deny that in effect puts the artist in the positon of a slave. It denies them the intrinic/assumed right to posess anything personal, as well as the control over how their most personal impulses should be presented. In effect, it gives the "fan" the position of being able to say, "We OWN you. Give us everything you have, whether you want us to have it or not". Of course, the aptness of this will vary widely depending on the artist in question, the nature of the performance, and who's wanting to hear it and why. Which is why I personally think that the private/personal distribution system is more in keeping with a show of respect for the material involved. Yes, you DO have to work harder to get a hookup, and no, you WON'T be able to get anything you want anytime you want it. Oh well. But... There's something to be said, I think for "earning" the "right" to hear such material. It teaches you an appreciation for both the material and the processes of creation and performance. It also means that you have to deal with people rather than computers. Basically, it forces you to deal with the music, and the individuals who inhabit/surround it, as people, and not just a set of digital data to be bandied about like so many subway tokens. The very nature of this type of material places it in the realm of "special", and I truly believe that it's dissemenation should do the same. I'm certainly not accusing anybody in this forum of being the type of person who "knows the cost of everything, but the value of nothing" (FAR from it!), but the easy, open, and public distribution of unofficial recordings can't help but breed that type at a rate far greater than a more selective/restrictive one. This music in general is viewed cheaply enough as it is. Do we really want to expedite and encourage that any more than what already exists? I'm in no way advocating the hoarding of private recordings, nor of not using the Internet per se to distribute them. I just think that such a process should be kept as private as possible out of respect for all concerned.

Well, call me crusty and wipe me with a moist towelette, but I do see a difference between collectors trading such material as this privately and providing it "publicly" online. Maybe it's just a difference "in principal", and maybe its a moot point anymore, what with the Instanet and all, but I see a difference nevertheless. Several differences, actually... Not that I'm above availing myself of certain "opportunities" when they present themselves (haven't yet figured out how to do the bit-torrent thing, though), but when said opportunities are removed, I can't say that I'm surprised and/or disappointed either. Contrary to the promises of the Utopianet, "we're" not "entitled" to have whatever we want whenever we want it, and not everybody "needs" such material to an equal extent. Call me an elitist or some such, but that's how I feel.

http://www.iporecordings.com/My_Homepage_Files/Page9.html Michael Patterson - Arranger, Producer Jimmy Owens - Trumpet, Flugelhorn James Moody - Tenor, Soprano Benny Golson - Tenor Frank Wess - Flute, Alto, Tenor Bob Brookmeyer - Valve Trombone Hank Jones - Piano Sir Roland Hanna - Piano (taped excerpt) Richard Davis - Bass Mickey Roker Drums 1 Subtle Rebuttal 5:37 2 Thad's Pad 4:53 3 Kids Are Pretty People 6:40 4 One More 5:49 5 Mean What You Say 7:05 6 A Child Is Born 8:02 7 Bossa Nova Ova 5:12 8 The Waltz You Swang for Me 7:02 9 H and T Blues 5:37 10 Consummation 5:23 11 The Farewell 5:26 12 Monk's Mood All I can say is that the playing and the tunes are all you'd hope for. Lions (and near-lions) in winter, perhaps, but if this be winter, let it snow.

YEAH!!!!

I'll differ on both albums. LIVING TIME's main problem is poor recording, not bad music. It's really more a Russell album than an Evans one, and is probably best appreciated/evaluated in that way. As such, once/if you're able to hear through the mud, there's actually some very raw and exciting writing and playing going on. SYMBIOSIS starts very strongly, and then loses steam as it goes along, but it's hardly "bad" by any stretch of the imagination. Myself, I'd rather hear Evans do something like these albums than yet another trio session.

Although I have a very high level of respect for Elley Eskelin's abilities as a saxophonist and creative improvisor, I've never really though of him as being an "inside" player, that tribute to Jug thing he did a while back notwithstanding. Although, with him, it's obviously a matter of choice. The cat can definitely play his instrument. However, this past weekend I got to hear an album by drummer Tony Martucci that had a front line of Eskelin & Joe Lovano. The material itself was sorta "inside/outside" - a Monk tune, a Sam Rivers thing, and some originals that had various degrees of repetitive structure & preset changes built in to them. Eskelin nailed the inside stuff, and, of course, excelled on the freer things. So I'd definitely add him to this list.

So, this puts us closer to the actual 1957 Five Spot quartet than any known recording, right? A few months earlier, we'd have Wilbur Ware on bass, and wouldn't that be special! I'd think that in a right world, this would be major news...

DOH! Of course! My bad. Add another one to the list!

They's gators in Arizona, doncha' know.

and those were all from the late 1950s as well, right? http://www.bsnpubs.com/latin/seecorelated.html Yep.

Used to be readily available throughout most of the 70s in the US as a MPS LP. The Verve connection came much later,

Larry Appelbaum, studio engineer/supervisor at the Library of Congress, holds the very rare previously unpublished live recording of the Thelonious Monk Quartet with John Coltraine, at the Library of Congress, Tuesday, April 05, 2005, in Washington. The tape was recorded in November 29, 1957 at Carnegie Hall in New York. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

YEOW!!!!! Brownie, you RULE!

Yes, Bertrand, please report back!

Probably(?) because it's not a commercial recording.

I have no recollection whatsoever of ever hearing about Monk & Trane playing together at Carnegie Hall. Maybe individually on the same bill, but even that I'm not too sure about. We shall see...

Nothing on any of the other jazz boards, and just this AP article on the web, apprently from within the hour. Guess this is genuinely "breaking" news! But WTF IS IT??????

Heard this on the KNTU-AP News at noon whilst in the car, going to grab a pack of smokes. Rushed right home, checked it out, and here it is. Couldn't believe it then, still having a hard time believeing it. Not enough info. But, as it says here: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20050405/D899BEEO1.html

Dude, Bowman lives in Plano now, not too far from my crib. We cross paths on the occasional tux gig and such. You want me to send him some robins?

EXACTLY at 80,000 miles!

Well then, that would seem to be the same Dawn label that did all the jazz LPs then. Same logo:

Thanks for that info, Mike. Some things to be on the lookout for, definitely. Here's a pretty neat Kenton site, by former Kenton publicist/insider Noel Wedder: http://home.comcast.net/~noel_wedder/wsb/reflections.htm His comments about City of Glass are provocative, frustrating, and representative, I suspect, of the way that many in the Kenton circle viewed Graettinger: Wedder's full site here: http://home.comcast.net/~noel_wedder/wsb/kentonindex2.html

Dude, that's the way it goes - we never go anywhere, but nobody knows us anyways. It's like being buried in an unmarked grave, except you can't leave your unpaid bills for your heirs to take care of.