Monk minus Monk = this album
nathan | Oakland, CA. USA | 09/22/2000
(1 out of 5 stars)
"This album is Monk if you subtract everything that made him a true, quirky-but-methodical original, and the greatest jazz composer ever (or at least tied with Duke for the title). No edges, no grit, no shards...no "brilliant corners", you might say. To be fair, this sort of middling approach may have value to some listeners, and perhaps it will turn someone on to the originals, so perhaps it is not a total waste. At any rate, it's hard for these ears to take. Why not buy a Steve Lacy record instead?"
Great Jazz?
Michael L. Lewis | Tulsa, Oklahoma United States | 08/16/2003
(2 out of 5 stars)
"I love Monk to death and am always exicited when I see/hear someone playing Monks Music. He is simply one of the greatest composers ever, period! He had more imagination and creativity in his writing and playing than anyone else, no discussion needed. Having said that I was disappointed in this CD (unforunately). I always thought Wynton needed to loosen up on his jazz playing and had hoped that in playing Monk's compositons he would be able to do that. Even though he was exposed to Jazz at an early age it almost seems like he learned his classical musicianship too well as he seems like a classical musician playing jazz. It just misses being great jazz. My feeling is why listen to almost great jazz when there is so much great jazz around that you can listened to. I also thought some of the horns tone and overall sound were a little bright sounding and didn't have the richness it needed for Monks music. I am not sure if this is a recording issue or playing issue. As always though he has a great rhythm section behind him. I have heard a liitle of his live CD's at the Village Vanguard and have liked what I have heard and will be buying that. Maybe he just needs to record his jazz live only."
One Of The Worst Interpretations Of Monk Tunes I Ever Heard
J. Rich | 03/24/2008
(1 out of 5 stars)
"Wynton Marsalis is a great trumpeter. No question that he can swing with the best of them. Unfortunately, this "Standard Time" is the second weakest of the "Standard Time" series. Like all great music, it has to be evaluated carefully.
Here's a brief analysis of "Marsalis Plays Monk" -
The playing on the recording, while all-around good, doesn't do anything for me. It's too static and formulaic. The improvisations aren't that great. Marsalis seems to be holding back a bit from letting his imagination do any real kind of creative thinking. It sounds as though he's just going through the motions instead of trying to capture Monk's music. It sounds almost like it's too "New Orleans" to be Monk. I'm fully aware of where Marsalis came from, but Monk's music doesn't really lend itself to this kind of treatment. In fact, Monk's best work is with smaller groups like a quartet. There are too many instruments not blending well together. The unison lines are sloppy and need more rehearsing. This record sounds more like a jam session.
People can say what they want to about this record, but to me, it doesn't hold up very well and it is, for lack of a better word, uninspired."