Thelonious Monk's playing on the Columbia albums

[Late]

I guess newly remastered editions of the Columbia big band material are essentially out of the question these days.

[mikeweil]

I think Sonny and Charlie and Griffin did Monk just fine.

Yes, of course they did. Very fine they did. Perhaps he wanted it. But none of them was rhythmically as close to Monk as Frankie Dunlop was, as far as rhythmic conception is concerned. Just me, of course.

[blajay]

I think Sonny and Charlie and Griffin did Monk just fine.

Yes, of course they did. Very fine they did. Perhaps he wanted it. But none of them was rhythmically as close to Monk as Frankie Dunlop was, as far as rhythmic conception is concerned. Just me, of course.

I thought we were talking about horn players?

[blajay]

I think Sonny and Charlie and Griffin did Monk just fine.

Yes, of course they did. Very fine they did. Perhaps he wanted it. But none of them was rhythmically as close to Monk as Frankie Dunlop was, as far as rhythmic conception is concerned. Just me, of course.

I thought we were talking about horn players?

And in terms of drummers, I'd say that Art Blakey played best with Monk. Maybe because he started out as a pianist...

[jazzbo]

I like Dunlop best. Mike, I think Monk got what he wanted, his rules, out of those cats. That's all. I like the contrast.

[gmonahan]

Mike, I think Monk got what he wanted, his rules, out of those cats. That's all. I like the contrast.

Me too. I love listening to solo Monk, but I can only do it for limited periods of time. It's like a really rich liqueur for me. Have to take it in small amounts. Oddly, I have the same experience with Tatum, and I can't think of two pianists more unlike each other than Monk and Tatum!

I came late to Monk. The angularity of his playing didn't appeal to my too traditional tastes for a long time. Now when I listen, I just try to let myself slide into his extraordinarily adventurous journey. I never know where he's going, and I have the wonderful sense that he doesn't either. I'm listening to the Columbia "Straight, No Chaser" album right now. Sounds great to me. I like the way Larry Gales and Ben Riley (bass and drums respectively) lay down the rhythm without getting in his way. And Rouse was way cool.

Greg Mo

[Leprechaun]

But what I'm interested in is the argument that Monk's playing deteriorated in the 1960s.

That's a new one on me. I've always thought his best playing was on the Columbia Recordings.

[Guy Berger]

But what I'm interested in is the argument that Monk's playing deteriorated in the 1960s.

That's a new one on me. I've always thought his best playing was on the Columbia Recordings.

The Penguin guide makes that argument, and I have heard it elsewhere. I think some of the contributors to this thread did as well.

Guy

[mjzee]

One aspect to consider is that Monk's playing was so much more documented in the '60's than before, particularly with all the European concerts. But in those concerts, Monk and his band were playing a set list to large audiences. It would make sense that, within being true to himself, he'd want those concerts to be as dependably successful as possible. Hence a lot of them sound alike. I wonder whether we're partly reacting to that.

Also, listening to many concerts from the same tour, regardless of the artist, will reveal a certain sameness. I'm thinking, for example, of all the European Mingus concerts with Dolphy.

[danasgoodstuff]

I think Monk's playing is fine on the Columbias, it's just the way it's recorded that rounds off the edges and makes it seem less interesting...

[mikeweil]

Like every other jazz musician, Monk wasn't in top form every night - compare the Live At The It Club and Live AtThe Jazz Workshop performances, which were recorded soon after one another. His playing during his Columbia years had a certain steadyness, like he was a bitt settled - rather consistent. I have nothing to complain about this.

[clifford_thornton]

Yes, they are clean and consistent rather than raggedy and somewhat inconsistent. Since I prefer the latter -- as many might -- I'm going to go for the Riversides first. But later Monk is still Monk, and is very important work in this music, work that is still probably not very well understood.

[AllenLowe]

I always like him best in a trio, except for the Trane stuff - even when it's Griffin or Rollins - for me it's gotta be with Trane or a trio -

and I find Rouse unlistenable, I'm sorry to say - his playing just sits there; sounds like someone playing at playing, to paraphrase Martin Williams (in a different context) -

[Leprechaun]

The Penguin guide makes that argument, and I have heard it elsewhere. I think some of the contributors to this thread did as well.

I couldn't find it in my copy (5th edition) but I did see that there's a lot more Columbia material available now than when I had "all" the albums in the 60s. So who's to say? I wouldn't argue one way or another; my post was just to join some others here in letting you know that you're not alone in the way it sounds to you.

What I like about hearing things like this is it inspires me to revisit music and listen for something I hadn't heard before. Once I'd got it in my head that I liked Charlie Rouse's playing better than any other saxist with Monk, that's all I would ever hear until someone like AllenLowe comes along and gets me to go back and listen to the Coltrane sessions with fresh ears. It may or may not change my mind, but either way, it'll usually enhance my appreciation.

Edited September 14, 2008 by Leprechaun

[John L]

I always like him best in a trio, except for the Trane stuff - even when it's Griffin or Rollins - for me it's gotta be with Trane or a trio -

and I find Rouse unlistenable, I'm sorry to say - his playing just sits there; sounds like someone playing at playing, to paraphrase Martin Williams (in a different context) -

When Rouse just "sits there," I find him to be a great foil for Monk. I absolutely love the way Monk comps around Rouse. That is one of the real attractions of the Columbia period for me.

[JSngry]

All things considered, make mine Prestige.

[Larry Kart]

All things considered, make mine Prestige.

Agreed.

[AllenLowe]

the "live" stuff in the movie Straight No CHaser is my favorite -

[Stereojack]

Once I'd got it in my head that I liked Charlie Rouse's playing better than any other saxist with Monk, that's all I would ever hear until someone like AllenLowe comes along and gets me to go back and listen to the Coltrane sessions with fresh ears. It may or may not change my mind, but either way, it'll usually enhance my appreciation.

Don't listen to Lowe - he's generally full of shit.

[jazzbo]

I wouldn't want to be without the Blue Note, but honestly I like all the decades and I wouldn't want to be without the unofficial material I've found. . . .

[paul secor]

I'm with Lon. I enjoy all periods of Monk's career, and wouldn't want to be without any of them.

Edited September 14, 2008 by paul secor

[CJ Shearn]

I find the "It Club" set to be full of exceptional and vibrant playing.

Edited September 14, 2008 by CJ Shearn

[Soul Stream]

The Monk sides I've listened to the most over the years are "Live At The It Club" (that stuff swings HARD) and his Blue Note recordings. Don't know what that says really...oh, yeah...and solo Columbia stuff is a close third.

[Peter Friedman]

In my view, all the periods of Monk's recordings have something to offer. The Riverside's though, are my favorites.

I do admit to hearing a certain "sameness' to the quartet sessions with Rouse. I find that those recordings are ones I would not want to listen to one after another. They are more enjoyable to me spread out over time for listening purposes.

For some reason, I actually find Rouse to be a more interesting tenor player on a number of the recordings he made as leader without Monk.

These four are probably my favorites.

Takin" Care Of Business - Jazzland OJC

Moment's Notice - Storyville

Soul Mates - Uptown

Social Call - Uptown

[AllenLowe]

well, I'm full of something - ask JSangry - and I have tried to appreciate Rouse over the years - even heard him in a small club with my friend Neloms, probably around 1980 or so (could be wrong about the date) - it was the Angry Squire, 23rd Street - and I tell you, it was interesting but telling; Rouse was a bit detached from the band, and they were clearly surprised at his reputation - played well, but nothing that really got inside the music -