Jim R Posted September 4, 2011 Report Posted September 4, 2011 On the heels of seeing Chuck's thread, "Stupid review on the AAJ site", I just stumbled across this review of the Sonny Criss album "Rockin' In Rhythm" at Dusty Groove... One of the best Sonny Criss albums ever – and a record that, despite a stupid (and possibly misleading) title, is a warmly lyrical session that features Sonny supported by the incredible rhythm team of Eddie Green piano, Bob Cranshaw bass, and Alan Dawson drums. Like some of Sonny's other Prestige sets from the time, this one has him playing tracks that should sound stupid, but which are turned into completely new works through Sonny's masterful approach to soloing. Case in point are the versions of "Misty Roses", "Eleanor Rigby", and "The Masquerade Is Over"! This reviewer thinks that the album title (which comes from the Carney/Ellington/Mills tune- which is one of the tunes on the fucking record!! ) is "stupid and possibly misleading"...? And... why is that? Uhh, geez, I dunno- because it's not a "rock" album? Some of the tracks "should sound stupid"... (btw, who the hell says this in a review?) Cases in point: "Misty Roses" (well, sure, obviously ); "Eleanor Rigby" (of course- why would they have chosen a Beatles tune... in... 1968?); and "The Masquerade Is Over" (why would a jazz saxophonist select an over-recorded Leon Russell song? (Just to be clear, I know that Leon Russell wrote "This Masquerade"... I'm just trying to get inside the mind of an incompetent hack here.) Stating that "(I'm Afraid) The Masquerade Is Over" should sound "stupid" on a jazz recording... I mean, that would be a foolish comment even if the tune in question WAS "This Masquerade" (and even if that tune existed in 1968, when this session was recorded). Dusty Groove's reviews can be a little goofy at times, but not usually asinine. This is beyond just being the goofy Dusty Groove review, with the wacky adjectives and such. This may be the most idiotic review I've ever seen on their site (maybe anywhere), regardless of the positive spin (the backhanded compliments). Heavy sigh... Quote
seeline Posted September 4, 2011 Report Posted September 4, 2011 I've never viewed the DG blurbs as "reviews" - they're ad copywriting, basically. But this one's certainly full of clunkers! Quote
JSngry Posted September 4, 2011 Report Posted September 4, 2011 Send them an email about it. I did once about their blurb on a Chico Hamilton album that he had recorded with some members of Little Feat (they were completely oblivious to an obvious selling point), & they both responded and changed their copy! Quote
Jim R Posted September 4, 2011 Author Report Posted September 4, 2011 I've never viewed the DG blurbs as "reviews" - they're ad copywriting, basically. You're right, of course. I was too worked up to get that sorted out. Quote
Jim R Posted September 4, 2011 Author Report Posted September 4, 2011 Send them an email about it. I did once about their blurb on a Chico Hamilton album that he had recorded with some members of Little Feat (they were completely oblivious to an obvious selling point), & they both responded and changed their copy! I almost wrote to them last night, but held off. I may take your advice. Btw, this was a blurb written for a used copy, and they list it as OOP. Combining that with the fact that this recording was made 43 years ago, I kind of felt like it was a waste of time. Maybe not... I still feel like ignorance of this magnitude needs to be stamped out (delicately, of course) wherever and whenever possible. Quote
Dan Gould Posted September 4, 2011 Report Posted September 4, 2011 Keep in mind that they keep the ad copy on file for the next time it shows up in stock. So even if it is OOP and relatively rare, it could show up again with the same stupid shit written about it. For a knowledgeable store like that to not know Rockin in Rhythm as a Duke cover is pretty lame. If you tell them I bet they change it to something like "you might think the title is misleading but actually its a cover of a Duke Ellington tune and its pretty rockin'!" Quote
Jim R Posted September 4, 2011 Author Report Posted September 4, 2011 Dan, I might have suggested that you and I offer to get together on a re-write for them, but... clearly we could not be trusted. Ah, I miss those mad-libs. Did we do some of that here, or was it all on the BNBB? Quote
Late Posted September 5, 2011 Report Posted September 5, 2011 If you tell them, I bet they change it to something like "you might think the title is misleading, but actually it's a cover of a Duke Ellington tune and it's pretty rockin'!" You nailed it there. Watch for the edit if someone writes them. I think they don't always listen to the CDs they write copy for. Case in point: the blurb they had for a Gus Mancuso CD went on and on comparing Mancusco's playing and tone on "bari" to Gerry Mulligan's. Mancusco plays baritone horn, and Mulligan of course plays baritone saxophone. I wrote them about it, and their blurb was only lightly edited. In fact, it's probably still there somewhere. Ah well. I still order from them, but I refuse to read the copy. It's the only time when I want to use one of these ---> Quote
fasstrack Posted September 5, 2011 Report Posted September 5, 2011 This may be the most idiotic review I've ever seen on their site (maybe anywhere), regardless of the positive spin (the backhanded compliments). Heavy sigh... Wait around. They'll top themselves. Won't be long. Reminds me of story a friend told me about a gadget he bought. ''It was supposed to be 'idiot-proof', but I think I found a way to beat it''. Quote
Jim R Posted September 5, 2011 Author Report Posted September 5, 2011 This may be the most idiotic review I've ever seen on their site (maybe anywhere), regardless of the positive spin (the backhanded compliments). Heavy sigh... Wait around. They'll top themselves. Won't be long. I believe it, Joel. That may be one reason why I still haven't mustered the energy to write to them. Maybe if we all bombarded them at once? A co-ordinated strike? They'd still probably soon top themselves... Quote
Jim R Posted September 5, 2011 Author Report Posted September 5, 2011 (edited) We interrupt this discussion with an important news bulletin: After getting a nice pm, and coming back here and reading this thread again, I was on the verge of doing the deed. I went to the DG page to copy the url for use in my message to DG, and lo and behold... The dreaded blurb has been edited!! (and quite well, I might add): http://www.dustygroove.com/item.php?id=n7bd6bw3zb Ah, such relief. Now... who to thank... could it be someone here? Will that person step forward, or do I have to guess? (and I do have a good guess chambered ). At any rate, big props in advance! Well done. Edited September 5, 2011 by Jim R Quote
JSngry Posted September 5, 2011 Report Posted September 5, 2011 Not only has the blurb been edited, but the CD has been sold with the kind of speed that keeps us coming back for more! Quote
fasstrack Posted September 5, 2011 Report Posted September 5, 2011 We interrupt this discussion with an important news bulletin: After getting a nice pm, and coming back here and reading this thread again, I was on the verge of doing the deed. I went to the DG page to copy the url for use in my message to DG, and lo and behold... The dreaded blurb has been edited!! (and quite well, I might add): http://www.dustygroove.com/item.php?id=n7bd6bw3zb Ah, such relief. Now... who to thank... could it be someone here? Will that person step forward, or do I have to guess? (and I do have a good guess chambered ). At any rate, big props in advance! Well done. Oh, well. Even a broken clock...... Quote
Jim R Posted September 5, 2011 Author Report Posted September 5, 2011 Not only has the blurb been edited, but the CD has been sold with the kind of speed that keeps us coming back for more! My only regret now is that nobody took full advantage of the opportunity for some good (I mean really good) mad-libbing! Quote
JSngry Posted September 5, 2011 Report Posted September 5, 2011 Maybe my last response was too subtle and/or lame, but it was intended in that spirit! Quote
Jim R Posted September 5, 2011 Author Report Posted September 5, 2011 Maybe my last response was too subtle and/or lame, but it was intended in that spirit! Not at all- I was (jokingly, of course) referring to the idea of having imparted some (actually, a LOT ) of that spirit into the new blurb! Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.