JSngry

Hard not to be trivial after something like that, so...whatever happened to Tony Inzalaco?

Absolutely not!

Why the fuck do we even bother?

The "scary" part of the original quote for me wasn't the "redoing" part (hell, once something's out there, it's fair game, for better or worse), but the NATURE of it. It's intriguing, and as a "one-world vision" type thing, I think it's beautiful, but I don't think that Santana has the skills to pulls something like this off on too much more than a touchy-feely, "We are The World, We are The Love Supreme" level. I mean, the type of shit he's talking about, if you want to do that at the same level of intensity and sheer musical "depth" (not to sound condescending, but hopefully y'all know what I mean) as Trane's original, well you're gonna have to have some SERIOUSLY badass theoretical/orchestration/etc chops together, and I don't think that Carlos, God bless him, does. All he has is a vision. But I could be wrong. If I am, I'd like to find out! Anyway, a man with a vision is nothing to be sneered at, one way or the other. But no matter - the scariest part of the whole thing is the tuxedos. Trane died in 1967. Thirty-six years later, tuxedos continue to survive, but dammit, we're doing our best to fix that. Think, Carlos, THINK!

If all of Indiana was as hip as you, the world would be a better place. Not that there's anything wrong with Indiana. Never been there except once in passing. Just trying to pay a compliment, albeit awkwardly, which just goes to show, I suppose, that sometimes a simple HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!! is all it takes to get the point across!

Sign of advancing age I suppose, but I need to ask: was it on this board or the Blown Note that I did a thread about this all-time party classic of an album? Not that it matters, but it kinda creeps me out that I can't remember.

Well hey man, put up a tombstone anyway, any damn place you feel like it. Imagine... "Here may or may not lie the body of Larry Young, one of the greatest jazz artists of all time. That's for us to know and you to find out. But as long as you're here reading this, here's what you need to know..." etc. Have one of those Fast Food Drive-Through speakers playing samples constantly, and keep a supply of bio-disographical brochures readily available in one of those tube things that they use in front of houses that are for sale. Why not?

Well hey! Thank you, Ray, for the compliment AND the help. The really ear-bleeding stuff that I still like (and changing tastes as one matures/ages/whatever is a topic unto itself) tends to be in the 15-20-minute-and-beyond range in duration, so why take up that much space on an 80 minute CDR for something that you KNOW is going to be poorly recieved by a majority of recipients? And now, back to those comments. Y'all keep'em coming!

My opinion: The first two were good, the third one great, CARAVANSERI, BORBOLETTO, and to a lesser extent WELCOME beyond great (LOTUS, having been a Japan-only import for decades, falls outside my real-time chronological experience, but it rates, too, as does the thing w/Alice) and then after that...whatever. For me, the allure of those albums were never in Santana's guitar playing (although I knew quite a few jazz players in school who loved his tone and were fascinated by his sustain) but in the group gestalt. At their best, that band was greater than the sum of it's parts.

Well, yeah. The guy was a major pro in that he had the ability to adapt his basic vocabulary to any setting, any style, and any type of changes and give you "Joe Henderson". That's no small feat in and of itself. But there's times when he's, not really "going through the motions" or "coasting", but just making sure that he turns in a good performance for the record. That's just the nature of the beast (making records as part of a "repertory company", loosely speaking, as BN was in it's own way), and I don't mean that as a knock in the least. Hell, those performances of his that are that level are better than a lot of guys going all out. But when Joe was REALLY into it, magic happened. The same's true of pretty much everybody. The idea of being "constantly inspired" is usually a fallacious one. Almost everybody's got their "bag o'tricks". You got to, or else you don't work, as a rule. And I can be perfectly satisfied, excited, even, by somebody working that bag really well without necessarily being maximally primed, because what's in that bag is pretty damn cool in and of itself, if you know what I mean. To have an "average" level that high is already winning the game, dig? But when the REAL magic occurs and the juju is ripe - THOSE are the moments that you realize that life isn't just great, it's F***ING great! Hey, don't take my word for it, ask Tony the Tiger!

If by "top drawer" you mean at the level of UNITY, THE REAL MCCOY, INNER URGE, etc., I'd say there's lots of stuff that isn't at that level. Most of it, in fact. That's Joe at his peak, and for me, that's "top-drawer". OTOH, if you mean of a consistently high level that doesn't reach THAT level, well, no, off the top of my head I can't think of any. Even when he was not necessarily fully turned on, he remained interesting and distinctive. The guy was remarkably consistent that way. Maybe it's the difference between "top-drawer" and "topperest-drawer".

Which leads me to ask - are there copies of the actual soundtrack recordings circulating amongst collectors? I know I've never seen one on a grey-market boot.

I ordered the Jimmy Lyons box set from JazzLoft and was very pleased by their price, and well nigh amazed at their speed of delivery. I will be doing more business with them, definitely.

Early 80s, if I remember correctly.

You know that's Wild Bill playing on Marvin Gaye's "Mercy Mercy Me", right?

I saw the Ganelin Trio perform live on the Today show. They played "Mack The Knife".

So, uh, working w/Benny was a piece of cake by comparison, eh? Seriously, that's some heavy dues. Next time you see him, give him a salute for me, if you will.

Wow.

That's a pretty intriguing notion for a theme - "Things That Everybody But Me Seem To Like. Help Me Understand The Attraction". Seriously. The discussion could be quite interesting.

Sorry for the late response. I'm watching the Cowboys suck and suck and suck. On BROADCAST TV no less! Hell yeah, Deep. Tell the story. I had no idea.

Oh I see. Trying to get rid of me huh? Well it ain't gonna work! Good!

The only thing better would be to get a Congressional Proclaimation declaring the Organissimo Board an Official Whine-Free Zone!

That would have been a somewhat appropriate comment for Disc One, Track Two. And that's as much of a hint as I'm giving about any of this.

Wow, Dan, you must have been REALLY offended by my discs! Would you like a refund? :g There were 3 "non-jazz" cuts on my two discs (using a definition of "jazz" that is not rigidly dogmatic and/or stylistically myopic), and a fourth that is by an artist whose "status" as a jazz artist is a matter of constant debate. All of these cuts were chosen with very specific musical reasons in mind, and as commentary on the music they precede, follow, or are sandwiched by. As well, 2 of these 3 are artists who have had a HUGE impact on the soul-jazz/funk-jazz favored by a lot of people here, so there is a relevance to their inclusion, because I think that there are some people who are unaware or underaware of these artists. My test, my opportunity to give them exposure, and I think that all compilers should have the same opportunity. As for obscurities, bring 'em on, I say, especially if they are things by artists we know or artists the compiler would like to give exposure to. Everybody we like, we had to hear for a first time somewhere, right? Why should that first time not be here? Also, knowing that "jazz" is a music with an incredibly deep and broad past and present, it stands to reason that the audience for it will consist of people with very diverse tastes. If a compiler wants to play to a "known quantity", so to speak, in terms of audience and genre, that's their perogative, but if a compiler wants to cross eras and mix up genres, that too should be their perogative. In my mind, the Blindfold Tests should be whatever the compiler wants them to be. If the compiler wants to make a "this is the only kind of jazz I like, and here's some of it", go for that. There's going to be some good music there. Similarly, if a compiler wants to do a "this isn't really jazz, but I think you might like it anyway because there's some connection", bring that on too. I view these tests as a wonderful opportunity to hear some stuff that other people are into that I'm not too familiar with, or am totally unfamiliar with. If I don't like, it, well hell, what did it cost me other than a few minutes out a day? And if I should get my coattails pulled to something really interesting, well, HOORAY! Jazz is a big music with global scope in both its influences and its exponents. Nobody's going to like it all. But that's life!

Jim also said that there would be things on there to offend every taste. I am a man of my word! Seriously - no harm done. An honest reaction is the best kind, no matter what.