♪ announcer: from our studios in new york, this is "charlie rose." we begin this evening with the air campaign against isis in iraq and syria. david martin visited a crucial military base where the strikes around. here is a look at the report that is airing sunday on 60 minutes. caringing bombs and feel. instrains to get airborne the 100 degree heat. it will take three hours to

reach the target with two aerial refueling's along the way. >> welcome to the combat operations floor. >> lieutenant colonel david hayworth takes us into the command center as the b-1 and other aircraft carryout the days attack plan against isis. >> it doesn't have windows, but it has a nice view. >> the air war has been going on for 14 months, but this is the first time news cameras have been allowed into its nerve center. of choice is information. the more information we have, the better we are able to make decisions. wall, a giant map showing the location of every plane. green are american and allied. the blue are commercial aircraft. on another, a video feed from an unmanned drone, one of dozens orbiting over iraq and syria. we make our way around the floor

to a spot in the center called the crows nest. >> this is the nexus, the center of the air campaign. 60 minutes is here to follow that b-1 bomber on its mission against isis. general charles brown is the commander of the air war. how much of an effort does it take to mount a strike like that? , ajust that one airplane three-day process scheduling wise. sometimes days, weeks, months. >> just after 2:00 a.m., five american helicopters with special operation forces landed outside a heavily guarded isis prison in northern iraq. the troops stormed the compound, and in an exchange of gunfire killed two dozen isis fighters. a u.s. servicemen was fatally wounded. the commandos rescued 70 hostages about to be executed. charlie: we want to talk about

the 60 minutes report, but also about a u.s. raid resulted in the first american killed in iraq since renewed military intervention last year. david martin joins me now from the pentagon. i am pleased to have him on the program. thank you for joining us. tell me what we know now in terms of what was the intent, what was the success, and what does it imply about the future? david: the intent was to rescue what was thought to be kurdish prisoners before they were executed in the belief that they were about to be executed. that came from aerial surveillance of the prison compound which showed massive graves'being dug. mass graves being dug. they went in, a firefight broke

out, an american commando was killed in the firefight. they managed to save or rescued 70 prisoners being held by isis. those prisoners have since told the united states now that they are back in some form of safety that they had been told that they were going to be executed after morning prayer. if you back up the time of the raid, that means that those 5-6 hourslanded about before the scheduled execution. -- other interesting thing about that raid, i just minutes ago was in a press conference with the fence secretary asked carter, and he said, i suspect there will be more like this. charlie: it seems that there is something indicated by this that america is to pay her to do?

that's right. if you look at the last war in iraq when the united states had 100,000 plus troops on the ground, what really defeated al qaeda in iraq were those special raids,ons, the night 10-20 a night, and which they not only killed and captured swept up thoseey cell phones and laptops and got more intelligence about the network. in this war where we only have 3500 trainers and know someand we now commandos on the ground, there have been exactly to raids, the one earlier this week, and one a couple of months ago when they went after an isis leader in syria. they got a lot of intelligence out of that raid, particular about how the finances of isis work.

secretary carter said they got a lot of intelligence out of this raid on the prison compound. we don't know yet what was in that intelligence. charlie: my understanding is they captured some isis combatants? david: it is not clear. they have six members of isis, they werenot clear if running the prison or if they were in fact prisoners who had --ehow run of foul of isis run against isis. charlie: we do know the u.s. was asked to do this by the peshmerga forces, to join them? david: that's right. the mantra is that iraq is a sovereign country and we are there at the behest of the government. we saw that in the air war. has veto power over any target that the u.s.

wants to strike because it is their country. charlie: what do we know about how the member of delta force died? again, secretary carter just said something interesting, which i have not had a chance to follow up on yet. he said the indications are that that soldier, whose name was joshua wheeler, a 39 your old earter sergeant, -- 39 your old master sergeant, that he and his teammates were responsible for pulling those prisoners out of there. i don't know the circumstances or why he said that, but that is what the secretary said. he was hit by enemy small arms fire. in a firefight like that, it is possible that you could be hit by friendly fire, but the pentagon specifically says he was hit by enemy small arms fire.

charlie: let me talk about what you saw and the access you had. what surprised you about what you saw? david: what surprised me the most, both what i saw and the reporting i did leading up to it, is the difficulty of finding high-value targets that are really worth hitting. when you go there, you see very clearly that the u.s. air force can hit just about anything it aims at. every once and a while there is a dud. the dud great is 2% on the bombs, but otherwise they are firing satellite guided or laserguided weapons that almost hit the targets. hitting a target is not the problem. the problem is finding lucrative targets. the raid we watched was against a cluster of buildings that were supposed to hold a car bomb

to mounthat isis used car bomb attacks. when we watched the raid, you could clearly see secondary explosions that indicated that explosives were indeed in those buildings. fromhat is to stop isis moving in to another bank and -- vacant building, getting more derelict cars, making more homemade explosives? and this is what passes for isis'industrial base. those oil platforms where they skim oil off the desert floor. so this air campaign would not pass a cost-benefit analysis. bomber that dropped its bombs on those buildings, and it basically obliterated those buildings, it stayed over iraq for several more hours, and it was sent to check out a report

of a loan sniper on a rooftop. so here you have this bomber that was built to drop nuclear weapons on the soviet union back , which is caring 17.5 tons of conventional bombs, hunting around for one sniper. charlie: here is what is interesting. for me, is this the place where they coordinate with the russians so that there is no overlap in terms of "conflicting?" david: we don't know exactly where that coordination happens, but it has to go through this command center. when we were there, there was no coordination. the memo of understanding had not been signed yet. so we did not see any formal coordination, but the american

pilots we talked to were not sweating the russians at all. they have air superiority over those russian planes and that the russians would be very foolish -- i mean, arehe first place there three times as many u.s. aircraft as there are russian aircraft. more importantly, the u.s. has all these support aircraft like , and warning radar planes a totale these pilots picture of everything that is happening in the airspace, and they will see the russians before the russians and see them. hasddition, the u.s. also the f-22 stealth fighter, which is the only jet fighter in the world that is both supersonic and stealth.

the russians don't have anything like that. the americans and still maintain total air superiority over syria. the russians are a nuisance. charlie: they are a nuisance to the u.s., but do we know whether they have been effective at all in terms of their attacks against rebel forces fighting bashar al-assad? david: they are helping the syrian army along with iranian fighters. they mount offensives to take back some of the territory in the corridor that runs from damascus up to aleppo. progress,aking some but they have conducted so far about 140 strikes. the u.s. conducts about 140 strikes in today's. strikes,uct 60-70

drops, weapons a day, and you see how slow the progress is are the u.s. and its allies making against isis, so i don't think russia is going to have instantaneously on that battlefield with your airstrikes. the ideawe still have that airstrikes will get you somewhere, but not far enough, unless they find soldiers -- put soldiers in combat troops on the ground, they can never complete the job. david: you have to retake the ground to win a war, and to me that is probably the most discouraging thing about what i witnessed. war, 130,000 troops on the ground with complete control of the air and it took eight years. this iraq war, we have 3500 advisers on the ground and who knows how long it's going to take? charlie: david martin at the

pentagon, thank you so much. david: you bet. charlie: back in a moment. stay with us. ♪

charlie: former secretary of state hillary clinton ran a marathon on thursday, answering questions in front of the longest running select committee in the united states congress. at issue, the deadly 2012 attack in benghazi, libya.

at the end, the republican chairman conceded that there were no big revelations. to all theout republican members of the select committee to appear on this program. of those that responded, none were available. welcome to the program. >> it is great to be with you. charlie: where are we and where are we going? >> that is a good question. it is hard to say. all the other hearings that were planned were canceled once the hearing with secretary clinton was scheduled. 10-12going to be hearings, defense secretary, cia, but those were all put off or canceled for good, so we are waiting to hear from the majority, and of course we will have to evaluate based on their plan going forward what that

means in terms of our participation. there has been a debate all along about whether it makes sense for democrats to participate in what we view as a highly partisan exercise designed to attack the secretary , so we will have to see what they plan in the future and make a decision about that. charlie: is it likely that you will not go forward, democrats? our ranking member is issuing a statement that we continue participating for now. a lot will depend on where they intend to take this. to be honest, i don't think they know yet where they want to take this. everything has been leading up to the moment we had last night, and i think they are in the process of evaluation how much longer they want this to drag on and what is the objective. the very beginning of this investigation to get them to agree to some scope, if not scope in terms of the time of the investigation, at least to identify what issues we were trying to unravel, whether it

was the allegation of a standdown order or whether it was some other issue, but they were unwilling to it essentially narrow or even define the scope, so we are not sure where we are headed, to be honest. charlie: have you asked for the release of the transcripts of the interviews with sidney blumenthal? >> many times. this was a deposition governed by house rules. promptly after his deposition to have that vote, the republicans would never scheduled to vote. they did not want to have to vote on this. we forced a vote on it during the middle of this hearing, and to a person, the republicans voted to keep those transcripts private. it is curious because they were willing to release blumenthal's e-mails, but they weren't willing to release the transcript of his explanation of the context of those e-mails,

and i think, charlie, the reason is pretty clear. it wasn't so much what he said, but what they asked him. been goingbers have on national tv to say they are not interested in the clinton foundation or the personal relationship he had with the clintons, but when you look at the questions that were asked, there were literally hundreds of questions about the foundation, media matters, the relationship he had with the clintons, and a must nothing about the events of benghazi. charlie: tell me what you think of the questions were and what the answers were. >> the big questions at the outset of all of the investigation, i will tell you -- we have to put this into context. in the very beginning after these tragic events, there were very legitimate questions about was the security enough, were the requests that went unheeded, who was responsible for that, how do we improve security in

the future, what happened afterwards, why were the talking points wrong? those were all legitimate questions. but by the time this started, they had been asked and answered, which was the challenge in terms of defining what we were going to do in this investigation. there have been these persistent myth about standdown orders, gunrunning, interference insecurity, so it was clear we were going to do another look at that, but what i think is so telling about this and this was intimated by the chairman at the conclusion of the clinton hearing, notwithstanding all the witnesses, interviews, documents, e-mails, there has been nothing new discovered that alters any conclusions made in these other eight investigations. so we do not have much to show for a year and a half worth of work, in the sense that we can't tell the families or the

american people anything new about this tragic events. charlie: are you bothered by the fact that the secretary of state did not know about the request for additional security? >> i think the secretary answered that quite well yesterday, and it wasn't the first time she has been asked. there are people responsible for security at all our embassies. that is who received the request for additional security. i don't know whether i would want the secretary of state, who has a very big job, to be micromanaging decisions about whether there should be six security personnel, eight, 10, or what level it ought to be. there are people whose expertise and job is to do that at the state department. the key question, do we keep this facility open, i think that is perfectly appropriate for her. and she did answer that. charlie: in this case, this was

summoned she knew and admired, and if he was requesting additional security, you might assume that somehow it would get to her? >> well, it might have, and it didn't, and i think the fact that they did have a relationship and this was somebody that she chose for this position, i think that indicates also that if ambassador stevens thought she was the right person to make these decisions, he would have been able to go to her. in fact, there is a mechanism within the state department to go to her. a relationshipas with all of these ambassadors around the world. some more than others, but we have to put this into perspective. there were 20 capitals that seemed under siege at this time when that video took place. there were numerous other hot spots around the secretary also had to deal with. there were a lot of dangerous posts.

whether this particular request should have gotten to her, the answer is that it didn't get to her. it is hard to lay responsibility at her feet. charlie: sheep pointed out that she had a number of conversations with chris -- she pointed out that she had a number of conversations with chris and security was not brought up. not sure how often she communicated with the ambassador, but i know she was quite clear that he never raised a security issue with her, and i think the accountability review board which looked at this objectively, done by two career -- they concluded that the decision to act on those requests was certainly a flawed position by those who made it, but that was not really a decision to be made at the secretary of state level. everye: she said that recommendation has been a limited. is that a fair statement?

statement which he said that when she left the state department they were in the process of being implemented, some taking years to implement. she did mention one that we in congress have slowed down and not fully implemented, and that is the establishment of a joint training center to train our diplomatic and security personnel. that is a project slated to be built in virginia. if we were serious about embassy security as our committee let's on, we would get that project moving. charlie: there is also the question of where does ,pontaneous reaction to of film where does that go from being spontaneous in terms of the plannedof benghazi to a al qaeda attack taking the advantage of a spontaneous outburst? >> this is a subject that we

covered in an investigation that lasted almost two years in the intelligence committee. what we discovered, and i think that has been verified by the well, andmittee as that is the intelligence we received was improved in the days after the attack, and changed yet again in the week after the attack. initially, some of the first intelligence indicated that this was a planned attack that she related to the egyptian prime minister. within about 24-48 hours, the cia had assessed based on human intelligence, open source intelligence, signals intelligence, that it probably began as a protest that was hijacked into an attack. it was not until about eight days afterwards, when we got the videos from those compounds and we could see there was no protest outside the facility that we were able to definitively conclude that this

did not begin as a protest, but what i think is significant here is that if you look at what the secretary said at the time she said it, much like if you look at what ambassador rice said at the time she said it, it was completely consistent with what our intelligence community was telling us at that time. everyone knows how the intelligence process works, particularly after a tragic incidents like that incident like this, your assessments continue to evolve over time. trying toress were understand what we knew. some of that proved to be wrong. we found no evidence that there was any deliberate intent to deceive anyone. charlie: wasn't faulty intelligence? -- was it faulty intelligence? was, but i don't consider that an intelligence failure.

initially, you had one group that claimed responsibility. source open so's -- reporting that there were active protests going on. you have people on the ground saying protests were going on, so if the intelligence is conflicting, the analysts who look at all the streams of intelligence, their conclusion was that it began with the protest. then you get more definitive evidence, and in this case it was the actual video, and that was quite compelling and showed us in fact that there was no protest. the government in libya tell the government in the united states from the get-go that they thought it was a planned attack? >> i don't recall exactly what the view of the libyan government was on that issue. i do recall that the libyan government was really appalled at the violence and quite devastated that our ambassador

was killed. with tens of thousands of libyans taking to the streets because they love this man to say this is not us, this is not islam, and i think the point in those initial conversations when the secretary was still trying to get help and security with the libyan government, they were trying to assure her how appalled they were at this loss of life. charlie: how you think the republicans on the committee, including chairman doughty, view it so far? >> i have to think they are gravely disappointed at what happened yesterday. hoping that byre the skill of their cross examination that they would have had more to show, some sound-byte moment that would have played into the presidential campaign, or at least

the committee achieve something. months, theree isn't anything they found we didn't know already. there's not much they can tell those urging the creation of this committee that justifies all the time and expense. charlie: you are a democrat and a politician. secretary clinton has had, by the judgment of most political observers, a very good month, the debate and his performance at the committee hearing. has she essentially wrapped up the nomination now? think in this kind of political environment, you can never say anybody has wrapped it up until you see electoral votes on the board. she is a very strong candidate. she was at the outset. i think she's gotten stronger even after her debate performance and frankly after going through 11 hours of grilling and looking very presidential. she demonstrated a pretty onlyehensive knowledge not

of our foreign policy but how the state department operates and a great respect for the people who serve overseas. think she looked very presidential. i think members of our committee looked very small in comparison. you have to conclude it was a pretty good month for the secretary. charlie: thank you very much for joining us. to onet we couldn't talk of the republican members. toinvited them on, hoping have an ongoing conversation not only about this particular thing but also other issues in congress. thank you very much for joining us. rep. schiff: you bet. charlie: adam schiff, democrat from california. back in a moment. stay with us.

charlie: herb alpert is here. he is one of the most successful trumpeters in pop history. his top 10 hits launched him into the pop-culture stratosphere. three years later, he released "whipped cream and other delights." the album became popular for its risque cover. a "taste ofok at honey." ♪

♪ charlie: herb alpert was one of the entertainment industries shrewdest businessmen. in 1989 for more

than $500 million. i am pleased to have herb alpert at the table. herb: nice to be here. charlie: it's good to have you here. it has been a remarkable career. herb: it's been a dream. "the lonely bull" that really started it all. that was our first release. ♪ it became a top 10 record. i got a letter from a lady in germany about a month after the record was released who said, dear mr. alpert, thank you for sending me on this vicarious chuckledijuana, and i when i read it. wasought, wow, that music so visual to her it took her someplace. that's the music i wanted to make. charlie: miles davis saidcharlie:, you hear three notes and know if it's herb alpert or not. herb: i think that is what we are all looking for in an

artist. it's the sound. you want to find your own voice, and it takes a while. charlie: when you say the sound, what do you mean? herb: i have a classical background, and when i heard miles and louis armstrong and all the guys closing their eyes and just playing, that is what i wanted to do. i could play a little bit like harry james. i could play like miles. charlie: but what you wanted was your own sound. herb: i didn't know that at the time. i was just looking for something. , mary heard les paul ford. remember the record "how high the moon?" hearing that record, i tried that at home. on one tapeumpet machine, overdubbed it to the other, and i got this sound to her that was the genesis of the tijuana brass sound. charlie: when you heard it, you knew that was you? herb: i didn't know that exactly at the time.

i knew i was onto something that felt good, and i didn't know and until "the lonely bull" "the letter from the lady." then you start getting your courage up. herb: you have done it all. you've been a businessman. you've been a musician. you've been a broadway producer, painter. charlie: herb: i still am a painter and a sculptor. charlie: which one of those defines you the most? herb: i think all three. i am a right-brain guy. music,, i sculpt, i make and i'm lucky. charlie: do they feed each other? herb: absolutely. i get that feeling when it happens. you can be sculpting, and the piece doesn't really take shape or feel good. i'm just as anxious until it's resolved, and when it's resolved, it's a great feeling.

it's like playing a solo. i'm intrigued about the mystery of the arts. i think there's an unwritten thing you can't describe, and i like that. charlie: it's a bit like, everybody sees a painting differently, because it touches something in them that is unique and different from everything else. do you hear it differently? herb: if you like something, i don't think you hear it with your ears. you hear it with your soul. good art resonates in the soul. it's like standing in front of a jackson pollock painting. if you try to analyze it, it's not going to happen. you have to feel it. charlie: is that what you've good, whherb: how famous was ths

albumherb:? big. -- 14 like 14-platinum million platinum records. it was huge, and it happened in a strange way. charlie: how is that? herb: i got a call from our record is jupiter in new orleans. distributor in new orleans. he said, i just heard a song that al hurt turned down. i said, could you please send it to me echo that was "whipped cream." i recorded it four days later. it was not a monster hit, but it got on the charts. my partner jerry moss had a brilliant idea. he said, let's couch this in an album with food titles. in that album was "taste of honey." charlie: the cover became as popular as the music. herb: the cover became iconic. people love that cover. charlie: do they bring it to you

and have you sign it? herb:herb: i will tell you -- one thing happened. says,comes up to me and you know that whipped cream album you did that cover, it's beautiful. i just love it. when you hear music today, what do you like? like honest music. there are certain artists, when you hear them, you know they are giving it their all. it's like ray charles. when weheard ray charles, it was like he could sing "god bless america," and it drills you. charlie: were you and miles friends? with miles dinner one night, and i didn't understand a word he said. i loved him. he was an important figure.

charlie: a la hurt turned something down that you took. have there been instances in which you turned it down and somebody else took it up to stratospheric heights? herb: those days, it was a whole different story, but people used to come in with master records. they would play a record that was finished, and you had the opportunity to release it if you chose to. there was one record. it was 1968, i believe it was. i didn't like it at all. there was an original record we heard in 1958, but it was too long. it didn't sit right with me. i turned it down. that happened to be "louie, louie," which was number one for like eight weeks in a row, and every time i heard it, i still had that same feeling. instincts.y it feels good, great. if it doesn't, i will pass.

charlie: a&m was successful because it was for artists, by artists? herb: it was thinking from the artist's point of view. i reported for a major company for about a year and a half, and i didn't like the way they treated me. i was a number. i went into the playback room, the studio, and wanted to hear a bit more base on some of the bass on onebit more of the songs i did. the engineers left my head and said, don't touch that again. i thought, gee, shouldn't you be looking at music from the artist's point of view? i said, if i ever had my chance to have a company, i would certainly approach it differently. charlie: you once saidcharlie: you didn't know what a hit record sounds like, but you knew what good music sounds like.

herb: it's hard to predict. in 1965, my partner and i released third man theme on the a side, and on the b side was "a taste of honey." i was playing in seattle, washington at the edgewater, and every time i play "a taste of honey," people go crazy. i called my partner and said, jerry, we are on the wrong side. man, it stops in the middle, starts, stops. it's not a radio record. i said, i'm telling you, turn it over. we finally did, and three months later, it was the breakthrough record. we had hits before, but this was the one that really charged ahead. charlie: that told you to trust your and sticks. herb: i always did trust my instincts, but this was a message from above.

when taste of honey hit, we did all the big shows, ed sullivan, dean martin. charlie: the list i saw for 1966, you are the number one in 1966. you outsold the beatles. herb: we outsold the beatles in 1966. i only know that because -- it's not patting myself on the back -- i saw that in the guinness book of records. charlie: what song was that? honey." was "a taste of records on had five the top 20, quarter records -- charlie: five in the top 20. herb: and four albums in the top 10. it was just crazy. charlie: you also knew sam and worked with sam cooke. herb: loved sam. he taught me a lot. he just had a natural way about him. he was very elegant, very

musical. he used to come in with a notebook, and he showed me his notebook wants. i was looking at these lyrics he would write down. this set of lyrics looked really corny to me. "the popcorn's on the table." "let's have a party." i said, what does it sound like? he picked up his guitar, and it was like magic. the melody was beautiful. everything was in the right place. myself like,g to that's what it's all about. it's all about intent. charlie: it's also about emotion, isn't it? he understood emotion. he knew you had to connect. herb: it was real stuff. that major record he had was "you send me." record, i was in the studio watching him, and the owner of the company had a chart

. he was listening to the playback . he kind of new music in a strange way -- i'm talking about the owner of the company. he said, sam, do me a favor -- bar 82, put in "woah, woah." sam looked at him and said, jack -- his name wasn't jack -- he said, you can't just put in a whenever you want to. you have to feel it. that was sam. charlie: dizzy gillespie one set of being a musician, the closer you get, the farther it looks. herb: that's true. charlie: what does that mean? herb: you never get to the place on your own instrument where you are satisfied. charlie: the closer you get to perfection in your own mind, the farther away it seems. the more you know, the more you know you have to know. the more you know, the more you realize you don't know much.

herb: for sure. on an instrument, it's always different. there are so many facets of playing an instrument right. on to her with your wife, you mix it up. most of it jazz? herb: it's all jazz. it songs we were going to play, but it's never played the same way twice. that is what i love. i'm basically a jazz musician, and i brought that sensibility to the tijuana brass. i never, ever practiced the songs that i recorded, believe it or not. one time i did. "or by the greek" i practiced, but the other songs, i waited until i had the track or i was recording in the studio, and then i went and put my horn on, trying to just have that .xperience of the moment to me, that is what is so seductive about painting and

sculpting and making music. i'm sure you feel it, as well. when you are doing something you are passionate about, you are in the exact moment of your life, and that is what hooked me. charlie: it's a feeling like nothing else. it's almost like being -- as they say in sports -- in the zone. herb: when you are not in the zone, you might be thinking about tomorrow or yesterday. charlie: when you're in the zone, it just comes and flows. herb: it's the place. i tell kids, please, unless you are passionate about being a musician or artist or poet, don't do it. while you are sleeping, other people are practicing. charlie: exactly. it's true. his music missing something that it had when you were at your best? herb: that's hard to say. there are a lot of great artists out there, and they don't have the same opportunities. radio is a little stingy with

what they are willing to play. if it has a guitar, i can't play it. if you know how to get around ,he internet and you get lucky but it's pretty astounding, charlie -- there are records like bruno mars, his last record , "are you sitting?" one billion people have watched youtube. one billion. charlie: do you like those numbers? herb: i would like to have 1/10 of that number. charlie: this goes a long way back. this is a clip of you and the tijuana brass playing "spanish flea." ♪ ♪

charlie: we were just saying, herb asked me who i liked in jazz music, and i said one of the people was winston. herb: i love him. i love everything about him. musician but ac human being. i played with louis armstrong once. i interviewed him. i was a moderator and mc. i played with him, and i couldn't describe. he was the only musician i've met so far that his personality came right through the horn. charlie: roll tape. here it is. >> ♪ she makes that old magnolia treat ♪

♪ ♪ herb: let me tell you something.

said, i know-- i people call you sasho. i said, what do your friends call you? he said, my friends call me irving. [laughter] this.e: take a look at this is when marsalis. >> you are inventing it as it goes on. you are adjusting what you are playing to go with them, and they are doing it with you. it's like a dance. you are finding each other, and it's very fundamental and basic, but it's also complicated. charlie: it's true. you've got to let it happen. charlie: but you have to know your -- i've often believed, and jazz is the perfect example, the more you know, the better you are, the more schooled you are, the more spontaneous, the more you can go off, because you know how to come back. herb: absolutely.

stan getz was a dear friend of mine, and stand used to say, i'm not sure where i'm going, but i know where i'm going to end up. he never played a note that he wasn't ready to come out with. you have to trust yourself. you have to trust your instincts. you have to let it go. if you try to be too cute with it and play for somebody else and see if you can do something someone else is going alike, it's not going to work. charlie: there is a concept in sports. sometimes, you have to let the game come to you. in music, you have to let it come to you. herb: if you try too hard to be hip, you are going to be corny. [laughter] charlie: just be authentic and let it come to you. herb: to be authentic is the goal. it doesn't have to be perfect. perfection is not there. we all loved billy holiday. she wasn't perfect. she didn't sing in tune all the

time. it's all about feeling. charlie: you released an album on september 25 called "come fly with me." herb: what is in it? is thecome fly with me" title tune. we all know that son from frank sinatra. i wanted to do it to transport us into another spot. we use steel drums on it, and it takes us to the caribbean. i always loved that melody. blue skies. charlie: music you love. herb: i only play music i love. i can't play the music i don't love. i can only play music that feels right. charlie: how often do you paint? herb: every day. herb:i think that is one of the problems i've been having as an artist. says,ar my name, and he he has some nice paintings, he's probably a sunday payer. charlie: everyday?

you have to do it? herb: for my own health, i have to do it. charlie: that's what i'm saying. you get up every morning, have a cup of coffee -- herb: i paint, i sculpt. my wife is not crazy about this, but i do these wax miniature things with a blow torch that is where i create the idea. charlie: some of the sculptures at the field museum -- herb: there are nine sculptures at the field museum right out in front. bronze totems from 13 feet to 17.5 feet tall. it looks really good. there is one huge one inside. i love doing it, man. that's me. charlie: thank you for coming. thank you for joining us. see you next time.

convulsive sive syndrome. china says focus on the bigger picture. calls to beef up its acts as the latest grand casino opens its doors. and it's gross gym but not as much as we know it. it will be a far cry from last year's stellar numbers. welcome to "first up with angie lau" right here on