jazzypaul

I already explained that - it was a list of faults that one can find with past champions. It was for illustrative purposes, not necessarily that I believe all of those were cases of poor champs. I also pointed out that with an unbalanced regular season schedule win-loss records don't mean as much. I've also pointed out the obvious - that injuries also explain the poor regular season record of the Cards. If you're going to parse the season records of the Royals & Pirates then why not recognize that the healthy April Cards were on pace to win 110. They played the same percentage ball in October. I find it strange that one can accept wild-card champs but get outraged about low win total champs. Such a system will give you some of both. I wouldn't mind going back to the olden days, but as noted there's too much money to made with the current system. Wasn't Boston the Wild Card in 2004?

Dan, I've been trying to stay out of this, but lets face it, if it's not the Cubs or the Red Sox, you're going to bitch. You complained that the White Sox won last year, even though they had the best record in the American League. Now you're complaining that a team didn't win enough during the regular season to be worthy of the championship. The Cardinals won. Big deal. They made the playoffs, and even if they made the playoffs because they were the best team in a shitty division, they still made the playoffs. And once you've made it into October, you have just as much of a chance as anyone else. They went on a tear (much like last year's White Sox) and took out some teams that might have been better teams. Bottom line: the Cardinals wanted it more than the Tigers. End of story. Personally, I'm glad that for two years in a row, that it wasn't teams with $200 million payrolls that won it all. I'm glad that teamwork and effort and heart won out over all-star teams (not that Detroit fit that mold at all, but you get my point...). First the White Sox and now The Cardinals. Now both of my favorite teams have won back to back. Yippee!

I think the Chicago Cubs and White Sox also play 2 3-game series each year. It seems to be quite the attraction. I guess there's something to be said for this kind of interleague rivalry, but in a lot of cases it doesn't make too much sense. It may not make sense, but it's a HUGE money maker not only for the Sox and Cubs, but in ways, also for the surrounding communities. Not to mention, it gives a meaningless rivalry some, well, meaning. And while it's not very nice to beat up on those who are smaller, weaker, and not nearly as talented, it's a blast to see the Sox beat the living snot out of the Cubs two weekends a year. A lot better than the "my minor league team is better than your minor league team" charity games that they used to do.

I voted for the blank because you forgot my favorite option for last year: the end of baseball season is depressing because it means no more White Sox kicking the living shit out of every other team in baseball. and you also missed the appropriate option for this year: Thank God it's over, because I couldn't have taken any more of my beloved White Sox getting trounced by every other team in baseball. We got lucky in '05. If we wish to get lucky again, we need a new owner and a new GM. Many sports towns are jinxed by lack of funds. We here in Chicago are only jinxed by really bad ownership. But, damn. The Bears are winning! And shockingly, so are the Blackhawks. Who's joining me for Hawks vs. Red Wings in the upper balcony at the United Center?

up, because, well, the show's tomorrow!

I've always felt it weird to post my shows on another band's forum, but everyone else is doing it, so here goes: THE PAUL ABELLA TRIO AT THE BUZZ CAFE, OAK PARK, IL 6PM-9PM The trio, as mentioned in another thread, is guitar, bass and bongos. Doing a few more bossas and sambas than I had originally planned, but it works really well in this setting. At least for now. So, for all of you Chicago area Organissimo posters, please, please, please make it out and hear something new, nifty and neat.

while I'm at work: diet coke. once I get home: round barn winery Pinot Noir. Nice spicy red. Whoda thunk Michigan could make good wine?

sorry

True story: I lived with some real scumbags for a year back in 2002, and Screech was doing a workshop at a local college that one of the roommates was going to. They invited Screech over to the place, and he actually came. If I find the pic, I will post, but somewhere, there's a picture of Dustin Diamond and myself doing Jaeger shots. To quote Mark, "I don't know whether to be proud of this or embarrassed..."

Yes, uptempo rockers would be a good thing for this comp. - since it's for the car. I'm Down is pretty much a must then, eh?

Since you said spectacular remakes of Beatles tunes could be allowed, I offer two: Wilson Pickett's Hey Jude Aretha Franklin's Eleanor Rigby along with Dear Prudence, What Goes On, and for the very last tune on the CD-R, You Know My Name, Look Up the Number.

you are surely joking -------- right? amen. Most of my family lives in Miami, Ft. Lauderdale and Ft. Myers.

And most classical stations play "top 40" anyways. And here's one from Beethoven (or Mozart, or JSB...) That absolutely makes sense. Until there is 100% funding for all classical and jazz stations through government sources (ha!), there's no way you're going to be able to keep a business (and that's what radio stations are) afloat playing Stockhausen, Prokofiev or Stravinsky. That's just the way of the world in George W. Bush America.

I wanna tackle this backwards here... absolutely agreed. I remember my 7th grade music teacher (this would have been 1988 or so) saying that jazz was dead. Which just seemed like an odd idea at the time, that any kind of music could be dead. How wrong he was... That said, how would you teach it?

The problem isnt that they are wrong. The problem is they think that's a bad thing. How best to put this...Simply, for the newbie anyway, there's not a problem in their thinking. There's a problem in OUR thinking. We've been so busy, as a group of musicians, oogling, oggling and drooling over the Braxtons, Brotzmann and Cecil Taylors of the world that we've forgotten one important thing: music serves a purpose. And the less you know about music, the bigger the purpose that it has to serve. Think about it: average joe non jazz fan goes to a club to hear some music. They're either going to want something familiar that they can relate to, or something grooving that they can dance to. Or at least tap their foot to while they drink a beer. Now, after a while, if you can snare that person in the first place, maybe the "what they can relate to" or even the "what they can tap their foot to" might grow a bit. Or a lot. But there's still that relatability factor that even every one of us needs to admit to, even with our overblown record and CD collections. I think that such relatability is what grabbed so many record store geek types for John Zorn. If you're into some serious thrash metal, Naked City might be relatable. If you're into punk music, Zorn's take on Coleman on Spy vs. Spy might make sense. And of course, for the more adventurous jazz listener, his takes on the Sonny Clark catalog and Masada make a lot of sense. While I was still a budding jazz snob working at a record store, Zorn fascinated me because of the sheer depth of his catalog. But not everybody is a musician. Or a record store geek. Or a musician who's a record store geek. Some people are just average joes who work their 9 to 5 and get challenged enough (so they think) at their day job. They don't want to be challenged by what's in their CD player. And understandably so. So when we say that such a thing is what's wrong with them, we couldn't be more wrong. What's wrong with us is that we don't allow such people the journey. Start off with Diana Krall or Jane Monheit or Jamie Cullum. We as jazz fans, and especially those of us who are musicians or writers or disc jockeys need to be willing to understand that just as we went through a musical journey to get to (insert your favorite "challenging" artist here), that other people should be allowed to make that journey as well. And that journey should (probably) start with some sense of foot tapping, dancing or snapping of the fingers. And that said, if there's one thing that pisses me off about the way that Verve handles their publicity of both Jamie Cullum and Diana Krall, it's this: that there's not something attatched to the CD that says, "if you like this, you might also like..." Hell, even if they just stuck with Verve's catalog, that's still Oscar Peterson's and Wes Montgomery's most famous stuff. That's still important recordings by Charlie Parker (w/strings), Dizzy Gillespie (both small group and with the big band), Quincy Jones (Austin Powers theme, anyone?), Blossom Dearie, Jimmy Smith, and most importantly to a Diana Krall fan, Ella Fitzgerald and Sarah Vaughan. Heck, throw in acquisitions to the catalog, and you can add in Ahmad Jamal, Ramsey Lewis, James Moody, John Coltrane, and God only knows how much more. Not only would it line their pocketbooks (potentially, anyway), but it would give people that impetus to go buy more jazz. And once that ball starts rolling, it rarely stops. That's good jazz evangelism, and it's three MILLION more potential jazz listeners in earnest. Now, rewind that same scenario. Same newbie buys Anthony Braxton's For Alto because Braxton got a genius grant (well deserved, I might add...). Jazz begins and ends right there. Maybe there's more Diana Krall, Jane Monheit and Norah Jones to be had in the collection, but that's about it. And then we're back to where we started from... (jazz fan shaking fist at an uncaring world) "The problem isnt that they are wrong. The problem is they think that's a bad thing."

Call me wrong on this one (and I probably am), but Mythologies strikes me as the kind of album that can only be listened to in one sitting, from beginning to end. Trying to listen to it track by track, it didn't seem to really captivate me. But, when I popped the disc in and listened first track to last track, it really clicked. It isn't really my cup of tea, but I liked the ambition. And, I gotta say, live, she's a different (and more lively and interesting) animal, to be sure. As well, I also have to agree with Lazaro, there's a ton of great singers doing some cool things around town.

$50? what are you playing? $1/$2? I haven't been on a table in about a year and a half. I miss it. I gotta get to a casino soon.

How many times do I have to tell ya...don't bet against Chicago unless its the playoffs...

Then come see us at our first gig...October 27th at the Buzz in Oak Park.

Hey, I agree with Greg on this - cool sounding project - and don't disregard a Sabbath tune. I'm tellin' ya - if you've got the chops and you can fit the sound to the style, then you'll get some attention. For me, tired old standards and "common" tunes getting a well-done makeover makes me as happy as jelly pie! There's already an Indian (Hindi) version (sitar, tabla...) of Sabbath out as well as Sex Pistols and a few other wonderful absurdities (Dead Kennedys, et al.) that leave a lasting impression. Gotta love that Nouvelle Vague for what they do too - "new wave" in English and "bossa nova" in Portuguese - taking popular 80's new wave hits and doin' a Brazilian pop workover to them. Good luck and keep us up to date. pop tunes I know we're doing as of the moment: Eyes of the World (Grateful Dead) Signe (Eric Clapton) We're Gonna Groove (Led Zeppelin) Black Sabbath wise, I'd love to do Changes. Greg, if you heard my last band's disc, then you know I'm perfectly willing to do Metallica tunes in a jazz format. And speaking thereof, I've had a hard-on for Disposable Heroes (Master of Puppets) for a long time now. Thanks for the tips, gents! And Sal, some Inventions and Dimensions stuff would be hip!

Okay, so to prove I've completely lost my mind, I'm putting together a new project. Guitar, upright bass, and myself on bongos and congas. Hopefully, I'll get to add a soprano to the mix at some point, but first things first. The book is already pretty big, and it's covering a lot of ground. A few standards, a few rarely played gems (Samba du Bois by Phil Woods, practically everything on Gary Burton's Duster and Lofty Fake Anagram records), a boatload of bossas and sambas and some originals. The question is, if you were to either (a) play with a setup like that, or (b) go hear it, what would you want to hear or play? We're looking to record in November (yippee!). Any suggestions?

ditto on all counts.

Where would you like them to go? North Dakota works for me. I hear Fargo needs a minor league team.

And Patrick and I have both asked heatwave if he likes jazz and he's yet to respond...

That disc is the most "alive" that I ever heard the Melhdau/Grenadier/Rossy version of the trio. It crackles with energy in ways that the Art of the Trio discs absolutely do not. This isn't to say I don't enjoy the other discs with that lineup, but Day is Done really flipped a switch in my book as far as Mehldau is concerned. I hope Ballard continues to play with them, as he really brings something special to that group.