alocispepraluger102

this wonderful recording received considerable support and parts of it may have appeared on radio 3.

freedom of the city2001/large groups/london improvisors orchestra/strings with & without evan parker

hope its as good as the jeri southern........

I don't hear the bass drum as too loud - we're used to unnaturally soft bass drums from studio recordings beacuse audio technicians were afraid the cutting stylus would jump out of the groove, and producers didn't like it. Drums are recorded at too low a volume on most recordings. agreed

an historic effort by the lakies!

GETTING IN TUNE WITH GOD’S GIFT OF MUSIC II Samuel 6: 14-23 (portions) When the victorious army of Israel recovered the Ark of the Covenant, and returned it, there was much singing and blowing of trumpets. King David himself, danced without restraint before the Lord. But David’s wife, Michal, watched him from her window. She saw her husband leaping and singing before the Lord and despised him in her heart for doing so. When the rejoicing ended and all the people went to their homes, David too, returned to greet his household. Michal came out to him and said, “What a glorious day for Israel when their king conducts himself as did you, dancing and singing like an empty-headed fool, in the midst of servants and slave-girls,” David replied, “It was in the presence of the Lord that I sang and danced, the Lord, who chose me to be prince over his people, Israel. Before the lord, then, I will again dance for joy; yes, and thus I will earn from you, yet more disgrace and, and will lower myself still more in your eyes. But the people of whom you speak, will honor me for it.” Apparently even 3000 years ago, husbands and wives were known to argue, when they got home, about who behaved how (and shouldn’t have) at an evening’s events. It may seem like too inconsequential an argument to have recorded in scripture. It may well have been, though, the beginning of the end of David and Michal’s relationship. They remained legally married, but had no more children, and shortly David took an additional wife. She was Bathsheba (who probably told him that his dancing and singing were “charming and marvelous”). You caught what their fight was about, didn’t you? Put in contemporary terms, Michal was embarrassed because David was “singing too loudly at church.” Meanwhile, for David, it was a mountaintop religious moment: Israel finally taking back from the enemy who had stolen it, this sacred Ark which was the central symbol of their faith as a nation. Michal had no problem with anyone being happy about getting the Ark back, but it was no excuse for a king to go leaping and singing and cavorting down Main Street. Michal, you see, was the well-bred daughter of David’s predecessor, King Saul. Hers was a strong sense, then, of the importance, for a king and his family, of dignified restraint, courtliness and royal etiquette. A king, stripping to his loincloth and dancing wildly in the street was NOT an example of any of that. No! It was the behavior of an ex-shepherd, a country “hick,” unfortunately proving to everyone, that while you could take the boy out of the hills, you couldn’t take the hills out of the boy. But again, for David, music had always been a central force in his life. He was the writer of a substantial number of the Psalms in the Old Testament. As a young man, he had actually served as something of an early “music therapist” called in to play and sing for Michal’s father, King Saul, when Saul (who apparently had what we now would call a bipolar disorder), was in one of his frequent episodes of depression or agitation. To David, music was so vital and important that he wasn’t about to apologize for being carried away by it. Loosely translated, he says to his wife, “So, Michal, you didn’t care much for what I did today. Well hold on tight, lady, cuz you ain’t seen nothin' yet.” It doesn’t say what she said back to him, or what he then said back to her, or how the rest of the evening went. (Not well, we suspect.) What we had there were two very different ways of relating to the power and excitement of the music that happened in Bethlehem that afternoon. Michal’s was more passive, intellectualized; an I-can-take-it-or-leave-it response. Very much in contrast, then, was David’s powerful, visceral, all-consuming, never-mind-what-anyone-thinks, response to it. Those were only two of countless different and divergent ways in which music is received and experienced by us human beings. Beyond question, though, is that throughout recorded history, music has always played a powerful but mysterious role in human life. It is capable, under the right circumstances, of touching us human beings deep within, as little or nothing else does. For example, music frequently evokes inexplicable tears that are neither tears of sorrow or of joy. They’re simply tears of deep response. Other times, music can reawaken vivid memories of something that the person had totally forgotten. Music has, at times, galvanized people’s courage to go forth to face death in battle. In other instances, it has had an extraordinary quieting effect upon persons in the agitation of a severe psychotic episode. On and on go the examples of how and where, in ways that defy explanation, music has strangely, mysteriously, been a moving or healing or innerving part of our shared life. Even so, though, somewhat similar to love and to faith, it is not something that can reliably be harnessed or be turned into a science. Its power remains an elusive one, stirring one person deeply and falling flat for another. Absolute statements about music keep turning out to be wrong. I may convince myself that, because of study, experience or talent that I now have a sure handle on what is inherently great music, what is music of worth, what is music that is “appropriate.” Uh uh. It doesn’t work that way. Humility is always in order. Right around you and me, are persons who are touched at the core of their being, by music that appalls me, AND vice versa. As much as I might attribute that difference to musical taste, or lack thereof, it is far more mysterious than that. As much as I may dislike, for example, back-country hymns like “There Ain’t No Flies On Jesus,” or “Get Under the Spout Where the Glory Pours Out,” as turned off as I might be by acid rock or by Country and Western music, it is, without question, a form of musical arrogance and intellectual elitism to close my mind to the possibility that it could touch and nourish anyone’s soul. Right here in the Mansfield area we have had that illustrated when, a couple of months ago, someone decided to change the format of FM station 102.3 away from playing the old ballads and show tunes from the 40s, 50s and 60s, to rock music. The avalanche of letters to the editor of the News Journal was astounding. The objections and complaints went on and on and on. How many issues can you recall causing so much upset? A proposed new tax, for example, or a local scandal, a questionable piece of legislation, a controversial municipal project--didn’t hold a candle to this. I suspect that had any of the losing candidates in the primary two weeks ago, been smart enough to campaign on the issue of restoring 102.3, he’d have won. THIS was about someone messing around with the music in people’s lives. People felt robbed of the music that had been nourishing them, and they weren’t about to take it lying down. True, there were also a few letters from people who couldn’t seem to comprehend how anyone could feel anything but thankful when those “oldies” were finally replaced by some legitimate rock music, but those letter-writers became lightning rods for a lot of hostility too. It smacked a little of an incident in which a fourteen-year-old girl, while riding somewhere with her father, had the car radio tuned to a rock station. As her favorite rock band was was playing a current, top, rock hit, she said dreamily to her father, “Dad, have you ever heard anything so wonderful?” He replied, “I can’t say for certain that I have, although I once happened to be standing at an intersection when there was a collision between a truck loaded with empty aluminum cans and another truck loaded with live geese.” Just so! Though it might seem that somehow there ought to be, the fact is that there is nothing close to a general consensus or universal standard, when it comes to the nature of the music for which your soul has receptors, versus those of my soul. That, obviously, is the first matter to keep in front of us as we gratefully reflect today, upon the music that touches yours and my lives and our faith. It is particular to each one of us. It is, again, as individual as is faith or love. As King David made clear to Michal, one doesn’t have to explain it, apologize for it, or justify it. Just embrace it, cherish it, and let it stir within you. Another part of understanding it, though, has to do with the way we receive our music. Those who claim to know, tell us that it is the through the right hemisphere of our brains, that we are touched and moved by music. That is, it is not by way of our intellects. Our intellects are the part of our minds that analyze whether the music is being played accurately, whether the percussion is drowning out the oboes, whether the conductor is any good, whether what I am hearing is the sort of music I prefer, whether the words make sense. The part of our brains, though, through which music inspires, nourishes or refreshes us, is not that analytical part. It is the same part of the brain’s left-hemisphere in which resides wonder, intuition, the spiritual, the “feeling” side of us. Thus it is difficult and often impossible to intellectualize music and still be touched and refreshed by it. As one writer said, analyzing music is like dissecting a frog. One can definitely do it, but it is very bad for the frog. Someone else commented that to experience music through the intellect ends up something like attending a tennis match, but not really seeing the game because of being preoccupied, the whole time, as to whether or not, when they painted the lines on the tennis court, they got them perfectly straight or not. At its deepest and most nourishing, music, then, should be a holistic experience, one that washes over us and is allowed to do whatever it is able to do with our emotions, to our sense of awe, to our memories, to our longings, to latent passions, to our joy at being alive, to our sense of connectedness to those who have gone before us, and yet more. Whether the music is happening in your family room, a concert hall, or here at church, for that to happen, it is necessary to make oneself consciously, intentionally, vulnerably, open to it. That gets more and more difficult in our part of the world where, through most of yours and my lifetimes, music has been cheapened by being used as background noise for shopping malls, dentists offices, restaurants, and elevators. One becomes inured--actually calloused to it, accustomed to hearing it, but not listening to it. It takes its place along with traffic noises, the hum of the heating or air-conditioning, and the sound of the neighbor’s law mower, as a general “din’ of modern living. The other matter is that of coming to our music with expectancy--expecting, in some way, to be nourished, renewed, or respirited. In one of the professional journals to which I subscribe, a minister tells of having had an extraordinarily difficult, frustrating, stressful week. In the middle of the worst morning of it, in order to be out of reach of everyone and to have some brief solitude, he got into his car and started driving to nowhere in particular. He had a deep appreciation for music, so after having driven a few miles, he turned on the car radio to a music station. He said that at that point, miraculously, his whole bad week broke open and the darkness of it left him, as from the radio came the voice of Cat Stevens (as he was then known) in that old recording where he sang, Morning has broken like the first morning. Blackbird has spoken like the first bird. Praise for the singing. Praise for the morning. Praise for them springing fresh from the Word. Mine is the sunlight! Mine is the morning. Born of the one light Eden saw play! Praise with elation! Praise every morning! God’s recreation of the new day! “Why did that help?” asks the intellect. There are no theological or therapeutic insights delivered in that song. It offers no assurances that everything will be just fine. What could the voice of a blackbird, or morning sunlight or intimations of earth’s creation, possibly have to do with the daunting dilemmas and stubborn worries weighing him down? He couldn’t explain it, I can’t, and neither can you. But that song being there for him in particular, at that juncture, with its soaring melody, combined with words of hope, of newness, and of God’s grace woven all through our living, restored his soul that day. That happens. Music really can do that. Oh, not every single time, but more often than its given a chance. That’s why music is so much a part of faith. Martin Luther went so far as to say: Music is the art of the prophets. It’s the only art that can calm the agitations of the soul. It is one of the most magnificent and delightful presents God has given to us human beings. Exactly! Whether calming, refreshing, stirring, inspiring, cleansing, reminding, there’s far more of God’s grace to us in our music, than most of us allow to reach us. So let it get to you, let it release whatever is stuck sideways in your soul, let it reach in and lift whatever weighs you down, let it pull you back to experience anew, your own spiritual dimension. That’s what it is here for. © Clifford Schutjer The First Congregational Church Mansfield, Ohio. May 19, 2002

muriel angelus expresses the lyrics of oscar hammerstein II

preregistration is easy and free. http://www.ncaasports.com/basketball/mens/story/10042884

thanks. she has a very powerful voice, but doesnt constantly blast with it.

anyone know anything about a nancy wilsonish singer, natalie douglas?

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=ap-i...p&type=lgns

I think they are oop but you can easily find it on amazon or djangos. another haden montreal trio recording of that week was blackwell, cherry, haden, also on verve.

another gorgeous recording of that week was haden/p. bley/motian in a live recording. they were 'on'. hearing these 3 at their best is a considerable listening experience. a personal fav!

thank you for sharing this loving appreciation.

http://www.allaboutjazz.com/php/review_print.php?id=258

it is a very beautiful sport.

...e.g. historical fiction made for tv, or a certain npr producer's history of jazz

delius idyll. barbirolli/halle. probably the only recording/a personal fav

after the brutality of last night the nhl website's lead story is about players wielding pink sticks for cancer research. nothing about this: Rangers 2, Islanders 1 Rangers Take a Big Hit, Then Deliver a Bigger Blow By LYNN ZINSER UNIONDALE, N.Y., March 8 — Ryan Hollweg, the Rangers’ agitator, stood in the locker room sporting the most visible mark of his team’s hard-fought 2-1 victory over the Islanders on Thursday night — a bloody gash on his chin that soaked part of his scruffy beard. Islanders forward Chris Simon had slammed Hollweg in the face with his stick late in the third period, but Hollweg wore the injury with pride when Petr Prucha scored the winning goal on the ensuing five-minute power play. “I just finished a check and I turned around and the next thing I knew, the stick was across my head,” Hollweg said. “I’m glad we scored on the power play and got the 2 points.” The victory pushed the Rangers (33-27-7) into a tie with Carolina and Toronto for the final playoff spot in the Eastern Conference with 73 points, a huge accomplishment for a team that has spent weeks desperately scrambling to get back into the race. The Rangers are only 3 points behind the seventh-place Islanders (33-24-10), who had beaten them in the first four meetings of the season, several times by embarrassing margins. After Hollweg shoved Simon into the glass in the Rangers’ end with 6 minutes 31 seconds remaining, Simon turned and headed toward Hollweg at the blue line. With his hands on his stick, Simon bludgeoned Hollweg in the face. Hollweg dropped to the ice and lay motionless for a few minutes while his teammates rushed to hit Simon. Simon was given a match penalty for intent to injure. Afterward, Simon was visibly upset, but he said he would not discuss the incident until he spoke with the league. National Hockey League officials will probably suspend him for the brutality of the hit. Exactly three years ago, Todd Bertuzzi, then with the Canucks, punched Colorado’s Steve Moore from behind, drove him into the ice and tried to fight him, which led to a lengthy suspension. “I’ve always been known as a clean guy and I just feel bad for letting my team down,” Simon said. “I just don’t really want to say anything about the incident right now because I have to talk with the league first.” Hollweg did not express anger at Simon. “I’m a little surprised,” Hollweg said. “As far as I knew we respected each other as hockey players and that’s it. I just play my game. And playing my game helped us win, so that’s good.” The Rangers capitalized when the diminutive Prucha camped in front of the net and poked at a rebound of a Michael Nylander shot with 5:14 left, sending the puck trickling past goaltender Rick DiPietro. “I didn’t even see which way the puck went,” Prucha said. “I just heard people and saw guys cheering and it was in.” But this game would not end so simply. The Islanders thought they had scored the tying goal with 20.4 seconds left, when Rangers goalie Henrik Lundqvist lost the puck in a crowd in front of the goal and swiped it off the goal line with his stick. The referees ruled it no goal, and after a long look replay officials confirmed it. “At first I thought it was a save and then I looked at one replay and it looked like a goal,” Lundqvist said. “I think we deserved this after a lot of games this year that have gone the other way. We finally got that extra luck that we need in this game after such small things being the difference.” The Islanders were the ones to absorb the bad luck this time and the loss could end up even worse if forward Ryan Smyth, who skated off the ice at the end of the game dragging his right foot, is injured. Smyth was acquired from Edmonton in a trading-deadline move to galvanize the Islanders’ playoff push. Islanders Coach Ted Nolan said after the game that he had no information on Smyth, but Smyth later left the arena walking normally. Until Thursday, the injury woes had all belonged to the Rangers. They lost forward Marcel Hossa in Monday’s game to a knee injury that will keep him out up to four weeks. That is on top of the extended absence of forward Brendan Shanahan, who has a concussion, and defenseman Fedor Tyutin, also rehabbing from a knee injury. But the Rangers had been playing with a newfound fire since falling behind St. Louis last Saturday in a home game they came back to win in a shootout. They won a thrilling shootout against the Islanders on Monday night at Madison Square Garden, pouring 57 shots on DiPietro. “We just knew we had to,” forward Sean Avery said. “We went out and battled and Prucha gets a big goal. He’s 150 pounds and he’s getting beat on in front and stays with it and scores. That’s what we need. That’s what we need every night.” The newly gritty Rangers have a new poster boy and Hollweg wore his gash with pride. SLAP SHOTS Islanders captain Alexei Yashin returned to the lineup after missing 16 games with a knee injury. ... The Rangers prospect Brandon Dubinsky played his first N.H.L. game after being called up to replace the injured Marcel Hossa. ... The Rangers face fifth-place Pittsburgh on Saturday and Carolina, one of the teams tied for the eighth playoff spot, on Sunday. check the new york times or espn for pics, not the nhl site. there's nothing quite like a shot to the neck with a hockey stick.

NHL's Player Association Director Hit With Possible Email Scandal March 9, 2007 7:06 a.m. EST Todd Sikorski - All Headline News Sports Reporter Toronto, Canada (AHN) - The hockey world was hit with a rather bizarre public relations problem on Thursday. Surprisingly, it had nothing to do with the whole Penguins-city of Pittsburgh dilemma or the recent controversial violent play that has sent various NHLers to hospitals. Instead, NHL's union head Ted Saskin has been accused of tapping into players' email accounts in order to find out about people who opposed his hiring in 2005. The allegations are so severe that insiders say if they are proven true, NHL players might discuss firing Saskin very soon. The whole incident was first reported in the Toronto Star this week. The newspaper said the Toronto Police Service was investigating claims that Saskin and other members of his office were accessing NHL players' email accounts without their permission. Saskin responded to the allegations in a statement on this past Monday in which he said "there have been no illegal activities at the NHLPA." Saskin became head of the player's association back in 2005 when he replaced Bob Goodenow. At the time, his hiring was heavily criticized by such respected NHL players as Chris Chelios and Trent Klatt. His two-year tenure at the position has not been the most trouble-free either. Along with questions as to how he was hired which happened after hockey's lockout, Saskin's salary has been heavily criticized. In a sport struggling to survive financially, he is making over $2.13 million a year which is more than double the amount that baseball's Donald Fehr is making at a comparable position. NHL players are just starting to react to Saskin's allegations. A conference call for players is expected to take place this weekend in which player reps will confer over what to do next. Saskin is not rumored to be part of the call which leads many to believe a big majority of hockey players have lost their faith in their union's top director and he might be forced out soon. For that to happen, more than half of the 30 team player representatives in the NHL would have to vote for his firing.

beautifully stated. thanks.

Sure it can be transferred but can you "read it". Migration of the data to a viable format that can be read is always going to be the big question as we move forward. fine point well stated.

of course

More and more I spend a large part of my work day wrestling with this very subject. Electronic data is a blessing and a curse. my trusty vinyls, many more than 50 years old, will probably outlast my modern cd-r's. they probably should. the music is better. as we are a plastic plugged in species, will we leave any signs at all that we were here? i am in no way implying that we/our data are worth preserving.

JOHN DVORAK'S SECOND OPINION The end of information? Commentary: Smart investors know storage technology will never go away By John C. Dvorak Last Update: 5:47 PM ET Mar 7, 2007 BERKELEY, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- According to experts, the world generated 161 exabytes of information last year that needed to be stored. What does that mean? I sure didn't know off the top of my head what an exabyte was, but I knew it was big. Technically, it is (you're going to love this) 1 quintillion bytes of information. Great; I'm not sure how many zeros are in a quintillion, either. And apparently we are talking about 161 quintillion. I had to look it up. A kilobyte has three zeros -- it's 1,000 bytes. A megabyte is a million. A gigabyte is 1,000 million or a U.S. billion (nine zeros). A terabyte is a trillion bytes (12 zeros). Then comes the petabyte, which has 15 zeros. Finally, the quintillion-ish exabyte with 18 zeros! That's a lot of zeros. FYI: Next comes the zettabyte with 21 zeros, and then the yottabyte with 24 zeros, which eventually will become a disk drive for sale at Costco for $150. After that, perhaps the yotta-yottabyte.My advice to investors: Storage technology is never going away. So how did we find a crisis in our midst regarding the need for all this storage? The Associated Press reports that a study done at the University of California at Berkeley found we were humming along in 2003, creating the need for 3 exabytes per year worldwide, and then the rate jumped to 161 exabytes. Surely the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act can't be the only reason for this. This situation concerning the long-term reliability of stored data is the biggest joke in high technology. The need arises from the emergence of digital storage for videos; larger formats of digital images; the requirement to archive entire corporate databases for years on end; the storage of trillions of e-mails here and there; multiple stores of the entire Internet (or as much as can be found); digitization of film archives and digital distribution of new films. It just goes on and on. When you start to look into this, it's not the actual storage of all this data and all the backups that's alarming, but the integrity of any of it. (The AP article concludes the same thing.) This is what nobody really wants to discuss. This situation concerning the long-term reliability of stored data is the biggest joke in high technology. Does anyone really think the 4.7 gigabytes that you moved to a DVD-R disc will be readable 100 years from now? Or 20 years from now, for that matter? I have CD-ROMs that are a decade old and failing. For example, it's a well-known fact that there are only a few working 2-inch tape, 4-head Ampex video machines still in operation. These are the monsters that were the workhorses of network television in the 1960s and were phased out in favor of newer technologies. What few are left get stripped for parts to keep a few others working, in a futile effort to transfer old master tapes to new formats. Time is running out as the defunct technology falls apart. Because of never-ending changes in technology, all sorts of things will be lost -- from entire movies, photos and electronic publications to corporate records and entire digitized libraries (the ones that threw out the books). Of course, this loss always has been a problem with media since the first great library burnt down. The difference is that the mean time to failure (a great tech phrase) is not in the hundreds of years anymore. Now it's just a few years. The irony is that digital information can be easily moved from here to there intact, unlike analog media that cannot be copied perfectly and degrades over time from copying itself. But once you cannot read the data, you're out of luck. Usually nothing is salvageable. The implications and consequences of this inevitable loss of information needs to be studied sooner rather than later. End of Story TRUSTe: Click to Verify Copyright © 2007 MarketWatch, Inc. All rights reserved. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy (updated 4/3/03 http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/smar...p;dist=printTop