JSngry

Hey, they're coming to my house. It'll be my reputation that's on the line. I don't want anybiod saying hey that little Jimmy Sangrey, we walked all the way from Sausalito to take him his records and then he didn't even invite us in for a bowl of that hot beef stew which we clearly smelled cooking, that guy's an asshole. See, I was raised in a small town, and we just didn't act like that. Nor were we encouraging of it in others.

So it would be a nice thing to have a nice meal for them, right?

There's only two rocks thrown and the the filming stops. coming back for a third one. It could be 4/4, but without a score (or being privy to the pre-performance discussion, it also could not be,

Geography, bro, geography. That, and Harold was wanting to go there already.

Anybody ever heard these?

The genius that David Axelrod had making all those live/"live" Cannonball records was in the realization that the more you could make an audience sound like a congregation, the easier it would be to feel the spirit. It's a genius that the producer of this record (Shannon Williams) did not share. Not that the Montreux audience gave him much to work with (or if they did, the mikes didn't pick it up), but hey, David Axelrod knew how to work around that, so...no excuses.

Weird cover, but a great record. Plus, I got an OG inner sleeve (just like Eddy and that shirt, Discogs has one like mine!): Green on the inside, purple/pink on the label: But apart from all that, great record. Hardcore gospel tempos (you'll reach a star, because there are such things), and anybody who plays in any kind of a section should listen to vocal groups - any kind, really - to better understand what can be done with blend, group vibrato, shading, inflection, you know...music. Hear a Curtis Mayfield influence? Hey, how about that, eh? Two-way street, maybe? To anybody who's interested (if there is anybody), always check the "Religious" section of whatever used store you are in. You might come up with nothing but Anita Bryant records, but you might find...lots of great music.

A plushy stuffed animal magically transforms before his or her eyes into a comfy hoodie with all the same huggability.

Shower, hell. I took a freakin' bath!!!!!

Maybe it's the tree blocking one of the speakers, but I swear there's a bass clarinet on here...weird...

Yeah, apparently at one point I belonged to a Yahoo group? Because I was getting those "alert" email for about a month now. No idea why, but yeah, they're gone.

Ok, here's where personal taste comes in. I've long known that track, and have never found it to be more than semi-informed noodling (the constant run-on phrasing of almost all guitarists of this ilk has always been a BIG problem for me. It's a musical example of "how can I miss you when you won't go away"). That and the rudimentary symmetricality of the phrasing (where actual phrasing exists). I certainly appreciate the ambition, though. But in the end, ambition is not enough, not really. Kudos for the idea, zilch for developing it out. Then again. Mike Bloomfield has always been hit or miss with me. Mostly miss, to be honest. Again, personal taste. I know some people revere him. I don't get it, and at this point have no further desire to figure it out. So he was a really good white blues-rock player. That's like, what, being a really good indoor slot-car racer? Anyway.... What changes everything is something like a catastrophic meteor shower, or something like that, real planetary impact. Other than that, nothing. All it changes is what "you" and other people like "you" know. And that may very well be something that other "you"s either have already known or maybe even find totally irrelevant, so....no change there! Just getting tired of specific demographic groups seeing themselves as the center of "everything", past, present, and future. It ain't working no more, that isn't. And it ain't working because it's just not true/accurate/fair/balanced/etc. "Everything" mean every thing. There is no one true lens for everything. Perspective is by definition limited to the individual, and then a collection of individuals who perceive much the same thing. Now, let us all worship the one true god, and good luck with that.

So...Paul Butterfield was the American John Mayall, is that what I'm hearing? Seriously, though, I liked the guy well enough. I just never saw him as "important", not like that, any way.

What's more evolved, an ape or a chimp?

Original link was to a DL site of at best questionable legitimacy and has been edited (by me) so as to now be unusable. Please be careful going forth, ok?

By "younger", you mean "young white people who weren't already caught by the "folk blues" movement of a few years earlier", correct? Not saying that that was not important, especially in terms of the marketplace, just that if there's an anything part of "everything" that got changed, that was it. If you want to look at what changed blues itself, I think you look at James Brown more than you do Paul Butterflied.A LOT more. James Brown changed as much of "everything" as there was to be changed.

A dolman sleeve brings laid-back ease and casual elegance to a chunky-knit tunic perfect for stylishly layering on breezy days. Stylish? Layering" Breezy days? I dunno, man, sounds like it's pretty narrow in its application. And I resent the body-shaming implicit in the word "chunky".

"Everything" is a pretty big word...

Live sermons/songs.

I appreciated him even more once I learned that he did so much of that stuff to work in and around the existing small group jams. I know some people are repulsed by that very notion, and I get that. but still and all, like it or not, it's not everybody (or anybody, really), who could write that freely (sic) in that context. And he had a pretty damn broad palette, color-wise. Having said that, a little goes a long way. One record at a time, at most.

Very much worth knowing The Fantastic Violinaires! Produced by Gene Barge!!!!