papsrus

That's a good deal! About $9.50 per disc. From purely an investment standpoint, the buyer did well, me thinks.

This one's easy. Wasted about two grand on iTunes purchases before realizing they weren't worth the $$. For DL's, emusic's a way better deal. For sound quality, CDs are a way better deal. Two grand, flushed. On the plus side, without them I'd probably not have begun (restarted) exploring jazz again in depth, so maybe in the long run it was money well spent. Wouldn't give iTunes a plugged nickel today though.

Two men and a pap?

Disc 2 of the Complete H.R.S. Sessions, which just arrived here a few days ago. So impressed with this one. Rex Stewart's "Cherry" (1940) is knocks-the-socks-off great -- slightly sad, slightly happy, easy swingin' ... beautiful.

No, see, the goal would be to be a part of a fluid local scene, one that offers opportunity to get out as well as to stay put. A big part of that is dissemination through recordings, and Chicago's got that (where else can you do a vanity project, play your games right, and get it out on a label with distribution like Delmark? No money, but when is there ever?). Another part of it is potential national visibility from a local platform. Chicago's got that too. Chicago's got a lot of stuff that none of those places you list don't. Remember, the objective isn't a "perfect" "jazz scene" where one can live happily ever after and get happy and fat. You can do that in any of the places you list (or I guess you could. Dunedin? Uh...) The objective is to be in an environment where you can move your shit ahead on at least somewhat your own terms (and that's why NYC is off the map, and has been for a good long time), get something good going, and then see what comes out of it. No doubt Chicago is not without "quirks" and/or "issues", and there might be a lot of "hype" to the rep, but this is (or would be...) not about all that, but rather beyond all that. Dig it - I stayed here for a good long time because I had playing opportunities, regular "creative music" gigs, ongoing weekly spots at the same venues. Cats from NYC would marvel at that, saying that they get to do something like this maybe a few times a year, saying that you got a good thing going. Well, ok, yeah, all well and good, but then what? Granted, my own lack of business acumen at the time coupled with an unrehabilitative desire to be an "important sideman" rather than a leader are as much a factor as anything, but after a while, hey - no real "creative music community" of fans, no press support at all, any/all recording has to be 100% self-financed & promoted/pimped (and no amount of pimping can get it on the one jazz station in the area), the venues start out wanting "something different" and then slowly but surely freak when they realize that they're actually getting it, on and on and on. You start becoming a legend in your own mind just to think that what you're doing might, on some slim chance, possibly "matter" . After a while, it all just gets silly, and...hey, I love my wife now more than ever, that's about all I'll say about that. Granted, I'm on the outside looking in, but it sure seems that Chicago jazz scene is alive in every sense of the world. It may be the only city in America where that's the case to the degree that it is, which is a symptom of something else, and a big part of why it is that I decided to fall back in love with my wife all over again. Jazz is not healthy, and jazz - as I fell in love with it - may already be dead, but from here anyways, it looks like of all the (many) places you can say that about, Chicago ain't one of 'em. That's all I'm trying to say. Well said. ... And as for Dunedin (up the road from here) I'd guess you would do well to have some bagpipes in your bag of tricks.

Well this is a fine pickle ...

I got turned on to Roberts recently and picked up her two Sticks and Stones albums. Both great. Probably favor "Shed Grace" just a little more. Super nice version of 'Ishfahan' on that one. "The Chicago Project" is also outstanding, IMO ... especially the three 'Birdhouse' numbers with Anderson. The whole album is good though. She has kind of an understated phrasing, yet so fresh and -- as she says -- respectful of the roots of the music. I can't get enough, personally. ... Would love to know more about the Chicago scene. Jeff Chan, in particular. Still need to look into his music.

Don't know if the Mosaic has all the tracks, nor I have it, but my Columbia Jazz Masterpiece cds sound pretty awful, for sure the recent Mosaic remastering is light years' better. Yes it has all the tracks. (Vol 1 begins with a couple of Rex Stewart tunes that aren't on the Mosaic.) So it has all the tracks except for a couple of Rex Stewart tracks? I expect I'll just go ahead and snag the Mosaic in a month or two. Thanks all. (I'm still curious about the person out there with two disc 2's who apparently either hasn't noticed or doesn't care. I asked the seller to put me in touch if he ever heard from this person. Not holding my breath.)

I think we all agree it's a 'curious' article at least. Sort of a review of Roberts tied into a quick overview of the Chicago scene.

Mine arrived yesterday with two disc 1's and no disc 2. So if there's anyone out there with two disc 2's and no disc 1, I've got your other disc and would love to trade. (Seller refunded purchase price, so I guess I'm keeping what I have.) PS: Should I just go for the Ellington Mosaic and get it over with????

Curious there was no mention in the article of KV, especially given the premise that the scene is a murky mixture of avant rock and jazz. The writer is hip of Roberts, so it's gotta be an intentional omission, I'd think. Whatever you think of his music, he's no small force on the Chicago scene. EDIT: Glancing through the article again, the whole thing's kind of pegged on Roberts, which is great, but in that light not so surprising there's no mention of KV.

Thanks for posting that.

Maybe it's a little reverse psychology on Zorn's part. ... Critics generally treat him well, don't they?

Oh! I just stumbled across this. Good to know for those late, late, late (Eastern time zone) nights I find myself stumbling around the house unable to sleep. Thanks!

Yes, they are really, really ... and I mean really tasty. (Isn't everything that's cooked on a grill?). My experience with seafood in general is that it is much more flavorful when cooked on a grill wrapped in foil (where your special coatings, etc., can percolate away). Corn on the cob is another one (although you have to pre-cook it). Wrap it in foil with butter and slow cook it. MAN! ...

CJ, I think you will be happy with them. Paps, good job! those are the ones to get.

What a fantastic idea. There is a festival in Scotland devoted to this sort of thing, I believe. This says it all:

Curiously, in my own listening habits (and I suppose this is quite common) I enjoy purposefully bouncing around different kinds of music. Not a particularly broad palate, I suppose, as it's almost entirely jazz and related creative musics, and lately blues. But within jazz, I certainly veer off in one direction, then another -- for example from Ellington to the Schlippenbach Trio to Chet Baker, back to Basie and off to Braxton, etc. This enhances my appreciation for each of these different kinds of musics. They each sound fresh when set against the others. I would find a more predictable approach unsatisfying, I think. ... Something like that ...

Haven't read through the entire thread, but has anyone BBQ'd lobster tails? ... Wrap them in foil with some butter, maybe some lemon juice or whatever else you want for flavor, and cook 'em shell down. Here's a recipe.

Listening to the Complete Robert Johnson, decided to head over to amazon to pick up some Son House discs:

I'll eat dirt, but only if it's fresh.

Most of you folks are up before me. Usually it's to sleep between 1 a.m. and 2 a.m. and then up between 8 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. ... So I guess I'm a bit of a night owl and somewhat of an early riser too. (It's true, I think, that the older you get the less sleep you need -- until you're ancient, perhaps. Then, mostly sleep??) I have noticed that sometimes the time stamp on my posts isn't correct, and can be off by several hours. There seems to be no logic to the discrepancy (although I haven't paid that close attention ... just noticed it was off sometimes). EDIT: For instance, I posted this at 6:10 Eastern time but the time stamp says 5:10. Maybe my settings are off, but I don't think so.

You'll never regret it. Happy listening! Yeah, thanks. I'm really looking forward to this one (I've said that every time I order a Mosiac, I think). Snagged today at the local new/used CD shop here: Jimmy Lunceford and His Orchestra: 1930 - 1934 (Chronological Classics) ...... and, and, and .... Loading the Robert Johnson to the hard drive now as I spin the Lunceford (which I snagged based solely on the label, knowing zero about him. Enjoying it right now).

Going to see Branford Marsalis tonight (in a couple of hours). Nice seat, too -- Row 9, in the center seating but just off to one side a bit. Should be good. Post-concert EDIT: Well ... that was interesting. Half the band didn't show up because of weather up north and canceled flights. So, it was Marsalis and Joey Calderazzo in a sax-piano duo. Billy Taylor was in the audience and sat in for a couple of numbers as well. So that was a treat. Marsalis and Cadlerazzo played two beautiful tunes ("Hope" and "Eternal") with Marsalis on soprano sax. Gorgeous. And Marsalis played wonderfully on tenor on tunes such as "Monk's Dream" and "Love is Here to Stay." Lots of interesting interplay and improvisation. But ... I found Calderazzo's playing to be a little dense for a duet setting. He displayed a gentle touch on "Hope," but otherwise wasn't leaving much space in his playing. This was brought into sharp relief when Taylor sat in at the piano. He had a much more nuanced touch, I thought, that worked better in duets. And while Marsalis' playing was solid throughout, he didn't exactly break a sweat. And he gave a lot of solo space to Calderazzo -- a bit too much, IMO. All in all, the whole thing had kind of a casual, playing-around-in-the-studio feel to it, which is fine. And the audience pretty much loved it. But in the end, I would have preferred to listen to the quartet.

I still think it comes down to the difference between "studying" the music and simply "listening" to the music on its own terms. And this is not to put a relative value on either, nor to deny that there is a physical aspect to playing (and studying) music that enhances your own experience, as you describe. You could conduct a little experiment for yourself by listening to a piece of music that you are intimately familiar with. How do you listen and react to it? Then put on a piece of music you have no familiarity with at all -- it might be a piece of classical music or free jazz, something you have no idea how to play. Gauge your response to that. How do the two listening experience compare?