<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Ethan Hein's blog - Latest Comments</title><link xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="http://api.friendfeed.com/2008/03#sup" href="http://disqus.com/sup/all.sup#forumcomments-0258962f" type="application/json"/><link>http://ethanheinsblog.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://ethanheinsblog.disqus.com/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:00:54 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Round Midnight</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/round-midnight/#comment-440861109</link><description>Glad you found it helpful. Have no fear! Listen to all the versions, absorb them and forget them. Sing it like yourself, and like you mean it, and I'm sure you'll sound swell.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Carmen McRae's Monk album is a must-listen. It's wonderful to hear someone singing not-so-well-known tunes like "Ask Me Now" and "Ugly Beauty," especially when it's Carmen.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ethanhein</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:00:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Round Midnight</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/round-midnight/#comment-440787520</link><description>Thank you for posting this, Ethan. I'm learning this tune for a jazz vocal workshop, and though I'm now even more scared of trying to tackle this, it's great to have the history of the song, along with several great performances of it available in one place. Ella has been my favorite singer for a long time, and I'm just now discovering Carmen McRae. I have a lot of work ahead of me! Thanks again!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">MaryB</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:46:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Hawaii, part one</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2010/hawaii-part-one/#comment-437605302</link><description>Just calling it like I see it.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ethanhein</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 08:48:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Hawaii, part one</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2010/hawaii-part-one/#comment-437339249</link><description>I hit this blog searching for images of saffron finches. When I read "the most tourist-packed, overdeveloped strip of the Kona coast," I nearly snorted my Kona microbrew.  You make it sound like Virginia Beach. Even in the context of Hawaii, the Kona coast is hardly overdeveloped.   Your descriptions of the market and hippies are likewise hyperbolic and tinged with a mixture of liberal guilt, cultural self-consciousness and racial insecurity I've found to be peculiarly endemic to a certain variety of East Coast cubicle-dweller.  Locals here have an expression to describe you:  "fresh off the boat".</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">yippeekayay</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 01:09:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Lick</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/the-lick/#comment-437001026</link><description>Will look into it, thanks for the tip.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ethanhein</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:03:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Lick</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/the-lick/#comment-437000668</link><description>You know, I don't, and I would love to. If anyone reading this has suggestions, please respond.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ethanhein</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:03:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Lick</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/the-lick/#comment-436995917</link><description>Another interesting one to add to The Lick and the Amen Break is the 'In Nomine' - a tune by John Taverner that spawned a whole genre in 16th century England.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tim Johnson</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:53:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Lick</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/the-lick/#comment-436993639</link><description>Do you know of any studies of  the classical counterpart to the lick?  Those conventions (ie, cliches)  that abound, defining baroque, classical, romantic, etc.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Petter Naess</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:48:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Gimme Shelter</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2010/gimme-shelter/#comment-434130451</link><description>gimme shelter is in open E, not open G</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Scottydangs</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:59:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Jay-Z and Alan Lomax</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/jay-z-and-alan-lomax/#comment-428247264</link><description>The book is written by a professor of communication and a professor of law and economics (whether he is a practicing entertainment lawyer is not clear). Why this book even mentions Alan Lomax is a mystery since his copyrights date from the 1950s and both laws and practices have changed considerably since them. The writers seem to be just trading on Lomax's name, since what they do to have  to say about him is completely speculative ("we assume" and so forth). Apparently they never bothered to interview anyone connected to him. Nor, in a book dedicated to sampling, do they even bother to mention the most famous and successful sampling of Lomax's recordings by Moby!!!! Due diligence anyone??&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Nevertheless, chapter 3 mentions (in passing) that  "musical copyright" is distinct from  other kinds of copyright. It also acknowledges that all kinds of people are put down contractually as "authors" besides those who actually wrote or performed the songs. The book also mentions that copyrights can be bought and sold and most often it is large corporations (music publishers) who end up getting all of the money, while the artists, band members and arrangers see very little. Needless to say, to find out about a particular copyright you would have to look at the specific contract for each song.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">John Culpepper</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 21:59:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Jay-Z and Alan Lomax</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/jay-z-and-alan-lomax/#comment-428115247</link><description>Pete Seeger did not copyright Wimoweh, this was done by his publisher, who assigned Seeger a share of  "author's" rights. When Pete found out there was a known author, Solomon Linda, he immediately directed his publisher (Folkways/AKA Harry Richmond, Harold Leventhal, and Pete Cameron) to send his share of the (artists' half) of the royalties to Linda. However, the publishers did not bother to do this and Seeger had no way of checking up on them. In fact although Seeger "renounced" his royalties, he continued to receive them, Rian Malan discovered. Pete was not very business like and was chagrined. No doubt he had let other people handle his finances. See the wikipedia article for this. Richmond continued to take a share of authors' royalties (using a pseudonym) for the Tokens hit version (a rearrangement), which was copyrighted by Abilene music.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">John Culpepper</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:55:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Jay-Z and Alan Lomax</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/jay-z-and-alan-lomax/#comment-428109846</link><description>You should familiarize yourself with entertainment law before spouting off.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">John Culpepper</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:46:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Choice Is Yours</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2010/the-choice-is-yours/#comment-420807554</link><description>Awesome article. Most of those video links are broken, however you can still find most of those songs on youtube at other url's.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ian</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:58:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: It don&amp;#8217;t mean a thing if it ain&amp;#8217;t got that swing</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/swing/#comment-417908035</link><description>Wonderful read!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I'm just starting to appreciate jazz and it was hard for me to put the pieces together and your post really put things into perspective.&lt;br&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Anonymous</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 01:28:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Jay-Z and Alan Lomax</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/jay-z-and-alan-lomax/#comment-415658474</link><description>This is not correct. There is widespread public ignorance of the fact that the rules for music publishing copyright are not the same at all as those for print publishing, but are sui generis, and date back to the sheet music era. Under music publishing laws both publisher and author receive royalty income, split 50 / 50. These percentages can be and frequently are further subdivided in various ways among producers and arrangers. (Today recording artists normally form their own publishing companies to avoid having to give half their royalty income away.) After World War 2, when the sheet music publishers realized that they were losing income to the recording industry, they figured out they could make up the loss through publishing copyright income; and they began to raid the field of traditional music and copyright everything they could get their hands on, usually using pseudonyms and spinoff companies. They raided the entire Lomax catalog, claiming that the songs in the Lomax books, which had been edited and arranged by the Lomaxes, were public domain. The fact that the publishers agreed to a settlement demonstrate their awareness of the weakness in their case. However, Lomax would have preferred to have been offered a share from the publisher's half rather than the artists' half of the publishing right, as was not infrequently done. Lomax was advised by his lawyers, however, that the pockets of the music publishers were too deep for him to fight against. It may be argued that the attacks on the Lomaxes that persisted over the years were calculated to distract the public from the publisher's role and to make him a scapegoat. Redbaiting may have also played a convenient role in this.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">John Culpepper</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:08:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How does jazz work?</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/how-does-jazz-work/#comment-414233640</link><description>That's it. That's the most you can get from music writing - fun. Thanks!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Cheers</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 06:27:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How does jazz work?</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/how-does-jazz-work/#comment-413902072</link><description>That explanation is primo college Jazz 101 material. Very, very good. Thanks.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Esedensky</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:16:15 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How does jazz work?</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/how-does-jazz-work/#comment-412590060</link><description>Staying tuned - and will checkout those books.&lt;br&gt;Thanks!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tristan Mills</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:38:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How does jazz work?</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/how-does-jazz-work/#comment-408648512</link><description>This post got such a positive response that I'm going to write a series of them as time permits -- next up will probably be Thelonious Monk's "Round Midnight," so stay tuned. If you're interested in Coltrane, I recommend the book John Coltrane: His Life And Music by Lewis Porter. It's a well-written biography interspersed with a lot of excellent close musical analysis, probably the best single book about a jazz musician that I've read. To understand the improvisational process more generally, check out Beethoven's Anvil by William Benzon, which combines music and neuroscience.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ethanhein</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 09:50:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How does jazz work?</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/how-does-jazz-work/#comment-408542614</link><description>Excellent article. I love jazz, but miss a lot of this. Understanding it just adds to my enjoyment.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;More analyses of tracks would be great - are there any sources for them?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tristan Mills</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 06:10:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How does jazz work?</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/how-does-jazz-work/#comment-407892516</link><description>Thanks man!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ethanhein</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:11:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How does jazz work?</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2012/how-does-jazz-work/#comment-407875837</link><description>Brilliant stuff Ethan. Nice one.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">the droid</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 10:51:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What is the best song by a solo Beatle?</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2011/what-is-the-best-song-by-a-solo-beatle/#comment-400794730</link><description>"Imagine" is an awful song, insipid,  with a rolling, stupefying non-melody that will eat a corner of your brain if you are subjected, as I am, to it as endless loops to begin every atheist podcast that I subscribe to. &lt;br&gt;That said, I fully enjoyed your exposition on Manu Dibango's "Soul Makossa" as referenced on the Sound of Plaid.&lt;br&gt;Best solo ex-Beatle work? Nothing by John Lennon or George Harrison, hackwork all across the board,  and McCartney is as stale as there could be - must be Ringo's "It Don't Come Easy."</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">notabilia</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:37:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Michael Jackson sample map goes viral</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2009/the-michael-jackson-sample-map-goes-viral/#comment-400597153</link><description>"Do It Again/Billie Jean" by Club House. This song came out shortly after the "Thriller" album was released, in 1983. I'm thinking it was possibly the first song that sampled a cut from "Thriller." I heard it one summer while visiting my dad in Maryland on a Washington, DC radio station. Keep in mind there was no widespread Internet back then, so it was several years before I was able to find it...and I searched hard! It interpolates "Do It Again" by Steely Dan and "Billie Jean" by MJ. It is a HOT cut. Here's the link from YouTube: &lt;a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lLkL34E-xc" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Paul B. Bellamy</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 14:35:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How to get web traffic from Google</title><link>http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2010/how-to-get-web-traffic-from-google/#comment-399674927</link><description>What percentage of web traffic is generated by Yahoo versus Google?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">SEO Sheffield</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 12:00:20 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
