A Lark Ascending

The examples quoted are clearly silly and deserve ridiculing. But, as a whole, I don't think Cook and Morton are anywhere close to the top of the tree when it comes over the top sounding-off against things that they are not keen on in jazz. Though they might seem that way if it is the music you treasure that is victim of the hatchet. It's worth recalling the context of the original Penguins: a) It originally came out for a UK audience at a time when it was very hard to get information on jazz. There had been a number of failed magazines, the rock weekly's had dropped jazz coverage, 'The Wire' had shifted towards a different focus. I know I used the Penguins enormously in the 90s when I was expanding my jazz listening because it was such broad source. b) I doubt if this was their conscious intention, but it also appeared at a time when jazz in Europe was really starting to take off in a big way; and the Penguin provided avenues into that (I suspect Morton was the driving force there). It was refreshing to find a publication that did not tell the story as a largely American tale (I appreciate that to some it is the latter). In that sense it was almost part of that independence struggle - perhaps the Blue Note sniffiness needs seeing as the actions of an adolescent leaving home and wanting to establish his independence, indulging in some boorish behaviour in the act of breaking away. I used Penguin as a major guide for about ten years; partly because there was little alternative, partly because it did the job and introduced me to music that I really came to enjoy (I'll forgive them the rosette for 'The Individualism of Eric Satie'). But since 2000 there have been so many other ways of getting a steer - largely due to the internet but also with a long running UK jazz magazine. If I want to find out about a recording I read about here, I go to Google rather than Penguin. I suspect its days are now past - aphysical, single volume survey of a topic as vast as jazz recordings just seems too big. Best left to the net, though I think there is still a place for well researched, enthusiastic surveys of narrower periods. I'm not in the market for a book on the whole of Classical Music on CD; I would like one to guide me through Medieval/Renaissance. As for the arrogance and sneering...well I regularly see this applauded as 'strong opinion' when carried out by other critics with other targets. Cook and Morton just suffer from that affliction that benights so much jazz writing. The tendency to present subjective opinion as hard fact; I'm often reminded of: A quick look back at threads on this site on musicians like Bill Frisell and Brad Mehldau will reveal commentary that make Cook and Morton's on Blue Note seem positively benign. Jazz writing as a whole - especially jazz writing based on reactions to music rather than intensive research - needs to learn to be more tentative in its judgements.

Rachel Unthank and the Winterset are as good as anything I've heard in the folk world - 'The Bairns' was my album of 2007. Better still, they are part of an incredibly impressive wave of younger English singers/players in the folk field. There's been something building since the early 90s and it has really hit full force of late.

I really am puzzled by the economics of this. Those albums were all acquired within my normal monthly 100 quota and I still have 40 left. Cost = £19.99. I'd be paying £50+ using existing online stores. Not that I'm complaining! Here's my guess as to the economics: the label is monetizing existing assets. You're right that each CD would cost X if you bought it in a store. But, besides the cost of manufacturing the CD and shipping it to the store, it's then going to sit there waiting for someone to buy it. It also has to be first bought by a retailer, in the hopes of reselling it at a profit. So the retailer has the risk of loss if it doesn't sell (this is just a simplified portrait; often, retailers can swap out non-moving items for others). If the retailer doesn't want to take that risk, he doesn't stock the CD, you can't buy it, and the label can't sell it. With eMusic, there are no manufacturing costs, you're far more likely to download way more music than you'll ever have time to listen to (trust me, I know about this), and the label (and, hopefully, the artist) is earning revenue they would not have received otherwise. Because the issue isn't really the titles you would have paid for in the store, but the ones you wouldn't have (but are now downloading). Finally, the label receives a fairly steady stream of income. Makes sense; thanks mjzee. I can see it re: things that have been in the catalogue a while; and with less known labels. It just seems strange to put these up ahead of a major series of budget priced reissues appearing on CD. I'd have thought they'd have waited a while. Maybe the 'Touchstones' series is a sign that the back catalogue has been shifting slowly at full price. The reissue CDs and e-music uploads could be there to generate interest. One odd thing - though quite normal for e-music - is that the name of the artist whose disc it is has been generated randomly. So 'Gnu High' is attributed to Dave Holland (alphabetically the first named performer?).

Only arrived last week - hopefully it will hit the US soon. I really am puzzled by the economics of this. Those albums were all acquired within my normal monthly 100 quota and I still have 40 left. Cost = £19.99. I'd be paying £50+ using existing online stores. Not that I'm complaining!

A great batch from the ECMs that have just arrived on the UK version of e-music - 'Cloud Dance' (Collin Walcott), 'Oregon' (Oregon), 'Conception Vessel' (Paul Motion), 'Sargasso Sea' (Abercrombie and Towner), 'Bass Desires' (Marc Johnson), 'Northbound' (Iro Haarla), 'The Source' (The Source). I do hope they add widely to the initial 23. A wonderful way to plug some gaps.

Here's a practical suggestion that should be lapped up by a 'socialist' party. Abolish the 'charitable' status of private education (how assisting the already privileged to jump further ahead in the queue amounts to charity, I'm not sure!); plough the funds recouped into intensive literacy programmes for the youngest children in areas of social deprivation. We'll leave busing the pupils of Eton, Harrow etc into inner city comps in Slough, Reading, Tower Hamlets etc for a few years yet!!!

Thatcher ! And Major. Public services were not a high priority.

Like you, I'm a life-long labour voter but its true that Gordon Brown has no connection with the British public. He might be a decent man with a 'moral compass' and all that but its not getting across at all. Possibly this is to do with boredom with Labour after 11 years and possibly voters buying the 'style over substance' of the Tories, being so enamoured of our celebrity-obsessed culture. But we shouldn't forget that there has been, not before time, decent investment in schools and hospitals, with crime also coming down significantly by most reliable measures. While I'm disillusioned too, I'm even more concerned about the damage the Tories will do. If this lot are out of touch, I suspect the Tories are more so. The question is - will Labour get rid of Brown or just sit back and accept defeat. This is pretty much what the Tories did under Major and look where it got them. A new leader might not turn things around but it might limit the damage. You are right about the investment - however much I might moan about the way they are trying to steer the educational ship, there is no doubt that education has benefitted enormously since '97. I can physically see the change. I've been in the same school for nearly 31 years - for the first 20 nothing happened. The last 11 have seen huge structural improvements. Improving the actual education is more complicated! Which means that however disgruntled I get I'll still vote Labour.

I think that ties with a general (in Northern Europe at least) stronger acceptance of higher taxation and state intervention. Britain was moving that way (I come from the age group that benefitted) but then did a volte-face from '79, buying into the American 'free-market-is-all' dogma. Labour has its roots in the former but got into power in '97 by embracing the latter. Now it just seems confused!

From that BBC article: It always has to be born in mind that the independent sector is dealing with - bar a smattering of 'assisted places' type students - children from middling to very well off backgrounds. They can provide smaller class sizes, resourcing well above what the state sector gets and - the all important - contacts and connections. They deal with children who - by and large - have stable backgrounds, experience of a wide breadth of social and cultural experience from their earliest days. Most significantly, children who are surrounded by examples of success and, often, high achievement in their parents, relations, parental friends. State schools - especially like the one where I work (a good 10% below the average GCSE pass rate) - have the impossible job of making up that ground and then doing the teaching for SATS, GCSE etc. The point made by the head in the earlier BBC article (in a school in an area of far greater deprivation than mine), that teachers frequently work in such schools out of choice based on a desire to make a difference, to try to give kids in those areas a chance, needs taking seriously - continue to bash them and they'll just move to the more affluent schools where they can get the results demanded of them. Teaching kids who come from backgrounds of low educational achievement with the sort of distractions that your middle class kid wouldn't know anything about is a completely different experience. I'm not saying that teaching kids from more advantaged backgrounds is easy (different pressures - they often come with great knowledge and skills, you need to be right on top of your subject and parents are watching from not far away); but getting kids from disadvantaged areas involves so much work to get off the starting block. I've no problem with government pushing to raise standards. But Labour seem to have fallen into the Tory trap of assuming that schools with low achievement are simply the result of poor teaching/management and need beating with a stick. There is a singular refusal to recognise the differing social contexts when comparisons are made. The government should be going in to help these schools deal with their situations (maybe even...shock horror...putting some work into the social situations themselves instead of worrying about frightening off middle England), not trying to scare them into improvement. Fear doesn't make kids work harder; it won't make schools improve. It's going to be interesting to see what happens when the current Academy programme fails to bring the big improvements the government promises; and how long the business people being co-opted into them will stay the course (we have one opening in Mansfield this week, run by a chap who made his millions making fake Cornish Pasties!). The debate igniting at the moment on plans for 'faith' schools shows again how backward the government's thinking is ('Faith' schools get better results so we need more 'faith' schools; as opposed to 'faith' schools attract middle class parents (some of who will acquire their faith from no-where to get their kids in!), creating schools with a higher proportion of middle class kids, thus making them more successful). There was an interesting study done a few years back that concluded that the best way to predict the performance of a school was to study the postcodes of its catchment area. The cynic in me says the government knows all this and knows it can do nothing about the social inequalities that underlie variable performance; so it refuses to acknowledge them, preferring to flag up those schools who buck the general trend and berate the rest.

What's happening to the standards of GCSE's and 'A' levels, Bev? Over the past 10 years the percentages passing these things has gone up and up and up and it totally reeks of grade deflation. At one time to get 8 or 9 good GCSEs at grades A to C was viewed as top notch but these days every kid seems to get it. As for 'A' levels, the Universities now seem to be saying they are hardly worth the paper they are written on. I remember the day when three/four A-levels at grades A and B was an outstanding achievement that would get you into Oxbridge but again, it is very common now and no longer a discriminator. Methinks the plot has been completely lost... It's complex. But ask yourself, every time we have an Olympics new world records are established. Are athletes getting better, is their training more skilled...or is it medal inflation? [the cynical, I know, will cry 'drugs'] There are some things going on that I'm not happy with. A lot of new courses that are 'equal to' 2 or 4 GCSEs but don't seem to be anything like taking 2 or 4 traditional GCSEs. The way things are assessed varies enormously - in Science modular tests with lots of multiple choice, whereas History and Geography exams are 75% end examined, requiring extended writing throughout. And yet...there's a book on sale at present with 'O' Level questions from the good old days. The history ones are pure memorisation - 'What were the terms of the Treaty of Versailles', 'What were the causes of the First World War?' (and as I recall doing them, you had plenty of choice). Today's kids have to do source analysis, often on sources they've never seen before, and write analytical answers that might throw together two people they've studied (say, Alexander Fleming and Louis Pasteur) and ask them to decide who was most significant to the development of medicine (most of the papers giving no choice). Reeling off their knowledge gets them nowhere. One of the things in the current debate that makes teachers despair is the cries of 'GCSEs are getting easier' matched with 'it's a scandal that so many children don't get 5+ higher grades'. We're scuttled either way. Despite some inconsistencies that must be sorted soon (and an even greater problem with regard to exam marking - the SATS fiasco is just the tip of the iceberg), I don't believe exams in general are easier but they are very different to 30 years ago. It's worth reading this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7502340.stm I feel that one of the sad things about many older people is their need to feel that younger people are not nearly as accomplished as they are. Its almost jealousy. What they forget is that most of the things they know, and that they despair about young people not knowing, they have learnt AFTER leaving school. The grumbles of the universities I don't take too seriously - they generally come from those locked in the old model where an elite attended university, where we are now in a world where a huge proportion of the population need that level of education. They are no longer educating the independent sector plus some bright state school lads and lassies...like schools, they are also having to deal with an increasing proportion of students who do not come from advantaged backgrounds, students whose disadvantages are still there to see when the reach university. There's also trouble brewing with standards of university degrees - there's virtually no mechanism for ensuring comparability there. So the universities are really in no position to grumble about the situation in school exams.

This is what makes so angry with Labour at present: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7570633.stm I expect the Tories not to give a damn - whatever pretence they make at caring about the population as a whole, they have always stood for buying their way to the front of the queue in health, education, etc. Yet Labour should know better. The trouble is they too are dominated by people who had it on a silver platter and are deluded into thinking that they got where they are today by their own merits. They are clueless about the lives of people who live and work in areas like that described in the article.

It always amazes me the way that our politicians explain their unpopularity by concluding that they are failing to get their message across. No...it's the message itself that is at fault! I've only ever voted Labour but despair with the present bunch of public school (that's British code for 'highly privileged private education') twits. They've clearly lost middle England, the people who were persuaded to back Labour in 1997. But what they should be really scared of is the way their grass roots supporters are angry with them for losing sight of their very reason for being. It hardly seems that a Conservative government will be much different (unfortunately, an error, I fear - they will be much worse!).

'Solstice' was my first Towner record (c.1976), opening the door not only to the guitarist but Weber and Garbarek too. The guitar opening to 'Nimbus' I still find jaw-dropping.

I'm way too guilty of buying the next CD before properly listening to what I already have. One of the delights of the last couple of weeks has been discovering just how rich his music is. Some of the discs that I've enjoyed but then quickly moved past (the duos with Peacock for example and the more recent solo albums) are absolutely blossoming in my ears. He's also written some absolutely exquisite tunes. Every now and then I'll be reaching for the sleeve to work out what that one was. 'If' and 'Tramonto' have really caught my ear in the last 24 hours.

Especially his solo chord melody arrangements. They are so unique and creative. He's a monster! My grasp of the technicalities is limited in the extreme (I'm no musician) but there is definitely something very personal about the way he approaches them. Impressive that he has never strayed into electric guitar or using electronics to alter the sound of his guitars (not that I have anything against the electric guitar). Yet he's been happy to play around with synths and programming on keyboards. This has certainly helped him cut a quite distinctive corner in the jazz world.

And a word for Towner doing standards! Not something he's usually associated with but he drops one or two in every now and then. A lot of Bill Evans associated tunes scattered over the Oregon/solo discs. Just been listening to his last album - 'Timeline'. Marvellous versions of 'Come Rain or Shine' and 'My Man's Gone Now.' Must be about time for a new one!

Radio Times (a TV/Radio magazine, full of fluff but the best way to know what's on the Radio in some detail). Gramophone BBC Music Magazine Froots (folk/world music) Mojo (started as a rock magazine for old crusties but, as these things go, tends to obsess on much more recent things now. Keeps me alert to interesting reissues from the olden days). Every now and then a copy of The New Statesman. That Mosaic magazine that always has 80% of the same pages - seems like something from a lost era!

Spent much of this week listening back to Ralph on his own records and with Oregon. A real treat. Two which made a huge impact: 'Batik' - the trio with DeJohnette and Eddie Gomez. I bought this on LP when it first came out and just listened for the first time in many years. One of his 'jazziest' records - the long title track (16 mins or so) is amazing - a slight theme used as a vehicle to build up real momentum with marvellous solo passages from all three. Due for reissue very shortly. Worth getting if you like Ralph but don't have the record. '1000 Kilometers' - the most recent Oregon record. They've returned to a more acoustic approach after the electronic colours of the 90s. There's a marvellous track called 'The Bactrian' which sounds like its title suggests - vaguely middle eastern. McCandless in particular works up a wonderful head of steam. I also finally CD-Rd my copy of 'Oregon in Concert', another really thrilling record.

What a brilliant photo, MG!!!! Here's mine, caught a few weeks back on holiday between heavy showers (the story of this summer): The place I long to retire to in a few years. This was my old one, taken during the only spell of good weather I recall this year in February!!!!

The thought of being stuck on a ship with the same people for 10 days, a month or whatever with little chance to escape gives me the screaming abdabs! But it might be the most practical way to do the fjords of Norway with Jan, Terje, Ketil and friends providing the music. Though I imagine that would give a lot of other people the screaming abdabs!

I agree - and admit to enjoying the indulgence of trying to tell the tale for the umpteenth time. Ever noticed how often you end up reciting the same viewpoints, telling the same stories down the pub? It's part of being human.

You can always burn a safety copy of the music...or 2....or 3. Downloading is in its very early days and I'm sure the various glitches surrounding it will rapidly be solved. I can't see any way that it won't become the major way of acquiring music in the near future. But just as things are still put on vinyl, so I imagine there will be CDs for quite a while, though I can't see them having the range of choice that downloading will offer. I'm sure with every change in technology - 78 to LP, the end of the mono option, cassette, 8 track etc, many people have been sad to see the old format go. That's understandable (I still miss the LP sleeve, though not the records themselves). But after 20 odd years of the CD model dominating all and other formats falling flat (SACD anyone?), I'd wager that this is the one that will overtake the CD. I've just got to get past my need to burn it on a CD-R and make a cover for it! Still locked into that model when I know others are already working from digital squeezboxes and the like.

I think they would have been better with Zawi. The last one I was in seemed more interested in selling those WI computer games than music! In fact DVDWI would be a more appropriate (and no more daft) name!

More or less ignored music until I turned 14 in 1969. 1. A year or so of totally indiscriminate listening to Radio 1 and Radio Luxembourg, trying to sort it all out. 2. Rapidly brainwashed by the music magazines of the early 70s into 'progressive' and 'underground' music - all the usual suspects (Moody Blues, Yes, Genesis etc). Chicago also appeared early on (II and III), I suspect laying the groundwork for brass and reeds. By the mid-70s the Soft Machine, McLaughlin, Henry Cow, the Canterbury bands were starting to dominate my listening. All those Brit jazzers on King Crimson LPs led me to Keith Tippett's 'Septober Energy, though I was brought to a sudden halt by a couple of completely incomprehensible (at the time) Tippett albums.' At the same time I was starting to explore classical (Sibelius, Mahler, Stravinsky, Bruckner). And the Fairport axis of UK folk-rock was getting me to attend the university folk club. 3. Jazz stole up on me around 1975 through hearing 'Escalator Over the Hill' and then buying a few Jarretts ('In the Light', 'Facing You', 'Bremen/Lausanne', 'Death and the Flower'. I'd heard jazz on the radio but didn't quite get it - I knew I liked the sound of the piano trio but didn't know where to start. Seeing Stan Tracey do 'Under Milk Wood' (the 1976 version with poet!) and Harry Miller's Isipingo and buying Mike Westbrook's 'Love/Dream Variations' deepened the interest. 4. The real determining factor was punk - I loathed it. Overnight there was nothing I wanted to listen to in the rock world (most of my earlier favourites had broken up their groups or were producing weak stuff). So I had to look elsewhere for musical sustenance - jazz, classical and folk all became the main areas of interest. Miles, Coltrane, the Ogun and ECM labels were major areas of focus. 5. Jazz dominated around 1978-80 and again 1983-4; then a long period when classical took over. But around 1991 jazz came back with a vengeance and it has been out front ever since. 6. Up to the late 90s most of my buying was either American (exploring the history and some new stuff) or British. But the arrival of the internet and regular attendance at festivals like Cheltenham and Bath introduced me to mainland Europe - Italy especially got me excited. 7. Today jazz dominates though I still have an active interest in classical and folk with Scandinavian folk, Brazilian music and a little country and wider world music added. I live in a small house with inexpensive furnishings but with a wealth of wonderful music that I never tire of. Though I might lose enthusiasm for particular areas for a time, I always come back later - and that includes those very early rock records.