patricia

I understand what you're saying, Greg. But, as a tireless pilgrim I accept that a diamond is occasionally among the dreck you described. I guess the thrill is mostly in the hunt. Finding a clutch of good stuff, hiding in there is worth it. The downside, of course, is the time-consuming aspect. I compare it to sifting through a consignment clothing shop. Mostly useless junk. But, a vintage St Laurent makes the whole expedition worthwhile. If time is the problem, best to stick to vintage vinyl outlets. You will pay more. But, our time is worth something. However, there is nothing like the increase in heartbeat that comes with finding a treasure where you least expect it.

I only have 2: a British compilation of Earl Bostic from the mid-fifties and one issued by Ace over here in 1981 by Oscar McLollie and his Honey Jumpers. I used to have a few others but I replaced them with CDs or 12". MG I have sixteen 10" records. Among them are Sidney Bechet's conert in Paris in 1952, Cugat's Favourite Rhumbas, Mills Brothers Barber Shop Ballads, The History Of Jazz- Then Came Swing, which is a compilation which includes tracks on which Benny Carter, Sid Catlett, Nat King Cole, Bumps Myers, Coleman Hawkins, Illinois Jacquet and others are featured, America's Music - Basin Street Six, Sarah Vaughan Sings, Woody Herman's Blue Prelude, Dixieland Comes To Carnegie Hall, Woody Herman And His Herd, Clifford Brown Ensemble with Zoot Sims, JazzTone Society Spec 100 Jazz Sampler, Harry James - All Time Favourites, and Sarah Vaughan - Images. My main local vinyl source has a good-sized section of 10" LPs, about half and half, classical and jazz. The 10 inchers I've found are in surprisingly good condition, still in their original covers. Sometimes the covers are a little rough. But, the records were well-cared-for, for the most part. Nice. I just had an e-mail from True Blue music, saying that they had a load of stuff on its last legs. Included in the list were a dozen or so 10" LPs - reissues (I guess) of Prestige originals featuring mainly Bebop classics. Not my sort of stuff. $17.98 each - is that a good price? MG Seems a little high to me, but not unreasonable. But, keep in mind that the price always depends on the demand for the product, as it does for anything else. I usually get mine at my favourite vintage vinyl place and his prices are very reasonable, from $5 to $20 usually. The Clifford Brown was $5, but a vintage Rafael Mendez, which I sent to my best friend was $20. My guy bases his prices on the condition of the record. The Brown had a skip on "Blue Berry Hill" and the Mendez was close to mint. So, I would say snap up only the records that you actually want to listen to. $5 would be too much to pay, IMO, for even a rare record that you don't think you'll ever play.

Have it. Love it

DUH And, eating more than your body needs, to perform everyday functions results in excess you. Expensive government-funded research into the obvious. Dontcha love it?

You know, Greg, I find lots of good stuff at the Sally Ann. As you say, old folks' relatives quite often dump the records off, along with the ugly furniture, when their elders go to their reward. I've found JazzTone, old Blue Note and other rare records there. My Sally Ann charges a straight 99 cents per record. So, a Jazz Giants 3 record boxed Billie was three dollars, with the book included, immaculate shape. Also, check out garage sales in old neighbourhoods. Same thing.

I only have 2: a British compilation of Earl Bostic from the mid-fifties and one issued by Ace over here in 1981 by Oscar McLollie and his Honey Jumpers. I used to have a few others but I replaced them with CDs or 12". MG I have sixteen 10" records. Among them are Sidney Bechet's conert in Paris in 1952, Cugat's Favourite Rhumbas, Mills Brothers Barber Shop Ballads, The History Of Jazz- Then Came Swing, which is a compilation which includes tracks on which Benny Carter, Sid Catlett, Nat King Cole, Bumps Myers, Coleman Hawkins, Illinois Jacquet and others are featured, America's Music - Basin Street Six, Sarah Vaughan Sings, Woody Herman's Blue Prelude, Dixieland Comes To Carnegie Hall, Woody Herman And His Herd, Clifford Brown Ensemble with Zoot Sims, JazzTone Society Spec 100 Jazz Sampler, Harry James - All Time Favourites, and Sarah Vaughan - Images. My main local vinyl source has a good-sized section of 10" LPs, about half and half, classical and jazz. The 10 inchers I've found are in surprisingly good condition, still in their original covers. Sometimes the covers are a little rough. But, the records were well-cared-for, for the most part.

Louis Armstrong - Al Hirt - Dixieland Trumpet - Murray Hill label - 4 record set. Favourite track - St James Infirmary [but I love this by almost anyone]. There is a don't drink and drive public service commercial which has this, by somebody, playing in the background that I watch, just because of the soundtrack.

I agree with you, Soul Stream. But, it depends on what you think of as being in love. If you mean that blinding, irresistable chemistry that most of us will feel, more than once in our life, that's not it. What lasts is that, plus a deeper connection. You really see them, warts and all, and those warts don't matter. The right partner makes you laugh, or you make them laugh. You miss them when they are not there, as if you had lost part of yourself. You want to tell them good news first and bad news too. As I mentioned before, they actually bring light with them into the room for you and take it away when they leave without you. But, it is possible to have a successful marriage with someone that isn't that kind of soul connection, if you realize that they aren't. After all, marriage is a partnership of two compatable people. It's life lived with another person. Sometimes people who marry for practical reasons, or even because they panic, thinking the one is a myth can be quite happy. Those couples are more realistic, because they didn't expect magic. There may not be the highs. But, there aren't the lows either. You're just not alone. That can be a very safe choice. So, it's a gamble.

Maybe a few thoughts from the other side of the equation might be helpful. You know what Shawn? There IS such a thing as the "real thing". With the benefit of many more years than you, I can say that it is real, but it doesn't always end up happily ever after, nor last as long as it should. This is not because it's not real, but because sometimes circumstances step in. In my own case it was ended by an accident and I settled for a secure marriage to a decent guy. It was the wise choice for that time of my life. But, I still long for the magic that is so rare. If you are really lucky, you will marry your soul-mate. But that may not happen, if you are impatient. So, realistically, we sometimes marry because we want what marriage offers, stability, children, a conventional life. But, that doesn't necessarily mean that you will never meet, later, somebody who will be magic, but unattainable, because you wanted the conventionality and direction that marriage provides. It takes no skill to find someone to marry. But, to be comfortable with yourself alone is not so bad either. In fact, expecting someone else to make you complete is a mistake, I think. So, don't despair. When you feel the time is right and the other person is the one, then marry her. She will be the one who brings light into the room for you. Not perfect. Just perfect for you. If you let her go, you will probably marry somebody else, but will always wonder what your life could have been.

The initial post said that he paid 8 million down and that his mortgage payments would be $177,400.00 per month. If that's not true, then we're talking about something else.

I also like to think that my family and friends consider me charmingly eccentric, rather than hopelessly out of touch with current ways of financial bobbing and weaving. I had completely forgotten that mortgage interest is deductable in the U.S. It isn't deductable here in Canada. So, here I would be giving a gift of several thousand dollars to my lender in exchange for their lending me the money to buy my house. Few actually calculate what they will be paying for their house at the end of the lending period, twenty or thirty years from the initial down payment. The rationale of course to having a mortgage, as opposed to renting or leasing is that equity is built up, which isn't true if one rents or leases. But, because few, if any prospective home-owners have to come up with the total cost of a house, they wouldn't be able to ever own their own home. So, there's that, coupled with your mortgage interest being deductable which puts the cost of owning a home, if one can come up with the down payment, desireable. Most people decide whether or not they will pay the price of a home on the market, not by looking at the asking price, but at the monthy payments. The so-called value of the actual house is often hugely inflated because it can be. Chances are that they don't really own their home until the end of the mortgage, twenty or thirty years from now. But, they rationalize, they would be paying someone either way and at least if they have a mortgage, they are also building up equity, which will help them move up to a larger house and a larger mortgage. BTW, it seems to me that from to time there is talk of discontinuing the deduction for mortgage interest. But, that deduction is so entrenched that it would be a bold Federal Goverment which would even consider it. You do have a definite advantage there. The mortgage interest deduction is enormously expensive from a tax collection standpoint and I'm sure that your government has wished, more than once, they could snatch it away. But, all that is the accepted way these days, though I still think that Tiger could have paid cash. You're going to be paying somebody at some time, so most think that the equity they build up if they have a mortgage is worth it.

All-Time Favourites - Harry James - 10' on Columbia Images - Sarah Vaughan - 10" on Em Arcy label Clifford Brown Ensemble featuring Zoot Sims - 10" on Vogue Nostalgia, well-rewarded. These are wonderful, transporting me back to a better time. Sometimes I need that.

Dan, it's a psychological as well as a financial thing to me. Given the choice, I would rather a bank or mortgage company had no financial interest in my house, my car or my anything else. My point is that over the life of the mortgage, you will pay much, much more for the property than you originally agreed to pay for it. And, should you, for some reason, not be able to make a payment, the bank or mortgage company can, indeed repossess the property, with you forfeiting perhaps thousands and thousands of dollars. Of course, we hope that doesn't happen, but it could. Yes, you are using the bank's or the mortgage company's money. But, they are using yours as well. Your leverage is, well, nothing. Theirs is that they can take away your property if you should have to default on a payment, for some reason. I still maintain that, if a person can, they are better off if they can possibly pay cash, even for their house. But, that almost never happens. In fact, when people do sell their house, usually mid-mortgage, they almost never trade down, except for those who are going to retire. Those people usually do pay cash if they want to own. Otherwise, they rent or lease, using the profit from the sale of their house as investment capital, or to pay for their day to day living expenses.

Actually I hate the concept of interest payments also. Different cultures, different ways. I can't help but think that my mother, who was born and raised in Scotland, must have secretly been Middle Eastern. She saw no sense in borrowing money to buy something for which you could pay cash. She felt that paying at least twice as much in the long run for something, including a house, if you didn't have to, was insane. My youngest brother, taking her at her word, paid cash, over the last thirty years for seven houses, which he rents to teachers, thus creating a substantial income, should he decide to retire, which he's not ready for yet. Using other people's money to buy something means that other people own that something until you make the last payment. So, who can say which is better? I would tend to think that actually owning something, which you can sell if bad times appear over the horizon, is the more secure investment. There is no guarantee that your income will rise, remain stable, or disappear, making you unable to meet your monthly payments of $177,400.00 per month. I'm not saying that Tiger Woods will suddenly stop winning, or become indigent, but one never knows. A home is something that a person needs and it just seems to me that owning it makes more sense than the bank or a mortgage company owning it. But, what do I know?

Or for feeling genuine affection for those who care for me and for whom I care, wanting to hug and be hugged. It's normal, social, human behaviour that is to be encouraged, not made to seem somehow sinister. This is just craziness.

Why would Tiger have a mortgage at all? He can't pay cash? If he can't, wouldn't it make sense for him to get a very slightly less palatial spread and pay cash for it? I still remember an interview, years ago, with a real estate woman who was talking about searching out properties for Middle Eastern potentates in the U.S. When asked by the interviewer what the mortgage payments these people would be paying would be, she looked amused and said "They pay cash". Now, that would be impressive if it were also true of Tiger Woods.

There seems to be a huge fear these days of contact of any kind between not just children, but everybody. I'm a hugger, because my family were huggers and their friends were huggers too. There is nothing like a hug to make you feel all secure and fuzzy inside. It has been shown in many studies that people who don't show affection, or aren't shown affection, particularly in their formative years, fade away emotionally. Demonstating affection by hugging someone is so far away from improper conduct as to be on a different plane entirely. As for fear of child-molesting, the "bathing suit" guidelines worked for my girls when they were little. A hug is good. The rule was that being touched where a one-piece bathing suit would cover is suspect.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY OPHELIA!!! Dancing is not just recommended, but required.

A suggestion, considering that I am responsible for throwing out a moving man's back some years ago. When you have packed the first box with your LPs, lift it yourself. If you can't do it without a lot of difficulty, chances are that the moving man can't either. Fifty albums per box seems to be a reasonable maximum to me. The devil boxes I mentioned earlier had about 150 each and were much heavier than I thought they would be. I had packed them and just left them where I packed them. No, I didn't attempt to lift them before the moving guys came.

I just got the 2 disc DVD of Sergio Leone's "Once Upon A Time In America." I saw this when it was first released in theatres and it remains one of my favourite gangster films. It stars Robert De Niro, James Woods, Elizabeth McGovern and a ton of others. Leone re-cut it to standard length, on pressure from theatre managers. It was a butchery, in that it became an incomprehensible mess. The original is told in flashback and spans the lifetimes of the main characters, kids from a Jewish neighbourhood at the turn of the twentieth century. If you thought the original, uncut version was long, even though it had an intermission, this DVD release is slightly longer and includes scenes not in the original, as well as many extras.

I would think that smooth jazz would be relaxing, like those waterfall cassettes some people play to lull themselves to sleep. You wouldn't listen to a waterfall for stimulation. Same thing for smooth jazz. They don't want people too excited in a crowded elevator either. So, that's it's value to really sick people. But, if money can be raised for cancer research with this project and it's legitimate, I say good for him.

Big Bands - Vol 2 - 2 record set on Columbia - 1972 Earlier, The Les Elgart Touch - also on Columbia - Nice dance album.

First, Vinyl Frontier Second, Miscellaneous Music Third, Politics Then Miscellaneous, Non-Political I browse about half the other threads, then I get back to work.

NOBODY really knows any of us. There's no such thing as a perfect couple. We have our public face and our private face, all of us. Most of us don't kill our spouse. That's what makes this couple unusual. We certainly don't know these people, just as the congregation of the pastor's church didn't know what was going on. But, how many of us tell our friends about the less than perfect areas of our private lives? The only thing anybody knows for sure is that for some reason the pastor's wife killed him.

Obviously they were not the perfect couple, which we will doubtless find out, in excruciating detail, once this thing goes to trial.