Dan Gould

Damn, damn, damn. Terrible news, but he left so much behind for us to enjoy and remember him by.

I didn't know that FLAC files could be played directly ... for editing purposes, Goldwave "extracts" a FLAC file, presumably to WAV in order to do any editing, and I don't know of an audio player that automatically plays a FLAC file. One cool thing I noticed recently with NERO is that FLAC files are recognized as sources for audio CD burning. Saves me a step when I get around to burning my backlog of Dime shows.

I just finished Reminiscing in Tempo, an oral biography of Duke Ellington (highly recommended if you haven't read it) and it clearly states that a lawsuit resulted in a financial settlement over Forrest's use of the section of Duke's composition. So that questions whether Ellington "wasn't unhappy" about the situation (although maybe at the time Mills was getting co-composer credits and it was at his insistence? The book isn't clear). And it also suggests that Jimmy had a really defective memory at the time of the interview, since he agreed to settle the suit way back when.

As far as the first one goes, I always understood that these sorts of "euphemisms" didn't have specific real-life meanings. They were using/appropriating real-life actions ("trim your cheese" - cut away the mold since the rest is still safe to eat) and using them as an implied sexual metaphor.

I like the fact that the Sox had to designate a couple of pitchers for assignment to make room on the roster for Kotsay (David Aardsma) and Smoltz (David Pauley) but didn't just lose them; they made trades with the Orioles (probably just middle relief waiver wire fodder for Pauley) and the Mariners (a very interesting sounding single-A prospect named Fabian Williamson). Williamson pitched in the Pacific Coast League, which I believe has a bunch of hitter's parks. But what's impressive is 144 Ks in 124.3 innings over 1 1/2 seasons in A-Ball. And his control isn't bad, with a strikeout to walk ratio over two to one. And did I mention he's a lefty? Haven't found anything about his stuff but I'll take a lefty with big strikeout numbers any day, especially for someone who doesn't fit on the roster anymore. Heck, this guy sounds like a younger, lefty version of Aardsma, without the wildness.

The point, Bev, is that downloads could be offered in a lossless format like FLAC but MP3s and other compressed formats are what is being offered. The technology is exactly the same - Internet downloads - and its that technology that allows the potential to "keep a lot more music available indefinitely" and with broadband connections, the time to download isn't that much more. I don't think its unreasonable for people to prefer non-lossy formats, but I am afraid the battle over whether MP3s are good or bad was lost a long time ago, so carry on into your Brave New World.

Yes. Art Blakey And The Jazz Messengers Wynton Marsalis (tp) Bobby Watson (as) Billy Pierce (ts) James Williams (p) Charles Fambrough (b) Art Blakey (d) "Bubba's Jazz Restaurant", Fort Lauderdale, FL, October 11, 1980 The tune is Bobby Watson's "Time Will Tell". Jim, did you recognize this because you are so familiar with the recording or did Windows Media Player do the ID-ing for you? I mean, it seems ridiculous that someone would claim to have a recording that he's certain is Bird and its a well-known standard but its actually a Bobby Watson original?

Sweets Edison.

Its available at Amazon in the U.S. http://www.amazon.com/Love-Jump-Jazz-Bross...5058&sr=8-1

I agree. This is going to be a real snoozer of a Super Bowl. That's the exact same thing they said about the Wild Card round, the Divisional Round and the Conference Championship game...guess who won all 3? I never heard that, but the 8-8 Cards as the NFC representitive there is no reason to get excited. Unless, of course, as and if the NFC West representitive actually wins....then it'll be a great game The Cards won their division at 9-7; they're now 12-7 and about as confident in themselves as any team could be. I wouldn't count them out.

Thanks for that summary, Allan, I didn't know much of what had gone on between Sonny Thompson - Jimmy McCracklin and the Four Souls (Pullen gave Bubba and Williams credit for teaching him to play blues, iirc). One late-stage date you didn't mention is Bross Townsend's I Like Jump Jazz, also on Claves.

Reminds me of the piece the Times published a while back about largely forgotten rock musicians making good money playing for their fans in back yards and living rooms, usually on birthdays.

You might try the Three Sounds Soul Symphony, which came out in the summer should be easy to find. Side 1 is a single extended track (though Gene Harris solos throughout, it might not be ideal for what you are looking for, as the "Symphony" goes through many different themes so the soloing isn't quite as "extended" as you might want - still a cool tune though) and the album certainly fits in that era of "commercialization sell out".

Thanks for the report, Dave - so the Frankly Jazz tracks have good or even excellent sound? Because I was wondering what they'd have for source tape. Any acknowledgment of a Lance Evans in the booklet? I'd assume they got the source tape from him, he set up a website about his father but never took it any further than a home page. And how would you describe the level of musicianship on the "prison" band cuts? Were all those guys solid players, or is it more worth it just for the rarely-recorded Bolton?

I'd certainly agree ... and I can still enjoy it because of that Turrentine "sound".

You're astonishing inability to read is staggering. Please consult post number 300: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php...st&p=877412 Look again you contemptible moronic fool. You said the "juiced" ball came into being in the "mid-80s". The sustained peaks in home run hitting started in 1993, which everybody except you understands is, at the very minimum, better explained by expansion, diluted pitching, and smaller parks. Are you really so stupid as to posit inter-league play as an explanation for "spikes"? And what ever happened to your claim of the ball being juiced in the "mid-80s"? 1994 is the mid-80s? 1999? 2004 and 2006? Try again, you sad pathetic troll. Its time to go to school, "teacher" (and it is unbelievably sad that you are an employed, indeed a tenured "teacher"). National League home runs, 1982 to 1992: 1299 1398 1278 1424 1523 1824 1279 1365 1521 1430 1262 These are the numbers you interpreted as signifying some sort of "juiced" ball, pointing particularly at 1987. I asked if you had a fucking clue what "standard deviation" means. Of course you do not. The Mean number of home runs hit per season: 1418.45 The Standard Deviation: 163.48539 This means that one standard deviation around the mean is 1254 home runs to 1630. Only a single season, 1987, shows a variation above the mean of more than one standard deviation. This is a spike, an outlier, a meaningless single event. Let's look at the AL, shall we? We did it before, let's see what Means and Standard Deviations show us, "teacher". 82 - 1992: 2080 1903 1980 2178 2290 2634 1901 1718 1796 1953 1776 Mean: 2019 Standard Deviation: 267.07752 One Standard Deviation Around the Mean: 1752 - 2286 What's this? One season just a hair's breadth more than a standard deviation above the mean, and one season, '87, that is a spike, an outlier, an isolated event. Bottom line: You said that the ball was juiced starting in the "mid-80s". I have proven, beyond and to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt, that there is no evidence whatsoever for this claim outside of a single season which constitutes a clearly isolated event, an outlier, an insignificant spike in the data with no long-term impact. Now, shall we move on to the 1993-2008 data? Do we really have to? You've posted the numbers, so let's examine them with a little bit of intelligence, shall we, "teach"? Here are the AL numbers: Number one, you contemptible moron, 1994 was a season that ended in August due to a player's strike. You cannot compare 1994 to 2008 or any other season. So let's be intelligent (c'mon Tim, try it, you might learn something) and drop 1994 from the data. We are left with: Mean: 2486.15385 Standard Deviation: 171.90542 Once again, every single season's Home Run totals are within one Standard Deviation from the Mean for the period under study except for one, and that season's numbers exceeded a Standard Deviation by a scant 30! Let's look at the NL, shall we? 1917 2220 2163 2565 2893 3005 2952 2595 2708 2846 2580 2840 2705 2608 Mean: 2614.07143 Standard Deviation: 318.09323 So, there is a bit more variation around the Mean for the NL. But before we get into this, I do need to point out one thing: The Mean is 2614 for the NATIONAL LEAGUE. In the same period, the Mean for the AMERICAN LEAGUE was only 2486. But Timmy, didn't you tell us that its the American League where more home runs are hit? Might be time for remedial arithmetic, "Teach". Ah, but back to our results. There are three seasons that are more than one standard deviation different from the Mean. One just barely makes it, the next season of 3005 is clearly a spike in the data. But what about 1995? If the ball was juiced, how could the home runs total only 1917, a total that is more than TWO STANDARD DEVIATIONS FROM THE MEAN??? Timmy, please explain how a juiced ball could stop going so far, so suddenly????? If 3005 home runs has any statistical significance, than 1917 has even more significance. So let's summarize. Average NL Home Runs 1982 - 1992: 1418.45 Standard Deviation: 163.48539 Average NL Home Runs 1995 - 2008 Mean: 2614.07143 Standard Deviation: 318.09323 Average AL Home Runs 1982 - 1992: Mean: 2019 Standard Deviation: 267.07752 Average AL Home Runs 1995 - 2008: Mean: 2486.15385 Standard Deviation: 171.90542 Sure looks like something happened between these two eras, doesn't it? But before we go further, let's remember: THIS ISN'T A CHANGE THAT TOOK PLACE IN THE "MID-80S". So what happened in 1993? The National League expanded, adding one park in Colorado that played like Ebbett's Field. That alone, beyond any shadow of a doubt, accounts for a significant portion of the increase in home runs in the National League. Expansion also diluted the pitching talent in the league, as more jobs were created and filled by pitchers who would otherwise not qualify for a major league job. Many new parks were opened in this era as well, parks with decidedly smaller dimensions than the ones they replaced. And last but not least, there were of course, the effects of Performance Enhancing Drugs. Disagree all you want, Timmy, but no one else in the world, perhaps in the Universe, disputes that the jump in home runs came with the bulking up, and in many instances, steroidization of major league baseball. No "juiced" ball, and by God, whatever happened in 1993, it didn't happen in the "mid-80s". Do you understand, "Teach"? I guarantee that everyone else on this board who cares about the question understands. Somehow I know that you don't. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. But its even worse when that mind is in charge of the intellectual development of children.

Did not know about the injury history, J.H. All things considered, I'd say its a good deal then. It'll be interesting to see if they get a good deal with someone like Victorino that locks up some free agency years. They need to pick and choose and who they want to keep (and reward) and who they're willing to go to the mat with in arbitration. And of course there's that big fella at first base.

Yeah, I saw after I posted how many arb-eligible players they have, but wouldn't you prefer that they ignore that three year rule, which you say is unofficial, to lock him up and postpone free agency? Better to do that then risk that in three years he's the best lefty in either league and will cost an arm and a leg. So I guess it can be called an excellent deal, its not as great a move as it could have been. Of course that is my 2 cents and YMMV.

One other thing that may be of concern, James - I just saw that Kazmir has been added to the USA team for the WBC. Given his history, I'd be concerned about the likelihood that he'll end up on the DL sometime during the season after being asked to crank it up and compete so early in the year.

Phillies sign Cole Hames to three year deal. But unlike the Red Sox deals with their young stars, and the deals most small market teams try to make, they didn't buy out any of his free agent years, this only covers his arbitration-eligible years. So they have cost certainty - if he pitches great he can't get huge raises in arbitration. But I'm not sure what's really gained without keeping him off the market beyond his anticipated free agency season. Is he a Spawn of Satan client who would never give up free agency? Or did the Phils just want the cost certainty?

You also in a sense acquired David Price because he will be given Edwin Jackson's spot in the rotation and represents a gigantic improvement, even if he doesn't live up to the hype. But I'd worry about the pen as a whole and not just the closer because a bunch of unheralded arms had career years in 2008. Its been shown that there is a great deal of variability in the performance of middle relievers from year to year; what are the chances that all of the middle relievers have such impressive seasons again? Overall, the Rays should be right back in the thick of it but I suspect that between improvements in New York and potential improvements in Boston, I think a fallback is at least as likely as a repeat.

Well the question, Conrad, is what you now think of the Braves' offseason. Three pitchers added, Smoltz lost. Is it a little less depressing than it was?

Well, they didn't kiss and make up yet, but according to the Globe: At this point I'm glad that Theo hasn't paid the extortionate prices being demanded for young catchers (starting with Texas - let's see how they feel about having three catchers and NO PITCHING after the season starts) and at this point I think they should get something done to bring Tek back for one year @ 3-5 million; 2 if they want to be hard asses about it.

I wholeheartedly agree, but I really must put it into my own words: Timmy, you're the dumbest fuck on the planet.

You want the AL breakdown? Read 'em and weep, for it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was no "juiced ball" in the mid 80s: 82 - 1993: 2080 1903 1980 2178 2290 2634 1901 1718 1796 1953 1776 2074 See you contemptible joke? MORE home runs BEFORE the spike of 1987. FAR LESS home runs after the spike, until 1993, which did not even exceed the first year's total. And before you tell me about the rise from 85-87, look at the ranges. Well within the standard deviation, until 1987. And if the ball was juiced, what's up with the collapse after 1987?