DrJ

1. That cover of the old pop song "Venus" that came out a few years back - Bananarama I think - always sounded like in the chorus they were saying "I'm your penis..." instead of "venus." 2. One of my buddies, as a teenager, used to think Elton John's line in "Bennie in the Jets" was: "Oh, but the weed and it's wonderful" instead of "Oh, but they're weird and they're wonderful" Tells you where HIS head was around that time...

If things don't get movin' pretty soon, I'll be sittin' quietly at home with my wife, waiting for our baby to decide when he wants to make his entry into the world...if it happens that day, could mean "fireworks" in more ways than one!

Me either!

Zbigniew Namyslowski - LOLA (Decca) Pat Metheny - SECRET STORY (Geffen) Chubby Jackson & Bill Harris - THE SMALL HERDS (Keynote) JULIAN "CANNONBALL" ADDERLY (Emarcy) THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT (Rope-A-Dope) Fred Hersch et al - LAST NIGHT WHEN WE WERE YOUNG (Classical Action) Barre Phillips - CAMOUFLAGE (Victo)

Cool - glad we're OK, and we can agree to disagree a little bit while probably agreeing on MUCH more among the volumes we've written here. And Dex taller than Griff? Nah, just some BIG old mother heels...

Zbigniew Namyslowski - LOLA (Decca) THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT (Rope-a-Dope) Pat Metheny - SECRET STORY (Geffen) Chubby Jackson & Bill Harris - THE SMALL HERDS (Keynote) Fred Hersch et al - LAST NIGHT WHEN WE WERE YOUNG (Classical Action) JULIAN "CANNONBALL" ADDERLY (Emarcy) Barre Phillips - CAMOUFLAGE (Victo)

You said: "I don't mean this as an "attack" or an argument with you Tony, but the last few months have, for personal reasons, really brought me face to face with just how inseperable I am from music, not just my music, but the entire world of practicing, creating, performing, and all that. I'm having to live in the so-called "real world" a lot more directly now than I have for quite some time, and it's forcing me to confront who I REALLY am, since I don't seem to have more than a passing similarity with most of the people I'm dealing with regularly now. They have a concept of life, its goals, its rhythms, its textures, its priorities, its colors, pretty much EVERYTHING that is different than mine and the people I've been dealing with (mostly) for the last few decades - musicians and other "creative" types. I'm not in any way saying that one group is "better" than the other, because that's obviously just not so. But the differences are real, and birds of a feather flock together for good reason - life just seems to go smoother when everyone's, if not on the same page, at least reading the same book. And there's a LOT of good books, so we don't all need to read the same one. Saying, "I think Mobley was far more consistent throughout his sadly truncated career than Sonny has been" for you is no doubt a simple enough expression of opinion, and I gotta respect that. But in the touchy-feely-where-the-hell-is-my-life-going-to-go-NOW frame of mind I've been in lately, I feel compelled to tell you, and all the other posters who have made similar comments about other artists, that THAT'S NOT THE POINT OF MUSIC!!!! Not the ultimate point anyway, and ESPECIALLY not the point of either Sonny Rollins or Hank Mobley, individually or together. I mean, I'm a fan too, as well as a musician, so I know what y'all mean, and I can go there too, if only to a point. But qualitatively comparing Sonny Rollins and Hank Mobley, two of the few musicians whose work has been as close to my heart as any and have deeply helpde mold who I am as a person, well, you just got my goat and I'm snapping!" Uh...show me the bullshit. The way I read it: you are saying basically the same thing in those paragraphs that I said, just dancing all around it and nice-ing it up. You are saying that I said something that was innocuous to me but really hit an inner sensitive spot with you, and by golly YOU established the contextual issues related to your personal life (I would never have dreamed of going there without you going there) and I continue to contend that says this issue seems like it's all about YOUR issues, not mine. I mean you SAY FLAT OUT that I've offended you because I've offended two of your formative influences by having the gall to compare them. Again - WHERE is the bullshit? Go ahead and say that Sonny Stitt was more consistent than Sonny Rollins. I know of no sane individual that would disagree with you, nor of any sane individual that would agree that that comparison is irrelevant to anything having to do with too much of anything except some "rating system" that serves what purpose? I know some people get a kick out of that kind of thing, but are you telling me that it's actually a SERIOUS consideration? I don't know how many times I can say this - I was not rating them or assessing worth. How many times can I say it? Remember the old "compare and contrast" instructions from high school essay tests? Well this was a case of "contrast," setting their differences into relief for the sake of what I had hoped would be illuminating dialogue, to whit: many people seem to talk only about Hank's earlier work, through Soul Station era, and then neglect his later stuff including last recordings. I was trying to point out that right up to the end he was playing some seriously interesting stuff, and how much I admired that because even for a giant as great as Sonny Rollins, it is apparently hard to do (based on my hearing of his later work). No rating scheme implied - in fact, if you still contend there is, you go ahead and tell me from those statements and my earlier ones which person you think that I think is "better." Go ahead. You'll be wrong either way, though, because the answer is "neither." And btw, the Stitt deal was comparing him to HIMSELF Well, er, yes...but that's not my point. The point I was making is you made some pretty glib pronouncements about a large body of Mr. Stitt's work that were stated as pretty definitive and unqualified with phrases like "in my opinion" or "according to my ears." Which is what you've been taking me to task for now for several pages worth, telling me unless I regularly have tea and crumpets with Sonny or better yet psychoanalyze him every Tuesday, I have no basis for criticizing what I perceive to be a lack of direction and lack of real commitment in many (not all) of his later recordings. I was not talking about the dreaded comparison issue, which I've hopefully put to rest for the last time above. Just so we's clear here, I would NEVER be this blunt about any of this if you hadn't continued to hammer away (in a nice-on-the-surface but ultimately pretty condescending manner) that it was basically me making an ignorant, unthinking comment that touched off the righteousness. Not that I've never done THAT, but this wasn't one of those times and I'm not keen to cop to something I never did. I admire your insights and the stimulation of discussions you are a part of here more than you probably realize and sincerely hope this won't create any kind of rift, but you certainly weren't pulling any punches so I didn't feel inclined to either.

I was just winding up to say the same thing, Mnytime, glad I read your post before responding! Well put. Just will add that it's so bad I find I can't really enjoy the music as much as it probably warrants. I'll be looking for updates (imports?) in the future.

Not into the artist ranking thing for many reasons, but I really feel Hill is a giant. One could hear his rhythmic approach as sophomoric, as has been commented, but one can also interpret him as a master in that realm. He can really get "micrometric," to use a word I coined talking about Mobley recently, one of the greatest in that sense - subdividing and then sub-subdividing the beat, displacing accents, etc. Jim makes some nice analogies. For me it's even beyond the impressionism comparison though, given the degree of precision in his subdivisions - I say he's almost an aural pointillist. For that reason, I find that "standing back" figuratively, with my listening, and letting the whole thing hit me at a visceral level results in supreme enjoyment, much more than trying to tease out each of those very finely graded moves he's making. I like Hill in just about every setting - solo, big band, trio, small groups. He excels in every environment, and still sounds totally like himself whether it's just him or a bunch of guys along for the ride. In fact, this discussion has inspired me to change album covers for the week...to one of my favorites of all time (not just the artist, but the art itself - what a perfect encapsulation of that dark, shaded undertone in even Hill's most jubilant music!).

Never met a Christy recording I didn't like, not yet. The Mosaic is wonderful, although it's not Christy's greatest it's refreshing and the Peggy Lee material is often sublime. Amazing job with the sound by Malcom "My Man!" Addy. jmjk - You might want to check out, just in case you don't have it, THE SONG IS JUNE/OFF BEAT (Capitol Jazz), which has the most stunningly beautiful version of "Spring Can Really Hang You Up the Most" you've ever heard. It's all good.

I want to address one point you raised, in response to my comment about people in the vanguard, once toast of the town, sort of falling from "grace" of the critics, fans: "What the HELL does that have to do with Sonny Rollins, one of the most notoriously NON-comfortable-with-the-critical-and-public-fuss in the history of the music?" YES, I agree. I wasn't very clear there, so can't blame you for your question. I was talking in Sonny's case about some of his most ardent fans and followers basically experiencing the same kind of "you just don't get me" head trip vicariously! There are certain performers that bring out that kind of reaction in their faithful, and Sonny's one of 'em. Had meant to make that connection but didn't. I hate to say this lest I trigger more debate, but to be honest I think your position on all this, and reaction to an innocuous and not unusual post really smacks of this sort of proxy emotional response, almost a case in point. I don't know exactly why this occurs and why it's so much more common for certain performers than others, but it happens. One thing I'm pretty sure about, it says a lot more about the devotee than about the person they are defending (even in cases where there is no reason to be on the defensive!). You basically admitted there were extenuating personal life issues involved here, and that's what I am picking up in the tenaciousness of your dogging of this one simple, benign illustrative comparison. Somehow my criticism of Rollins has been construed as a criticism of you. Regardless, what you're basically saying is that despite my inner crap detector vibrating like a chain saw, I should just ignore it and say "Well, I'm sure old Sonny really is on to something." It's like you're takin' my viewpoint way more personally than Sonny would, which is kind of weird honestly. I can't ignore my instincts any more than you could, nor should I. I also agree with the person who called you on making comparisons between performers. We ALL do it, it's one of the most fundamental devices and I'm not buying your semantics in justifying why it's OK when you do it and not when I did it. If you go back and look at my original comparison of Hank and Sonny, again I think what I said is perfectly reasonable AND very nonjudgemental about anyone's "essence." My point was mainly to question the party line about Mobley somehow being a second-line player, and secondly to point out an interesting difference I find holds true between many pioneer/innovator types and the more "steady excellence" performers like Mobley - when the innovators go for the gusto, they only reach it sometimes and generally their body of work is more uneven (not necessarily less interesting, or less "good," things I never said, but undoubtedly more unneven). I don't know how to say it any clearer. Another thing I think is odd: you, my friend, just recently spent more than a few lines incredibly casually dismissing huge amounts of another Sonny's work - Sonny Stitt's - in another post, accusing him of "coasting." I could have raised many of the same concerns you have in response - did you know him personally? Did he TELL you he was coasting? How would that have made the man feel? etc etc. I mean really, it's pretty much the SAME FREAKIN' LINE OF REASONING, Jim. But I didn't call you on it, even though I pretty much completely disagree with you (I think the Sonny coasting issue is largely a canard, rather it's just that he had a relatively unvaried approach and so sometimes there is a sameness to the music that can superficially appear to be lack of inspiration on a less than stellar day. In fact given the sheer number of recordings he made it's un-freakin'-believable how few true dogs there are in there...oh oh, do I feel a "consistency comparison" coming on? ). I DIDN'T call you on your "degradation of Stitt's essence" because it WASN'T ANYTHING OF THE SORT and I readily recognized that. I recognized that your comment simply represented your impression, borne of some musical knowledge, some historical knowledge, and a whole lot of intuition. In other words, I trusted your motives because I know your posting record, and I remain puzzled that you seem to refuse to trust mine and you're still "after me" (in a civil, discursive way) about an issue that really doesn't warrant the dogging.

Depends. If you are the type who, once bitten by an artist's work, likes to have as much of it as possible, go for the Aladdin. The Proper boxes are by all accounts excellent (haven't heard any) but they are compilations and so, once you really get into the artist's work, you may be irked to find some great stuff missing. Just to make it more confusing, though: the Proper boxes are very inexpensive. Might be worth it to invest in the Proper and, if you really find yourself digging Lester and the Aladdin period, then add the Aladdin (you'll only have partial duplication).

"If Sonny has been "lost" for the last 30 years, what would/should he have been doing if he had been 'found'." Hey, man, that's hardly my role to decide as a listener, you know? That's for him to know and me to find out! If there was ever a time for the phrase "I'll know it when I hear it," this would be it. I know some people (maybe you) think it's bullshit, but there is little question in my mind that one can actually "hear" it when someone has their heart in the music, when they are "in the groove" and locked in to some sense of meaning/purpose (abstract as it often is in music - I'm not talking about someone playing a line and saying "I just commented on the South African situation" there). This is true in pop, jazz, classical, whatever, and it separates lifeless crap from real music. What separates, for example, the first couple of Pixies albums from their later ones - inspired, laying it all out there playing versus merely good. I'm sorry, but for ME, some of Rollins' recorded output over the last 25 years or so has been lifeless crap, more often merely fair to good, and very rarely great. I emphasize - this is how it all hits ME. Your mileage may vary. I think it's pretty clear (or at least thought it was) I'm a relatively "big-eared" listener and am more than willing to do my part of the work to try and meet the artist where they are at. So to make it unequivocally clear: I am not saying to Sonny or anyone "Play me what I wanna hear," but rather "Play me something that will make me WANT to hear it." Big, HUGE difference there. That's the whole enchilada in this debate, maybe even: I DON'T HAVE A CLUE what other alternative directions Rollins might have taken his music in that would have struck me more favorably, I'm just sorry I never heard them. Now to hopefully put this whole opinion issue to rest: when I state an opinion about someone's recorded music, I figure it's a given that I'm talking about my own outlook - hey, who the hell ELSE could I be quoting? Of COURSE I am not saying "Sonny Rollins has lost it for everyone - people, get out of that club/record store line, put your money back in your wallets, and go home and listen to SAXOPHONE COLOSSUS because I can GUARANTEE you won't find anything appealing to hear in this man's work now...the great arbiter of musical opinion has spoken (pay no attention to that man behind the curtain)." Come on Jim, YOU can do MUCH better than to think that's what I was trying to say. Give me a break! If that "just doesn't cut it" for you, well, I never intended it to, YOU were the one who the opinion happened to chafe. I never said everyone was going to feel the way I do about Rollins, but I do personally (just me personally) happen to know a lot more folks who feel that way than feel otherwise regarding his more recent music when TAKEN AS A BODY OF WORK (there are certainly individual exceptions for me). You may know a different crowd. Fine. But enough of the badgering about a really very articulately stated outlook. You get it, you just don't like it! "Is the answer to the first question based on an intimate knowledge of the man's life, or is it an expression of what you personally would like to be getting from him?" See my comments in a prior post, where I admit that I (like everyone) project a whole lot of myself into my listening. Impossible not to, and anyone who says they come to music "objectively" is a big fat Al Franken book title excerpt. But still, that is not the crux of the issue. I like to be surprised; refer back to thoughts above. Within that unavoidable limitation: I'm not "expecting" anything from Sonny except him putting his heart and soul into his playing. And to anticipate another debate: it may not seem fair but I actually DO expect a whole lot more in that department from someone like Rollins than from a merely excellent musician. Rollins IS a giant, my opinions about his later work notwhithstanding. He has reached heights most musicians never dream of reaching, and I deeply dug that and admired that he took chances and did the immense work it no doubt took to get to the point where he could do it (because I'm sure it was 90% perspiration). When my ears (I trust 'em - perty good crap detectors, to borrow a phrase from critical reading) don't hear the same effort, the same drive, well, I can't help but be disappointed. For another musician who never WAS the kind of restless pioneer that Rollins was, well - it would be less much less disappointing. How's that for a big fat slice of relativism, bane of philosophers everywhere? But there it is, FOR ME. And therein lies what I feel is a big tendency for people who push the envelope (in music, in any art) to want to have it both ways. They're quite happy when they're in the vanguard, pushing boundaries, critics' darlings, etc...but when living on that razor's edge gets kind of exhausting and they'd like to have an actual LIFE for a while and they ratchet back on the intensity, and the music inevitably SOUNDS like they've ratcheted back (flat even), and the fans and critics call them on it, then suddenly it's THE FANS AND LISTENERS' FAULT for just not being hip enough to appreciate their "later period." COME ON! Give me a break folks. I've used this quote of Neil Young's before, coined back in the 80's rock period: "Every wave is new until it breaks." So there are times when I would like to tell certain artists who were once avant garde darlings but have, well, by my ears (crap detectors) lost the edge amd/or are casting around for a sense of relevance and purpose, "You live by the sword, you die by the sword. Please don't whine about people calling you on it when you've descended from the heights to mere mortaldom." Note that some former pioneers do age more than gracefully even when, in one sense, coasting. Louis Armstrong was a great example for me. Over time I have come to appreciate his later work and there are days where, removed from the whole "historical perspective" mindset, it exceeds his earlier work for me. Why I think has to do again with intent and heart and soul, and with my crap detecting ears - Louis may have played the same songs over and over again, but he just kept putting heart and soul into them and his actual playing never suffered - it just kept sounding more and more like Louis, less and less like such mundane considerations as trumpet plus accompaniment, you know? Not that he didn't have his off days, but there were stunningly few based on recorded evidence. To emphasize, your ears (crap detectors) may be calibrated differently than mine. They're both up to code, just different. "Have you heard the SILVER CITY set?" Creaming off the relatively few excellent tracks from a 25 YEAR PERIOD and saying it's a strong set is fine and well, but to extrapolate that as an accurate representation of the period as a whole, well...let's just say the scientist in me really balks at that kind of methodology!

Timely, sage advice in this thread for this soon-to-be-daddy! Funny Ed, I have been contemplating going the headphone route. I'm spoiled with my current stereo audio quality, though, so looking at Grado and other comparably expensive phones and saving a bit to make the grade.

Been sleepin' apparently, 'cause I missed out on this music so far. Thanks Lon for bringing it to attention.

Being a person who strongly believes that most human behavior is intended neither as cynical or sinister but instead is the result of attempts to fulfill deep-seated, often unconscious needs - I believe it's the latter much more than the former.

Agreed on all accounts - do not miss this collection.

Wow, a guy goes shopping and for a little ice cream (105 degree heat here in Sacramento today) and there's enough for several BOOKS written! Interesting stuff, and I will say that I should definitely have qualified my comments about Sonny Rollins' later music to say STUDIO RECORDINGS because I have not seen the man live. I am NOT one of those folks who has only heard jazz through stereo speakers, though, I hasten to add! I won't doubt for a SECOND that Sonny's music could be a whole lot more transcendent in the live setting (and I know what you mean, I have had a similar experience - I'm sure in a very different way though - when seeing Andrew Hill at Birdland), which may in fact be what really matters to him. It's just that, if that's the case, I wish he'd stop making records! NEWKLEAR MUSIC (Milestone) by the Keystone Trio is a real winner - John Hicks piano, George Mraz bass, and Idris Muhammad drums. All songs written by Sonny at various points in his career except the closer: 1. O.T.Y.O.G. (Rollins) - 5:28 2. Times Slimes (Rollins) - 8:16 3. Wynton (Rollins) - 7:47 4. Here's to the People (Rollins) - 5:31 5. Airegin (Rollins) - 6:47 6. Tell Me You Love Me (Rollins) - 5:58 7. Silk 'N' Satin (Rollins) - 6:27 8. Kids Know (Rollins) - 4:30 9. Love Note for Sonny (Hicks) - 7:23 As you'd guess, this is not fire and brimstone, change your life kind of music, but a refreshing spin on his pieces, done with a dead simple approach (and I mean "simple" as in elegant). Now I do also have to say that I think this point you made Jim: "But - JUST LIKING OR DISLIKING SOMETHING DOES NOT CONSTITUTE HAVING AN INFORMED OPINION!!!"...really misses the main point. You're right, like/dislike is not an informed opinion, but they are just different, one is not inherently more valid than the other as you imply. There is no OBLIGATION written down on a stone tablet somewhere that says anyone has to do any kind of homework to LISTEN TO OR COMMENT ON music...until they start having pop quizzes you have to get at least a Gentleman's C on before you can get into Yoshi's or wherever, it will NOT be an obligation. Some people prefer a whole lot less insider stories, heavy analysis, and consideration of the artist's intent with their jazz and that is PERFECTLY VALID and what's more, it does NOT invalidate their opinion. Furthermore, sometimes I find those folks make more refreshing comments than the insiders (including, yes, musicians), who tend to bring all their own baggage and project it into the music (hey, I'll even admit that maybe I am doing that more than a little with later period Sonny and that maybe I need to approach it, yet again, with a conscious effort to "leave it at the door with the bottles, weapons, and air horn"). I find relatively few musicians to be articulate in talking about music, to be frank...I think it's a different part of the brain phenomenon, although there are some definite exceptions. Funny you picked the doctor metaphor - there's a growing movement in medicine called "patient-centered care" that actually DOES in effect, ask the patient "how do you think we should address this problem?" Now that is not saying we tell them "do your own bypass," but we give them options and trust that most people are reasonable and will pick the most acceptable one that FITS IN WITH THEIR LIFE/PHILOSOPHY/GOALS/etc. Rather than me, the all-powerful doctor, saying "do what I say and like it" which is old school medicine. The new approach works - increased patient satisfaction, increased adherence to care, better health outcomes in research and actual practice. No patient "tells me how to practice," but I look to them eagerly and avidly for guidance to make sure that what my expertise is best applied TO THEIR INDIVIDUAL CASE. It seems to me that musicians, the greatest in my view - the ones that consistently have moved me - make a similar effort to "meet the audience in the middle." I would NEVER presume to tell you how or what to play on your saxamophone, but I would hope if I was in the audience you'd be thinking about me and the other folks in some manner - not in terms of note choices or anything that tangible, but just in the "they're out their listening, with varied backgrounds and levels of musical understanding, and I have some obligation to find a way to meet the majority of them where they live and then try to take them a few steps further." Maybe that's over-idealized, I don't know. So anyway: when my listening buddy tells me he never reads liner notes, doesn't really care if he knows all the musicians on the session, and his eyes glaze over when I start telling him the little background stories that I know about different musicians/recordings, that's cool! His opinion is still very much valid, even if not "informed" in the way you mention. Just to clarify in closing - he listens to music avidly (several hours a day), good stuff, excellent natural ear, etc, and he doesn't overstate his case (e.g. if something seems alien, he may say "not hitting me right now" but won't say "what a bunch of jive mothers!"). So I agree with you that the bore sitting at the table next to you droning on about things he can't begin to understand, that's just plain obnoxious and I think we all know who those people are - take them out of the equation, and you have my vote to diss them at every opportunity. But I think on the whole you vastly over-estimate the value of being "informed" in enjoying music. It works for some people, and it can add another (different, not better) facet to listening, but for others it may actually hinder enjoyment because it turns something pleasurable into (for them) work. That's why they're not musicians or critics, they are listeners.

Hey, no personal offense taken! This is clearly an issue near and dear, and I hope in return that I didn't inadevertently offend you personally. First, to clarify and take issue a bit with your main point: I find no problem in using a well-placed artist comparison to illustrate a point. This is a time-tested writing device, not just in music but in any expository writing. I find it is often quite illuminating and think many other jazz fans do. If you'll notice, I wasn't saying Hank was "better" than Sonny, a useless statement that would indeed be worthy of a rant. But to point out Hank's greater degree of consistency (which was not attached to any further value judgement) is a much different issue. That is a tangible and reasonable observation that can provide a way in to further consideration of these two giants. I personally found the insight illuminating for me when I had it, so I wished to share it. I think some others might also find it illuminating, though not all apparently! Also let's clarify what "consistent" means: it can mean consistently mediocre, which is not what I was saying, or consistently sublime, which honestly I feel Hank Mobley's playing was. So maybe there are semantics at play here, but I don't feel you understood that I was not promoting consistently bland "American cheese on white bread" jazz but rather consistently great "Brie on French bread" jazz! So to say Hank was more consistent is, in this instance, a high assessment indeed. I do hear what you're implying about artists who go for greatness and sometimes fall short, but are more interesting for the trying. I agree to a point. But it's kind of like (here's an oddball metaphor from my life) conducting a really seminal piece of medical research - every once in a while someone just lucks into it, but mostly it takes a lot of pre-preparation and you have a pretty good hunch before you even do the study that it's going to be something special. What I'm trying to say is, some artists are constantly "trying something different" in the name of "going for the sublime," but really they lack a sense of purpose and direction and are swinging wildly and desperately. I would not put those folks in the same category as someone like Don Pullen (probably not the best example but the one that comes to mind), whose work, while somewhat uneven as a body, has many threads of continuity and the chance-taking is based in some sense of purpose and pre-reasoning. I do hear all you're saying and think you make some good points, but I do happen to continue to disagree about Rollins' music in particular. Sorry, while I understand all the theoretical issues about what music is and isn't about, artist's intent, their identity with the music, etc., as a listener those are secondary issues at best. His stuff doesn't move me and I don't think it's a misunderstanding to say that he's alienated a huge portion of his audience AND (this is important) failed to win much of a new one because many others also feel similarly, not just among critics but among fans. I find personally that for every 10 people who pay lip service to Rollins' later music, there's only 1 or so who really enjoys it. It is not an indictment of Sonny as a person to say this, but I feel he's basically lost a sense of direction and inner purpose, and I think if one reads/listens between the lines of many of his interviews and his performances, he knows. In that sense, you and I saying much the same thing - the music is inseparable from the artist, and here we have an artist who has lost his way much of the time. One of MY hot button issues is artists who either admit to, or who I perceive to, basically discount audience opinions. Call me old fashioned, but I appreciate artists who make an effort to meet their audiences in the middle. When I see said audiences leaving an artist in droves, I get suspicious that either 1) the artist is just plain stinking it up; 2) they are actually going out of their way to alienate the audience (and I think Sonny often does this, part of his extreme ambivalence about his stature in jazz and his sardonic sense of humor); or 3) the audience is just not trying and will eventually come around. Regarding the latter: perhaps in 50 years or so I and a lot of other people will come around and what Sonny's doing will hit us. History has shown this can happen after all. But I doubt it in this case. Again, though, all that is secondary - the main issue is I dislike his later playing pretty intensely, after giving it more than a fair chance, and that is really all I care about as a listener. I love his work through the later 60's, especially the wonderful (and often reaching - but with purpose - RCA recordings). And his compositions, on the other hand, have remained interesting throughout, as evidenced by others covering them splendidly as on Keystone Trio's NEWKLEAR MUSIC (Milestone). There, I'm not unreasonably "anti-Sonny"!

Yes, to be clearer (I realize now I wasn't) I did go ahead and order it from The Music Resource given that it was a really good discount. Glad I did based on what you're saying, for sure! CONGLIPTIOUS is a real joy to listen to, fresh and exciting and daring and funny, so I would imagine the box will be more of the same.

Hey, I'm here P.D., anytime! B) Dan - yep, as Mr. Petty once said, "The waiting is the hardest part." 38 weeks and counting...

Ah, you're going to love it as I'm sure you know. Being "Way out West" I won't be there, but I saw Wayne's Quartet at the new Mondavi Arts Center at University of California, Davis this past Spring, which has an excellent acoustic. I was pretty much blown away, and excited to finally get to see Wayne live AND get to see Brian Blade again after having seen him and pianist Aaron Goldberg tear up what was otherwise a very mediocre show by Joshua Redman (I found myself wishing it had been a piano trio date!).

I'll definitely check it out, thanks for the review Jim. Mariano is indeed an original, and I have thus far been out of the loop on his later work. I enjoy his work with Mingus tremendously - BLACK SAINT and also MINGUS MINGUS ETC. It's not an exaggeration to say that without his keening, passionate alto solos and work in the ensembles, the music would not have worked at nearly the same exhalted level. He was, for me, the spark plug on those dates. A few early Mariano sightings that folks might be interested in checking out, particularly to compare where his art began to where he went with Mingus and has now ended up: CHARLIE MARIANO WITH HIS JAZZ GROUP (Imperial) - I think still in print on a TOCJ paper-sleeve import, early leader date (maybe his first?) from 1950-1, with a Boston crew including Jaki Byard (Jaki Byard! Yes! His jazz standard "Chandra" is one selection too) and Herb Pomeroy on trumpet. STU WILLIAMSON (Bethelehem, 1956) - another Japanese import CD. Whether you are a Mariano fan or not, DO NOT MISS THIS RECORDING, repeat DO NOT MISS THIS RECORDING. Williamson was a neglected master of jazz trumpet, and he soars here. In addition to Mariano playing fine alto (and still sounding like Mariano even early on), Bill Holman is on tenor, Jimmy Giuffre on baritone, brother Claude Williamson on piano, Leroy Vinnegar on bass and Mel Lewis at the traps. Fine arrangements, great playing all around, these kinds of Bethelehem dates are a great argument for some type of Mosaic treatment now that the U.S. Bethelehem reissue program seems to have bitten the dust.

Did anyone else see this on the recent e-mailing from Mosaic/True Blue? Too bad Chuck is on vacation, 'cause I'm wondering if this limited edition box is truly soon to be sold out/OOP? I've been eyeing it for some time, and actually lost an E-bay auction of a used copy recently, but this note prompted me to finally take the plunge. I've only heard some of the music - the material released in a 1998 Japanese CD under Roscoe Mitchell's name, CONGLIPTIOUS (has the same tracks as the original LP plus 3 extras). Fascinating music, and historic. Check out this Chicago Tribune article (hey, no regional bias there!), which places the music alongside that of some major heavyweights: 20 boxed sets If anyone else is interested, The Music Resource (www.themusicresource.com) has it for about $58 right now, substantially lower than the $75.00 list price. Their shipping times are often prolonged, but worth it for the discount.

Woody Shaw - SOLID (32 Jazz) Billy Mitchell - THIS IS... (Smash) Stitt/Ammons - BOSS TENORS IN ORBIT (Verve) Julian "Cannonball" Adderly (Emarcy) Pat Metheny Group - LETTER FROM HOME (Geffen) Miles Blackhawk box (Columbia/Legacy) Disc 2 Sarah Vaughan/Lester Young - ONE NIGHT STAND (Blue Note) - that last one always makes me chuckle, sounds like a tabloid headline, didn't anybody think about the double entendre?