Not sure where to post this

[mattes]

Abolish the star system!

[J.A.W.]

Can I suggest you guys' don't overdo it? A lot of comments on the same day will look co-ordinated. Well, it is co-ordinated, and amazon customers may dislike that.

And Amazon may get suspicious and delete the follow-up reviews/comments. They've done that before.

[Stefan Wood]

That's not the point. Folks make choices based on the stars.

I can take the stuff personally.

Of course you can, but dammit, criticism is part of the game here. One guy won't spoil the whole thing. And yes, the Amazon rating system sucks.

[Big Beat Steve]

May I throw a comment into the ring from another angle?

I haven't heard the record so can't and won't comment on whether there is anything to that 2-star "rating" in its entirety - BUT:

What struck me in that criticism is how the reviewer complained about the bass being too prominent. Sorry to state this but I have had similar feelings about several "latter-day" (i.e. 70s) recordings by 50s jazz greats that I have purchased through the years, e.g. Tal Farlow, Al Haig, some Basie Pablo session. In each and every case the very prominently featured, oddly resonating amplified "plunkety-plunk, thumpety-thump" lines of the droning, throbbing, plunking bass (electric or overly amplified doghouse?) really marred the otherwise fine recordings for me. Just overdone and too much up front in the mix. Sign of the times, question of what was en vogue ...? Couldn't it JUST be that "too much presence of the bass" was at the core of the gripe of the reviewer here from HIS (subjective) point of view too? A highly subjective matter of taste for sure but maybe something that just MIGHT warrant mentioning? (Though I agree this would not warrant downgrading to 2-point)

So do I like Ray Brown's unobtrusive yet felt bass presence? Yes.

So do I understand Jimmy Giuffre even better when he - in response to a question of the "Where is the beat/rhythm?" sort - replied "It is understood"? Definitely yes!

Just my 2c

Edited May 9, 2011 by Big Beat Steve

[Quasimado]

I don't know what that guy was on about in relation to Warne's playing. It's a very fine recording, an excellent summation of his Rediscovery in the 70's, and it's right that it should be appreciated as such. It's also worth reiterating that the hard core Marsh/ Tristano people feel that the 50's - early 60's is where the genius really shines.

Q

[Hardbopjazz]

What's the link to the review? I don't see it on Amazon.

[alankin]

I also gave a nudge to the "helpful" reviews...

[John Tapscott]

I also gave a nudge to the "helpful" reviews...

Ditto. The average is now up to 4.5 stars. FWIW, I have loved this album since I bought it (at a guess) some 34 years ago. I still have that LP along with the CD. And along with Warne, the rhythm section is outstanding IMO. Swings like crazy.

Edited May 9, 2011 by John Tapscott

[king ubu]

I've never, ever bothered to check out these reviews... I try to arrive at my own opinion... anyway, this great album certainly merits a more than decent rating!

[J.A.W.]

I will probably get flamed for this and I do disagree with the negative review, but I think a negative opinion as expressed on Amazon should be respected, even if it provokes outrage and anger here and might hurt sales. Trying to suppress it by snowing it under in a more or less concerted action is not the way to go in my opinion as a member here.

[John Tapscott]

I will probably get flamed for this and I do disagree with the negative review, but I think a negative opinion as expressed on Amazon should be respected, even if it provokes outrage and anger here and might hurt sales. Trying to suppress it by snowing it under in a more or less concerted action is not the way to go in my opinion as a member here.

I don't think anyone is trying to supress the negative review (that would require somehow removing it altogether). But one negative review can skew the rating. So we're just trying to provide a more realistic view and a rating more in line with the historical reception of this album. I would say that a 4.5 rating represents the broad consensus of people over the years have heard this album and written about it. Justice is now done IMO. (I seem to vaguely recall that Downbeat gave it a 5 star review).

[David Ayers]

I agree with Hans - it is at the very least bad form and could backfire.

[jazzbo]

Your opinion is duly noted.

[Hot Ptah]

Chuck's first post reminded me to post my true opinion of the album. I don't feel any moral qualms over that.

Now if someone contacted me and said that I should get involved in an internet campaign to improve the online status of some new teen pop star I have never heard, and I did it just to rig some result, with no knowledge of the singer or the music, that would be questionable to me.

To me, this is an important distinction.

[JSngry]

I agree with Hans - it is at the very least bad form and could backfire.

Forget it, Jake. It's the internet.

[Big Beat Steve]

FWIW, and while I do not agree with Hans in essence, I'd like to remind all of you (who chimned in to "push up things") about this for comparison:

What does a NON-100% positive rating of eBay sellers say? Negative feedback where a reason for the poor rating is given will always stand out like a sore thumb and will attract more attention than SEVERAL positive reviews. Especially since many positive feedback replies are really run of the mill stuff where people enthusiastically drool about the fact that they got their item at all. No doubt I am not the only one who pays particular attention to whatever negative has been said in places like that. And the same IMHO essentially holds true for ratings on sites such as Amazon (if one looks there AT ALL, that is...). So I can only hope that what ALL of those said who chimed in on the very same day today (what coincidence...) will come across as a really detailed and argumentatively sound evaluation to everybody else out there. This IMHO would be the ONLY way of passably offsetting that negative review. But after having had an even more detailed look at this review section I must say that if I were one of those keenly interested in buying the record but intent on reading those reviews I'd find it EXCEEDINGLY hard NOT to notice the coincidence both of the dates immediately following the 2-star review and of the high "helpful" ratings of all those "subsequent" ratings. Not something THAT common in these Amazon reviews overall, especially since the SOLE previous review is about 5 or 6 years old ...

You all would have been really, REALLY well advised to spread out your positive reviews over 1 to 2 weeks as the very minimum!

So I have to agree with David Ayers in that this MIGHT backfire if somebody feels it reeks of a concerted action.

Otherwise, I'm all with King Ubu. Many, many platter reviews on Amazon are strictly for the birds anyway. What good would it do to me to read (as it happened the other day) a glowing review about a 4-CD box set compilation that has clearly been written by a total beginner who enthuses about the most elementary stuff that is there but fails to note the finer points of why that compilation would be of interest even to seasoned collectors? And the same goes for negative reviews by those who feel that certain tracks are inappropriate on that set - but only so because they have no idea of what that segment of music actually encompasses. Best left to the "Skip" button, most of that ...

Edited May 9, 2011 by Big Beat Steve

[Rooster_Ties]

Several well-written 4-star ratings wouldn't hurt either.

[Hot Ptah]

It strikes me that we may be overthinking this a little. Chuck Nessa reissues an album, bravely taking a risk with not unlimited personal resources, and then it gets two customer ratings on Amazon, one of which is very low and seems to be written by a rather ill informed person. That one low rating may kill the chances of it getting any Amazon sales, which seems unfair, and the real world impact on Mr. Nessa would be significant.

So a few of us posted our honestly felt, high ratings, so that the consumer quickly and casually browsing the jazz section of Amazon, or the Warne Marsh listings in particular, might give this album a chance. Such a person is very unlikely to get caught up in many details other than the overall star rating.

What more is there to think about? When I posted my five star review, I knew that I wasn't solving a mystery of quantum physics or striking a great blow for social justice. I wanted to help Chuck, and I am glad if I did.

[B. Clugston]

Keep posting the positive reviews--no one is going to pay too much attention to the dates.

The two-star reviewer is nuts and probably listened to a rip of someone's old scratchy vinyl. This is a great reissue in so many ways--excellent remaster, interesting bonus tracks, interesting liner notes.

[Big Beat Steve]

The two-star reviewer is nuts and probably listened to a rip of someone's old scratchy vinyl.

You do realize that this sort of commentary discredits the entire - basically laudable - efforts of pushing up the review rating?

Calling somebody nuts just because you disagree?

You do realize a lot of these listening impressions are a matter of PERSONAL TASTE (which is why "ill-informed" misses the point just as much) and don't deserve to be seen as ANYTHING but that? Even by those who read the reviews?

And why would anybody go to the pains of posting a review on Amazon for something he didn't even buy there?

[Dave James]

I'm in the Big Beat Steve corner on this one. Negative reviews, for whatever reason, hold more weight than do positive ones. This was borne out by something called the TARP Study that was conducted by the University of Georgia in the 1990's. In that study, it was found that someone having a poor customer interaction with a service provider, retail or otherwise, was seven times more likely to tell someone of their poor experience than if they had had a satisfactory one. Kind of the same thing with Amazon evaluations. I try not to give too much credence to one and two star reviews, but I do read 'em and I find myself asking, " uh, oh, what if they're right?" I don't ask myself the same question if the review is positive. Human nature I guess.

[Big Beat Steve]

I'm in the Big Beat Steve corner on this one. Negative reviews, for whatever reason, hold more weight than do positive ones. This was borne out by something called the TARP Study that was conducted by the University of Georgia in the 1990's. In that study, it was found that someone having a poor customer interaction with a service provider, retail or otherwise, was seven times more likely to tell someone of their poor experience than if they had had a satisfactory one. Kind of the same thing with Amazon evaluations. I try not to give too much credence to one and two star reviews, but I do read 'em and I find myself asking, " uh, oh, what if they're right?" I don't ask myself the same question if the review is positive. Human nature I guess.

(Referring to the bold print in your statement:)

Indeed, though not new. The after-sales service bulletin stationery of my favorite classic car marque, for example, way back in the 50s read: "A satisfied customer brings 4 more. A dissatisfied customer takes away 10 more."

Or like a proverb over here says: "Positive things require proof. Negative things are believed sight unseen." Human nature, I guess too.

Which would seem to underline all the more the necessity to counterbalance this by truly felt positive reviews. Agreed 100% - but for the sake of those affected and to avoid it backfiring, PLEASE do it in a SENSIBLE manner. Going overboard in a rush all on the same day, artificially exploding "helpful" markings in a - to outsiders looking on - most unlikely way, etc., is NOT sensible in my book.

BTW, and FWIW, where have those honestly felt "full-mark" reviews been all those years BEFORE that dissatisfied review came up? They could have helped all along after all.

BTW, if I read those amazon reviews at all, I tend to read those 1 and 2-star reviews atentively too. Mostly to get another impression of the wide variety of human nature, and so far these reviews have hardly ever prevented me from buying any item I had REALLY set my sights on. After all one man's meat is another man's poison.

Edited May 9, 2011 by Big Beat Steve

[ejp626]

I'm in the Big Beat Steve corner on this one. Negative reviews, for whatever reason, hold more weight than do positive ones. This was borne out by something called the TARP Study that was conducted by the University of Georgia in the 1990's. In that study, it was found that someone having a poor customer interaction with a service provider, retail or otherwise, was seven times more likely to tell someone of their poor experience than if they had had a satisfactory one. Kind of the same thing with Amazon evaluations. I try not to give too much credence to one and two star reviews, but I do read 'em and I find myself asking, " uh, oh, what if they're right?" I don't ask myself the same question if the review is positive. Human nature I guess.

While this is probably true for customer service interactions, I wonder about in the art/music/theatre world where you end up with people seemingly only speaking up for amazing arts and "not saying anything" if they cannot make a nice review. I am often astounded by the sheer number of 4 and 5 star reviews for fairly average CDs and books and I do quickly discount them (and do trust the negative reviews a bit more). (On the other hand, life is a bit short to sit around and give 85% of everything on Amazon a 3-star review. I usually only bother if it is something I hate or really love.) Same thing with the people chiming in about the standing ovations of a play on opening night (when the place is packed with friends and family).

I tend to really only focus on the details in the reviews, information about the special features and how the video mastering looks and something even what is included in box sets (when Amazon has really fallen down on the details). This of course is largely undercut by Amazon's stupid insistence on bundling reviews across different editions (this is one thing I would change right away if I were emperor of Amazon).

[Rooster_Ties]

I only pay attention to 1 and 2 star reviews on things like vacuum cleaner, and lawn mowers.

When it comes to something like recordings, or movies and the like -- I find it's best to ignore negative reviews, and see if the content of the positive reviews can win me over. Negative reviews of music, especially, seem more often to come from people with axes to grind.

Edited May 9, 2011 by Rooster_Ties

[ejp626]

I only pay attention to 1 and 2 star reviews on things like vacuum cleaner, and lawn mowers.

When it comes to something like recordings, or movies and the like -- I find it's best to ignore negative reviews, and see if the content of the positive reviews can win me over. Negative reviews of music, especially, seem more often to come from people with axes to grind.

Well, I can see that, but I would say that the overwhelming number of 4 and 5 star reviews just strike me as puffery or from people who just luv all music and can't make distinctions. (Or as part of a concerted effort to inflate the CD's ratings...)