RDK

Sneaky, Jim, sneaky. I had noticed that the running time was off a bit, but I wasn't expecting an (alternate?) take from here

Before anyone gets the wrong idea, I meant to add a smilie next to my Sting guess for track 11 - I didn't really think it was him. Just that she sounds like him.

First off, my apologies for my tardiness – I meant to post my comments last week but never had the chance. I’d blame it on my kids keeping me busy, but heck, that didn’t stop Jim from putting this together in the first place – and I’m sure he had a busier week than me. Congrats again, Jim! Anyway, here goes without my having read anything on this thread… Track 1. That opening bass clarinet (?) vamp reminds me so much of John Surman, but the rest of the tune (and instrumentation) sounds like no Surman recording I’ve ever heard (though I’ve only heard a handful). And now the vibes come in? Or is that an electric piano? No clue, but I like this one. Actually, I might like this better without some of the other horns – at least without the ensemble passages. Track 2. The opening sax sounds familiar – I’ll probably kick myself for not recognizing the player – but nevertheless I haven’t a clue. I like the bass line. Otherwise it’s solid and I’m enjoying it, but it isn’t a home run for me. Track 3. This has got that 60’s Blue Note kind of sound, but I suck at identifying individual players and the tune doesn’t ring a bell (though I’d bet I probably have it somewhere). Again, I like the tenor sax solo more than the ensemble horn passages. Track 4. Early 70’s for sure. It’s got that early Corea/RTF vibe to it, but it’s not ringing any specific bells (but I only have the first few RTF albums). Listening closer, now I’m not sure that’s Chick at all – the electric piano doesn’t sound quite right. I first thought that was Flora singing, but now I’m not so sure either. So it’s either RTF or a period clone. But I like it – fun, Brazilian, and it makes me want to dance. Track 5. I love the sound of a bari sax. But there’s also something sort of klezmer about this track – like a jazz band at a Jewish wedding. Can’t wait to learn who this is. Track 6. This has got that late-50’s-early-60’s Jazz Messengers vibe to it, but though it sounds familiar no bells are rung. I dunno – it’s solid but also a bit generic. I think the drums stand out to me, but it could be Blakey or anybody. Track 7. Not bad, but it doesn’t knock me out. It’s a live recording and a bit weak-sounding. Sounds kinda Blue Note-ish, but too loose. I like the raucousness of the sax around 4:30, but that bass first solo does nothing for me. Nice bluesy piano and then – what the hell – a wood flute? Let me guess the Cannonball Adderley Sextet with Yusef Lateef. But then that would mean I just dissed Sam Jones… Track 8. Ah, now we’re cookin’! Nice energy from the count-in on. I know this tune – what the heck is it called? I could listen to this track every single day. Track 9. Nice transition to a slower, quieter piece. Very atmospheric, very nice. I love the mix of piano and vibes. This tune also sounds very familiar – I’m sure I have some version of it. It’s gotta be Hutcherson-Hancock, from Happenings or Oblique. Track 10. This may be my favorite track on this comp. Overall, tracks 8-10 are killer! Great groove, great sax sound. This tune also sounds familiar, but I can’t place it. I love how it gets wilder as it progresses, and when the conga drums and flute enter. Gotta get this one! Ends too abruptly, like everyone just ran out of gas… Track 11. “Nature Boy.” That’s not Sting, is it? A bit too slow and loungy, but cool nonetheless. Nice, atmospheric production. Track 12. Another very fine (and familiar?) track – I should know this one, but maybe I’m just used to it from playing it so often this past week. The pianist sounds very familiar. Another one that I’d buy. Overall, I’d say the second half of this disc is stronger than the first. Bonus Disc (and how!) Track 1. Nice droning intro – the kind of thing that would drive my wife crazy. Then things get interesting. Again, the tune sounds vaguely familiar. Post-Bitches Brew to be sure – the rock influence is there. Could this even be Miles? I’m so unfamiliar with much of his 70’s work. I like this. Track 2. If this is what I think it is – and I’m pretty certain it is, without checking – then it represents one of my greatest regrets in my jazz listening experience. I had never heard of this pianist until just a couple of years ago – shortly after his untimely death – and it’s my great loss since he lived and played right here in L.A., right under my very nose. I won’t name the players and album as I’m sure others have already identified this essential music. It’s a bit out there, but not too out there, and it’s amazingly beautiful, passionate music. I’m indebted to my pal Chris for turning me onto this via CDRs. Track 3. Hey Jim, your disc is skipping! I had jotted down some longer notes to this bonus disc while listening to it on a drive across town the other day, but now I lost that sheet of paper and I’m too lazy and tired to go into it now in more detail. While it doesn’t make my ears bleed, this is a bit too out there for my tastes. The playing’s fiery, but it’s not doing much for me. But I would never say “don’t know, don’t care.” Track 4. A bit better, but I fear my wife would have me turn it off before long (a litmus test, of sorts). I really dig that trombone – but overall I like the solos more than the ensemble sections. Hmmm… the more I listen the more I like how the music goes in and out… Overall a very nice test, Jim. Thanks much. Now get some sleep while the gettin’s good.

My CDs are all arranged by artist, genre, and date of recording... except when they're not. In other words, they're scattered all over my home and office.

I saw this the other day. Hilarious stuff! Next they'll be outlawing the flagrant display of epidermis...

I thought I saw an Art Farmer/Sonny Rollins the other day, but those combos can be hard to remember...

10th planet? Hardly. Most astronomers don't even consider Pluto a planet anymore... And if anyone disagrees, you can stick it up Uranus!

I seem to recall that one of the Jazz Casual CDs was pulled shortly after distribution. Was this one of the Art Famers (maybe the one with Farmer & Rollins)?

Louder can be *very bad* in this age of "loudness is everything" remastering. In short - I'll post some links later if you want - by mastering a CD "louder" one has to raise the levels across the spectrum, and if done too agressively this will squash the dynamic range of a recording. This is still, of course, largely subjective - some may like the dynamic range squashed, some may think it sounds more like an original LP - but others do not. The industry has many reasons for doing this, among them so that CDs sound better on boom boxes than on quality audio systems. And a lot of people *think* louder=better, which simply isn't the case. It's not as simple as just turning up or down your amp...

So the other day I popped disc 1 into my CD player at work and started listening, but I was doing some other things as well (uh, like work) and so wasn't really paying a lot of attention. But then I recognized a song that I had just been listening to earlier in the day. Hey, I thought, that's Sam Rivers. Wow, I was just listening to that very track earlier. And then the next song started and I realized that it, too, was Sam Rivers - from a disc I only recently purchased. And then I realized that I had placed BFT #8, Disc 1 on top of the Sam Rivers disc that was already in my CD player.... Where's that Homer Simpson "D'oh" pic when I really need it? Anyway, that's just my roundabout way of saying that I'll be posting my comments soon, hopefully after my girls go to bed....

My god, the memories - I haven't listened to "Lookout Farm" in years! I'll have to dig that LP out of the stacks. Still can't believe neither that nor Beirach's "Elm" are out on CD...

"You've got mail!"

Also "stolen" from Hoffman's site, this link to Paul Lynde witicisms... http://www.classicsquares.com/lyndesquares.html Here's just a sample... Peter Marshall: Paul, according to the World Book Encylopedia, what is the main reason dogs pant? Paul Lynde: Because they can’t talk dirty! Peter Marshall: Sophia Loren has written a cookbook which will be published this spring entitled, “Cooking With ...” Cooking with what? Paul Lynde: Cooking with a three-foot-long spoon. Peter Marshall: Fidel Castro recently gave Yugoslavia’s Marshall Tito a gift. What was it? Paul Lynde: A cheap, hand–painted tie. Peter Marshall: Paul, true or false. Occasionally, a bull moose will hear the horn of diesel train and will run to it thinking that it is its lover? Paul Lynde: And heaven help the conductor! Peter Marshall: True or false. In Athens recently they discovered sketches of the great philosopher Socrates, revealing that he bore a striking resemblance to Paul Newman? Paul Lynde: But he walked like Joanne! Peter Marshall: Paul, in ancient Rome, bakers were required by law to bake something into each loaf of bread. What? Paul Lynde: A Christian. Peter Marshall: The Atlantic Ocean is the major body of water on Africa’s west coast. What major body lies off Africa’s east coast? Paul Lynde: Ex-president Mobutu. Peter Marshall: Glen Campbell recently stated, “Love to me is something you ..." Something you what? Paul Lynde: Purchase. Peter Marshall: Besides a baton , what did Xavier Cugat always have in his hand when he lead his orchestra? Paul Lynde: Oh, arthritis. Peter Marshall: A woman who is divorced, has a college education, and is nineteen-years-old is more like to have a certain ailment than anybody else. What ailment? Paul Lynde: The heartbreak of psorriasis. Peter Marshall: Can chewing gum help prevent a child from catching a cold? Paul Lynde: No, but I know it’ll plug a runny nose. Peter Marshall: Paul, true or false. Nylon is stronger than steel? Paul Lynde: But steel panties don’t turn me on! Peter Marshall: Who are more likely to be romantically responsive. Women under thirty or women over thirty? Paul Lynde: I don’t have a third choice…? Peter Marshall: Where does most of the olive oil in the world come from? Paul Lynde: Caesar Romero’s comb. Peter Marshall: A soap opera in Australia called “Number 96” offers audiences something that no American soap opera has. What? Paul Lynde: An unfaithful kangaroo. Peter Marshall: Eddie Fisher recently stated, “I’m sorry. I’m sorry for them both.” Who or what was he referring to? Paul Lynde: His fans. Peter Marshall: True or false. Ari Onassis gave Jackie $5million worth of jewelry in their first year of marriage alone? Paul Lynde: And it didn’t cure her headache. Peter Marshall: In the movies, who gave the advice, “whistle while you work”? Paul Lynde: It was either Paul Winchell…or Linda Lovelace.

Handball? Looks like a boy-group dance rehearsal.

I'm *very* excited about the Beirach/Liebman set!

Is Alex even still interested? I know it's not a prerequisite (though I think it's the only fair thing to do), but I can't recall him participating in any BFT discussions in quite some time.

In my opinion, Ray Davies may be the most underrated r&r songwriter ever.

Man, I don't know if I'm free on March 16, 2004 let alone that date in 2005!

Here's a pic of me and my daughters Sammy and Dinah. Seriously, other than the fact that I wear glasses and don't smile quite so much, the resemblance is uncanny...

Ah, yes, Sam's "vocals" are a riot. Seriously, I always considered (not necessarily correctly mind you) Rivers as part of the angry 60's a-g jazz scene. Not really so a-g, but his playing always seemed so intense and, I dunno, clinical maybe - and anyway, that's not so often my bag. What seeing him live did (and I've seen him twice in the last six months) was really show me his fun, personable side. I went to that Bakery show not really expecting to like it - I was going to tick another "jazz legend" off of my list. Don't get me wrong: I'm very open-minded and optimistic about such things, and I was hoping to like the show, but I didn't think It would be much "fun" - at least not in the way that Lonnie Smith, Lou Donaldson, or, say, Mose Allison are fun to see live. The second time I went, I took along my father-in-law. He's around 75 now, and though a long-time jazz lover he's pretty conservative in his tastes. Mostly big band stuff if you know what I mean. But he's also fairly open-minded and I was somewhat surprised (though very pleased) that he ended up really enjoying Rivers' show. He admitted that while he might not ever listen to one of his recordings, he'd have no problem seeing him again in person.

With your avatar, Mark, I wouldn't go around dissing hat racks!

Thanks for the reminder! I just saw Dorough in NYC last weekend. What a damn cool cat - and a pretty nice guy to boot. I'd forgotten about this BN release - yet another disc to pick up. "Conjunction Junction," indeed!

Wonder why? Well, my guess is that the reason had to do with money - that's essentially the reason why anything gets released or not released on any label. Either the album cost too much to produce, Chambers' wanted too much, or "Mirrors" didn't sell enough to make back what it cost. I'm sure if it was a "hit," we'd have seen another one from Joe on Blue Note. Yes, it's a shame, but music is a business as well as an art form.

Add The Who to my list as well. I'd almost throw Hendrix in there, but his career was cut too short for me to consider him a definitive 60's band. Glad to see the Moby Grape reference. Their first album is in my Top Ten, but after that piece of absolutely fuckin' brilliance there isn't a whole lot more of note. I kinda feel the same way about Love's "Forever Changes."

For this poll to be effective I think you have to first get rid of the The Beatles and the Stones - two 800-pound gorillas. Quite frankly, every other band of that era is second tier compared to them. In other words, I couldn't not vote for the Beatles as my favorite, but with them out of the picture I'd have gone for the Kinks or VU or the Doors or...