Claude

It's like the Bob Dylan and Rolling Stones SACD reissues, which were priced at $15-16 (but frequently discounted). Later on, remastered midprice CD versions were issued to co-exist with the hybrid SACDs. BTW, the Mercury SACDs are priced 15 Euro in Europe, which is in between mid and full price.

Kevin, you may be confusing the SACD prices for the RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence reissues. The RCAs are midpriced, but the Mercurys are fullpriced. http://www.cduniverse.com/productinfo.asp?...544&style=music http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0000DC15K/

http://www.german-cinema.de/archive/film_view.php?film_id=15

While Starker is the classic recommendation in the US, in Europe the Pierre Fournier DG recording from 1960 is usually mentionned

Thanks for the great find, Brandon. Do they really call it the "street of dreams"?

Not all are TOCJs, maybe half of them are McMaster transfers. I think there was a list of the TOCJs among the spanish Blue Notes in an earlier thread. The Curtis Fuller Vol.3 sounds great indeed.

That's a funny story, but when british media report bizarre things happening on the continent (and vice versa) it must be taken with a grain of salt. Unemployed being penalized for not accepting a job in prostitution is as unlikely to happen in Germany as elsewhere. Brothel boss Ulrich Kueperkoch obviously enjoys to be in the news: http://taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives...8/20/2003064488

I'm a civil servant dealing with industrial property (patents, trademarks, designs) law and policy. Very busy now with the EU presidency, but I still manage to check the board a few times a day. I'll make a short trip to Washington this week, my first time in the US.

As far as McMaster's recent remasters go, in my view they don't even match his own mid-1990's remasters. That was the case of the Moncur Select vs Connoisseurs and the recent Chet Baker Pacific Jazz reissues vs the 1994 Chet Baker Pacific Years 4CD box. They may be better than his earliest 1987-90 EMI remasters, but that's not difficult. The new versions sound artificially quiet and processed, in one word: lifeless. It could be due to the Sonic Solutions console he is apparently using at Capitol studios. I've read other remastering engineers refusing to use it for that reason.

I love of Rollins' RCA and Impulse! recordings, because he playing is freer than on his "classic" Prestige, Riverside, Contemporary and Blue Note sessions (which are undoubtedly more "accomplished"). Even "What's new", which is often considered sub-par by critics, is a great album in my view. The setting in which he plays really doesn't matter that much, it's his improvisations (longer on the 60's recordings) that are the essence. I love his sax-percussion duo on "What's new".

"Label: Angel" ??? Does EMI think the Blue Note trademark isn't sexy anymore?

The pictured sleeve says "European Tour July 1978" A bootleg with this name is listed on this Gil Evans site: http://gilevans.free.fr/disco_us/seances_1978.htm#780700

Second hand is the way to go as far as high end turntables and tonarms are concerned. You can get a Linn LP12 for $1000, depending on the level of upgrades. If you absolutely want to buy new, I would recommend the Nottingham Analogue line, starting at $1200. http://www.aslgroup.com/nottingham/index.htm

If you link intentionally to content that infringes copyright, you participate in the infringement act. The Jazz Piano Workshop. Berlin, 1965 video was probably never sold commercially. I saw it on german TV years ago. So no studio was harmed by the downloads. But this doesn't matter from a legal point of view. One of the most often asked legal questions on TV/Cinema-related message boards is "Can a share on the internet some TV shows that I have recorded from free TV?" The answer is clearly No, but it is difficult to explain why one can't make available to others what is already available for free. Music fans often think its ok to share bootlegs and OOP records, but not to do it with commercially available recordings. Those are valid ethic considerations, but from a strict legal point of view it doesn't make a difference at all whether you share the latest Hollywood movie ripped from a reviewer DVD or a movie taped from a free TV station. That being said, the important question is, who has an interest in sueing the copyright infringer, in the case of material that is not commercially exploited? I haven't heard of free TV stations that went after those who share TV shows in file sharing networks.

The sender address of an email can easily be faked. The only reliable way to check who sent the email is to look for the IP address of the originating server (in Outlook Express, go to the Options of the message window to display the complete email header) and then to check if this IP address has something to do with paypal (do a IP Whois at www.samspade.org). If it is the IP address of a server in Russia or China, you can be sure it's a scam.

By artist and then the artists by musical style or origin. Lee Morgan and Freddie Hubbard are next to Art Blakey. Duke Ellington, Count Basie and Louis Armstrong not far from each other. But due to the increasing size of my collection, or my age I have more and more problems to find CDs fast, so I may switch to alphabetical organization soon.

No, maybe my english was too limited there. It made my suspicion stronger.

Hi Tjobbe, I don't know that release, but I don't like the ECM-ish cover

Grachan Moncur III's "Evolution" is one of my favourite Blue Note sessions. That's why I always wanted to find the best sounding version (but I couldn't afford an original LP release). I wasn't satisfied at all with Ron McMasters mastering of this session in the Mosaic Select, although it is still the best sounding session in this set. Today I got the japanese TOCJ CD, which I won on Ebay for only $11.6. Before the Select was released, this would have been a CD with many bids. It was released in 1996 (the disc mentions 1994 and 1996, so I guess the later date is the release date). I made a A/B comparision with my two CD players. The first noticeable difference was that there is more tape hiss on the TOCJ disc, while the Select was almost dead quiet. This confirmed my suspicion that McMaster uses NoNoise filtering on his latest remasterings. The seconds and most important difference is that treble on the Select seems capped. The TOCJ doesn't sound bright, but the Select is muffled and distant in comparision. At the same time, the cymbals sounds slightly distorted, while on the TOCJ they sound smoother and have the right timbre. The difference is a bit like FM vs AM radio. The dynamics on the TOCJ are also better, it sounds much more lively. My impression of the Select is that it sounds like being made from a multi-generation tape copy, while the TOCJ is made from the master tape. Of course this can't be, so I wonder what McMaster did to make it sound like this. I don't want to bash him, because he made some Blue Note remasterings which sound very good, better than the TOCJ versions. But missed this one, and it's a pity it happened on a Mosaic set, which is supposed to be the definitive reissue. So if you see a TOCJ copy of this session, it is worth getting it even if you have the Select. It's my definitive version.

Several Universal jazz midprice CDs have been temporarily reduced from 9.99 to 7.77 Euro at amazon.de I ordered a couple of Impulse! discs and the Chet Sonet disc

Kevin, the vast majority of these are not lawsuits and not even administrative proceedings (opposition)against other trademarks, but only requests for extension of the opposition period, that Monster Cable made to be able to study the other trademarks. If you click on the details, you will see "Current Status: A request for an extension of time to file an opposition has been filed at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.", and in the USPTO letter "The request to extend time to oppose is granted until xx/xx/2004 on behalf of potential opposer Monster Cable Products, Inc.". Whether this procedure is also used as a sort of warning I cannot say. The only thing that's strange is that Monster made so many of those requests, many more than any other big company I have checked. I have only found a few cases that said "Current Status: An opposition is now pending at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board." One case was "Current Status: Abandoned after an inter partes decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board." I haven't seen one opposition that Monster Cable won. But anyway it seems that the dominant strategy of Monster Cable is not to start official proceedings (which they would probably lose) but to menace small companies who don't have the means to study the legal situation, by sending them letters requesting to take a trademark licence from monster Cable or abandon the use of "Monster". This is also discussed here: http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthre...24&page=2&pp=20

The MP3 phenomenon and the decreasing awareness for sound quality is one thing. But also a majority of those music fans who care about sound quality were satisfied with what CD sound can deliver. I'm speaking about those with a $2000-3000 hifi system, not the freaks with $3000 cables If CD sounded as bad as some high-rez freaks now say (why did this PCM-allergy only appear in 1999, when SACD was introduced?), the hifi community wouldn't have adopted the format in the 80's and stayed with vinyl. Just as they refused the data-reduced formats Minidisc and mp3. CD is capable of audiophile sound, and that is the biggest problem for SACD. The second advantage of SACD and DVD-A over CD is multichannel sound. Many music lovers are not convinced by surround, or they don't want to invest into the additional hardware, only to be able to hear "Kind of Blue" on the original 3-track recording. For jazz fans especially it makes no sense, given the small number of multichannel discs.

I heard that for the demonstration flight the new Airbus will pass under the Millau bridge

I don´t think it means he doesn't listen or pay respect to the past masters. I understandd this quote as meaning he doesn't want to imitate them (like the "young lions" movement in the 80's).

Have you heard the Definitive release? This is *said* to be the best version of the Carnegie Hall concert. Less noisier than the Schaap (extreme in this regard, even my 80 year old neighbour complained about the scratching sounds ) and much clearer than the noisereduced earlier CBS CD reissue. As far as the Ellington disc is concerned, it's great to hear this concert in the complete and unedited running order. But the idea to create a stereo sound from two independent mono recordings (Columbia and broadcast tapes) is absolute nonsense in my view. Although the CD doesn't sound bad, the effect has nothing to do with correct reproduction of the soundstage. Maybe if one day they discover an audience recording of the concert they'll do a surround version