seeline

I bet you could have your seat and some dancing, too - sounds like this one is all about dancing.

IKWYM, Steve! I think you're entirely right about "easy listening" being a better description or category label, too. (which is kinda why I mentioned Mantovani a bit earlier. )

OK, the thing is - most all the labels out there *are* about marketing, whether consumers and listeners realize that or not. In the US, at least, all "product" that isn't "classical" is "pop" by default; further subdivisions (so customers can find what they're looking for) are made from there. "Jazz" already covers about as much territory as "classical" - and makes about as much sense, if you try to parse it (from my pov, anyhow). Other than that, I guess I've been involved in a few too many threads about "authenticity" (elsewhere) to feel like I can - or want to - claim some sort of high ground about the music I like being innately better than the music someone who tunes in to a "smooth jazz" station likes - especially because most of those stations play things that I *do* like (soul, R&B, funk, actual jazz). Honestly, I would rather put the energy I used to spend on getting upset about this into listening and/or playing music. It's much more fun, and has done a lot for my blood pressure. (I'm not kidding about the blood pressure part, BTW.)

Re. "younger people," I put that winking icon there for a reason!

But it's *all* popular music. I love all kinds of esoteric music (jazz and otherwise), and have as much of a stake in that as anyone else here, I'm sure. But I also love a lot of unabashedly commercial pop music, like old R&B, soul, and funk - and a *lot* of Indian movie soundtracks. The latter is not what the Indian embassy here in the US would necessarily put on its "approved" list of Things You Need to Hear in order to understand Indian music. That said, it's loved by millions of people all over the world, and is about as "authentic" as it gets! I can get all misty-eyed over "difficult" music, but I also need to cut loose and dance a bit - and it's a lot easier to dance to a lot of pop music than, say, Roscoe Mitchell. I guess I just don't see the need for a hierarchical way of thinking about this, though I sure did waste a lot of time and energy worrying and fulminating about it in the past. It's just not worth it anymore, to me, at least. What I'm saying probably won't go down well with some folks here, but... it's just an opinion, not The Gospel According To... ! And I'm content to let it rest there. Edited to add: I have been known to order from the drive-through at the local McDonalds - doesn't everyone?

Well, it comes down to "What's in a name?," doesn't it? "Classical" is used as a label for everything from light entertainment (operetta, Strauss waltzes) to Beethoven's string quartets to Cage to... you name it, it's in there. I think younger audiences are just as capable of discovering all kinds of music on their own as a lot of us Baby Boomers were, y'know? (I could get on the soapbox about "authentic," but Bev, you probably already know what I'd say, and I'm sure it's been said many times in other threads, by other posters, so... )

I can't knock Gilles Peterson - he's got very good taste, and has gotten a lot of nifty music reissued. If anything, i wish that people like him got more media exposure.... As for "building houses," I do think a lot of it comes down to allowing people to discover things on their own, as (likely) most everyone here did. One thing I do recall from when I was very young: My mom played a lot of jazz LPs, and was happy that I enjoyed many of them. But she didn't give me info. - she kept on playing records, allowing me to make my own choices as far as what I liked and what I didn't. (She also put up with a lot of "bad" music that I liked.) There was info. available to me, if i wanted it, but she never pushed it on me. I think that's crucial.

"Odious"? Nope. It's a label, for marketing purposes - that's all. There was a time when I looked down on it, and (admittedly) I still don't care for the music, but... live and let live. there are *far* worse "vices" (IMO) than being a fan of Najee or Chris Botti - and there are plenty of talented musicians who have work as a result of the genre's popularity. As far as I can tell, it's the current incarnation of the kind of music that made Andre Kostelanetz, Mantovani and others popular/famous. It's hardly "evil." I have a lot of musical "guilty" (or not so guilty) pleasures, so I really don't feel like I'm in any kind of position to cast the first stone, y'know?!

When you dance you're charming and you're gentle. Especially when you do the Continental...

Think you're correct. Bingo! Hey, I was in the throes of grad school at the time, so I'm kind of amazed that I remembered this correctly! Lots of things from those days are a bit of a blur.

Daniel Ponce, maybe?

Well, thanks, Jim - I wasn't assuming that you thought I'd come over in the Mariel crew! (Not kidding: I knew a handful, back in the day - they weren't all criminals, but some definitely were!)

But... but.... those aren't Foster-Grants!

Observation: if i were the subject of that kind of remark, I'd leave, too. (And be fully justified in doing so.) The funny (as in "odd") thing: I never viewed jazz - and jazz fandom - as a "guy thing" until I began reading various jazz listservs and boards. Maybe that's because of my background as a kid (my mom loves jazz, had ambitions to be a professional musician at one time) + knowing many other women who love jazz and have been actively involved in every angle from promotion to DJing/running a jazz station to publishing to just buying records and going to live gigs... So the internet was a real shock in that respect - few to no women around, lots of misogynistic remarks, etc. My feeling is that there are a lot of women out here who largely choose to ignore internet discussion boards, for whatever reasons. I've taken long breaks from them in the past myself, due to all kinds of things (misogynistic comments being one factor, but not the primary one). I was hesitant to join this board and have found it to be, for the most part, far friendlier than I'd anticipated - but some of the things that have been said in this thread really give me pause - as a newb on this board, that is. (Would be true if I were a man.) I hope this post serves as food for thought. Best, seeline

Quick observation: the whole "classical" scene is still pretty closed to women musicians, especially if they play instruments that aren't somehow or other viewed as "feminine" or "women's instruments" or whatever (flute, cello, violin, viola, piano, concert harp, etc.). There were all kinds of problems when the NY Philharmonic 1st started hiring women musicians, and there's still a boy's club atmosphere in many, many places. How many women conductors can you name? Here in the US, Marin Alsop is one of the few that springs to mind. The glass ceiling isn't exclusive to jazz by any means.

i beleive you're right - which is how I remember finding out about a lot of bands that I liked, back when.

Y'know, I'm not sure that that "consensus" made any sense to my parents - and now that I'm older than they were when I was a teenager, it doesn't make sense to me! Who was it that said "The more things change, the more they remain the same"? it certainly seems true of "youth" and music, fashion, etc. - no matter what media are being used for talking, hanging out, passing ideas on, etc.

Agreed on the recs, Bev - though for whatever reason, ECM seems to do a great job at recording Gismonti's guitar work and (I think) badly on his piano and keyboard playing. I'm not so fond of his more experimental recordings (which were - mostly - done in Brazil, in the 70s), but some of his early stuff is quite lovely - Sonho 70, for instance.

The German ECM site sells their reissues of titles he originally released on his own label, Carmo - Alma (in my previous post) is one of them. Dusty Groove does carry some of these titles, but not on a regular basis...

Should be co-credited to Naná Vasconcelos - I love the "A" side! This album (live piano-only gig) is also pretty nifty -

Having just spent 45 minutes inside the coil of an MRI, I find it hard to believe that anyone could play anything during a brain or upper spinal scan! Not only is the tube horribly small, the machine is deafeningly loud - I had headphones and could barely hear the music for all the pounding. (Though I was "playing" some West African percussion riffs in my head to keep my mind off both the noise and claustrophobic thoughts - I'd love to know how that might be interpreted! )

Have you checked the Bola Sete site? Sadly, almost everything he ever did is o.p. and - unless his family is able to buy rights to various recordings - likely to remain so. There's a nice discography section on the site... and I'd also recommend checking the Loronix blog... Edu Lobo: Again, so much of his material is o.p. - do you have any of his early albums? (They've all been reissued at various times, and DG usually tries to stock them.) His 70s material is especially hard to find... very little of it has ever come out on CD, and then only in very limited pressings. You might try eMusic.com for some of his more recent work, though. And DG has been stocking a recently-released live concert DVD (on Biscoito Fino).

Hey - first time I've seen your site - nice! I'll be looking forward to new work (no pressure, Noj! ) I like your sense of humor, too - something that (I think) is neglected in a lot of contemporary art...

I'd love to see an interview with Dick Spottswood on these topics. Should be very interesting!

Mike's right about their service - and if you so much as look at their in-print, in-stock titles by/with Silva, you're going to spend quite a bit of money, MG.