Scott Dolan

My point has nothing to do with what Rouse did or ddn’t do after playing with Monk. My point is that he was the most sympathetic and tuned in Tenor player that ever played with Monk. He was the ultimate team player. He wasn’t looking to step outside of the music and do his own thing, he was looking to become one with the music, the style, in which he was playing. Hey, when in Rome...

Quoted just because nobody else was willing to touch it. And I agree with Mr. Gould 100%. Rouse brought more to the table than most are willing to concede, and obviously enough for one of the most genius musicians of all time to keep on as a full time sideman. Let’s be honest enough to admit that Monk kinda knew great tenor men when he met them.

I wonder who is least appreciated. Rouse with Monk, or Coleman in his short stint with Miles?

I disagree as well. There’s simply too much projection involved.

Exactly. Stereo systems were more prevalent in the U.S. than they were in Europe at the time, so their main focus was on the mono mix because that was how the bulk of their fans would be playing it back.

This has always amused me, the disdain so many have for Monk's Columbia period. And Rouse, more often than not being the focal point as to why. Sorry, but Live At The It Club, Live At The Jazz Workshop, as well as Monk In Tokyo are arguably the best live Monk albums in existence. That band was super tight, super sympathetic and played some really wonderful music together.

Sgt. Pepper was release in both formats.

Take the words on their own. Seperate them from Monk/Rouse. I’m taking them at their literal meaning. You’re apologizing and quibbling because it’s Monk/Rouse. I’m talking about the language being used. Yeah, language counts. Holy fuck, right?

So are the words I highlighted. Let’s not play make believe here, fair enough?

Is it? What do things like “took over Rouse” and “submissive/suppressive” imply? “Took over” implies ownership, and “submissive” implies giving in to your superior. Can’t imagine how one would see that as a master/slave dynamic, right?

Great. Now we’ve entered straw man land...

Whatever you wish to believe, brother. Rouse already had several dates as a leader under his belt before the Columbia years with Monk. Your master/slave argument is actually quite demeaning and insulting towards Rouse.

Sorry, Larry and Peter. But I find those arguments completely absurd. “Took over Rouse”? “Decreased his creativity”? There was a “submissive/suppressive” quality? So tell me, gents. Why didn’t Monk do the same thing to Coltrane? Or Rollins? Or Griffin? If he had, then you both would have a legitimate argument. Instead all you have is baseless projections. I’ll go back to something a buddy of mine once said to me when I was ripping on a Smooth Jazz artist he was fond of: Maybe he plays that way because he LIKES to play that way.

24 hours of nonstop infotainment? Tha’s a fate worse than death.

Yeah, but how can you discount how he was so in tune with Monk that he completely rebuilt his style to play in that vein. IMO, that is wildly impressive.

Well then, count me in as well. When he played with Monk he approached his solos in exactly the same way Monk did, by playing with and reworking the main theme. I found this to be brilliant, and a definitive breath of fresh air over the Coltrane/Rollins/Griffin styles that came before. They were great, mind you, but none encapsulated the awkward brilliance of Monk’s tunes like Rouse did.

I'm assuming he meant remaster, not remix. You're understanding of the term is correct. Unless they recorded the concert on a four track machine and simply mastered it in mono, which I highly doubt.

Let’s not be melodramatic here. Nobody is saying she is talentless, they’re just commenting on what they’ve been presented, which hasn’t been terribly impressive. But she loves what she does and likes to make people smile. Those are some highly admirable qualities.

Steve Lacy says hello.

Darrelle Reavis isn’t the bastion of intellectualism I’d be using to prop up my argument. I’ve been watching professional football longer than he’s been alive. I know good players from bad.

I diagree. How would a session with Eric Dolphy and Thelonious Monk have turned out is fun to speculate. You’re wanting to actually subtract from one of the greatest Jazz catalogs in history. That doesn’t strike me as fun.

It’s not even alternative or speculative. It’s more like retroactive wish casting. “God, if only Pops had never pulled the trumpet away from his mouth and started singing...” Now, I’m not a fan of fusion. But you’ll never hear me say, “If only Miles had never plugged shit in.” These things happened, and are historically significant. But, OK. Ornette and the trumpet thing...

It’s akin to saying you can’t critique a professional football player if you never played professional football. What an incredibly silly argument.

You ever wonder why he never played those tunes on tenor? I mean, Coltrane love to search, explore, experiment. So why didn’t he change horns for any of those tunes? Hell, he played an alto in Japan in his quest to explore every possibility.

So no Softly As In A Morning Sunrise, India, Your Lady, Spiritual, Vilia, Afro Blue, The Promise, and Living Space? Those themselves are a greatest hits compilation.