2005 Connoisseurs

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

Why that rat!! I'll fix him!! It's IRS audit time! B-)

Seriously, aren't there 6 tracks per lp? If the source of these burns worked a little magic and did some creative fading here & there, he did a decent job.

Introducing

4:43

5:26

6:05

5:50

10:40

8:28

40.32

Multidirections

5:21

6:01

6:41

9:51

4:57

5:04

37:15

Edited March 23, 2005 by Son-of-a-Weizen

[ghost of miles]

Great news about the Quebec 45s and the Ervin! I've wanted the Quebec in particular for many moons... I have the Don Cherry Mosaic, but I'm happy too for all the people who are excited about WHERE IS BROOKLYN?

[Brad]

Another great idea someday would be reissuing the Quebec-Hardee Mosaic.  Not that easy to come by in compact disc and a truly great Mosaic.  Only three cds.

This material is in print on a couple of labels out of the EU (where the copyright has run out). There isn't a whole lot of sales potential with them when these cheap copies are floating around. Sales would be tough. Who would pay $35-45 for a three CD set when you can get most of it for about $25 from Proper, Definitive, et al?

Kevin

PS. I E-mailed Michael Cuscuna about the "Consequence/High Frequency" two-fer idea.

PPS. A good friend of mine tells me that his two CDs of Kenny Cox material (complete) only clocks in at 80:10. An early fade and it should all fit. It's either that or cut a track. Any votes for the track to cut?

Kevin,

That's true. Too bad. Fortunately, I have it.

[sjarrell]

PS. I E-mailed Michael Cuscuna about the "Consequence/High Frequency" two-fer idea.

Thanks, Kevin!

[bertrand]

I did a search, but I can't find the thread anymore that announced the 2005 RVGs (Symphony For Improvisers etc.) Anyone?

Thanks,

Bertrand.

[Gary]

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php...ic=16624&hl=rvg

Here it is.

[bertrand]

Thanks!

So all three Don Cherry sessions will be in print simultaneously. That's quite an accomplishment. I'm amazed that it took so long, considering how fast the Mosaic box went.

Bertrand.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

The "Consequence/High Frequency" two-fer looks unlikely. Michael reply to this was, "I was thinking about that, but they are not a real match in terms of personnel or approach." In the past, when he's said this, it didn't happen. It was a nice thought though.

Of course, he's also changed his mind about these kinds of things too.

Kevin

[Rooster_Ties]

So what's the final audit say about the Kenny Cox timings??

(Or am I gonna hafta turn my house upside down, and try to find my burns of both of them, and answer the damn question myself??? )

Edit: But even if I do, that don't tell the story of what the stated timings are, as printed on the LP's themselves (if, in fact, the timings are printed on the label).

Edited March 20, 2005 by Rooster_Ties

[7/4]

Don Cherry - Where Is Brooklyn

YAY! :rsmile:

[Bill Fenohr]

Cocerning the Kenny Cox BN albums. I have burned both albums. Introducing comes in at 41:44 and Multidirection at 38:29 for a grand total of 80:13. When i record lp's i do it one track at a time and cue them up as tight as you would have on a commercial cd. I leave four seconds between tracks. So getting both albums on one cd would be close if you shorten the space between tracks. You would almost have to take it down to just two seconds between tracks.

[JSngry]

They could do a Club Mix thing and present both albums uninterrupted, with crossfades between cuts instead of gaps. Get the kids into Leon Henderson like never before, I'll bet.

Or not.

[jazzbo]

Thanks for the information Bill. Tried to find those and check myself, but you know me and my archive. . . they didn't jump out at me. I really doubt we'll see them on one but I could be wrong.

[Chuck Nessa]

Turd in the punchbowl time.

The Cox dates should be shunted/offered to Water. They are not "first rate" and would not generate any profit, thus limiting "interesting" reissues in the future.

[Rooster_Ties]

Turd in the punchbowl time.

The Cox dates should be shunted/offered to Water. They are not "first rate" and would not generate any profit, thus limiting "interesting" reissues in the future.

I'm with Chuck, better to release 'em through Water.

In fact, I think I'd almost rather have two, separate Kenny Cox issues from Water (2 CD's), rather than a combined "two-LP's on one CD" issue from Blue Note. (Though that's a tough call.)

(And I'm pretty sure Water would do them separate, since they don't seem to be interested in the "bonus track" route. For example, both the Eddie Gales could have fit on one CD (if I remember right), but Water did them separately.)

The Cox dates seem much more worth of Water, than being released as part of the Conn series. They are a bit on the 2nd rate side, but I'm sure many of us here would buy 'em, myself included.

In any case, I sure as hell hope BN doesn't release just one of the Cox date as a Conn, cuz then we'd NEVER get the other one -- cuz the first one wouldn't sell for shit. Let Water have 'em.

[JSngry]

As "BLUE NOTE JAZZ", the Cox dates are indeed 2nd-tier. As documents of a specific musical time and place, though, they are indeed quite nice, so yeah, give'em to Water, buy'em when they come out, and enjoy some perfectly fine music brought to you through the courtesy of love.

[jazzbo]

Hell I like them better than some Freddie Hubbard dates or a few other Blue Notes myself. I'll buy them however they come out. (I might prefer them coming from Water actually because . . .well I think lately they're doing better jobs than the Connoisseur series by a sizeable margin.

[JSngry]

Hell I like them better than some Freddie Hubbard dates or a few other Blue Notes myself.

That is a point with which I would be hard-pressed to disagree!

[Rooster_Ties]

A little 2nd rate, sure, but I think they're pretty damn interesting -- especially as examples of what must be one of the first overt reactions to what Miles 2nd Quintet was doing circa 1967. They're important, historically, and they're not at all half bad.

I'd buy both of them for sure, and if they came out on Water -- they'd stand a better chance of both coming out. And they wouldn't take up slots in the stream of Conns, that could otherwise be filled with other material.

[Chuck Nessa]

A little 2nd rate, sure,............and they're not at all half bad.

Ringing endorsement from Mr Ties.

[Rooster_Ties]

Maybe I should have said "A little 2nd rate...".

Basically I was trying to agree with Sangry's assessment -- that they're not showstoppers, but they are still valuable, and that I like 'em.

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

Why are they considered to be 2nd rate?

[Rooster_Ties]

I don't find them to be as successful as the original, "Miles circa 1967" material -- which they are plainly trying to emulate. The soloists aren't as nuanced (IMHO), and they don't have as much punch for me as the Miles material (EDIT: or highly developed group interaction).

BUT, I think they are an eminently 'competent' attempt at the same kind of material, both in terms of performance, and composition.

Edited March 21, 2005 by Rooster_Ties

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

"Emulate"..."highly developed group interaction". Sounds like what the Wallace Roney Sextet tried to do at the show tonite .....the original Miles tutored clone isn't he? When I see Geri Allen banging away on the fender rhodes and the others trying to interact with the woman spinning a silly turntable for a couple of tunes from the 'Prototype' Lp, I think 2nd rate. I'll take the Cox stuff any day. B-)

Edited March 21, 2005 by Son-of-a-Weizen

[Rooster_Ties]

Sangry's choice of words ("2nd-tier"), might have been better phrasing than mine. I guess people here have more negative connotations associated with the term "2nd rate" than I do.

I always thought 2nd-rate wasn't as good as 1st-rate, but 2nd-rate wasn't always "bad" either -- just not as good (or, in this case, not as great!!).

(In other words, this whole thing may just be a matter of semantics.)

Then again, if I gave everything letter grades, like this...

• Miles circa 1967 = A+
  
  Kenny Cox circa 1968-69 = B/B+
  

I'd probably get shit about that too.

Edited March 21, 2005 by Rooster_Ties