seeline

Rippers: I'm now using MediaMonkey, which I like far better than anything else I've tried (including Winamp - though there are similarities). It's great for organizing a lot of files, comes with the ability to rip to Ogg and FLAC, and is very easy to use. It's free, with a few nice but inessential "extras" for the paid version. (Liked it so much that I bought a license after a week or so.)

Have you tried holding down the CTRL key (or is it the "Shift" key?) when the disc is loading? (Keep pressing the key until the loading process is finished.)

It may well be that your drive needs to be replaced - it shouldn't be *that* touchy.

I wish we would do away with things like the Pledge of Allegiance, which has always seemed like a lot of unnecessary jingoism to me (and why on earth make a pledge to a *flag*?), but I doubt that'll happen anytime soon... As for swearing an oath to a monarch - ????

I couldn't agree more.

There are tabloids galore in the UK, but I think Tonyrefail must be in the 19th c. somehow, or else MG is able to successfully avoid frequenting places where they're sold. As for his comment, I very much agree!

One of my aunts (who frequented the H&H in Center City Philadelphia when she was younger) told me that she and her friends always said that the initials really stood for "Hasty & Horrible."

Thanks so much for the add! As for the books, my pleasure - though The Brazilian Sound is (I think) an easier read, in terms of the way the info. is presented and organized. Edit: I forgot to mention the Tambour d'Afrique show. The host's daughter archives all of his programs on her blog.

Bossa nova is very sophisticated, though - the chords, the rhythms, what's not played, etc. - at least, that's true of the best work in the genre. It might seem simple on one level, but on others, it's not - and it's awfully hard to create something "simple" that works so well! There's a very real place for that. Now, my personal taste runs more toward João Gilberto than Art Tatum, which is probably one of the reasons bossa nova appeals to me more than the kind of pyrotechnics Tatum was into. (Someone I know described his style of playing as "All the notes, just for me" - not meant in a derogatory way.) At any rate, all this to say that less often is more, from my pov, at least.

I guess I view listening for the purpose of learning something to be a whole different ballgame than listening for the sake of listening... Much like the difference between practicing an instrument and playing an instrument for the sake of enjoyment. I try to put both things into my "practice" time, but the boundaries get blurry - if I'm playing accompaniment at a dance class, for example, I'm both playing for the fun of it *and* learning at the same time. And - like papsrus - I tend to listen to a wide variety of things. Part of that comes from reviewing (back when I did that on a regular basis), but mostly it's because I enjoy doing it. (Which is one of the main reasons I quit writing reviews - too much work involved!)

You might also want to check out the Ambiance Congo radio program. The host also has a blog that focuses on archived programs, here. (All programs offered for a limited time only.) And the Voice of America's African Music Treasure blog is marvelous.

The Daminal, you need a copy of Gary Stewart's Rumba on the River - A History of the Popular Music of the Two Congos. Wendo Kolosoy has been around since forever - a friend of mine (old hand at what a lot of Africans call "Congo music") was amazed to find out that he'd started recording again, as he'd assumed him to be long since gone. I think there might be an old photo of him in Stewart's book, though I won't swear to it. There are some good anthologies of older music, like these... Kékélé started out doing all of their lyrics in French, Lingala and other local languages - I think their producers might be trying to make them into the next Africando All Stars, with them singing in Spanish. (Might work, might not...)

Excellent article, though - having had to rely heavily on informants for some research I did in the 80s - I'd have to say that *not* cross-checking accounts (and facts) is bad practice. Oral history is a very tricky thing to do well/right, and each person's recollections are exactly that - theirs, and based on memory. to use recollections as various ways of viewing something is, I think, fine - but memory is notoriously faulty, in so many ways. (Mine as much as anyone else's.) And people do tend, consciously or not, to change their stories, or (at very least), to change the focus/emphasis in their stories depending on who's doing the listening and recording. It's not necessarily about lying or fabricating things - I think it's a pretty basic fact of the way we all communicate with each other.

Exactly! And Ptah, I don't know "what's going on" when these guys play. It's about so much more than being able to transcribe or use technical terms... And i can guarantee you that if you ask these people what they just played, they will more than likely have a very difficult time telling you! It's not as if anyone is sitting there saying, "And I'm gonna play *this* run (solo, whatever) next." (Unless they're playing from sheet music, or unless they've memorized a certain solo phrase/whatever.) I'm sure there are some folks who *can* take a mental snapshot of what they just played, but I have yet to meet one. it's certainly not something I can do! The *only* way I would be able to tell you what I just played is if: 1. I'm studying a particular rhythm/pattern and am playing it over and over 2. I've been playing accompaniment parts that don't fluctuate or change (very normal for me) If I'm taking a rhythmic pattern and improvising - adding ornamentation, fill, etc. - forget it!

That's a very good question! FWIW, i once knew a very accomplished musician who could *only* demonstrate technique by playing excerpts from pieces where specific techniques were used. To my mind, that's not how music actually works, but... he was/is excellent at what he does. I do think some folks hew so closely to the notion of being different or special because they can do X (play jazz, for example) that they more than half convince others that their observations and insights are, by default, superior. Well, probably "yes" on certain subjects, but not on *everything*! That brings us to a good definition of "expert," which is (I think) someone who is readily able to say that there's so much that they don't yet know, and probably never will.

I still think there's something of a false dichotomy here - because someone who plays alto (jazz alto, to be specific) is going to hear things in Bird that I never will. By the same token, I might hear things in the playing of someone like Max Roach or Tata Guines (Cuban conguero) that will slip right by someone who has no experience playing percussion - and *both* of these players are somewhat lost on *me* (in terms of appreciation and analysis) because I haven't studied set playing, or Afro-Cuban music. Everyone hears as an individual. (As has been said earlier, by others.) There's no way around that. What you might admire in a painter - like Velasquez or Degas or Jan Van Eyck - is something that could not have been duplicated by any other painter. Copied, sure - but not duplicated. We all hear differently, due to our backgrounds, the music we're familiar with, and the music that we don't know. If you (or I) were to start taking guitar or piano lessons today - and to stick with them - 3-6 months down the road, there *will* be a difference in how you (or I) hear those instruments in *any* genre of music. But I doubt that knowing lots and lots about piano or guitar technique is going to help much when it comes to understanding what reed or bowed string or brass players are doing per se.... It's very difficult to draw analogies to the visual arts (something i did study, back in the day), but here's a rough one: ability at working with oil paints does NOT guarantee that you're going to be able to know how to carve wood or marble, or throw beautiful pots and vases, or.... These are all media used in art, but beyond that, they require *very* different kinds of skills and knowledge. Not only that: some people are very gifted at understanding how color works. Those same people might not be able to sculpt worth a damn. Skill at one artistic discipline/medium doesn't confer skill at all of them. It will probably allow for a greater appreciation (in some ways) of work in other media, but only in certain respects. I think there are parallels in the other arts, music very much included.

Thanks muchly for the link + recommendation, Larry. I've got a soft spot for Ciccolini, I confess. I much prefer his recording of Albeniz' Iberia to most of the others that seem to get touted a lot, but - it's a taste thing, I think.

Based on reading many of your posts elsewhere over a long period of time, I think you're selling yourself short, Ptah. Really! Edit: Now, this is coming from someone whose sight-reading skills are in need of a brush-up, and who isn't able to sit and do in-depth analysis of chord structures, etc. I'm a drummer (no jokes, please! ), and don't play any chordal instruments. So I'm at a definite disadvantage in some ways, but - since the stuff I'm studying isn't something that can be learned except by hearing and doing - not in others. Also, I'm admittedly not a professional in the somewhat limited sense in which that term is used routinely on some other board... Whether that even matters is another thing!

I'd throw that whole "written music" bit out the window, but that's just me... However, here's what someone else has said about that (for trying to notate a lot of percussion music): "The feeling, or the manner in which the rhythms get their specific characters or "signatures," is not covered by this notation. Countless additional symbols would have to be included, which would significantly compromise the readability of the notation lines. Here, we probably reach the limit of writing notation for African music in general." - Mamady Keita (with Uschi Billmeyer) in A Life for the Djembe The advice is really to trust your ears... in this book, but also in just about any decent source re. Afro-Cuban, Afro-Brazilian and African music. And it's true of so much more music, from all over the globe. You didn't have to know phonics (or how to spell) when you started learning to talk, right?! And you didn't learn how to speak by reading words from a page... (and so on). Edited to add: I think notation, theory, etc. etc. are great - but in some ways, they're a bit beside the point (if they become something that's the sole or main focus of trying to learn and/or discuss music).

Ditto on De Severac - I can't understand why he isn't much more widely known. (Though I wouldn't know he existed if it weren't for the kindness of someone at Academy Records in Manhattan, who steered me to a wonderful set, recorded by Aldo Ciccolini...)

Analysis has its place, but hey... I like to enjoy music, too. I think the analytical thing can be switched on or off (at least, I know that that's true for me), and I think (again) that there's a bit of a false dichotomy being set up here, re. musicians vs. non-musicians. Our brains are processing what we listen to, sometimes in very analytical ways, regardless of whether we've got formal training in music or not. We can all recognize pitches and intervals and many, many other elements of music. To say that people who aren't musicians *cannot* hear subtleties in music is (to my mind) a lot like saying that only painters can recognize red, blue, yellow... right down the line. We might not be conscious of the fact that our brains are, in fact, organizing and evaluating what we hear, but the processes go on nonetheless. I've seen adults who swear they can't play a note be able to pull off highly complex rhythmic patterns *if* those things are presented in a way that doesn't look like theory or notation. (following the stresses and weak beats in a nonsense rhyme, for example.) If you were to tell these folks what time signature they're playing in (or whatever), I think they'd freeze like the proverbial deer in the headlights. It's not a matter of tricking people in this case, but of using avenues that seem less charged - and less associated with some sort of professional competence. So all of you attentive, thoughtful listeners out there had better stop going on about how your perceptions must be somehow innately less insightful than those of so-called "professionals." 'Cause I think you're all wrong about that - of course, who the heck am I to act like some kind of authority, eh?!

Technical vocabulary only goes so far - and then what? Here's an example: 12 12 12 123 That's the beat pattern for a rhythm used in a lot of Middle Eastern music - it was used by Dave Brubeck in "Blue Rondo a la Turk." Those numbers don't really convey *anything* of how this pattern sounds when played - I'd have to use some sort of tablature and symbols for that. And even then, it would *still* just be an approximation of this pattern. Shifting the accented beats around would completely change the sound and feel of this rhythm. Maybe I can write that all out, but... far better to learn it via hearing it than by reading it on the page. Not only that, those numbers are a 2-D, visual attempt to approximate sounds. See where I'm going with this? Trust your ears.

I've definitely felt the same way, wondering what I might be missing. I imagine there are certainly moments for musician listeners where the audio experience combined with the knowledge of what was required to produce those sounds results in a level of pleasure which I am unable to attain. Maybe - it depends on who's listening, and the music they know/play/whatever. There's a lot to do with context that we tend to push aside, but it's real nonetheless.

Amen to all of this - and I honestly don't believe there's some sort of hierarchy re. "musicians" hearing or understanding things in a "better" way than "non-musicians." My hearing is affected by all kinds of things - including my cultural background and upbringing. I can hear pieces from Brazil that seem - to me - to have come from North American jazz entirely. And Brazilians will (and have) told me, "Well, not exactly..." and have very politely proceeded to explain that X chart or Y recording is really samba played Rio-dance hall style (samba gafieira) and - they're right. Yes, some of the ideas for charts come from North American jazz, but apart from that - it's samba, played in a way that I'd never heard before (not being from Rio and so on). So things like this do occasionally make me aware of the fact that I might not have the slightest idea of what I'm talking about ; further, that playing an instrument (any instrument) is no guarantee that I'm going to understand what someone else might be doing with the same instrument, or a similar one. there's always more to hear, and more to learn - for everyone, no matter who they are.