Видео

The album version of this. My first Maynard album.

Great song and great recording by MF, BUT he’s clearly miming this for the TV studio.

I saw him live, in Nutley, NJ, in 1972. He was amazing. I've heard every other well know trumpet master, but Maynard was the best.

Go Daddy Rubblebrainz!!!!!!!!!!!

One of the best of all time

The Maynard difference from other trumpeters is that he plays the upper register with the same smoothness of two octaves below

Maynard Ferguson, very old fashioned name Maynard hehe........ Talent wow its beautifull and astounding!!!!!!! Very fine & classy.............

Bridging the digital divides is real.

Thanks for your kind words: He's a good friend of mine - Ted

Idk, as far as his sound goes. Miyashiro comes pretty close I think.

You got that right!

How about %100 of us?! ...I played all his charts - lead on them as well...played all the same notes, lots of people have. But it never SOUNDED like him...no one ever has, ever will...

Maynard was so good. I mean I listen to him all the time but he never ceases to amaze me. He was just so talented it's unbelievable. You can practice all you want but odds are 90% of us will never be as good as him.

absolutely one of my favorite songs

No, ...."Morpheus"

great match

Let's be honest: Ben Stein made his bones (through Daddy's influence) pimping for Richard Nixon as a speechwriter. 34 years after Nixon resigned in disgrace, Stein is still pimping for Nixon. Admitting he was wrong is not part of his modus. My hunch is that Stein is laughing all the way to the bank behind the backs of the boobkin Fundies who embrace this pseudo-science prattle. He was no doubt compensated handsomely in all of this.

A similar justification was given for teaching music in the schools - so we could sing hymns properly. The school day used to begin with prayer.

The Supreme Court had no problem with schools having prayer and the like until the 1960's. An original justification for public schools was to equip our children to read the bible. !"

This is to deny our history. We live in Western Civilization (Christendom).Many of the greatest scientists have been Christian- and still are. Religious freedom back-in-the-day meant you could be Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, Roman Catholic, or Jewish. We made a law that the several states (Maryland,Vermont, etc) could not make official state churches in the manner of the church of England.

What has been denied by those that make the rules is "in the beginning, God . . ." Their justification is that there are many religions in the world - therefore they must all be treated equally.

"To not allow for either of these possibilities is collosal ignorance" Science recognizes its limits, even if the Discovery Institute doesn't. To paraphrase Carl Zimmer: The scientific method does not claim that events can have only natural causes, but that the only causes that we can understand scientifically are natural ones. Supernatural forces are, by definition, above the laws of nature, and thus beyond the scope of science. It's really simple. ID does not meet the criteria for science.

Exposed? The movie has been reviewed in full in many places. It's been screened a jillion times. Parts of it are on RUclips. And the general idea behind the movie is presented in the multiple trailers that sheeple have uploaded ad nauseum. If that's not enough, the producers have discussed it at length on Scientific American dot com in which they admit they left out the whole truth, and Ben Stein has blathered his ridiculous statements to every talk show that will listen. More like overexposure.

And one more thing - you state above: "the phony premise of this film ...Anyone ... has to admit that at the very least the producers have seriously stretched the truth. Because distortions are carefully crafted to support their agenda, and because they repeatedly deny it, I see no difference between what they've done and lying." But since the movie has not yet been released, you are exposed! What distortions? what lying? how could you possiblt know without seeing the film!

Come on, give me a break This is simple, people: is it logical to posit that there is a possibility evolution MAY either be simple random chance OR the product of design, or is it not? To not allow for either of these possibilities is collosal ignorance

I don't see that people who question the phony premise of this film fit your description at all. Anyone who's honestly examined these issues has to admit that at the very least the producers have seriously stretched the truth. Because the distortions are carefully crafted to support their agenda, and because they repeatedly deny it, I see no difference between what they've done and lying. Which calls into question the ethics and motives of people who pick their clips up and rebroadcast them.

Hah! good comeback, well done...I stand chastised for my over the top lingo....

"totalitarian intellectual fascism" Would you care for some Jeez with that whine?

Way to argue your point people. Start with the insults, then call your antagonist either "ignorant, dumb & stupid" or "evil and dangerous"- or both. Intellectual consistency has never been a forte of the lunatic left. Fact - Ben Stein has always been a moderate , not a conservative. Fact 2 - Evolution exists- but can you say that evolution is not God's method of creation? No of course you can't, and therein is the problem. You don't want dissent, just totalitarian intellectual fascism. Cheers

Brothers and sisters of Northern Uganda, we are with you. This is one step toward a new beginning, and we are pleased to make it with you. Peace.