JSngry

"Impact". The FIRST one must be the one you don't have. It's called MUSIC, INC. Nothing more. Dude, I pay my phone bill every month, dig?

"Maiysha"? Yeah, that's a GREAT tune, especially before it goes into the vamp. That's one where Teo's production is killer, I think. I ain't never heard no triangle sound like that in real life! But it also made for a great live piece as well. I also think that the revisionist attitude about Teo's production work, that it was inadequate and that he didn't "get" the music, is wrong. I dig where Lasswell and others are coming from, but like all hindsight, it's bound to be 20/20. I think that Teo did great work with those albums, and if today's ears want to hear a different perspective out of those tracks, that's cool to. But the music was almost as much of a "construct" as a pop record, so any number of choices could and were made. By and large, I find it very hard to fault Teo's choices, and I say this as somebody who listened to this music, and listened intensely/intently, as it was released. What Laswell (and to some extent, Belden) has done for is added a different perspective to the music, not changed it. If that's their intent (and I know that it is Belden's), then I'm cool with it. But if he's going to go around saying that "Teo got it wrong", then I couldn't disagree more.

Thanks, brownie!

No mention whatsoever on the Blakey/Moody CD reissue of who did the art for that one. I know(?) that Gil Melle did some early 50s covers for the label (and for Prestige too, right?), and that Blakey/Moody thing looks like it could be one of his, but as for that red Moody thing (geez, that sounds like a vintage C&W act - Red Moody), I don't think so.

The blanks, such as they will be.

What, are you CRAZY?

I thought this thread was going to be about the Patriots' Super Bowl run this year. Thank goodness it's not!

Ya' know, I dig the Reid Miles look, wouldn't trade it for anything in the world, especially as "represenative" of Blue Note, but DAMN that's one coolass cover! Even if that tenor would probably be unplayable...

Hey, if he can't make it, can I fill in for him?

Many thanks from here, also. I'll definitely be looking into the Bill Barron. That guy's work intrigues me to no end.

I got really stoned one night back in the 70s, put this one on, and had visions of it being a TV variety special, with all the songs having choreography, cotumes, and all the players playing different characters for each skit/song. You should have seen the dance that everybody was doing as they came on stage to Shelly's intro to "I'm An Old Cowhand", and how they parted in the middle for Sonny to step forward to introduce the show! As if it wasn't already one of the greatest records ever made...

Depends on what type of mother-in-law you got.

I'll posit that having interesting soloists was not what that band and thatmusic was all about anyway. It was very much a group music, with the intent being to create a collective rhythmic organism, with overt soloing serving as an ornament, not as the tree. The best example I've heard of this is on this bootleg: Recorded in such a way that allows you to hear the inside of the music, rather than just the collective mass of it, you can really get a handle on just how interactive this music really was, and how Miles was directing it all through his playing. Very intircate, very mobile, and built from the bottom up. The people who complained about Henderson just playing vamps over and over were completely missing the point. Of all the releases from this band/period I've heard, this one gives what I think is the truest picture of how this music really functioned. Hopefully, it will someday see "official" release.

I bought GET UP WITH IT on the day it was released, and "Rated X" was an immediate favorite. Dark, sinister, and pervese, yes, but hell, it IS called "Rated X", right? I've never "upgraded" to the CD version of the album, so I don't know what it sounds like, but I do have PANTHALASSA, and I found the version there to be interesting but ultimately supplimental.

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php...ndpost&p=287405

Yeah, I'm funnin'. glad to see the enthusiasm and, hopefully, the committment. But I still think it's kinda funny for a 15 year old to rate what Buddy Rich's "landmark" albums were (even though I do agree with the conclusion!). For a 15 year old to have that kind of perspective, he's got to either A) not be 15; B)had a teacher somewhere along the line tell him that; or C)have been immersed in the music and the overall history of it since he was 2 or 3. No matter, the kid's alright w/me!

Yeah, I got the LP w/the Himmelstein notes. Classic, indeed! A freakin' novel, almost, on the back of an album. I still say there's a very nice little book to be compiled from the liner notes to those Schlitten-produced Prestige dates and the ones written for the late-60s/early 70s "historical" reissues.

So, how does the Jack Tracy-produced Jack Wilson date fit into the Liberty-ness of all this?

Oh, Hank definitely had his patterns, and they became more pronounced as the years passed (and to me, that's where the action in The Total Hank Mobley Story lies - in his gradual paring down of his once relatively large array of choices to a relative stubborn few. Why? I've got my theories, discussed somewhere/elsewhere on this board, but this probably ain't the best time & place to go into them). But they're usually "micro" patterns, and you're never sure (usually) which other micro pattern he'll use next. to some extent, this is true of all players, but with Hank, that's sort of his raisin day eater, because he'll surprise you in his choices - you're not as much suprised/delighted/whatever by the specifics as you are how the whole thing is put together. And often enough, he'll disrupt the micropatternology of it all by throwing in some totally unexpected (off-the-wall, even, if you think about it) harmonic gamesmanship that is as ultimately "correct" as it is initially shocking. This is something he did until the end. And to top it all off, all this was delivered with total soul and sincerity. No "cleverness" to it, just invention and feeling in honorable and humble service to each other. Hank was HIP!

I think it's simple, really. Larry's critiques are based on his own responses to the music, expressed in language that is also based on his own experiences. Very personal reactions and articulations of same.The language he uses is very often alive with the same type of creativity that inspires it. In other words, it's often "impressionistic" instead of "literal". How well one does or does not "receive the message" is probably dependent on what one is looking for in jazz writing (as well as how much one does or does not share the same like/dislikes that he does). Myself, I've found his writing to often be as inspired, insightful, and creative as the music he's writing about. It's not writing for those who prefer a straight-up historical approach based on facts, narratives, oral histories, and things like that. With the Kartian style, one gets something else entirely - one man's opinion, nothing more, and nothing less. Now myself, I dig both approaches. Then again, I'm eclectic in my tastes, perhaps even to the point of being a slut. But a QUALITY slut, mind you! Thing is, I can appreciate how somebody might not dig Larry's approach, especially since he speaks of his dislikes as eloquently as he does his likes (and a lot of the joy that I get from his writing stems from having so many shared likes, discovering that many of the reasons for those likes are similar at root, and hearing those likes, and the reasons for them, articulated so damn creatively. That's bound to piss off some people who have strong passions for that which he dislikes. But otoh, who doesn't like hearing something said that they wish they could have so eloquently/creatively said themselves, or hearing somebody point something out that they might have felt, but not quite yet had a handle on? What I can't appreciate is an unnuanced, blanket disdain for the approach itself, if only because I think that Larry's writing is extremely "jazzlike" in it's conception and execution. Like a jazz musician, he gets a feeling, and then goes about articulating his personal expression of it in the way that suits him best, and refines it until he feels it something that has to "come out'. Some writers do this about love, or history, or politics. Larry does it about music. If he doesn't connect with everybody, that's cool (with me, anyway), but this is most assuredly not some guy blowing smokerings and random musings that have got squat to do with shit, and I find the implication that it might be to be just plain wrong. Disliking something, STRONGLY disliking something, for a failure to connect is one thing, but flat-out denying the essential validity of that thing in the first place is something else entirely. That's not saying that anybody here has actually intended to literally do that. But I get the impression from some of the terminology being used in this thread, that it is being implied, if only as a combat maneuver. And I'm taking this opportunity to say that I find it beneath what I know to be the dignity and intellegence of those who are doing it. Yeah, we all have gut-level reaactions, pro and con, and they're wonderous things. But really, once the guts are spilled, can't we go about the business of cleaning up the mess and/or making chitlins?

Oh, THERE'S Chuck!

Gotcha. FWIW, here's a cover scan of CAPE VERDIAN w/no Liberty fine print, at least that I can see: Now, my copy of JODY GRIND has Liberty fine fine print on the cover and innerfold logo, but everything else is "pure" BN - label, inner sleeve, and "VAN GELDER" stamped in the dead wax. But that comes before 4253 (BTW, the 4253 thing is also given here: http://kleene.ss.uci.edu/~rmay/Bluenote.html ), so I guess the covers might have been quickly redesigned as part of the turnover? I bought it back in the 70s in a dusty old Mom&Pop type place that was they type of joint where they never sent anything back, stock accumulated for years, so my guess is that it's a fairly "vintage" copy. Now, for years, I thought that JODY GRIND was either the last pre-Liberty BN or the first post-Liberty one, just becasue of the fancy gatefold cover and the picture of Albert Lion inside. But come to find out, years later, it was the last BN album produced by him, which is relevant to this inquiry, but only tangentally. Now here's antother wildcard to throw in the mix - Jack Wilson's SOMETHING PERSONAL (4251) recorded in L.A., August 1966, and produced by Jack Tracy. Definitely suggests some "outside" influence, but by whom and at who's bequest? Did Lion & Wolff pass it off to him, or did the L.A.-based Liberty call for this one in anticipation of their takeover? Like we've learned, going by things like labels, covers, inner sleeves, and such means not too much of anything. Any definitive answer might depend on exactly how the question is phrased, if you know what I mean, and the question as originally posed might leave itself open for several different answers. Maybe. Where's Chuck?

You lost me there. Post what?

For that matter, what's the deal w/the gatefold cover to THE JODY GRIND?