chris

You haven't changed at all Conn-- always the most negative interpretation of anything said about the Pats. I didn't say (nor imply) that the Patriots were just Corey Dillon. I just noted that adding him to the mix is intriguing. Kick that New England chip off your shoulder, man.

Argh, no. Please no, anything but New England! But I have to say, adding Corey Dillon to the mix was sure a potent addition...

That's cold man! I love American football, but there is no game as beautiful as real football (aka soccer) well played. But that's a different thread! Go Seahawks!

Not just continue them, but rumor has it that they are considering doing a feature film based on the character!

This is the thread to post your NFL picks and favorites for the upcoming season enabling bragging rights at the end of the season. No bandwagon jumping late in the season. Who are you rooting for? Who are you predicting will go all the way (if they're different). As an Alaskan, I have to root for Seattle. In a pinch I'll cheer for Green Bay... Needless to say, I'm not oozing with confidence that either will go all the way, but I'm cheering for them anyway...

I'm predicting Alonzo Bodden will win... but one never knows. Tammy Pescatelli was attractive, but that's about all she has going for her when it comes to the comedy circuit. I thought Todd (?) Glass should have lasted longer just because he at least didn't feign cynicism all the time...

I hadn't heard about this. What a sad note to come across after not being around the forums for a few months... makes me wonder who else died since last march. Jacquet was a good 'un

ah, now I see it. But why doesn't it appear when *viewing* a thread, which is where I most want to use it? Threads do belong to a forum after all...

The point isn't how many people claim to have read those books-- it isn't many, just as there aren't many people (relatively speaking) who claim to like Coltrane. The world at large ignores jazz. The point I am making is that of those who DO, the number of poseurs is pretty small, so claiming that they are really saying (to quote you, and your claim IS CLEARLY that they are lying: "I would like to be seen as someone who likes this sort of thing, but, truly, I neither understand nor enjoy this music" seems like particularly misguided way to rationalize the fact that others have a different aesthetic than your own. The analogy between a doctor knowing your gallbladder better than you do and others being able to understand your aesthetic position better than you is pretty flawed for the simple reason that the aesthetic sphere is much different than the factual sphere of medicine. Certainly, we don't even ourselves know and understand all the reasons we might like one piece and not another, which leaves room for others to help us discover any of that myriad of influences that makes up a negotiated individual ethics, but this is a very different proposition than you are laying forth so far. Your approach seems to be very binary, a kind of either/or proposition that isn't well in keeping with the way people actually work. It seems doomed to failure to not-- at some point-- accept that people's aesthetic apprehension differs for reasons that are not easily (and perhaps at all) illuminated, and that this might even be a GOOD thing! Further, you are conflating two different issues. By choosing an artist like Coltrane the real issue gets obscured, because there is a more fundamental challenge that goes unresolved by getting sidelined on the issue of the complexity of his playing and composition. That more fundamental issue is what allows non-musicians to appreciate and enjoy Coltrane (despite your skepticism of the same-- for instance, my son's two friends from across the street asked me about a song that happened to be Coltrane and spoke unprompted that it was "pretty cool"-- were they being disingenuous?). Stripped down to the core, this question is as simple (and unanswerable) as facing off on, say, the melody of a few standards. I bet we could find a few that we disagree on, perhaps even vehemently. How can one of us prove to the other that our chosen one is good or that the other is bad? Of course we CAN'T, but until that argument has been won, confusing the issue by layering more on top of it doesn't do any good at all-- and believe it or not, even non-musicians can honestly appreciate and enjoy (and dislike and despise) the melodies of various songs, just as they can appreciate or not things in coltrane they don't consciously note or understand. And for the record, I'm not putting WNMC or anyone else down. But it is very clear that these kinds of issues come down to so far irresolvable question of very simple aesthetics... which quickly grows old. You might as well try to convince me that I should like the taste of mayonnaise by explaining how it is made or the history of the condiment!

It seems like once or twice a year there will be a big sale with free shipping that DOES include box sets... I got a few that way, including the Bitches Brew box... but I only buy from them when they have sale + free shipping, since the shipping rate eats up the good prices otherwise. Still, it is worth it-- and they had a fantastic 4.99 per cd + no shipping sale this December where I got a BUNCH of great stuff. Well worth it.

Perhaps you need to reflect more closely for yourself rather than for everyone else. It is incredibly arrogant to presume that those who are not musically trained must not really be enjoying Coltrane when they claim they are. I'm sure there are poseurs in jazz just as there are poseurs in every audience for every art (I've certainly met more than a few people who ostentatiously place Finnegans Wake or Aristotle's Metaphysics on their bookshelves for others to see, but they are a pretty small minority. The much larger group have the books, have read them, and may not understand them, or not get particular nuances of the relationship between, for instance, Plato, Aristotle, and modern offshoots from the same sources such as Camus and Heidegger, but they aren't lying when they say they appreciated the volume nonetheless. It sounds like you are looking for some kind of conspiracy to justify something that is at once a lot simpler and much more complex-- a disagreement in aesthetics that springs from thousands of different sources and influences that can't be charted. Personally, the minute someone starts using reason as a cudgel to either denounce the taste of others or elevate their own (whether that taste be positive OR negative), most productive outcome in the conversation has long been lost... because most of the time, people that make the request to be more precise and "objective" only want to do so to make or disprove a point-- which is hardly what it's all about!

I'm down with it too! I'm always looking for good listening, regardless of genre...

I've seen in some other boards that, at the bottom of each individual forum is a "search this forum" box that does a quick search limited to that particular forum (see example at Hydrogen Audio Forum)... this is a handy feature rather than having to go to the full search function all the time. Think this would be a good idea for Organissimo?

Not to be smart, but do you feel bothered in the same way by, say, Lincoln's Birthday? Is it ever safe to celebtrate a person and their accomplishmens/contribution?

Well, Candy is itself a standard, isn't it? Morgan, Johnny Mercer, Chet Baker-- that tune's gotten some play.

Gee, didn't we already cover this earlier? You can't say I didn't warn you!

I haven't heard back from anyone who could supply the first three BFT discs. I'd be happy to do a B&P (I send blanks and an envelope with return postage) with someone...

That's the one-- I'm about 3/4 through. Not the most scintillating read, but interesting. The musical analysis is sometimes good, but often a little too gushing. And there are moments when I feel like I am reading some kind of gig-o-log just outlining one gig to the next... but still worthwhile because I find Evans' music so intriguing...

Yeah, you are starting to reach way back now-- I maintain that the overwhelming combination is a potent offense and a reasonably competent defense... And I'm not in love with high scoring. One of my favorite sports to watch is soccer, whose athletes put our pros to shame with their grace, and a 1-0 or 0-0 scores are sometimes the most exciting to watch. For some reason, though, watching the Patriots make their yeomanlike march down the field is nowhere near as interesting as the strategies, strikes, and feints of Man-U or Brazil. It helps to be able to have the ball constantly going both directions if you are going to be as boring as the Pats. The Panthers have an above average defensive line, though, so perhaps that will help. As for next year, I'll happily bet you right now, Conn, that Patriots don't make it to the Super Bowl next year. How much confidence do you have?

I don't know why I've been thinking that it's Saturday all day-- I see that Philly lost as I predicted, so all is not lost for the big game (that's what two days of indoor soccer tournament while it is -50F and colder will do to your brain)... I should also note that of those teams I listed, most had a competent defense (as is my thesis) but Green Bay actually had a pretty exceptional defense at the time. Of course, that wasn't the only thing that made them fun to watch (what with a few little things like Favre and Freeman, etc)...

With the Colts giving the ball away like old fruitcake in January, at least this game was less boring than just plain ugly. Conn, defense may sometimes win championships, but you act as if this is some kind of golden rule rather than just one fairly recent (and short) trend. Tell me, where was the vaunted defense on these teams in just the last decade: St. Louis, Denver, Green Bay, Dallas, San Fran, Washington? That's just back to 92. Defensive teams winning superbowls is a fairly recent phenomenon, and I will grant you that it may happen this year too, but if you were a betting man and you bet on defensive powerhouses for the last decade, you'd have lost a lot of money... Indy showed today that they don't have the competent defense needed-- which is indeed the most common super bowl winning combo: a competent defense and an outstanding offense. And I think Manning finally came down and played like a mortal and-- as I suspected might happen and wrote right here-- big game experience became the real factor... Oh well. Maybe Philly will win tomorrow and we'll also get record low television ratings too-- things can't get much worse for me

I'll be the first to say... that was UGLY. ouch.

Lame APS would be far better than what I had before. And if I still have access to the MANY albums I downloaded already before the terms changed, that might be worth my while! thanks for the info...

what are you, Brer Moose?

Fortunately (maybe), I have a heck of a lot more on my want-list than Mosaic and other boxed sets... people must be using Ebay, otherwise they spend way too much time looking for outlandishly BAD deals