Scott Dolan

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Thanks for picking up on that. I couldn't find a better term to use there. As for the rest of your post, I really appreciate the explanation, but I still have to admit that I don't get it. When you say "instructions", you're talking about the notes on the page, right? I guess I'll have to find the examples you mentioned and give them a listen to see exactly what it is that you're getting at. It's interesting because I always thought the ultimate goal of through composed music WAS to play it perfectly. Just knowing that that isn't the case gives me something to ponder. Wrapping my head around this as I type, so please forgive this stupid question: but doesn't it become improvised music if one deviates from the "instructions"? I suppose that would end in really interesting results in smaller ensembles, but in larger ones? How many pieces were in the ensemble you and your wife saw?

Is there really that much "wiggle room" when it comes to playing through composed music, though? It certainly wouldn't seem like it on the surface. But in fairness, some folks think most single malts all taste the same, too. So my woefully untrained ear for classical music leaves me at a serious disadvantage to make any argument to the contrary. Just out of curiosity, are there any examples of the same piece played by different musicians you could post to highlight the differences? Not that I'd necessarily hear them, but it couldn't hurt. BTW, just looked at their Wiki entry. Over 500 sessions! I knew they recorded a ton, as I stated earlier, but that's just insane!

Not sure if they're "state of the art" or not, but they certainly dominate the orchestral market. Seems like every other piece I hear on our local NPR was performed by them. That said, I'm not deep enough into that particular genre to know "perfect" from "personal". Jazz? Sure. "Classical"? All pretty much sounds the same (which is all on me).

They don't, Jim. That entire comment is completely irrelevant. "If they legalize gay marriage, that opens the door for being able to marry your dog!" Yes, that's the depth you just sank to.

No, but a nice try. Seeding should be best record to worst in the playoffs. And with 5 teams in, only the fourth and fifth best records should be playing in the Wild Card game. Not the second and third. There is absolutely no logic to that whatsoever. And all 30 teams play a 162 game schedule. They all end up with a win/loss record totaling 162 (though sometimes 161) games. That's about as "balanced" as it gets, or even needs to be.

A win is a win, and a loss is a loss. I don't care what team, division, or league it came from. That argument against inter-league has always been a non-starter.

Nice post, Dan. I agree that it's shameful that either Pittsburgh or Chicago will be done for the season after Tuesday. Either the second or third best regular season record will be absent from the true playoffs. That's just fucking stupid.

Jim, deep breath time. Even without a second Wild Card team, sometimes a 163rd game would be necessary. Some times teams will play each other to an even split. It happens. As with many things, you are overthinking it (no worries, I do the same thing all the time). Yes, the second Wild Card spot does exacerbate the situation, but not to the extremes you're painting it.

Wow! Brother, I could NOT disagree with you more. When they only had 6 divisions, yes. But now that they have 8? Absolutely not! There are plenty of examples, but let's look no further back than last year. The Panthers won their division with a record of 7-8-1. The Eagles finished 10-6. Which one made the playoffs? This was something I noted to friends of mine back when re-alignment took place. And it has happened multiple times since. I would argue MLB has MUCH better playoff seeding than the NFL right now. Now, I have only been a MLB fan since 2002, so I will defer to you, and others, who abhor even one Wild Card team. But, I've been a fan of the NFL since 1978, and I find their current system of playoff seeding to be an abomination. Sending positive vibes your way, C.C. Get well. The game means nothing when compared to your health.

Jim, you're ignoring the example I gave. The 163rd game could happen between two teams from the same division tied for the best record in the league. As for the second Wild card, whatever. I don't have a problem with it, but I think the single game elimination aspect of it is kinda silly. And really, MLB still allows less teams than any of the Big American Four sports into the postseason.

Ah, now I see what you're saying. It's simply a question of seeding. Both teams had already earned their postseason berths. If the Blue Jays and Yankees were tied for the best record in the A.L., they'd have to play a tie-breaking game to determine seeding as well. It's not as though someone was given a free postseason pass even though they lost that last game. They were already in.

That Yamaha has a nice old-fashioned look to it. I love it! First time I looked at it I thought, "look at that big ol' tuning knob, you don't see those anymore!" BTW, what is a NAS?

Yes, whichever team loses their 163rd game, be it a tie breaker, or the Wild Card game, is done.

Very cool! And a very nice looking unit. Thanks for sharing, I had never heard of it before. :)

No, it was just the huge outlets that were hoping this would be another "Superstorm Sandy". Mostly outlets like CNN and the Jim Cantore Melodramatic Overdrive Network. Glad you folks missed out on the Hurricane parties.

Yes, I know. I lived in Hurricane Alley for 32 years. And only a few miles from the coastline. The northern transplants were what made things such a bear down there, as they either 1. Had absolutely no clue how to properly prepare for a storm, or 2. Didn't take those storms seriously. The wind gauge on top of the four story hospital my wife and I worked at recorded a gust of 185mph when Charley's eyeball passed overhead. Lots of folks learned some pretty important lessons that day. I still think the term "superstorm" is melodramatic media-driven horseshit.

I love how the media is already falling over themselves breathlessly wondering, "will this be another SUPERSTORM SANDY?!" Also, who knew a Cat 3 Hurricane was now referred to as a superstorm? When Hurricane Charley, a Cat 4, destroyed my hometown in Florida, it was just know as Hurricane Charley. I guess they only become Superstorms when they hit the precious center of art and humanity known as NYC.

Feel good, team of destiny thing? That would be my Royals last year. That worked out well enough...

It will either be them, or the Rangers, IMO. Houston has an outside chance with the pitching that they have. Yankees and Royals have devolved into smoke and mirrors at this point...

Please do. I'm hoping he's doing well. He's been a long admired and respected poster here (and JC, also) for many, many years. He didn't go into detail about what he was dealing with in our pm exchange. Nor did I ask, out of respect. But, I could tell by the way he worded it that it was serious enough that it was taking a toll on him both physically and emotionally. So please pay him a visit, if you can. Let him know his extended family is concerned, and sends their best wishes.

Back in June Moosely and I got into a dust up because he thought I was treating Gould unfairly. The conversation left the board quickly and went to pm where we sorted things out. He told me then that he was dealing with some medical issues, and that they may have contributed to the way he handled the situation and that he might need to take a break for a bit. As far as I know, he hasn't posted since. I hope he is recovering nicely, and that we hear from him soon. He's a good dude.

A bit too late, unfortunately. Oh well, I'm certainly not expecting my Royals to go very far in the post season, so don't feel bad.

SS!, where do you stand on "the decision 2.0"? I honestly don't get it. If Manziel is the future, then why sit him for a 73 y.o. QB after he played two serviceable games? I suppose I "get" the counter-argument that they still need to ease him in after everything he's been through, but c'mon! Not that any decision that comes out of the Browns org should be surprising, but this one had me scratching my head.

The most amazing aspect of all of this is how many of us only knew him as a sharp-witted "buffoon", and never realized what an amazing baseball player he really was. Look at his numbers, folks. They speak for themselves. http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/berrayo01.shtml R.I.P. Mr. Berra. You've earned it.

It's not terribly happy for him.