lipi

Tsk, tsk. Name calling already, and with such poor punctuation to boot.

Ah, I see. "you guys" is supposed to refer back to "the majority of active members" and not to "a few people," then? In that case, I apologize and rather than give you grief about your political beliefs I will give you grief about your syntax. You can't switch subjects between clauses; that's not cricket.

Oof, buddy, you're off the deep end. You lost the popular vote, and you would on this board, too, by a wider margin still.

What a question... Of course Fatha knew best: just listen to his playing on "Weatherbird" with Pops.

Oh please. If you had read things correctly you would have said "It's not about the postmaster general, it's the Baltimore postmaster you should look at." Instead you said "she's only been with the USPS for 26 years." You don't get to invent some unmentioned antecedent for "she." So take your pick: you read incorrectly, or you skipped a step in your argument. There's no other option. That's still skipping the word, kids. If you want to take issue with the postmaster general being mentioned instead of some other official you feel is more appropriate, then you say *that*. They clearly didn't, but instead made a statement that could only be taken to refer to the postmaster general: Brad: You can probably thank that hack of a postmaster general. catesta: You are probably right. She's only been with the USPS for 26 years and still has much to learn. If you want to have a meaningful dialogue, you can't throw all decent rules of language, logic, and rhetoric out the window.

No. That was your point only after it was pointed out to you that you didn't read the first post properly and skipped a word.

San Diego State is also a place you could check. There was that article a month or two ago about Bram Dijkstra's collection going there. They took his collection whole, which many other places were unable or unwilling to do. Anyway, if you do start making a list of things to sell, definitely post it here. I'm enjoying "Turn Me Loose White Man" tremendously, and there are many things there I'd enjoy hearing more of.

I assume you meant to write "headphone output isn't a line output" there. If so, is the issue that the signal has passed through an amplifier stage already, or is the issue that the impedance is lower? And can you elaborate on "usually sucks"? Distorted? Cut-off? Compressed? I would love to hear from others (T.D.?), too.

OK, I promise that, like Daniel, I am not trolling when I ask this. Have you tried just running an audio cable (mini plug to mini plug or mini plug to RCA) from your computer's out to your amplifier's in? If so, where did it fall short?

What's "older"? I'm interested in most things pre-1940, and I still buy CDs, simply because a lot of stuff has not made it to download (let alone streaming) yet. You may also want to check with Michael, since he's been slowly selling a huge collection on this very forum. I always had the impression you were a producer—does that not translate well to downloads/streaming? Or is the issue that you have a catalogue of recordings, but that you cannot sell them in new formats without renegotiating rights? Genuinely curious to learn.

I know almost nothing, but you should drop me a line anyway (that dance we both love @gmail.com). For one, I have nothing better to do, and now that you've planted the bug I am likely to spend the next week reading all about this stuff. One suggestion is to reach out to some well-known jazz archives and ask for advice or contacts. Rutgers University, the National Jazz Museum in Harlem, etc. You could even try Joe Bussard, as long as you don't tell him you're into Swing Era stuff. Since it's only the process that matters, you can try classical collections, too. In addition to Audition, Izotope RX Elements is probably worth a look. It's the consumer version of their professional thing, and it's only $29 (40 upside down $) right now (at least when I access the website from the US). Not sure whether they'll give you a download or try to charge you an arm and a leg to ship you a CD.

No, but I can give you some irrelevant information instead. The move the dancer is doing is very likely either a "boogie forward" or an "eagle slide." No guarantee that's what he'd have called it himself at the time, though. (OK, fine, I have possibly relevant info, too, but I assume you already know this: William Claxton took that picture in 1960. The address is printed on the marquee, so location I'll leave to the astute reader.)

To my extreme annoyance, no, I don't believe so. You can listen to four of them on YouTube, with all the caveats about quality, legality, blahblahity:

Mosaic lists the Lester Young/Basie set under "Trad & Swing" and "Vocal" of all things, but not under "Big Band"...

If you don't have that set (or that material elsewhere), you should definitely go out and get it. There are some dirt cheap copies on Amazon right now, and if they're missing the liner notes, Chuck will soon be your man!