Dan Gould

I certainly expected that I would but the fact is I've given this newest CD three listens, and my reaction each time is a great big 'meh'. World class vocal chops and a tight band, but ... maybe I'm missing the point (shaking your ass) but I expected better songs. There was only a single song that I wanted to play a second time. BTW, did anyone else notice "Ian Hendrickson-Smith" on bari in the credits? Checking the info on the Cellar Live website for his live CD, its the same guy who records for Sharp Nine. Not that you could tell by his playing on the CD.

Notwithstanding the fact that if your record-breaking offense can't score and you can't keep Eli FUCKING Manning out of the end zone you deserve to go home with the most embarrassing failure in the history of the league, FUCK THE GIANTS AND MOST OF ALL FUCK THOSE ASSHOLES ON THE '72 DOLPHINS. The thought of those assholes celebrating tonight is like Joe Morgan, Bucky Dent and Aaron Fucking Boone all rolled into one huge fucking sucker punch in the gut - the kind that killed Houdini. I never in a million years imagined that I would now be instituting a Total Media Blackout

Looks like someone well aware of the potential copyright violation, and thinks this rigamorole will keep his ass safe. To take this approach to law breaking, its like trying to prevent a police raid of a drug dealer's stash by making everyone who enters sign a pledge that they aren't there to investigate criminal acts. Jim or one of the Mods should delete this shit forthwith.

Jack, Keep in mind that we normally try to let the existing BFT play out (in terms of discussion) before opening the new one. I know we're into February and its a short month, but I'd hate to tread on Al's fine discs, and there are several people yet to be heard from on his BFT.

I joke about what "sweetie" means but the fact is I read this thread and I am so grateful that my wife does none of the manipulative, controlling (yet seemingly passive) shit that other people are talking about. Apparently she really is one in a million.

Might be the distance from Mass to south Florida, but I have gone with Newbury a couple of times in the last six weeks or so - and they have not been fast at all. Mind you, I wasn't concerned because I was confident from what everyone else has said that they would come through but ... it wasn't the perfect, super fast response I'd been led to expect. Caiman in fact beat them twice when placing near-simultaneous orders for different discs.

Well, this I can't understand, Kimmel was extremely funny on "Win Ben Stein's Money" and Silverman can be pretty funny too. This gets a thousand from me. (I guess "My D*ck in a Box" really opened things up as far as what used to be called "Standards and Practices" is concerned.)

I am beginning to suspect that "sweetie" no longer carries its former meaning.

I have some potential concerns with copyright/trademark/use of celebrity "image" legalities and would appreciate any advice that any of the O-lawyers might have. I don't want to bring it out in public though so please PM me and I'll give you the rundown. Thanks!

Oh, and one more thing - the Times reports that Knoblauch spoke for an hour and a half - but Jim Murray's interview lasted three and a half hours. If Murray denied that he had contemporaneous discussions with McNamee about Clemens' potential exposure to testing positive, why would it take three and a half hours? The mere fact that the interview took that long suggests pretty strongly that he chose to tell the truth about what happened rather than protect Clemens and risk perjury, and that the conversation lasted so long because there were plenty of follow-up questions, starting with what he did after talking to McNamee - what did he tell the Hendricks brothers? What did he tell Clemens ... It really is looking worse and worse for the Rocket.

From the NY Times, regarding Chuck Knoblauch's statements after his interview with committee staff: That sure sounds like another former McNamee client acknowledging that McNamee told the truth about him. Is Roger really going to testify and risk a perjury charge?

So when the issue seemed to be guaranteeing a sixth year, he ended up with six years, plus an option/buyout on a seventh year? I'd say the Mets blinked, big time. But its not like they had a choice. I'm sure at the start he'll dominate the NL the way Clemens/Pedro did, but that's a long time and a lot of money for a pitcher. And they still need a big performance from at least one other pitcher before they'll be a dominant team. I guess the best I should hope for is for Phil Hughes to have some growing pains while Santana completely dominates - then you'll see some mortar shells lobbed from Lil' Boss at Cashman.

Incoherent, but I'm not sure if its irrelevant.

Oh, I am so in for this!

I've been meaning to ask, Paul, how you've enjoyed the winter in Tallahassee so far. I told you it would get cold eventually - and then the temperatures would bounce back to a nice range. I really miss that down here in Palm Beach county.

PM sent! Well, stuff is "new and exciting" if its been ages since you've dug out your copy of the vinyl. At least I know now what will be next in the "transfer to CD" pile. FINALLY!!! I thought nobody would pick up on this! I'd love to take full credit for this one, but the reality is that Booby is my default guess for vibes. So ...

Well, I hate to say it but Disc 2 wasn't nearly as pleasurable as disc 1. Track 1: Sounds like a cheesy MOR instrumental, circa 1967. NMCOT is too harsh, we need something to signify disinterest, not outright rejection. Track 2: Nice - and very familiar. Makes me think of those larger-band Stanley T. BNs that Duke Pearson arranged, but its not Stanley on tenor. Track 3: Chet Baker, who I've never been able to tolerate for more than about thirty seconds. NEXT! Track 4: Sure sounds like Sweets to me, on "Mean to Me". Track 5: Perfectly pleasant but just not the sort of thing I seek out. Track 6: Ditto. Track 7: And we've got three in a row. Track 8: Same as it ever was. Track 9: I think you see the pattern here ... Track 10: Sounds vaguely familiar ... I presume Jim R. will enjoy sniffing out the guitarists but I'm neither equipped to do that nor all that interested. Track 11: First I recognized Sweets ... and then Duke and Hodges. Backwards, Sideways, Forwards - its classic stuff. But will you look at me weird if I say that I like Sweets best on them? Track 12: Short and sweet. What's not to like? Track 13: At first I didn't want to like this but I couldn't help myself. No guesses though. Track 14: No guesses, and not really MCOT Track 15: Ah, back to the pretty but not terribly engaging. Ah well. Al, Disc 2 had more misses than the first one but was still enjoyable in its own way. Thanks for putting these together.

I think Allen is the one person with a shot to catch Sangrey on the post count meter.

that sounds about right. I got up at 8:15, tried to log on around 8:45, couldn't, but then got on a few minutes later.

If you've lurked here for any length of time you would realize that the band that hosts the forum does not want to associate itself with anything connected to copyright violations. That isn't to say that people here aren't well aware of BT sites, but there are some general ground rules that are followed: We don't solicit burns We don't recommend sharity blogs We don't talk about what may or may not be available at bit torrent sites

Thanks to Al for a BFT that has far more hits than misses - in fact, none of them are clunkers, just a few didn't really grab my attention, as pleasant as the tracks were. The dirty details: Track 1: Nice. Gotta be Blakey on drums ... was there a reissue of Blakey leading a big band in the early 50s? For some reason that's what I am thinking of but AMG is no help. Track 2: Nice, but no guesses. Track 3: Sounds Dukish to me, or at least his guys. Definitely Hodges in there. Classic, that's for sure. Track 4: See #2. Track 5: Very tight, whoever it is. Track 6: Classic Dameron tune, an all-time favorite, "On a Misty Night". So many recordings of this ... but this one has Griff on it. Track 7: Was track 6 the pivot point in the programming? Looks like we've moved on from Big Bands to small group bop/post-bop. Sounds like Blue Mitchell, from his Riverside, not BN recordings. Definitely Bu again. Another good 'un. Track 8: Very familiar tune, this one is going to annoy me til I find out what it is. That's three great tracks in a row. Track 9: Well, that streak came to an end. Not to say its not nice and all, but getting closer to sonic wallpaper here. Track 10: More of the same, only more instrumental variety. Not bad, but not to the level of the trio of tunes that came before. Not even close. Track 11: No guesses but impossible not to dig this. This is the first cut that is new and exciting enough to make me want to hear more from the LP. Track 12: Well, that's Lee, obviously. That sounds like Cliff Jordan on tenor, which brings to mind Take 12. It was the one Morgan recording that I bought early on as OJC vinyl, never replaced on CD, and never really listened as much to as his classic BNs. Not recognizing this as a BN track, that's what I'll say it comes from. Track 13: It took a little while but I finally ASSOCIATED this with a certain favorite "older" tenor player. Come to think of it, I believe that my love for Webster actually pre-dates Hank and Dex in my trio of tenor titans. Thanks for reminding me that I need to crack open the recent Storyville box set. A thousand Track 14: Pleasant like tracks 8 & 9 were, but it holds my attention a bit more. Smoothness of the tenor makes me think of Getz but I'm sure that is wrong. Track 15: Is that Booby? Track 16: More pleasantness but not really my preferred piano style. Can't wait to download Disc 2, Al!

I think I may have to make this my new signature:

It seems to me that the odds of a Giants victory is about equal to the odds that the Pats, with history firmly in their sights, will show up with fire in their eyes and come up with a blow-out performance like they did in the early part of the season. Say 25% chance for either outcome ... otherwise I see a 50% chance that the Pats win, by between 6 and 14 points.

I was reading through the Sharon Jones thread and came across this: So which is it, dumpy mama?

Well I'm not getting here too late but last week my brother emailed me to say he was at a Barnes & Noble and was so blown away by the music being played in the CD/DVD section that he was compelled to ask who it was. Long story short, he took it upon himself to order 100 Days, 100 Nights from Amazon for both of his brothers. That box just arrived so I can finally join in this discussion myself.