DrJ

OK, mildly interesting stuff, but there are literally DOZENS of equally scary-seeming test-tube studies published EVERY WEEK out there...and obviously 99.9% of these things never pan out in clinical studies to be of concern. Hey I'm up for caution as much as anyone, but this type of stuff always amazes me the way it's portrayed in the popular media as a real major, pressing concern. Pouring a chemical (one that's intended to kill bacteria at that) directly on to developing nerve cells is a LONG way off from concluding that shampooing with it is an issue...that would mean very high concentrations would need to somehow cross into your blood stream, which seems HIGHLY unlikely. A great example of the way science is routinely botched in the press. Classic quote from one of the articles from the scientist: "Can I say that these products are safe to use? No," he said. "Can I say that these products are unsafe to use? No." Gee. Thanks. Another telling comment: Again, Aizenman is quick to point out that there is no direct evidence linking MIT to (any of) these disorders. And this classic from some Assistant Professor at Vanderbilt: "There is a healthy dose of skepticism that needs to come when using any products or being intensely exposed to any compound," she said. Uh, OK - could we be any more sweepingly vague? OK. So given that time and money are limited at the governmental and every other level, hows about we worry about really PRESSING, proven health issues rather than fretting about stuff that will likely never pan out to be remotely important? My personal favorite, other than test tube studies like this one being made to sound like they're clinical studies, is when they quote observational studies (you know, the kind that finds associations between some exposure and some bad medical outcome) as if they are firm evidence, when in fact they are weak and can NEVER confidently be used to infer causality in the association (the exposure CAUSED the outcome). One not too long ago about television watching and ADHD just killed me; no way to determine whether TV "caused" or contributed to the ADHD or if parents (either in desperation, or due to neglect, or whatever) simply parked the kids with ADHD behaviors in front of the TV more than those of non-ADHD kids. Classic chicken or egg thing. Everyone who's interested in this type of ruse needs to read the DAMN LIES AND STATISTICS couplet of books, readily available on Amazon.

Sounds very worthwhile, will pick it up. Thanks friends!

For sure if you based your opinion of Hargrove on his track record as a recording leader, you'd say he was vastly overrated. But once you see him live you understand what all the fuss is about.

That's a damn fine album, isn't it? It's really a shame it hasn't reached CD. Think I'll reach for my vinyl tonight...

Actually I didn't take your comments as non-constructive at all Chuck - sorry, I think in reading it back my post was not very clear. I was making blanket statements about multiple posts, without enough precision. Anyway, I just meant to say I am at least glad to see someone fired up about some good music. I would hate for him to stop contributing (and in the process, lose out on learning - heck, I know how much I have personally learned from such discussions over the past 7-8 years myself on the old BN boards and now here) because he felt some people were overly critical in their responses to his posts. I'm probably over-reacting, though. He seems to be taking it in the right spirit.

I'm dredging this one up because I saw a used copy today and ended up passing on it. Something about the date (1982) and Stanley Clarke's name on it - unfair I suppose but I'm not a huge fan, even though here he reportedly is on acoustic bass throughout. LarryCurleyMoe's post from last year didn't exactly alight the world. So is this a worthwhile date, or one that failed to live up to its potential?

Well...yes, I can't say I even remotely agree with him on comments like that, and I personally think they betray a lack of deeper insight about the music. But then again, that may just be how he hears it right now, honestly. The way I look at it, he'll either a) be mortified some day when he's listened more and looks back on what he said or b) always feel that way (too bad, definitely HIS loss!). Either way I have to admire him for not becoming a "dittohead" in response to the pasting he'll take around here!

I found a nice one today in browsing some used haunts... I quite like this one - actually even much better than the (excellent) trio recording with Frank Butler metnioned earlier, which I found used a couple months back. On this one both Hope and Foster are in really hard-driving, bop mode. Nice one.

I'm with Jim R. I think if you look at Cannonball Addict's posts it's clear he's young and enthusiastic, not trying to denigrate any players or anything. So OK, he got a little carried away, but I think most of the veterans here are able to take these types of threads and educate everyone else, putting a little more meat on the bones of an otherwise potentially bankrupt line of discussion. While I could also do without any more poll threads for a while, it seems to me the best reaction is either to add something deeper to the discussion or simply ignore them, not make a big deal about it.

That was my impression too, but figured I'd check. I appreciate you all helping me maintain my sanity. Thanks folks!

A couple more I thought about today: Jerome Richardson - MIDNIGHT OIL and ROAMIN' WITH RICHARDSON Don't miss 'em, especially fond of the latter:

Bobby Hutcherson - CIRRUS (BN)

I have a line on a mint used copy of this set for about $300. 6 LPs. Seems pretty steep to me but then it's a relatively rare one and much of the music is unlikely to see issue anytime soon in any other format. So maybe not unreasonable. What do people think - fair price or exhorbitant?

Interesting info. So Morton must be the primary driver behind their (very welcome) inclusion and championing of less "mainstream" artists.

Nice thoughts, Bev. I agree that it is Cook and Morton's lack of humilty that rankles me most - that's what I meant by saying they were getting more and more insufferable. Yet I do like the humor, and it's not so much that I want to agree with them all the time. I certainly understand the idea of trying to bring some of the sacred cows like Blue Note down a peg, and at times I've agreed with their comments about certain much-lauded sessions that I also find ludicrously overrated, but they try so hard to make a GLOBAL case for this agenda that they seem to have lost all objectivity. Also, it is quite clearly true that many of the more modern, European-led sessions they rave about would likely have never even been conceived had not there been the foundation of those "meat and potatoes" sessions from Blue Note and other "foundation" labels. I think one needs to view those recordings, then, with at least an attempt at projecting into the past to see how innovative and fresh and influential they once were and in many cases still are. Anyway, all that aside, it's mainly just that I find the internal inconsistencies in PENGUIN are becoming more and more frequent and the quality control for the book abysmal. For example, I found another error last night that had me seriously wondering whether they had even listened to the recording they were reviewing (they talked about someone not playing a particular instrument on the record when in fact they had, prominently, which would be pretty darn obvious if they HAD listened). Then there's the lack of an index, as discussed previously - totally ridiculous. Clearly having purchased this many volumes, I've been a committed reader, despite the faults of their approach. But I think I'm now getting fed up. Inexcusable to get WORSE at what one does as the years go by IMHO.

Hee hee hee...

First Pretenders album, and a couple of the follow-up singles and isolated tunes on the disappointing PRETENDERS II, were about as tough and gritty as rock has ever been. Not in the faux manner of most rock artists, but in the honest, unglamorous mode. Sure, nothin' else Chrissy Hynde has done since has ever come close (although then again that doesn't seem to be what she's after anymore), but all cred is due. Classic stuff.

Glad to hear there's a new disc in the works, just so happens I have BOOGALOO SISTERS on my stack of discs to revisit over the weekend.

Wow, THAT could be really interesting (assuming the "old" Stevie shows up) or really hideous (assuming the "I Just Called to Say I Love You" Stevie is on the gig)!

More input: The "diagnosis" the HMO wants is probably just a working diagnosis, not a "definitive" one. They have to have something (an ICD-9 code, which is a numbering system for medical diagnosis) to put down on the paperwork. This working diagnosis can just be descriptive/symptomatic, e.g. "facial numbness" or something, doesn't have to be a final, pathologic diagnosis. Re: cerebellar herniation, usually it would take a catastrophic event (e.g. large brain hemorrhage or tumor) to cause the cerebellum to herniate outside of the setting of a Chiari malformation. I think you can safely cross those things off your list. Re: the fall, as it relates to the Chiari/herniation, it is basically about as close to zero chance as it can be that they are related. For a fall to cause a brain herniation, it would have to have created a major bleed (hematoma) due to head trauma - she'd have to have really smacked her head and would have other physical signs/symptoms (you see brain herniation after head trauma in cases like high-speed car accidents where someone hits there head and is brought in unconscious, for example - not after a fall like this where there is no loss of consciousness etc). So those two really can't be related. It is possible she torqued some nerve roots in the neck with the fall as you indicated earlier, but that also seems quite unlikely to me. Re: the Chiari angle, I think (at least from this distance and with what I know) you and your primary doc are absolutely on the right track - that's exactly what I was getting at with the "watchful waiting" comment (it's one of a doctor's greatest tools, since with time and follow-up often all becomes clear - assuming of course the patient is not getting worse or hopefully improving some). There's even an old medical saw we are taught - "don't just do something, stand there" - to remind us not to be overly aggressive unless it's truly unavoidable or an emergent situation, lest we end up potentially doing harm to a patient by being hasty in trying to force a diagnosis/therapeutic plan. This is something it's hard for patients to understand sometimes, but having seen what can happen from people being too certain too soon, I will take a cautious doctor ANY day. So by all means, sounds like a good idea to get the neurosurgeon's opinion and then watch and wait. Your wife thankfully lacks a lot of the potential symptoms of full on "classic" Chiari, things may resolve, another cause may declare itself, etc. If not, you will be "plugged in" and can always cross the Chiari bridge if you get there. I'm SO glad you are starting to hone in on things!

It's usually readily diagnosed by MRI. My guess is the prior imaging studies simply didn't clearly support the diagnosis. A second opinion at this point from the proper sub-specialist MIGHT help, although one frustrating thing you're already experiencing is, the more doctors involved in cases like this, the more opinions you tend to get. Plus the treatment is major surgery, not to be taken lightly in itself and one reason to consider watchful waiting. For example, one of my medical resources puts it thusly: "The object of treatment is to stop progression and hopefully relieve symptoms. This may be accomplished by: 1) decompression of the neural structures, the brain stem and cerebellum and 2) re-establishment of spinal fluid circulation if it is affected. Decompression is achieved by removing the bony structures compressing the brain stem and cerebellum. Re-establishment of spinal fluid circulation may be established in a variety of ways. Treatment of the different disorders are diverse but generally involve a posterior decompression, a shunt, or a combination of both." It also says just before this that asymptomatic anatomic abnormalities should be LEFT ALONE. The point here is that this could just be a normal anatomic variant and the symptoms could have nothing to do with it - so you don't want to go through all the above and STILL find you have the symptoms you began with. I think GREAT caution in giving a firm diagnosis is definitely in order, particularly if there has been some improvement. Still, overall this sounds like the only relatively promising lead, so again may be worth pursuing another opinion. Again, my thoughts are with you guys.

Oh, PLEASE...

Well, YOU brought up the idea that it was somehow hard for younger people to get into this type of recording. Not only is there no good evidence I can see that this is actually the case, if that's not making an assumption about motivation for people's comments, then what the heck is? For my part, I have no such illusions - for all I know, teenagers might love this music while old fogeys like me don't. All I was saying was that for me, age, expectations, etc have nothing to do with it. Again, YOU made the point, I would never presume to try and explain why people do or do not warm to a recording, so - huh? Big Al - THANKS for the nice comments about my little one - he seems to dig traditional New Orleans style jazz most at this point, so maybe a nice regal Satchmo ballad for bedtime!

I still feel like people in various camps are shouting over different chasms rather than over the same one. I too revisited the recording due to this post, and... To reiterate: my position is that I do occasionally enjoy AM I BLUE? and don't think it's a total dud by any means, nor would I part with it. But after multiple listens (and with the context that I'm someone who has pretty darn catholic tastes, which include a dedicated place for sessions with this type of mood and vibe), AM I BLUE? remains a dissapointment. Age, expectations, and the alignment of the planets have nothing to do with it.

Well I'll try and post some examples when I get home this weekend, but basically there are quite a few segments that are taken pretty much verbatim from liner notes of CDs but there is no acknowledgement given that they're borrowing. To me, that's ethically questionable, tacitly taking credit for someone else's work. It's not rampant, not every entry or anything, but as I say, now that I have several thousand titles in my collection I am seeing more and more examples crop up. That troubles me. I remain unconvinced about their giving in-depth critiques, too. For a good example of what I'm talking about, compare the few instances where they DO provide a real in-depth and somewhat original spin - e.g. look at some of the entries for "major" figures like Charlie Parker and Miles Davis - with the other 99% of the book. To me, when I do that, it's clear they're often on autopilot. The other thing that is irking me more and more about Cook and Morton is that they honestly seem bent on docking every Blue Note session (and many other "glory days" American label sessions as well) at least 1/2 to 1 star simply because they have the agenda that many of their recordings were "overrated." And by the same token, they are about as Euro-Centric as one could hope to be, seemingly adding stars just on principle because the artist is NOT from the U.S. I find this ironic given that most people point accusing fingers in the opposite direction, claiming this type of chauvinism is a U.S. thing - not so. While I'm not going to argue the point, to me it's simply assinine to do stuff like give a recording like LEAPIN' AND LOPIN' less than 4 stars (and make snide comments in passing about how the band don't seem to realize the "rhythmic subtlety of "Voodoo" - huh? - and about Clark's inability to maintain prolonged interest in solos - WTF??!?) when they give 4 stars to some of the mediocre recordings they do that feature UK or European artists (a good example is the ECM date with Surman and Abercrombie, I forget the name because I forget the music - bland as can be, I bought it on their rec). I like Surman in the right setting but that one is simply a snoozer. Yeah, I know they're totally different gigs and such, and it boils down to personal taste, but come on, I've yet to meet a jazz fan who DOESN'T love the Sonny Clark date...it's pretty much a universally-recognized classic. Based on a quick perusal of the new edition of the Penguin Guide, which I just got, I couldn't find a single "new" BN reissue that has been added since their last volume that was given more than 3 stars, which includes dates by Larry Young, Andrew Hill (PASSING SHIPS gets 3 stars...everything recent by Dave Holland gets 3.5-4...hmmmmmm) and Rivers' FUCHSIA SWING SONG for christssake! That's just petty and perverse. I should add that I have been making a conscious effort over the last few years to explore jazz from other places in the world and so it's not a vendetta against "non-US" jazz that is motivating my comments. Rather, I think Cook and Morton exhibit a clear-cut bias in the other direction. Another quibble - their policy about supposedly "excluding" OOP or limited edition recordings is getting more and more fuzzy with each edition. I noted for example that for an artist they really like - Wadada Leo Smith and Paul Motian are good examples - they have continued to include listings for ECM dates that have yet to be reissued on CD, are still LP (not reissue, long OOP) only! Yet they exclude a slew of Conns that are still readily available. Oh-kayyy..... Finally - editing errors GALORE have always been a problem, but never more so than with the new version. I only spent 15 minutes reading last night and found at least 4 instances where a review for an album remained in the text (often incongruously beginning in the midst of discussing another album!) while the album and personnel listing itself has now been deleted...pretty much inexcusable. Proofread much? Basically, I am finding Cook and Morton more and more insufferable and arbitrary and sloppy, less and less broadminded and insightful. I think this is going to be my last edition, which is saying something since I've bought all of 'em up to this point.