Larry Kart

If by "Fans of Coll" you meant to say fans of cool and meant to lump in Balliett with such, Whitney (at least c, 1956-7 Whitney) was a man who more or less wished that anything post the mellower side of the Swing Era (i.e. Bop, Cool, and Hard Bop) had never comes to pass. He was, again (and IMO), a pipe and slippers, Irish setter at my feet, snifter of brandy in the library sort of jazz fan, and while he was very fond of any number of truly estimable figures -- e.g. Ben Webster, Pee Wee Russell, Bobby Hackett, Sid Catlett -- his fondness for them was very much akin to the "comfortable because it's comforting; if it's not comforting, we probably won't like it" way the magazine that he wrote for, the New Yorker, tended to regard many of the manfestations of the so-called Modern World. Getting back to Mobley and Myers' "voice of reason" remark then, I think that, a la Balliett, the reference is not to steadiness and dependability but to, in Myers' view, the relative smoothness/calmness of the surface of Mobley's playing in terms of timbre, melodic flow, accents, volume level, tonal "distortions", etc. -- all those things in hands of Rollins, Coltrane, et al. being marked by lots of typically Modernistic disturbance/agitation and thus serving as signs of "unreason." But of course we all know that Mobley was, as Dexter once put it, the "Hankenstein." Or, in the words of poet Frank O'Hara: "A lot of people would like to see art dead and sure, but you don't see them up at The Cloisters reading Latin."

I don't know what this means. Me either, not quite. But it does sound somewhat related to that dire gobbet of spit that Whitney Balliett hocked up about Sonny Rollins (the "bad taste ... hair-pulling" phrase IIRC) in his liner notes for the original issue of "Two Degrees East, Three Degrees West" (a.k.a. "Grand Encounter"). Don't think those notes were reprinted in any of Balliett's collections, BTW. The passage in full would be instructive to read if anyone has access to it, because it certainly encapsulates a moment in the pipe-and-slippers mode of responses to jazz. In any case, What Myers probably means is that Mobley's relative/surface air of calm or lower intensity, versus the often extreme surface turbulence of a Rollins or a Coltrane et al., made him "the hard bop movement's musical voice of reason." No, no, a thousand times no, but I would guess that's what he was thinking.

FWIW, I was being ironic.

Sometimes you may know a little about it from the word of mouth. Sometime the same players or organization have done them before and you know from past experiences whether it's worthwhile to give a listen. The Blue Note has done many with McCoy and others that I wouldn't go to, for example. All of these factors can give you a idea if the program is going to be worthwhile, or if it's going to be a thrown together set of players picking tunes on stage, playing with little real energy. There's going to be a Dexter Gordon Tribute coming up soon. Dexter's widow and manager Maxine Gordon is fully involved, and the musical director is George Cables. Sounds good. And the role of Dexter will be played by Eric Alexander?

Yes, both "Free Jazz" and Ascension" have composed frameworks/sign posts, but don't the improvised contributions/interactions of the specific players at their best not only make up the majority of each work but also serve as the chief points of interest, compared to the relatively loose weave of the composed parts? BTW, I never heard it (don't believe it was recorded, only performed), but my favorite "loony tune" idea of the sort we've been talking about is David Murray's orchestration of Paul Gonsalves "Dimineundo and Crescendo in Blue" solo from Newport.

That link didn't work for me.

Info in previous post (about a Bill Evans album with Tony Oxley) deleted. Again -- forum rules prohibit linking to bootlegs, and that's what this album is.

I vaguely recall a Max Roach Blindfold Test where he responded to a track from the Dorham-Ernie Henry album on Riverside with "Kenny can play some stuff that's really abstract."

If you can locate a copy of the Fricsay recording (on DG) it will chill your bones. Dandy. I have fond memories of a Constantin Silvestri recording on EMI, coupled IIRC with an equally striking Mathis der Mahler -- both pieces "shaped" more than is usual.

Bartok's Divertimento for Strings (only movement one on in this clip), a work with a unique lilt, Hungarian rhythmic zest, and echt Bartokian harmonic rightness:

Suk, Serenade for Strings -- unending tender lyricism (first movement only in this clip): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AD0RA3AgrY Well, actually the tender lyricism of the Suk Serenade does end -- the piece as a whole runs about 26 minutes -- but you know what I mean.

What's so familiar there -- the girl?

What's funny about that is that I've heard more than a few older jazz musicians who had no real liking for "Latin" musics on their own terms (i.e. - they'd call a tune with a "Latin" feel to play bebop over and let it go at that; I mean, they were some bad cats, but...play them a hardcore Salsa thing and it was, like, ok, two chords and a lot of singing, where's the MUSIC? ) hear people like Eddie Palmieri (ok, there's really nobody like Eddie Palmieri...) and dismiss it as not swinging and sounding like Brubeck! So, where's this hidden Afro-Cuban-Germanic link to all this hammering going on, anyway? Those guys can say Eddie Palmieri et al. sounded like Brubeck as a way of putting down both Brubeck and Palmieri et al., but did it sound that way to you? If not, I don't see the point, other than that 'more than a few older jazz musicians who had no real liking for "Latin" musics on their own terms' were in the Palmieri et al. case dealing from relative ignorance/lack of real experience. But that doesn't necessarily prove that their judgment of Brubeck's rhythmic alleged rhythmic incapacities was mistaken, unless (again) you feel that Brubeck's rhythmic approach was truly akin to that of Palmieri et al.

did you? You can be counted on.

Never said that his death had to do with the "other" news item. Just pointing out something that should should REALLY be peeved about. As usual, I see that some others here are all too eager to fall in line and brown-nose their way into the heart of the famous jazz producer. Credibiliity, real or imagined, has nothing to do with the fact that you choose to focus your energies on that instead of what is really the unfortunate travesty -- the death of a nation. Fame, or lack thereof, has no bearing on that. Couldn't agree more. Slurp! Pretty sad if this is the best you can come up with to justify your initial post, which had to do with your feelings and had nothing to do with this thread. What do you know? I pointed out my feelings about the initial "react to me" post. It's really quite simple: should one be more outraged that a jazz figure is unknown and unrecognized and goes unmourned when he passes, or that people (NRA, militia, militants, and other gun lovers) remain silent on a more prevalent problem in this country? What's pretty sad is that YOU don't get that. Why must only thing at a time get one's goat, and why must those those things be ranked in some inflexibly "proper" moral order? If, say, I'm disturbed by the behavior of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, must I be counted immoral, insensitive, what have you if I don't in the same breath speak out about the need for gun control in the U.S.? Right, I forget -- Carthage delenda est. Perspective and relativity are everything. To be upset by the perceived silence over the death of one's friend is understandable. However, to be upset over the silence and unwillingness to bend from a group of people who carry more political clout than deserved in this country takes precedence. That's the silence which not only upsets the families of the victims in this case, but one that should upset each and every one of us who reside in America. As a father of two teenagers who happen to attend schools not 50 miles from where said incident took place, I am frightened not only for my children, but also for the direction this country has taken. Perhaps I was a little heavy handed, and for that I apologize, but hopefully you and others here now see my point. But why must you link the contextual acts of speech or silence on the one topic (the one that was under discussion here) to contextual acts of speech or silence on the other topic -- and do so in a holier than thou, blaming manner? Further, you have no reason I can see to believe that anyone who has contributed to this thread is any less disturbed by what happened in Newtown and what is happening and not happening in its aftermath than you are -- unless, that is, you are of the school that holds that one must say the equivalent of Carthage delenda est every time one opens one's mouth in public.

Never said that his death had to do with the "other" news item. Just pointing out something that should should REALLY be peeved about. As usual, I see that some others here are all too eager to fall in line and brown-nose their way into the heart of the famous jazz producer. Credibiliity, real or imagined, has nothing to do with the fact that you choose to focus your energies on that instead of what is really the unfortunate travesty -- the death of a nation. Fame, or lack thereof, has no bearing on that. Couldn't agree more. Slurp! Pretty sad if this is the best you can come up with to justify your initial post, which had to do with your feelings and had nothing to do with this thread. What do you know? I pointed out my feelings about the initial "react to me" post. It's really quite simple: should one be more outraged that a jazz figure is unknown and unrecognized and goes unmourned when he passes, or that people (NRA, militia, militants, and other gun lovers) remain silent on a more prevalent problem in this country? What's pretty sad is that YOU don't get that. Why must only thing at a time get one's goat, and why must those those things be ranked in some inflexibly "proper" moral order? If, say, I'm disturbed by the behavior of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, must I be counted immoral, insensitive, what have you if I don't in the same breath speak out about the need for gun control in the U.S.? Right, I forget -- Carthage delenda est.

My mother was a lefty, but in those days (she was born in 1912) the Chicago public schools changed lefties to righties and taught everyone the Palmer method of penmanship. She did have nice handwriting.

Best to all.

FWIW: Robert Edward Brookmeyer was born on December 19, 1929, in Kansas City, ... Brookmeyer died on December 15, 2011, four days short of his 82nd birthday.

No -- probably because as a lefty I'm more than a bit left-handed as a typist, and I find that typing calls for more precise movements than moving the mouse does.

Me, too, for the most part. Write lefty, throw lefty, etc., etc., but bat and swing a golf club righty.

Again -- it is against forum rules to link to bootlegs. 7) We do not allow sharing, trading, or linking copyrighted material that is being offered illegally, including bootlegs.

The initial post is from 2007, when it still hadn't been said that many times. The article is available here: http://usatoday30.us...036564388_x.htm OK

As has been said many times, posting entire copyrighted articles (rather than a brief indication of what they're about, plus a link to the article) is a violation of forum rule #9.

Happy Birthday to one of nature's noblemen. :party: