September 30, 2004

• Oh God, that is too true about easy listening/musical corruption in general. I hope Brubeck's estate still gets the royalties for the missing quarter notes.
• Tito Puente does an awesome version of Take 5 in 4/4 (but triplets on the percussion make it hard to tell, as the rhythms overlap). Just because something is done out of the original time signature of the piece doesn't make it crap.
• In this case, LoopyG, I am willing to accept that it does. I mean, the piece is named for the time signature. I can just see some fat-cat Clear Channel asshole snapping his fingers and saying, "Groovy, man, but you can't dance to it..." Horror-show Monday MP3 FFP: "jazz lite" and "elevator music" versions of your favourite songs. Hmm...
• Nah, I'm still for it. Changing the time signatures (although changing TO common time is odd) is a common method used in jazz. Hell, I've heard recordings of Ornette Coleman playing Charlie Parker songs transferred from 4/4 to 7/8, so 5/4 to 4/4 doesn't make a song automatically classified as bad. I don't give that as opinion, but as scientifically and mathematically proven fact by the biggest brains that the world has to offer.
• Genius makes its own rules. Hacks churning out background music at three dollars per foot shouldn't necessarily arrogate this privilege to themselves.
• Let's face it, Tito Puente could have played knick-knack-paddywack scored for garbage cans and a live cat -- it would have sounded freaking awesome. RIP, Tito.
• this post would be about a million times cooler if we could hear the song
• geobabe1 is pretty sexy, huh?
• geobabe1 is pretty sexy, huh? Allegedly.
• thanks driving you have a way with words and I am laughing out loud right now at 9am....thank you!