JSngry

Lots of classical performers/conductors were with Columbia for decades...for that matter, at least one composer also comes to mind, Stravinsky.

Please, let's not devolve into the rabbit hole of defining good citizenship. It's a generally understood notion that is not universally embraced. So be it. Now, COVID news. Not until yesterday had I personally known anybody impacted, but sure enough, I heard from a co-worker who had lost two family memebrs, and currently has two in the hospital.

For the record - if you persist in this "it's all a hoax" thing, you will be flagged as a spammer, if for no other reason than hoaxes that involved provable deaths from provable causes don't fit any definition of "hoax". Once you are so flagged, you will still be able to read the board, and to update your signature. To have full privileges restored, you will have to go directly the board's owner, Jim Alfredson and make your case to him. You are, of course, free to believe whatever you want to believe about this, and to speak it wherever it is allowed. As it pertains to this "hoax" notion, this is not one of those places. This is the second time we've dealt with this on this board and on a COVID-19 thread. Please confirm - in this thread - that you have read and understand this and also advise if you intend on pursuing this line of thought on this forum so that moderation can proceed accordingly.

Please cite your sources (yes, plural) for this claim.

Yeah, I mean, it's a DIFFERENT sound to be sure, so maybe there's a thrill-seeking element to it. And yeah, in 1977, it was a GREAT sound (especially once you got to 15/ or 30 IPS). But jeez, anybody who wants to "bring it back" or whatever it is past a historical awareness... they just need to either grow up or else find that wormhole into the pre-digital 20th Century. Shit done moved on. Ultimately, "better" is whatever gives you what you want. #thatkindofthing

That sounds like the best Dating Game episode ever.

I still remember seeing that episode on original air date. Well, not the episode, damned if I remember the episode itself, but that part of it, yeah. and before the internet and stuff, I was really hoping like a hard hell named Harriet that it was Les McCann doing that. But no, not Les McCann. Oh well!

In The Future Of Jazz, Girls Talk! But seriously, that guy, that Pat Williams guy, he was certainly the future of something..TV Theme Jazz, maybe? Whatever, the guy had a thing, and if it got obnxious as pickle fuck eventually, early on it was pretty damn clever, clever and crafty, and pretty much unmistakable.

Neither hand nor and I'm afraid, still.

Pretty sure there's a lot between that 0 and that 1 (like, infinity), and that the brain is able to process all of it in one way or another, and also that there are other parts of the body besides the ear that are sensitive to "sound waves". Life is a full body (and probably a lot more) experience. This willingness to roll over and play baby for the digital paradigm...it's probably true that we've passed the point of no return there, but I'm less than convinced that it's gonna be a bright bright sunshiny day as a result.

Recreate is just that - a recreation. It's not the original. And even though analog is itself certainly a transformative recreation, a recreation of a recreation is still one step removed, logically. Let's just not make those leaps of logic, please. It might take centuries for them to unravel, but unravel they will, and then what will you have? A bunch of people who have redfined "is" to fit what they believe they know. WE WILL ALL BE GODS OF OUR OWN MAKINGS!!!!! Now, if you want to say that digital can imitate analog but analog can't imitate digital, that's fine. I concur completely. But don't get all test-tube baby about "recreating" analog via digital, please.

noooooo,,,,, Point Of No Return is the only one of those that even comes close (and it comes pretty close on some tracks).

But those are two different points. No, a sample is not EXACTLY the same (unless you can do the quantums and physically prove that the analog also has microscopic but undetectable to the make ears gaps). I don't care how small/undetectable the gaps are, they're still gpas. And yes, digital is now good enough that it's not only "undetectable" from analog, it's quite often better sounding than analog in terms of accuracy. But it's not the same. If it was, then digital = analog, and we both know that's not a true equation. Or maybe we have a different understanding of what "replicate" means. In the end, I don't care except as a random semantics thing, really. I'm getting older, my ears are often tired before they even get started, and the same is even truer for my mind. So in the end, fuck it, let's all jsut play our records, simple as that.

Ok, that's a fair point.

I think that THIS guy knew what he meant!

Tape is analog. It captures a continuous vibration, which is closer to a "real" soundwave traveling through the air than is a digital sampling of one. Whatever else is involved, that particular truth remains. That's just science. But tape is tape, and digital has gotten exponentially better and reliable. And practical. That's just reality. But...all things being otherwise equal (which is a BIG if...) a wider tape at a faster speed is always going to sound measurably better, because...wider tape and higher speed. So, again, all things being otherwise equal, any "normal" analog tape format will sound better than a cassette. All things being otherwise equal. Which IS a big "if".

Can't help anybody with "liking" it, that's for you to decide, but "getting" it is not really difficult, imo - it's profane (quite) comedic (subjective) pop opera. Have we all seen 200 Motels, I mean, seen it? That's it right there. connect the dots backwards (w/o too much difficulty) to something like this: and/or this in a bit of a way: then retool it for a traveling rockbandshow. THIS is what you get: and oh yeah - The Turtles...if all you know are the hits...don't kid yourself. Those cats had (or at least developed) a conceptual streak several miles wide, and not at all incompatable with Zappa's. None of this shit happened in a vacuum, that's all I'm saying.

https://heavy.com/entertainment/2020/05/betty-wright-dies/

That was a very good band with a quite interesting mix of ingredients with which to make music. 200 Motels had a lot of really good moments, and the two live albums from them have long been favorites. Even with all of the now-creepy sexual fetishisms, that was a really good band. Color me curious (whatever color that is?).

Give me (what is rightfully mine) or give me death! When framed as a labor issue, the march toward progress is rightly viewed an a noble thing with unfortunate, if at times noble, casualties. But ultimately, you know, ownership wins, because they have a right to it, so let's all move on, right? And that's one way to look at it. "Just how it is" because....that is just how it is. But another way to look at it is that, wait a minute, you going to take what is mine from me, for you, and basically tell me tough shit, them's the breaks? And that's it? That's all you think I'm here for is to be your cheap labor bitch? You want to call your god "master" and then you want me to call YOU the same thing (silently or otherwise), because you think that you should be - ARE - my god? Well, let's get this shit out in the open now and let's see how much of a god you are without having slaves (even voluteered ones) to keep you going. Let's see where the real strength and power comes from, ok? That's another way to look at to look at it, and I'll be damned if can say it's wrong in any way. Now, back to John Henry, I have to say that for any number of reason, all of them probably reasonable, probably none of the good, I've never heard this. So looking to visit The Future Of Jazz (non-Caucasio-Centric Iteration), I just one-clicked this, finally, wish me luck!

John Henry? You mean Patrick Henry, right?

I really should scan/upload/post this MASSIVE interview that M. Cusuna did with RRK in the April 1971 issue of JAZZ & POP, but check this little tiny bit out, he's talking about the strength of mind it takes to it takes to truly create something instead of just imitate it and how that strength can also drive people crazy b/c the human accomplishment involved is not valued except as fodder for the machine. Man, Wes Montgomery spent so much time on the guitar. Then after he gets half-way known, somebody invents a button that you push that it sounds like Wes Montgomery. Now you gonna tell me that a man in his normal mind can take some shit like that? After you done broke your fingers, you done stretched your fingers, man; this man didn't even use no picks, and you gonna tell me that you can just accept something like that, man? No, i can't buy it, and you can't beat me to make me buy it. Ain't nobody can make me buy nothing like that, cause it's wrong. You dig? It's wrong. Oh, this thing does go on, there's also talk about The Jazz & Peoples Movement, just ALL kinds of things...it's rich.

OH SHIT I JUST GOT BACK FROM THE FUTURE OF JAZZ AND THERE WAS DICK HYMAN ALL OVER IT ALL OVER IT!!!! Oddly enough, so was Zoot Sims...didn't see that one coming...

No, not really. It jsut seems that way because you were the target demographic then and it feel like they were speaking to you. I mean, that's the way this shit works. Supposed to work like that and does. No need to apologize for it working, any more than Bud Shank didn't need to apologize for making those records. That's the way shit is suppose to work. Free people, free market, everything free but money.