Big Wheel

Thanks Ron and David. Unfortunately my girlfriend left Japan a couple of weeks ago, picking me up one JRVG whose title will remain a secret to me until she gets back in the States. If I make it to Japan in a year or two, as is my plan, I'll definitely check out some of those places!

You sure Evans is at Smoke tonight? The schedule at www.smokejazz.com sez that he was only there last night, and tonight is some kind of TBA vocal thing...

Thanks Dmitry. I was thinking of going to see Ahmad Jamal at Iridium but the price is right on this one!

I play piano, which adds an interesting wrinkle to the discussion. This thread was another reminder to me that you don't have to comp EVERY chord as you're soloing (or comping behind a horn player, for that matter). This opens things up and lets you focus more on playing lyrically. It's amazing how underused the left hand is in straight-ahead piano playing, and sometimes I feel like my feel gets thrown off just because I'm trying to give my left hand something to DO, when it doesn't "need" to be doing anything at all. It's one reason I dislike playing lots of tunes that have a quick harmonic motion, especially ones like rhythm changes where the key center isn't changing much...I feel like I have to make EVERY change instead of thinking about what simply sounds good. Right now I'm listening to Ray Bryant comp behind Diz on "The Eternal Triangle" and it's just so simple harmonically speaking, but it works perfectly. Lots of I, V, I, V, not worrying about wedging every VI and ii chord in there. The soloist can imply that by themselves. Less really is more in cases like this. Playing in all keys is one thing I've been really lazy about, but I guess simple tunes like St. Thomas are the best place to start, right?

I'm heading to NYC tomorrow and I checked out the page for this club in Queens: http://www.cwj.net/CookingHomeFS.html . Scroll to the bottom of the page...that does look like other photos I've seen of Ridley, but I'm not certain. Anyone know if Ridley is known to double?

Interesting. St. Thomas is a tune that I've always hated soloing over. For me the rhythm tends to trip me up--having a drummer play that West Indian thing every chorus can get old quick. Also, the last four bars were a bitch to run through lyrically rather than sounding like I was just mechanically trying to make every change. Will have to revisit this one again.

The best of the ones I've got: 1. Vertigo (I haven't a clue why Alfred Lion didn't release this one, unless he felt there was just too much Jackie on the market already.) 2. Basra 3. The Complete Blue Hour 4. Solid 5. Cliff Craft (Honorable mentions: Destination Out, Byrd In Flight, Shades of Redd) The less good: 1. Jutta Hipp with Zoot Sims. I'm sorry, but the trumpeter sucks, and I feel like Zoot is the only one in the band who was really "on" that day. 2. Ummm...I can't think of any others in my collection that I have real problems with. McGhee's volume 1 is a bit lackluster, but for me the session is more than redeemed by the presence of JJ and the super Kenny Drew trio session paired with it on the Conn version. I can see how the Wilkerson is not some people's cup of tea, but I enjoy it for what it is (though admittedly I do have trouble listening to both discs together, all the way through). Initially I was nonplussed by the Melle set, but I haven't really given it enough listens to let it sink in. I do tend to pass on the Connoisseur titles of "previously unreleased" material, so that could explain why I don't have too many problems with most of the series. I seem to remember that Man With a Horn and Redd's Blues in particular have been panned.

I think there might be some regional variation on what's overplayed. For instance, in my hometown, I've NEVER heard All of Me or How High the Moon called at jam sessions, and only very rarely at gigs (maybe at the ones that are led by some of the hokier old guys who think they're catering to an older audience when they play that stuff). Usually people will at least call a bebop contrafact of common changes (Oleo instead of I Got Rhythm/Lester Leaps In, Ornithology instead of How High the Moon).

No, the REAL real question is: Does one's "rank" get promoted beyond "Groove Merchant" when one passes 2000? And if so, what is that rank called? "Groove Kingpin"? "Czar of Groove"? "His Majesty King Funk"?

Goddamn, I just heard this record for the first time after picking it up in the recent Best Buy sale, and that must be the FUNKIEST version of Blue Pepper I have ever heard. Even funkier than the MMW version! It's funny--I picked up Anthony Brown's version of the suite on Asian Improv a couple of years back after (I think) hearing Bob Parlocha play it on the radio, and I never got around to getting the original. Makes for a fascinating comparison between the two, and IMO the Brown version does hold its own.

D'oh. My bad. April 1 is my girlfriend's birthday so I must have missed out on some of the April Fools' Day festivities here.

To give credit where credit is due, that site was mentioned a long time ago in a thread on the old board. I think back then it was mainly used to check out older color schemes/forum layouts of that board.

the Way-Back Machine So I've got nothing better to do while this board's down last night, and I happen upon this. Now, not everything is there by any stretch, but still, quite a resource for those who really want to find deleted threads. Also provides an interesting snapshot of the world B.S. (before Sangrey). P.S.: you can see anyone's email address on there...kinda scary but might be useful in getting in touch with long-lost posters.

Hmmm...Lester Leaps In, maybe? I'm having trouble thinking of simple rhythm changes.

The Rhythm Changes was probably Oleo. Everybody plays that shit and it's old (although I do like the Pat Martino version where they strrreeetcch the phrasing out).

Jim, how easy is it to use Frodo? I tried a Commodore 64 emulator that I think was called "CC64" and it was a nightmare to use...I had no idea how to emulate the joysticks. HardBall was one of my favorites... (Al: my apologies for derailing this thread further. That is one terrible story. Really helps put my own relationship problems at 21 in perspective.)

Coincidentally, I brought this one home from the radio station today. Will be having a listen in a bit.

Claude, I can see how some courts might say that it's improper for a site to merely appear to be stealing another's intellectual property in a case like this, when in fact the data is not stolen at all--it can look like one is passing another's intellectual property off as one's own. If the organissimo.org home page contained a bunch of linked Frank Wolff photos of Jimmy Smith, it makes sense that Blue Note or Mosaic Images would have problems with Jim appearing to "own" the photos he's displaying on his web page. But isn't context an important factor? This is a bulletin board, not Jim's personal home page. It's obvious from the context in which the picture was posted that nobody is claiming that they created or own the image that's being displayed. They're only referring others to it--basically, giving information about it so others can view the content more easily.

Interesting then that an anagram of Late's first name is NOT AL.

Another thought: say you and a friend are in a bookstore. You're leafing through an engrossing book and want your friend to check out a certain passage in it. You put the book down and say to your friend, "Hey, check out page 167 in this book," and your friend does. Now let's imagine the same situation, only this time, you hold the book open for your friend and flip to page 167 so he doesn't have to. Is there an appreciable difference between the two scenarios? To me, the first scenario is the same as displaying an image's URL. The second is the same as using code to show the image without actually possessing the image file in any sense. True, you don't own the book yet while it's still in the bookstore, but the bookstore doesn't have a problem with you looking at it there. What people like Brenda Bragg (and certain German courts, evidently) don't understand is that on the Internet, the "bookstore"--in this case, her online photo store--doesn't only exist when someone's typed the URL of the store into their browser. Every time we looked at the now-deleted thread, it was just like we visited her online store.

This lady is comparing apples and oranges. First of all, as she notes, the image was watermarked. That means it has her stupid company's name splashed ALL OVER the picture ina way that's very difficult to remove. Only someone really dumb would try to download such a picture and take it somewhere to have it blown up so they can hang it on their wall. That's the whole reason why they watermark it in the first place. On the other hand, the vast majority of CDs are not watermarked. A straight burn of the CD would contain no deterioration in quality. A rip to a 128kbps MP3 file would show some deterioration, but probably not enough to deter most listeners from enjoying it. The closest analogy to a watermarked picture is a shitty RealAudio clip that nobody would want for regular use.

Betcha that Brown Sugar will be the next to come out in the US. Of course, that could be around 2007 at the rate BN is reissuing the Roach catalog.

Jim--you're right; there are two accepted forms of notation, but algebraic has become more popular. "Traditional" or "descriptive" notation, which I learned first, uses the names of the pieces to describe each square. instead of h3, that square is called KR3 or King's Rook 3--it's the third square up on the file your King's Rook is on. You describe a move first by naming the piece that is moving, then a dash, then the square the piece moves to. So if you want to move your knight to KR3, you notate N-KR3. If you're in a position where it's possible for both knights to move to KR3, and you want to move the one that started out on the king's side, you notate KN-KR3; likewise for your Queen's Knight, QN-KR3. (In traditional notation, pawns ARE notated as P, so the most common opening move is notated P-K4 rather than e4. Captures are not notated by square but by the piece being captured, so if your pawn takes a bishop it's just notated PxB--a big difference from algebraic notation, which only refers to the square that the piece captures, not the piece.) There are two big reasons traditional notation has fallen out of favor: 1) it generally requires more writing than is required by algebraic notation. Moreover, it requires you to remember more or less meaningless details. By the end of the game, it really doesn't matter which knight is your King's Knight or your Queen's Knight. If you're studying a position in the middle of a game, it's a huge hassle to go back and figure out which is which. Of course, you could circumvent this by replacing the specific name of the piece with the square it's originally sitting on-- instead of QN-QB5 you could write N(QN3)-QB5. or in English, "the Knight that is sitting on QN3 is the one that moves to QB5". But this means your notation gets even lengthier--using 10 characters instead of 6. In contrast, as Paul noted, algebraic notation can notate the same move in only 4 characters: Nbc5. 2) it can be more confusing because the way squares are named is *relative* to whether you're playing white or black. When you notate the white pawn moving two squares in front of the king, in algebraic notation it's notated e4. When black does the same thing with his own king's pawn, it's notated e5--and if he moves it another square on his next move, it's notated e4--the same square as white landed on in the first move I mentioned. Each square has one distinct name. But in traditional notation, each square has TWO names, depending on which side is making the move. If white moves his knight to KR3, it's notated N-KR3. But if black moves his knight to the same exact square, it's notated N-KR6, because that square is six rows in front of him. Hope this is not too confusing! Here are a couple of sites that explain things a bit more clearly: http://www.ex.ac.uk/~dregis/DR/descript.html http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descriptive_..._chess_notation

Personnel on this one: Clark Terry, Jon Faddis, Jimmy Owens, Eddie Henderson, Frank Greene, Sean Jones (tpt), Benny Powell, Luis Bonilla, Dennis Wilson, Douglas Purviance (tb), Jimmy Heath (ts), Frank Wess (ts, fl), Jesse Davis (as), Jerry Dodgion (as, fl), Jay Brandford (bari), Kenny Barron, Renee Rosnes (p), Anthony Wilson, Oscar Castro-Neves (g), Larry Ridley, Trey Henry, Bob Cranshaw , Lewis Nash, Stix Hooper (ds), Lenny Castro (perc).

Check out Passage of Time. Nobody talks about it but it's IMO the most mature thing I've heard out of him yet (haven't really familiarized myself with the organ records).