ThePortForum.com

djewesbury wrote:Kit Downes?

drum roll........no!

PopulusTremula wrote:To allow Daniel his turn, to continue the Swedish theme and pretending he's still alive; Jan Johansson esp. his jazzification of Russian folk music.

Nope.

djewesbury wrote:Oh I have a guess!!! Quick someone guess!!!

EDIT: Julian just PMed to say Esbjorn Svensson.. Silly Julian, he died a few years ago. Saw the Esbjorn Svensson Trio in the Elmwood Hall in Belfast not long before he died, one of the best gigs I was ever at..

So - is it Kit Downes?

not your turn

djewesbury wrote:The great Stan Tracey? Seen him at the Bull's Head in Barnes many times..

No. My guy is still breathing.

My fav is primarily a piano guy.

jdaw1 wrote:Lou Donaldson?

No

djewesbury wrote:Stanley Turrentine?

No

PopulusTremula wrote:Bleeding Gums Murphy?

No

No and no. Both slightly earlier than my fav.

Not the Duke.

jdaw1 wrote:John Surman?

Nope. I suppose I'd better start thinking of some hints.

djewesbury wrote:Tubby Hayes?

No

And to continue the Jazz theme, who is my favourite Jazz musician?

djewesbury wrote:

flash_uk wrote:Fats Waller

Unkind.

Merely my supposition as to what Julian would find amusing, not my view

Fats Waller

John Coltrane

No they don't.

AHB wrote:Is it this issue of Decanter which has the back page article on Nacional 1931?

Yes, the article titled "Quinta de Noval", and referring to Quinta da Noval within the article.

Yes it is!

OK, could someone please summarise the current thinking then on decades, decades where the first year ends in a 0, decades where the last year ends in a 0, millennia, C20, C21, the 60s.

I'd be up for that. 15th or 16th look OK right now.

djewesbury wrote:

RAYC wrote:if we want to be really pedantic

If? IF? Because we're not already, is that what you mean??

No it isn't.

Is anyone familiar with the argument clinic?

A proper decade is a series of 10 consecutive years in which the first year ends in a '1' and the last year ends in a '0'. A simple decade is any series of 10 consecutive years. If using proper decades, BBR is correct. I think you've only just invented that definition of a "proper" decade...

PhilW wrote:In a similar vein (though under-sold rather than over-sold), I'm surprised no-one has pulled me up on the title of the Martinez tasting.

At the time, I did take a moment to consider why it was named 75 years, and concluded that was not disingenuous to not name it 76 years.

Some claim that because there was no year "0", centuries run from 01.01.xx01 to 31.12.xy00. That's because there was no year "0", arguments influenced by Prince songs notwithstanding. Zero was not a number as we know it until the 5th century, but even then it was really only use...

Yes my point that I can't get either definition to work was incorrect. Defining a decade as 1961-1970, 1971-1980 etc, which is strictly possible as a decade only needs to be 10 years long thereby making these 10 year periods valid decades, means they do have 6 decades represented.