JSngry

Please do not take this the wrong way Che, but your post is unfair, and offensive towards the parents of this board that are proud of their babies and wish to share their happiness with other board member who are "friends" in some way. Yes I was afraid that some might see it this way, and it was not my intention, but you know I work with sex offenders and they manipulate pictures that they get from the internet and you can imagine what they manipulate them into. E-mails with pictures can be sent off-list, I have three children and would never dream of posting a picture of them on a general web site. In the end it is up to each parent, do forgive me if I caused offence. I just see a different world than some people. Che. I believe our departed friend makes a point that is not unworthy of consideration, at least.

I beg to differ, B. His "views" consisted entirely of empty slogans, tired cliches, belaboring of the obvious, and, when all else failed, "read Chomski". HE seemed to be totally lacking in nuance, the ability to ponder ambiguity, and of doing anything other than parroting a relatively few worn-out lines over and over. I preume to speak for no one but myself, but I would be very surprised if any of the thoughtful members of the "left" on this board viewed him as "one of us". I sure as hell didn't. Now, if my description of che above as a simpleminded sloganeer makes those on the right say, "HA! How is that any different than any of you other guys?", then we have a problem. Ditto for for the lefties thinking that of the right. A BIG problem. I know the rhetoric gets pretty heated in the political discussions more often than not, but really - when cool heads prevail and the focus is on light rather than heat, I think it's obvious that most of the participants are intellegent and thoughtful individuals who bring a variety of nuanced perspectives to any given issue. Che did not seem to be capable of doing that, not at all. If he had it in him, he never showed it, not that I saw. He was a one-trick pony. Two, maybe. Three on a really good day, with the wind blowing out. This is from a "political" perspective. Musically, hey, whatever, no judgements on that from me. His views were in line with most of the folks here the same way that an Etch-A-Sketch is in line with a handwritten letter.

Che's gonna come to Canada, sneak into America, blow us all up, and then whine about getting arrested. I got tree-fitty on it!

Anybody remember the eprisode of Gomer Pyle, USMC where Sgt. Carter needed a female singer for the officer's club and Gomer called in a favor and got Dinah Washington for the gig?

That was my impression from the beginning, and I was never totally dissuaded of it.

As well as the role...

Anybody?

I dunno, zeroing in on the frequency and broadcasting on a hypersonic level to all who strive to tune between the cracks?

Mastered by Wally Van Gelding? Sir Walter Wally? Or is it one of those Six-Walleye label things?

Is it true that Cuscuna didn't include the Nabors/Mormon Tabernacle Choir session in the set because he doesn't like large vocal groups?

Hey, John, as long as you're working your magic, hozabout putting some real money it that tip jar?

I dunno, ask Gerry Mulligan...

Our sole excursion into the "real" Orlando was not particularly thrilling (to put it mildly...), but we didn't try real hard to find anything excellent, either. Still, if we ever go back to Disney, we've pretty much decided to stay the hell outta Orlando and just keep it in-house. The real world fucks up often and easily (and Orlando per se seemed to do both more than normal), but Disney does not! Disney World offers a meal plan that can potentially be a good deal. You pay something like $35 per day per person (that's the adult price, don't know if it's different for younger kids or not), and you get one snack, 1 counter service meal (which includes appetizer, entree, dessert, and drink), and one full-table-service meal (same coverage as conter-service, except you're waited on) per day, fully covered. Doesn't matter what the actual cost is, you're good, tax and tip included. Pays for itself, and then some. Plus, you have the option of combining two table-service meals for one "Signature" meal ("fancier" cuisine and settings). We did that and got a $250+ seafood & steak meal for 3, and walked out of there w/o dropping a cent, other than that we bumped the tip up from the covered 15% to 20%. Disney World's food does not suck, and the portions are very generous. Plus, between the Magic Kingdom, Epcot, & MGM, they offer all kinds of food in all kinds of settings. There's character meals for the kids (and trust me, the kids DO love that), and more sophisticted settings for the adults, especially outside of the Magic Kingdom. It's all still Disney, but if you're expecting typical theme-park food in typical theme-park settings, you might be pleasantly surprised. I'd definitely recommend calling the DW toll-free to ask for more info. As evil as those fuckers ultimately are, they give you one helluva good family vacation experience and value. In particular, the package deals offer some potentially inviting perks (especially the extended hours at the parks), and since the kids will be along, you'll probably want to at least investigate the options.

Worth having just for the gorgeously subversive Riddle arrangement of "The Way You Look Tonight".

I heard that she left Blakey for Bird. Theat's why he killed him.

Don't be so modest. You are also four guys, in green blazers and white shoes. Actually, I thought that the reflectors on Pete's shoes in the original photo were quite striking. But hell, what do I know about fashion - I'm actually digging the lime green jacket as it appears on Gallio. Linen, right?

Wazzup w/the black vents? Ya' know, I'm almost at the age where that kind of thing would appeal to me, especially if it was in a cheap polyester. Almost... Pete actually looks good in his, though. I'll show him the picture, tell him who did it, and give him your home address. I'm sure he'll want to contact you personally. You were plaaning an extended vacation, weren't you?

Al, & Ray, I hope that what you all are discovering is that the term "avant-garde" is pretty much a meaningless term when it comes to this type of music. It's a critical term, not a musical one, and it's relevance is more towards placing the music in a historical/sociological "position" than in defining what it is that's going on with the music itself. As a result, the "popular" image of this music is that of a bunch of alienated, self-absorbed sociopaths doing their damndest to destroy everything in the world through unrestrained musical chaos. Which sometimes is the case. But not always. Quartet Out might have been considered "avant-garde" 35 years ago, but nowadays? Not really. We're just four guys who play what we like how we feel it, and let it be whatever it's gonna be at the time. Same as any other jazz, really. Nothing "intimidating" about that concept (or shouldn't be), not really. It's what jazz is supposed to be about, right? Thing is, we're not alone. Plenty of other people are doing the same thing (well, not exactly the same thing, but more or less so), and the term "avant-garde" too often scares people off because of the non-musical implications. You know, it's Anarchy Music, Crazy People Music, and shit like that. Well, maybe yes, and maybe no. All I can tell you is that we, and the countless other musicians like us, older and younger alike, aren't intentionally trying to "destroy" anything except the notion that we have to be anything other than who and what we are, and that a big part of that who and what includes joy, fun, a love of life, and the sheer ecstatic intoxication that comes from being in the moment as fully as we can possibly be at any given time. Yeah, there's baggage (there's always baggage...), but you can't lose it until you confront it. And losing it, well, hey, that ain't nothing but laughing (or screaming) to keep from crying - oldest game in the book. "Avant-garde"? Just what the hell is that anyways?

Yo Al! Thanks! Knew I shoulda got a haircut. Just for the record, Lyles is not a mechanic. Although, as much money as he spends on cars, he probably should become one...

GOOD MOVE blooms with repeated and detailed listening, imo. Might be worth a reaccquiral.

No disrespect mean by by the George Ringo thing, btw, and hopefully none taken. Just another example of how BeatleMania scarred the minds of a generation and all...

Isn't it time for Pope George Ringo?

ex-ACT-ly!

It went good, thanks. The band could've played better, but we didn't exactly suck either, so no regrets there. The crowd was respectable enough in size, although it took a while for it to build. But with O-Voard stalwarts Big Al, Joe, & Rostasi in attendance early on, the vibes were good no matter the size of the crowd. So Big Al's gonna post pictures, eh? I knew I should've gotten a haircut...

One of those is currently in stock at Dussy Bassar: http://www.dustygroove.com/jazzcd4.htm#81775 Woody Shaw -- Woody Shaw With The Tone Jansa Quartet Timeless (Netherlands), 1985 One of our favorite Woody Shaw albums from his later years -- and an album that's got the same joyous spirit and free soaring feel of his best 70s work! The core group on the album is the Tone Jansa Quartet -- led by European reedman Jansa, and working in a space that's quite similar to that of Shaw's backing groups on previous sessions. Jansa wrote all the tunes on the set, and gave them a soaring feel that we really love -- just the right mix of introspection and exploration found on classic Shaw sessions like Little Red's Fantasy or Lovedance. Titles include "Midi", "Boland", "Call Mobility", "River", and "May".