take5

Man, that's really off the mark. The creators of the show are a journalist and a cop that worked the area, wrote stories based on real events and people, and even cast some people that did some of the stuff portrayed in the show.

This PPV, right? Then I'm not watching it, as I certainly am not paying $50 and no one else I really know well gives a crap about the sport. Sad, really. I'll bet on Marquez, just because he seems to hit harder.

Yes Ted, I meant a CD compilation. Sorry. I ordered a 4 CD box set yesterday that has studio and live material of CC's recordings, including the afore-mentioned tracks. Looking forward to it.

The whole Michael/Bugs/Dookie sequence just killed me. I was weepy emotional wreck afterwards.

Thanks. It was probably "Ad Lib Blues" I heard.

What's the difference between blues and jazz music? Blues is 3 chords played in front of 3,000 people. Jazz is 3,000 chords played in front of 3 people.

Jimi decided to play Sunshine of Your Love as a tribute to Cream. This recording is available on the BBC Sessions double CD. When I was an angry teen, Pearl Jam was the be-all and end-all of music for me. Their appearance on SNL at the time was the coolest thing for me. They played 3 songs where most acts only get 2; they played a song or two from the new at the time Vitology album, an album that would have an interesting impact on my musical life a number of times; they did a killer version of Daughter; and Adam Sandler devoted a chunk of his popular Opera Man bit to them.

I recently heard a sweet tune from ~1940 where Charlie Christian plays with Count Basie and Lester Young in a small group setting. I didn't even know that ever happened. I didn't catch the name of the tune, but it was, as expected, great. I don't own any Charlie Christian yet but have been meaning to get a comp of some sort. Is that tune on his more popular comps, like Genius of the Electric Guitar, or is this some obscure recording?

It's a career collection, and does include the album those three did together. It does happen to be my favorite material on the box as of now.

Came across this one in the store. I think it's pretty new. I hadn't heard much of his music, at least not as a leader. He may be one of those over-looked greats, though. This is an interesting collection- not everything here is gold, but for 5 hrs of trio recordings it's impressively varied. Hope does these Monk bits and reminds of Ahmad Jamal in places. Frank Butler, on disc 3, gets a bit carried away with the drums at times, and the bass is way too low in the mix. The one downside of this comp is that it has pieces of some albums that might have been fun to hear in their entirety.

Rock 'n' roll is a youth music. Yes, that is extremely vague, but for whom were those Little Richard and Check Berry records made? For teenagers to dance around to. The real difference between experiencing rock and jazz (and we're talking about modern jazz, the stuff made while rock has been around, not the popular swing jazz that was supplanted by rock in youth culture) is that one is centered around the song, while the other is centered around the playing. That's why, say, people raised on rock and pop usually can't get into jazz- not only is there no singing, but they here these guys just playing and playing and, like, what's the point? That's why they call it "background music." And jazz fans often see rock as too simple and unrewarding because they're not playing anything interesting to them and it's repetitive. Square pegs and round holes, etc.

R.I.P. Omar I was confused by the body tag thing at the end as well. I'm taking it as a poetic visual moment: the sort-of-noble, brave warrior reduced to just another bag, susceptible to mislabeling. And the initial error of the label is just another case of bureaucratic incompetence.

I have ripped my entire CD collection to digital and sold the CDs, except for a few boxed sets or CDs that are autographed, etc. I use the FLAC format, which is lossless and therefore there is no sound degradation. Sound quality is important to me, hence the lossless files. I play it on my main home stereo system using a network music player called a Squeezebox. It is remarkably easy to use and sounds great (though I may get an external DAC to shore up the sound at some point). I have an external hard drive with all the music on it at home and another drive with a copy of all the music at work. This allows me access to my entire collection from both places and provides for backup incase of failure, theft, etc. The fact that they are in two different places makes them even more secure than CDs. The collection so far is a bit over 300 GBs. If/when the collection exceeds 500 GB, the capacity of the drives, I will get a RAID hard drive system, which is series of hard drives designed to back up information. I purchase CDs, rip them, than sell them to a used record store. I have no moral qualms about this because I am paying for my music. If keeping the digital files is technically illegal, I don't care, because no one suffers for it. Were I to keep my CDs, nothing would change for anyone except that the used record store wouldn't have my CDs. Since selling and buying CDs is legal and ethical, no problem. I also have a problem with people who just download music illegally and never buy it. But I don't have a problem with downloading illegally to sample a song or album and then buying it. I believe that practice leads to sales that would otherwise not happen. I've also known people who got into jazz that way. As for the notes, album covers and physical packaging- no, I can't say I really care.

Patriots vs Rams, 2001

No, this kind of comment is actually extremely rare. Most NFL coaches and players take blame, with the occassional bitch about ref calls.

Thank God, i live in Canada, could watch it on the regular sport network TSN. By the way, was not impressed by both defenses yesterday. Whatever happened to the times where teams with strong defenses ruled the NFL. The Ravens and Bucs won Super Bowls with dominant defenses and the Bears made it the Super Bowl with one, all in this decade.

Interesting, I've not heard of DAD. Just curious, can a DAD be played on a CD player? You have to have a CD player with DAD capabilities? [i assume there's no question on a DVD player.] No, a DAD disc is literally a DVD, ignore the new acronym. So like any other DVD it will work on all DVD players and no CD players. I personally don't bother with any of that stuff anymore and use lossless digital for everything. For one thing, most jazz titles that are given some new fancy format are re-mastered, and it's the re-mastering that effects the sound more than the format. I can hear a slightly improved clarity in the DAD simply because of the higher resolution, but for me personally it's not worth the cost and inconvenience of having any music outside of my digital collection, when the same masterings are easily available on CD.

The best sounding version of this album is one not mentioned in this thread- the DAD. DAD stands for Digital Audio Disc, but it's just a DVD with only audio on it. The greater memory on a DVD allows the musical data to be sampled at much higher bit rates than CDs. Very few were made: Blue Train, Somethin' Else, Roll Call and Cool Struttin' amongst them.

For this longtime hardcore Giants fan, last night was....fun.

I know why I do- it's because those songs cost valuable cash and take up valueable CD/shelf space, and so having them repeated is wasteful. We collectors all have our various OCD quirks- for some it's artist completion, for some it's by label, or maybe Japanese mini-LPs or whatever. For me, it's collection that's not small but compact, with minimised track repetition, and where every CD is eminently enjoyable to listen to. Comps, of various types and sizes, and sometimes when combined with albums, can be really helpful with that.

Compilations make up a significant portion of my music collection and listening. For jazz, how else can you get music from before the LP era? I don't like those large complete-recordings-of box sets because they're filled with outdated novelty numbers, alternate takes and boring vocals. I like to be able to pop a CD in, hit play, and not worry about making playlists or programming the CD player. I recently picked up a CD comp of Art Tatum's peak years. Wereas most jazz/Tatum fans would bristle at the notion of only owning one CD of his music, but that is enough for me, as I can only take so much of what he does. As for jazz singers, I realised I never listen to more than one or two CDs of even my favorite singers in a year, and so 2 CD comps of Billie, Ella, and Sarah suffice. However, for someone like Dex (to cite an example given earlier), I love his prime Blue Note albums so much that I can't just have some comp. So, as of now, my Dexter Gordon collection consists of: - the French label Classics CDs of his early work - Go!, A Swingin' Affair, and Our Man In Paris Blue Note CDs - The Panther, CD - Tower of Power on vinyl a nice mix of comps and albums that encapsulate his best work For rock and pop, there are few albums that hold my interest from beginning to end. However, those "few" still add up to quite a bit, but I'm close to having pretty much all the albums I want). Rock and pop are primarily singles-oriented. This particularly true for R&B and soul- Stevie Wonder's 70s albums, where both the individual songs are killer and whole albums are wonderful to listen to, are the exception. And so I enjoy the various artists comps- Atlantic R&B box set, the Motown Hitsville USA, Rhino's Nuggets sets, that sort of thing.

I make no apologies of being a former rocker who has become a jazz fan and prefers it over rock. I do see it as "superior." Ironically, though, this has given me a greater appreciation for some rock music. I got into jazz because I was seeking a higher quality of musicianship, and when rock tries it, it usually sounds sillly (prog?). So now I get my swing and fancy playing from jazz, and my aggressive rebellion fun stuff from rock. I used to hate punk and dismissed the rock 'n' roll originators of the 50s, but now I love it, because it's rock 'n' roll at its most natural- loud, amateur, and fun. So I have a handful of rock bands I really love (Pearl Jam, King's X, Marillion, Tool), a couple of CDs for nostalgia but that I also consider good musically (Alice in Chains, Soundgarden), and a bunch of comps (Rhino- various Nuggets, etc). I've also shifted more to R&B/soul for my pop music listening, also inspired by jazz. The syncopated shuffle tempos are simply more pleasing to me than rock's backbeat. Jazz is just the shit, anyway- I call it the "perfect" music because it has the coolest beat, it swings, it has improvisation as well as composition and some cool songs. It explores harmony almost as thoroughly as classical music in its own way, but it's also fun and catchy and great to dance to sometimes. I've also adapted a bit of a purist mentality, though know saying that doesn't make my hip in most circles and casts me in Stanley Crouch's shadow. But I can't help it, I know what I feel from music, and shit like white people coppin' on some f-ed up version of "the blues" or crapping around with synths, drum machines and cloying hippy chick vocals and calling it "jazz fusion" just comes off as some corny-ass jive crud, and I'd rather listen to the real thing.

Certainly understandable- these "Complete Everything Box Set" things are wearying and expensive, and they replace the fun of listening to music with dull scholarly tedium. I don't need to listen to Ray Draper's tuba solos to appreciate 'Trane. I don't need to hear ALL of the Red Garland sessions, just the good ones. I don't need to revisit the awkward pairing of 'Trane and Quinochette, or the mind-numbingly crowded 78-saxophones in one album thing. There's a lot of great material that 'Trane recorded for Prestige. And the good stuff is available cheaply on both vinyl and CD, especially for those of us who enjoy hearing it and seeing it in its original album order, regardless of how oddly they were put together.

I've seen different versions of The Eminent J.J. Johnson Vol 2 and Thelonious Monk Vol 1 & 2 (but only one version of JJ Vol 1, which I bought) with different cover art. Is there a different in content and/or mastering between them?

Jazztet set is taken. Somebody please take this damn Hancock cube off my hands (no, I don't work in marketing)