hardwork said:

You can find Bruno Mars type "talent" in any off-strip Vegas lounge act at one in the morning.

On a Tuesday.

Bingo.

MickyDolenz said:

phunkdaddy said:

Charlie's vocal style with the Gap Band always resembled P Funk

He sounds more like Stevie Wonder to me.

You're right in a nutshell particularly on ballads but on the funky tunes Charlie borrowed a little George Clinton P Funk slang. Oh yeah u gone dance sucka! I like the collaboration they did in 1995.

true!

hardwork said:

You can find Bruno Mars type "talent" in any off-strip Vegas lounge act at one in the morning.

On a Tuesday.

hardwork said:

You can find Bruno Mars type "talent" in any off-strip Vegas lounge act at one in the morning.

On a Tuesday.

LOL!

[Edited 12/20/16 6:39am]

hardwork said:

You can find Bruno Mars type "talent" in any off-strip Vegas lounge act at one in the morning.

On a Tuesday.

Well there is no denying that Bruno is not innovative. However, what he is trying to do with bringing old school sounding sounds into the mainstream is good for pop music currently. Trap music is taking over the air waves and I at least give Bruno credit for trying to bring some real instruments and actual music back into the current climate whether its innovative or not.

mjscarousal said:

hardwork said:

You can find Bruno Mars type "talent" in any off-strip Vegas lounge act at one in the morning.

On a Tuesday.

Well there is no denying that Bruno is not innovative. However, what he is trying to do with bringing old school sounding sounds into the mainstream is good for pop music currently. Trap music is taking over the air waves and I at least give Bruno credit for trying to bring some real instruments and actual music back into the current climate whether its innovative or not.

This! I applaud Bruno for taking this early eighties funk/R&B sound back into popular music and I think the lawsuits are ridiculous. Yeah, Uptown Funk and 24K Magic are both using that early eighties funk idiom, but the songs stand on their own and there is no need to sue IMO. It is a very dangerous and unhealthy development that could very well cripple the complete music industry.

And who the fuck are Collage anyway??? Like Tony Van Dam said, these guys have no original sound at all, they just used the idiom that was made popular around that time by other more important artists to create another funky dancefloor cut, in the same vein as many songs of their competitors at that time. They don't deserve a dime in my opinion.

funkaholic1972 said:

Graycap23 said:

Scorp said:

The lawsuits are more than just If these contemporaries would take the time and effort to make their own music, they wouldn't wind up being sued. The artists who really made this nusuc are not getting the recognition they deserve and the public is not being told who's really behind the music they are jamming to

Is that why John Lennon was sued for Come Together, George Harrison for My Sweet Lord, & George Michael for Waiting For That Day. George Martin has said that he used sound library records for some Beatles songs, and to get out of paying a fee, did it in a way that was not noticeable. How about James Brown copying the riff from David Bowie's Fame in his song Hot? In his song Praise, Marvin Gaye even says in the lyrics he hopes Stevie Wonder doesn't mind that he copied his riff. People have always copied. It has nothing to do with sampling. It's been said that Shakespeare copied and that was hundreds of years ago. It's not like Collage was ever popular in the first place, so why would anyone know them today. There's thousands, maybe millions, of obscure acts all over the world, since the recording industry began.

MickyDolenz said:

Scorp said:

The lawsuits are more than just If these contemporaries would take the time and effort to make their own music, they wouldn't wind up being sued. The artists who really made this nusuc are not getting the recognition they deserve and the public is not being told who's really behind the music they are jamming to

Is that why John Lennon was sued for Come Together, George Harrison for My Sweet Lord, & George Michael for Waiting For That Day. George Martin has said that he used sound library records for some Beatles songs, and to get out of paying a fee, did it in a way that was not noticeable. How about James Brown copying the riff from David Bowie's Fame in his song Hot? In his song Praise, Marvin Gaye even says in the lyrics he hopes Stevie Wonder doesn't mind that he copied his riff. People have always copied. It has nothing to do with sampling. It's been said that Shakespeare copied and that was hundreds of years ago. It's not like Collage was ever popular in the first place, so why would anyone know them today. There's thousands, maybe millions, of obscure acts all over the world, since the recording industry began.

it's over, since the late 80s, I can roll up and read the song credits on just about every album out there, including the albums/CDs I've bought over time where sampling has been the featured attraction and what the album's music was based on and relied on......this destroyed r&b music to the core, everyone from every genre tapped into it and left it barren......

and the proof is in the pudding, most of these lawsuits today that we are reading about such as this one involves the sampling and mispresentation of music used regarding R&B artists of the 70s and 80s and there's going to be more to come

which shows that real R&B during that time was the richest music on earth

Scorp said:

and the proof is in the pudding, most of these lawsuits today that we are reading about such as this one involves the sampling and mispresentation of music used regarding R&B artists of the 70s and 80s and there's going to be more to come

Samples have to be cleared, and if the song is a hit that's money for the original writers. Without sampling, they wouldn't make the revenue, especially for old out of print records that nobody can buy. Even if someone buys a used copy, or on ebay or something, the act doesn't get paid for that. In a lot of cases the acts didn't get paid for the original sale. Decades ago, many performers would get a car, fur coat, drugs, etc. instead of royalties. Or the label heads would put their names on songs an act wrote at the copyright office to get the royalties.

.

Daryl Hall said he likes sampling and is glad that Hall & Oates have been sampled. Paul McCartney said he would let people sample The Beatles music, but that it is Parlophone, their label that refuses to clear samples. Paul said he heard and liked the Grey Album by Danger Mouse.

funkaholic1972 said:

mjscarousal said:

Well there is no denying that Bruno is not innovative. However, what he is trying to do with bringing old school sounding sounds into the mainstream is good for pop music currently. Trap music is taking over the air waves and I at least give Bruno credit for trying to bring some real instruments and actual music back into the current climate whether its innovative or not.

This! I applaud Bruno for taking this early eighties funk/R&B sound back into popular music and I think the lawsuits are ridiculous. Yeah, Uptown Funk and 24K Magic are both using that early eighties funk idiom, but the songs stand on their own and there is no need to sue IMO. It is a very dangerous and unhealthy development that could very well cripple the complete music industry.

And who the fuck are Collage anyway??? Like Tony Van Dam said, these guys have no original sound at all, they just used the idiom that was made popular around that time by other more important artists to create another funky dancefloor cut, in the same vein as many songs of their competitors at that time. They don't deserve a dime in my opinion.

Bruno gives credit where it is due and always cites his influences.

He has never called himself original or innovative.

MickyDolenz said:

Scorp said:

and the proof is in the pudding, most of these lawsuits today that we are reading about such as this one involves the sampling and mispresentation of music used regarding R&B artists of the 70s and 80s and there's going to be more to come

Samples have to be cleared, and if the song is a hit that's money for the original writers. Without sampling, they wouldn't make the revenue, especially for old out of print records that nobody can buy. Even if someone buys a used copy, or on ebay or something, the act doesn't get paid for that. In a lot of cases the acts didn't get paid for the original sale. Decades ago, many performers would get a car, fur coat, drugs, etc. instead of royalties. Or the label heads would put their names on songs an act wrote at the copyright office to get the royalties.

.

Daryl Hall said he likes sampling and is glad that Hall & Oates have been sampled. Paul McCartney said he would let people sample The Beatles music, but that it is Parlophone, their label that refuses to clear samples. Paul said he heard and liked the Grey Album by Danger Mouse.

as I've said before, this is an issue that has proliferated in the realm of the real authentic r&b music and the artists who produced that music in the 70s and 80s, that realm of music has served as the lifeline of the music industry over the past quarter centry, if that body of music was omitted, there would be no industry today because the industry has evolved to the point where it wants to take the lesser road travelled

instead of praising contemporaries who "re-introduce" music of the past, that's really not their intended goal, they're not doing it to give props to those who created it, they are exploiting it most for their own benefit......

and what you pointed out is the root of what's going on today, the artists who generated that music was not allowed to gain their own songrights which made it possible for the music labels who represented them use their music anyway they wanted.....

the reason a Darryl Hall is saying that he's glad his music is being sampled is because acts like he and John Oates were phased out by the late 80s where the environment and the shift from the talent perspective to that of image made it very difficult for them to extend their careers beyond the 80s

the late Don Cornelius says it best about what's really going on

when everythign is tapped out, then what?

[Edited 11/3/16 19:32pm]

Superstition said:

The first time I heard Uptown Funk, the only song I could think of was this, a song by Tom Browne featuring Stevie Wonder's longtime backing vocalist Keith John:

Now THAT'S^ funky!

TonyVanDam said:

Superstition said:

The first time I heard Uptown Funk, the only song I could think of was this, a song by Tom Browne featuring Stevie Wonder's longtime backing vocalist Keith John:

Now THAT'S^ funky!

Definately!

mjscarousal said:

hardwork said:

You can find Bruno Mars type "talent" in any off-strip Vegas lounge act at one in the morning.

On a Tuesday.

Well there is no denying that Bruno is not innovative. However, what he is trying to do with bringing old school sounding sounds into the mainstream is good for pop music currently. Trap music is taking over the air waves and I at least give Bruno credit for trying to bring some real instruments and actual music back into the current climate whether its innovative or not.

I agree it's great he's doing that, and that many are enjoying it, both young and old.

Superstition said:

The first time I heard Uptown Funk, the only song I could think of was this, a song by Tom Browne featuring Stevie Wonder's longtime backing vocalist Keith John:

The Synth on this is funky as hell. It's also a little Gap Bandish.

But yeah seems like Mark borrowed some of this.

phunkdaddy said:

alphastreet said:

Scorp said:

Instead of sampling all the time Why cant they make their own music Why is this so hard for them to do this

Sampling should have been dealt with in 1979,when the Sugarhill Gang ripped off Chic's "Good Times".Instead it was allowed to continue and that has led us to where we are now

I think this is ridculous mark ronson and bruno clearly came up with this song while jamming and theres many funk songs that sound alike. Those other people can go kick rocks and get a job.

heathilly said:

I think this is ridculous mark ronson and bruno clearly came up with this song while jamming and theres many funk songs that sound alike. Those other people can go kick rocks and get a job.

they didn't come up with that.....

there's at the very least five riffs that were appropriated from major r&b classics from the 80s......

Scorp said:

heathilly said:

I think this is ridculous mark ronson and bruno clearly came up with this song while jamming and theres many funk songs that sound alike. Those other people can go kick rocks and get a job.

they didn't come up with that.....

there's at the very least five riffs that were appropriated from major r&b classics from the 80s......

I heard the story how they came up with it, they were jamming and it eventually turned into a song it was very organic. Of course their both obviously inspired by that funk sound to a fault in my opinion but its definatly an original composition born out of the love for that sound of music. And these people will find that out the hard way after they waste their money on lawyers leaving broker than when they started. This is just like the led zepplin spirit case to me facile similarities being the charge of plagarism. And led zeppilin or bruno mars arnt all that innovative to me but in both cases its case of someone envying another success. Once again collage or whatever there called can kick rocks.

[Edited 12/20/16 6:29am]

Scorp said:

heathilly said:

I think this is ridculous mark ronson and bruno clearly came up with this song while jamming and theres many funk songs that sound alike. Those other people can go kick rocks and get a job.

they didn't come up with that.....

there's at the very least five riffs that were appropriated from major r&b classics from the 80s......

So true, I hear The Time, Gap Band, Roger Troutman, EWF type horn licks, George Johnson/Larry Graham bass patterns etc etc etc. Its a great song but in reality they owe a lot of royalties to too many groups/bands/artists! From now on when you are obviously ripping off the funk, a simple mention such as a "tribute" of an artist or just share the writing credit to avoid the bad publicity ala Marvin Gaye law suit. Its not like they cant afford it.