Great series, Chris, but man...all these cool tunes & no
Bowie!?!

Interesting...another good point!

what an impressive series.

I'd find some of these mixes unlistenable, as the juxtapositions are so jarring. In the right context, I'd likely enjoy a Michael Jackson or a Stockhausen if nestled beside sympathetic peers, but I don't think I'd be able to make the auditory leaps on this one, regardless of the fine music herein. The rationale behind the order of things is curious to me. Does this follow the mag's order, or is it your own? If the latter, I'd be interested to know why you didn't group like-artists/like-genres. But then again I'm probably in the minority of those who like my mixes to have some kind of coherency from track to track.

Well!

Since, you asked...The order is my own.

Reasoning: First, to put like-artists/like-genres togethers would be impossible as the number of certain genres WAY outnumber others. Second, the magazine's list is Chronological and would be FAR more "jarring", as you put it. Lastly, to put together a mix using a magazine as a recourse and not put these mixes together in a creative fashion would be absolutely BORING!

I've listened to this mix three times, today...(as well as previous mixes numerous times, previously). Can't say there's a "jarring" moment to be found. Everyone's cup o' tea? Certainly not...but definately not jarring. And, quite listenable...and, dare I say...enjoyable.

For me, the back beat and repetitive refrain at the end of Billy Jean blends quite nicely with skittershot electronica/modern composition of Kontakte. But, hey, that's just me.

I guess it's just a matter of taste...the difference between my: hope to blend disparate genres, while maintaing a high level of quality and someone else's: making mixes solely focused on one genre over and over and over and over and over...

It's not my intention to diss your opinion...I guess I just don't agree.

And, and it's always my intention to make cohesive and interesting juxtapositions on my mixes. So, your comment is taken as an insult. But, thanks for playing!

musicgnome, all I've got to say is, "you f'ing rule, man!" Not "unlistenable" in the least. Freedom is Freeform!

Ditto Shawn! I love mixes that find a common vibe among disparate genres, as musicgnome's always do. Great series.

Wow, you put out the request for comments -- knowing full well you're going to invite controversy with the replies -- and then slam me for having some, as if I'd completely undermined your exercise?! I did say, "I'd find," absolving YOU of any responsibility for MY reaction. And, for the record, my mixes are not ALL jazz. I happen to think the torch I carry here for jazz to be an important one (relative to anything REALLY important, of course), even if it is a small, minority torch. And it seems very clear your objective in pulling that one out IS to diss me. So, no worries, I shan't be playing this game again. It is clear, after a few instances of this here, that if you question a mix, being pilloried with pouts, harumphs and ire is a common reaction. Tis a shame, as music (and by extension, musical appreciation) has never evolved as the result of laudatory, self-serving popularity contests. I like your mixes Chris, and I think you have a depth of musical knowledge far in excess of mine. But I think your reaction not at all in keeping with the spirit into which you entered this series. If you took offence with what I said, I am sorry. My intent was NOT to offend you.

Ok, it has to be asked. So after all this research, what are your top ten records of all time? Doesn't have to be from the list. (Excellent and much respected set of mixes by the way.)

Okay...then for educational purposes, statements such as "I'm probably in the minority of those who like my mixes to have some kind of coherency from track to track." should be seen as an insulting comment!(and, not only towards me.)

But more importantly, it completely detracts from the exercise...My request was to discuss the list...to which you offered: Nada. Well, other than comment on ommisions of two artists who were actually on the list.

Rather, you focused on the juxtopositions. And, made the mixing style your focus.

With your depth of knowledge in the jazz field, with your willingness to carry the torch and shine the light as the self nominated jazz aficianado for us all...why not comment on some omissions or changes you would have made to the list? In your opinion, are the "records" the magazine site worthy of such distinction? What artists should be noted here? Whom do you feel would be on your list, regardless of this magazine or anyone else's opinion. I'd be far more interested in those comments. And, the board would have/would still benefit from your input.

BTW, I welcome criticism. Popularity means zilch to me...rather, education, sharing of ideas, sharing of tunes definately take the forefront. But, in my opinion, comments like...I'd put this artist next to this one...add nothing.

Blasikin,

Good question and thanks for asking.

Let me offer the disclaimer: my classical music knowledge is comparable to that of an end table. Hence, any selection I would make would be best committed to flash paper.

But, to answer:

Louis Armstrong - Hot Five And Hot Seven
Charley Patton - Founder Of The Delta Blues
Charlie Parker - The Savoy Sessions
Chuck Berry - Sweet Little Sixteen (to utilize the list's selection)
Ornette Coleman - Shape of Jazz to Come
The Kingsmen - Louie Louie
The Beatles - Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
Ramones - S/T
Brian Eno - Music for Airports.

Honorable mention: Black Sabbath - S/T
Gershwin - pick one.
And, of course Ellington.

Great series, I agree with Shawn and Orchid as well.

Thanks for the reply. Looks like a very agreeable list. Classical music had the previous few centuries, so I think it's ok if it doesn't make last century's top ten. Then again, I'm also of the end table variety on the subject. (:

Commendable effort Chris. "Most important"/"best" are moving targets for me so I'll leave that debate to others, 'cept to say no Sonic Youth or "Bitches Brew?" Man that VU -> Michael Jackson -> Stockhausen sandwich is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

I'm in awe!

Another great submission. While I don't know everything here well enough to comment on your juxtapositions, I *can* say that based upon other mixes that I've seen of yours where I *did* know just about everything on them, you've got a real ear for that sort of thing. And I'm with you, Shawn & Orchid in terms of my approach to mixed-genre mixes.

I agree with all previous agreers, agreed.

Very ambitious series, my friend! You've earned a gold star. I like both smooth mixes and mixes with jarring transitions. Call me crazy.

Having listened to some of your previous mixes, Chris, I really appreciate your ability (like Orchid says) to find common factors in songs which you wouldn't normally associate with one another. It's one of my favourite exercises and you do it extremely well, and I completely agree with your comments about the beauty of mixed-genre mixes! So I'm sure that this is no exception and I think it looks fantastic - appreciate the Stockhausen and Evans a lot.

excellent look to this

Much appreciated.

I hope this doesn't cause any more controversey...well, actually I do. :) Just not of the previous type.

Editorial Note: I have a sixth installment still to come and I don't believe I will truly finish this list (some items are just not "getable")

Also, it really isn't my list...as Wire Magazine is the true instigator.

My hope is to compile others AoTMers thoughts and create an appendix mix (Noted: Honrable Mentions)...so far, I have Sonic Youth, Miles Davis' Bitches Brew, Bowie, (some personal choices, etc.)

Please continue to provide your insights (about the list.)