Frankie Dunlop on Monk's rhythm sections

[Tom Storer]

Ethan Iverson's Do the Math blog has a good piece on Frankie Dunlop and John Ore, who were with Monk in the early 60's. The blog links to an interview with Dunlop that another blog, Cruise Ship Drummer, got from a 1985 Modern Drummer magazine interview (whew).

Anyway, I was struck by the following observation by Dunlop:

Monk always liked an exceptionally strong bass man and drummer. The reason you heard so much straight playing was because Monk didn't consider it a rhythm section—even though it was a quartet—unless it had the driving sound—the dynamics and the attack of a heavy, hard-driving section like those of Count Basie or Duke Ellington. That was the way Monk thought. Rhythmically, his conception was not like the average quartet. From the first beat, Monk's quartet would be just like the rhythm section of any good big band—just like Woody Herman stomping off "Woodchopper's Ball" or "Northwest Passage." We played a little louder than the average quartet, but basically we played with a lot of dynamics. We were just four pieces, but all of Monk's things would be hard-driving.

I can see just what he means. Monk's harmonies and rhythmic quirks were very modern but the basic swing of his groups was strong, clear and emphatic. Even when he had bebop innovators like Roach, Blakey or Haynes, the bass was walking strong. None of that let's-all-converse rhythm section interaction for him. Function, function, function.

Here's Dunlop with Monk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qweSlfP6BtI

[Ron Thorne]

Thanks for sharing this, Tom.

Those were interesting, insightful comments from Frankie Dunlop. It's true that Monk's core was "driven", not unlike their leader. I remember being overwhelmed at times when I first heard Monk's band as a teenager. It was a bit of sensory and rhythmic overload. As a young drummer myself, I was trying to process what I was hearing, which was often very challenging.

Here's another piece from the same 1963 concert in Japan . . . Epistrophy. It's a bit tamer than Evidence, but it's still emphatic, rhythmically. Monk is evidence that the piano is a percussion instrument!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZ9El7k4mNo

[Tom Storer]

The older I get, the more I appreciate clarity and economy of means in music, in the jazz rhythm section in particular. A blistering, busy solo by a master drummer still does it for me, but in general I'm more impressed when the ideas are expressed with more focused and streamlined playing. Same goes for horns. I'd rather hear a saxophonist play a real melodic development with fewer notes than race up and down the scales working up a sweat.

[Ron Thorne]

I'm with you completely on the economy of notes issue, Tom. I've been in that camp for a long time.

As a drummer, I always enjoyed playing good time and complementing my fellow musicians far more than having a spotlight shine on me as a soloist. Textures, nuance and tasteful embellishments at the right moment were always more meaningful to me, personally. One of the biggest music-related compliments I ever received was when a bandmate declared that I played very tastefully and had "big ears".