JSngry

Them.

Why, visitors from beyond, of course!

I sometimes play in a rehearsal band that has a lot of the Pell octet charts, and they're harder tahn shit, some of them, wierd keys, and highly detailed rhythms. My basic take on them is that it's a lot of labor to very little end musically. But hey, I dig playing them anyway, just because of the challenge.

How do we know that they weren't just lawn ornaments?

It's a website. Not that familiar with it myself, but Joe's a good friend and a righteous kinda guy, so when he asked me to do it, I was more than happy to assent.

This is a deeply beautiful record.

Sony/Columbia offers much more elaborate documentation/packaging/etc. and probably deeper research and more "fastidious" remastering. That all costs money. I've been sent a review copy of this set and will be doing a "formal" review for Bagatellen, at the request of Joe Milazzo. But I can say here and now that this Prestige box offers good value and decent documentation. Not sure that the casual Dexter fan might not be better served, at least in the short-term, by getting individual albums, but that's debateable.

Milford Graves, a musician and holistic healer, in his basement laboratory in Queens. He uses electronic stethoscopes and computer monitors to analyze heartbeat rhythms and pitches.

No, but a nation of people living in the spirit of Scott's words and accompanying music could certainly go a long way towards saving itself. This is one serious sister, and this is one serious album. There's so much redemption, strength, and affirmation in this music that it's frightening to think about how/why it's so attention-grabbing. This should be the norm. Instead... Stunning, complex, deeply grooving, and HIGHLY recommended.

7. Man, you're good. You got Parker, but it's not Daniel Carter on the pipe, but it's one of the NY crew. I'm sure you know him. Roy Campbell?

Was he using regular D or sidekey D? If I was to wager, it'd be sidekey.

Don't know if the CD contains bout full albums, but the Galaxy material is good, if not always great. Definitely worth having if you're a fan, just not the best place to start if you're not. You do get to hear Dewey cover Gilbert O'Sullivan, however.

And Bu Pleasant's thing on Muse.

One of the Ganelin guys?

The usual disclaimers apply. First of all, a nicely mellow set, Dmitry. Very tasteful, listenable, and cliche-free. MUCH enjoyed it. Now, the dirty work... TRACK ONE: C-Ball Heifetz above the ceiling. Nice to hear this without scratches. The thing that becomes apparent as time passes is that no matter how "contrived" the concept/material/etc on those Capitol sides, no matter how circumscibed the tunes were for broader appeal, this band, especially the rhythm section, played for keeps. Of that there can be no denying. Yeah to giving it up for and to the people. TRACK TWO: Don't know. It's got that modern wood sound on the bass, which I like quite a bit. Gives the axe relevance to the hip-hop trip, which it certainly SHOULD have. Bottom, baby, bottom. Everybody sounds fine, no bs going on, even if the noir-ish theme and groove could precipitate some. I like how the guitarist doesn't really try to "swing" but just does it by playing his own feel. Bass and drums are definitely on the same page. Saxist is a little less substantive, but is aware enough of it to stay within himself, and maintains interest as a result. This is nice. TRACK THREE: The thing I like about Lee is that he'll play almost any material in any context and get into it. He can do this kind of thing, or something like MOTION e/Elvin, or the Tristano stuff, or the Nonet stuff, or some free improv, whatever. Context doesn't matter to him, (I guess I should say that it doesn't seem to intimidate him) and I think that's beautiful. Maybe that's an offshoot of the whole Tristano emphasis on "content" over "style", I dunno. What I do know is that I love Lee Konitz. Didn't have a clue as to either the tune or the album, but Dmitry's thoughtful inclusion of Lee speaking at the end was all the clue I needed: http://image.allmusic.com/00/amg/cov200/dr...d98582jmb9e.jpg This is an obscure one, I think! Can't go wrong with Lee Konitz. TRACK FOUR: Not even a remote clue, but I very much dig the Middle-Eastern/Jazz fusion thing. Played in a group locally for a few years that did it, and really came to appreciate the nuances of the phrasing and the rhythms. Sopranoist uses some of Liebman's techniques, but I don't hear the tone as being Liebman's. No matter, this thing dances and is full of life. Love it! TRACK FIVE: A stone classic. One of the most perfect pairing of singer and pianist ever recorded. They're both heavyweights on their own, but this collaboration was waaaayyy beyond "perfection". Exquisite. TRACK SIX: Walt Dickerson, from the MGM movie thing w/Ra, iirc. Have this one, haven't internalized it yet. But again, how do you not love this? TRACK SEVEN: Trumpeter sounds familiar, but I can't call a name after several listenings. A bit of Lee, a bit of Don, and a LOT of soul. Drummer is much to my liking. Bassist has that sparse but solidly stately thing going on big time. William Parker? Nah...What a haunting tune this is. Might like to purchase this one. TRACK EIGHT: "Stratusphunk", from this album, I guess: http://image.allmusic.com/00/amg/cov200/dr...f73452t3334.jpg Never cared too much for this altoist, but damned if he didn't have the best taste in writers and arrangers for his dates! Have never heard this version, so I was surprised to that hear the interval between soloists is identical, I think, to the one used on NEW YORK, NEW YORK's "Big City Blues". I'll take me some George Russell (and who else is on here, Art Farmer & Bill Evans?) any time, with or without this altoist. TRACK NINE: Yo lo tengo! http://image.allmusic.com/00/amg/cov200/dr...f65643abwgi.jpg This is really tame for this pianist, but hell that groove is what matters. A "must-have" for Latin Jazz buffs, but don't stop here as far as the pianist goes. There's LOTS more, and in more ways than one. TRACK TEN: More soul. Actually recorded in a subway tunnel? Like Paul Horn in the Taj Mahal, only the NYC version? No matter. The guy's at least a quarter-tone sharp, and it doesn;t matter one freakin' bit. That sound is his soul, and if that's what it is, that's what it is. That's what it must be. Deny this and you deny jazz, period, afaic. Very well might buy this too, assuming it's a commercial item and not something Dmitry captured w/a mini-disc recorder... Ten tracks, one disc, not a half-stepper in the batch. If this is this dentist's version of "dentist's office music", I'd have to seriously consider commuting for cleanings and such! Much thanks! [edited for spelling]

BURPDAY!

Listened again last night and feel the need to "clarify" a few of my earlier comments, First of all Moncur's chops don't really sound "strong". But he is able to execute what he tries to plat, which is more than can be said about the Reunion Band date. It's to his credit, I think, that he "stays within himself" in this regard. Second, all the trombone solos are by Moncur, I'm sure. Woodley might participate in the collective improv portions that a few of the charts have, but doesn't play any solos as such, at least not that I can remember sitting here now. It makes sense really - if Grachan's chops are tenuous, why have him play ensemble parts? Better to get sombody whose tone & intonation won't present a possible problem un that regard. Thirdly, my statement that "Nothing at all on here is even slightly "avant-garde" might be a little biased based on my own tastes. There are moments of colloective improvisation on this record (not a lot, though), and some of the voicings are pretty pointed and clustery in spots. Now, to my ears, that's been going on for over 40 years, and has been incorporated into today's "modern mainstream", but for anybody who still finds such things distasteful, I think it only fair to note that they will be found here, if in relatively small measure. Really, though, the writing could have been done by Oliver Nelson in the mid-1960s for one of his "non-commercial" assignments. Think Rudd's writing on FOUR FOR TRANE filtered through, say, Nelson's ALFIE charts, and you get the idea. What's NOT here are the out-of-tempo/pointillistic/etc works of Moncur that have turned off those who need a steady beat in their music. This stuff's all in time, and it all swings. The only exception would be the brief 'Excursion' , which sounds like it might be a collective improv. But other than that, you got a nice, taut, sometimes dark, sometimes prickly collection of swinging jazz. Actually, the entire side would not have seemed too "avant-garde" even in 1965, It might have seemed "edgy" or some such, but there's certainly nothing here that would have seemed "out" even then. "Progressive", maybe, but that's it. And it's now 2004, so... Other than that, nothing's changed about my opinion. A very good record, great writing, fine playing by all concerned (John clark sounds great too, and Tim Hagans continues to be the man of many faces, none of them predictable), and a welcome return to activity by one of the most interesting (for me) jazz composers of the last half-century.

I thought you wouldn't give a shit who I was or what I did. Ive been a member of boards in the past and usually, when there's a 'sell or trade' section on the forum, it's preciselly for that. The 'introduce yourself' section is for other kind of people, and personally I dont care for those. Fundamental misunderstanding there, and understandable enough. The various fora here are to keep the various topics organized, not to appeal to different members or types of members. With a few exceptions, most members read and post in lots of different fora. It's a "community", not a "department store". Just so you know. Like I said, an understandable error. BTW - Chuck's a great guy. Don't let the saltiness fool you into thinking otherwise.

Consider yourself signed and down then!

I have the Masters/Harper side on Capri. Good arranger, he is. Doesn't surprise me, then, that these charts are as they are.

dahdahdahdahDAHHdahdodut!

I hear plenty Moncur on here, fwiw. That personality unmistakably comes through, as it always has. Like I said, the chops are better than they've been the last few years. I've not listened recently, so Woodley might indeed have some spots on here. But so does Grachan, and let's just say that he doesn't suck.

Oh yeah - what label is this on, and who did the arrangements? The arrangements, I think, arewhat will "sell" the record to skeptics. Beautiful, skillful writing, and totally "accesible".

This is indeed a fine record. The arrangements and solos posit Moncur firmly withing today's post-hardbop mainstream. Nothing at all on here is even slightly "avant-garde". Harper & Bartz sound great, with Harper showing a mellowness in tone I've not quite heard from here before, and Bartz showing a lot of the old fire that I haven't heard from him in a while. The biggest surprise for me, having been sent the disc w/o personnel, is Cyrille. His mastery of many idioms should by now be self-evident to all who have followed his career, but for some reason I still never think of him as a "potential candidate" for this type of stuff. Foolishness on my part. Let there be no doubt that Andrew Cyrille is a living master! As for Moncur's chops, they sound better than they did on that Reunion Band side of a few years ago, where they sounded pretty sad (I'd go so far as to say tragic, but that's just me), and better than they did on the recent Shepp/Rudd live date, where they souded only slightly better. What's missing from the "glory days" is the "punch", the personal oomph that made his somewhat reductionist approach to the instrument something you had to confront, whether it was to be compelled by it or to be apalled by it. But that was then, and this is now. Knowing the difficulties he's had, I'd not expect him to have the same personality now. Besides, these are different times, and he is 40 years older now. I think he still sounds like Grachan Moncur III, just older and less determined to stubbornly do something "different". What that means is that this album strongly emphasizes the "traditional" elements in Moncur's playing and writing, and you can now hear, I think, how his whole deal was really coming out of the hard bop tradition and language, just trimming a lot of fat, and honing in on very specific elements for each individual piece. To that end, people who either don't like his BN work or who are "hesitant" about it might well consider diving headfirst into this one. I feel pretty certain that if you didn't know it was Moncur's writing and playing, you'd think it was some really hip modern mainstream album. Which is exactly what it is. I'll even go so far as to go out on a very shaky limb and say that, Lon, I think you will enjoy this one! Check it out, y'all.

It's rumored that there is a LOT of unreleased Rollins in the RCA vaults, including a few more hours from the Village Gate.