I just thought about this just now: How can the FUNK go any further than it already has? I mean, what other new and exciting direction can the funk go into? I mean, Hip-Hop apparently is the child of Funk, so that must be the way it's going. It's like, JB had his funk, then Sly, then George and his empire, then EWF, then Prince, and so forth.

But it seems like folks wanna hear an organic old school version of Funk. But that's not really moving forward if you're trying to re-create something from the past. That would just seem nostalgist and trite.

The way I see it is if you want a successful new spin on the FUNK, then try and think of some of new and exciting additions to make it seen fresh.

Am I right or wrong?

Real musicians with a new vision who've stewed in the old stuff and other new artists and are inspired to make it their own



Only the talentless or warped believe there's no place left to go.



Shit hop is the child of the uninspired, the talentless, the lazy, the cheap, the disrespectful, the misguided



No one wants that.

I think what Prince was doing on the Parade album was IMO the last time funk truly felt like it had progressed to another level. I think it's got to be taken from there. Parade was as funky as hell. You can also add Lovesexy to that also. Those records had a real ensemble feel to them. Black and white musicians just working together with a great leader.
[Edited 1/30/08 21:44pm]

The Jackson's should do a reunion album produced by Quincy Jones with musicians like Bootsy Collins, Catfish Collins and Bernie Worrell. That would so nuff bring funk back.

DarlingDiana said:

But that was what I was saying before. That would just sound nostalgist to try and resurrect the old school funk sounds. However, if they did come back and update their image (without pandering to whatever's mainstream at the moment), and have a funky fresh approach then maybe it'll work. I'd like to hear them sound like 2008, not 1978.

NWF said:

Yeh, it would be cool if the Jacksons got together and made music with people more their age like Bootsy Collins and that, but I would like them to try for a fresh sound and not just recreate the 70's Jackson, P-Funk or JB's sound.

One of the most important aspects of classic funk recordings was that they weren't of the best sound quality imaginable (even by 70s standards), and that also the electronic instruments were of a rather different kind than today. Humans are funky, they have a natural flair of funk, but when artists today desperately try to "recapture the spirit" of the old recordings with recording direct to hard disk by using their nord lead and virus synths it's not that just something is missing - something else should not be there as well. The funk is about the all-prevailing cosmic GAP that should manifest itself constantly on each bar for the as-yet-to-be-funkified subject. The GAP is meant to be confronted, like the brief visits to freudian death drive - hell it is the DEATH DRIVE as such - and the mark of authenticity was inscribed to this set of cultural signifiers already decades ago due to the classic albums. You'll have to understand that even if the meaning, by deafult, would arrive from the future (as best exemplified the question of potency in the form of the thread title that still indicates progressive time as a promise for the arrive of final enjoyment), the validation terms are still firmly rooted to the archaic past. Now, I'm not using the expression "archaic" here for light purposes only: the inherent WISDOM of funk is very much equivalent to the antic age in history, as lost but constantly referenced. One can only think of Hegel's famous thought that the mysteries of the egyptiants were mysteries for the egyptians themselves as well, and the same applies in this context. You have the transcendental signifier incarnated in the form of Brown, Stone, Clinton, Collins, but as such they also merely represented something highly vauge (in the positive sense of the term) for their contemporaries as parts of parts in the process (and this is a bit controversial thought, since fragmentation usually follows only after the divisive act of an utterance that perverts the law, but since the flow of time is in a way here reversed for conceptual purposes it doesn't pose a huge problem theoretically). Namely they formed collectives and supporters, and the meaning of funk was inscribed to a form of shared subjectivity which was fundamentally tied to the EVENTS of their historical time (and the word "historical" is not meant to be taken here lightly). The thing about intersubjective events is that, by rule, they have to be left behind and abandoned so that new cultural meanings can manifest themselves from the un-dead state they would be otherwise confined to, and where the spectators of an event would be abandoned like the existential waste of ethical theory that doesn't concern the actual living agent. What is needed is a firm STATEMENT - in the contect of funk this is best exemplified by a classic LONG-PLAY, a choice between the EGO and a re-newed subject. However, to renew is in these frames a form of "reproduction" - as best exemplified by the lacanian formula of analysis / act of matter: a / S2 -> $ / S1, where the position of the agent is occupied by the excessive part of pleasure that is inherent in all experiences, and consequently, the place of the product (final field) is occupied by a new phenomenal reduction of the transcendental signifier. This is why Clinton introduced the concept of "the clone", which is no less a philosophically valid thought than the kantian affirmation of beauty via the standards of nature's distintrestedness. "The clone" designates a mode of reproduction that attempts to fight back time by creating the organic yet non-subconscious lamella of the "un-dead" in form the new law - a multiplying signifying attempt. Ultimately where we are situated in this formation is the very same gap that was mentioned already in the context of musical equipment that is pivotal in the creation of funk. This break or cut is nature's rule and must be exercised without exceptions, because with it the GROOVE would not be possible. One must dare to fail, to allow the final shreds of subjectivity to be soaked in the abyssal waters of the four elements: here already reduced to the mathemes of a, S2, $ - also connoting the ancient elements of EARTH, WIND and FIRE. It is up to you, as the non-barred subject at this intersubjective event, TO BE THE WATER YOUSELF. You must locate yourself within the transcendental signifying instance of the abyssal WATER, in the place of the re-product, and complete the circle-of-four yourself. Not as a choice of the freudian EGO (as a source for the unethical enjoyment of the parental commandment to "do wrong", but rather to "Do The Right Thing"), but as a choice of renewed law - yet not with a sustained belief in the law as valid just because of its antique statue, but because the law will provide meaning with its own mechanism of non-meaning. This all of course harks back to the ideas of being and non-being of Parmenides when he also tackled the primary elements and like all of his contemporaries was supposed to have made a choice, but that's another story. The CHOICE is up to YOU, as long as you will PLAY (the exercise of the signifying chain as an accepted source of, both desire and enjoyment) and you will PLAY LONG. The non-being of being that can be harnessed for creative purposes demands a horrifying visit to the edges of the abyssal VOID, but one must simply take it in order to sustain at least a partially faithful relationship with the mastering rule of the REAL ENJOYMENT.


What I am really saying here is that I'm nuts.

Dance said:[quote]

You couldn't be more wrong. Oldschool Funk hasn't been as strong as since the mid-1970s. We are currently experiencing a huge revival. There's an entire global scene of new Funk bands focusing on the sound of oldschool Funk, and a lot of these bands are pretty successful.

In Europe, there's The New Mastersounds from Leeds (UK), Speedometer, The Sound Stylistics, Cookin' on 3 Burners (all from London), The Sweet Vandals (Madrid). Nichole Willis and the Soul Investigators (Finland), The Shaolin Temple Defenders (France), The Poets of Rhythm (Germany). In Japan, you got Osaka Monaurail. In the United States you got Charles Walker and the Dynamites, Breakestra and of course Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings, who have sold more than 100,000 records and even made it on the Conan O'Brian Show. Even in Australia there's The Bamboos. I could mention a lot of more groups. Most of these acts constantly tour worldwide, release albums and yes, they also release 45s.

There are record labels who focus exclusively on oldschool Funk, like Freestyle, Jazzman, Soulbrother, Funk 45 (UK), Timmon (Finland), Unique, Melting Pot, Tramp (Germany), Big Cheese, Hi&Fly, Sausage Records (France), Mighty High (Australia), Daptone, Deepfunk, Kay-Dee, Outta Sight (US).

Together with a partner, I run my own label in Japan called Shout Records, and we've released half a dozen albums and more than a dozen 45s over the past few years and will release much more this year. A lot of these labels also re-isse Funk from the old days.

Apart from the new Funk acts, many of the oldschool artists still tour successfully. I run my own booking agency, and as a DJ I have done more than 150 shows on four continents in the past three years alone, including artists like James Brown, Bobby Byrd, Marva Whitney, Vicki Anderson, Martha High, Sweet Charles, Roy Ayers, Gwen McCrae, RAMP, Pee Wee Ellis, Fred Wesley and many others. And I could count on one hand the show that were not well attended. Other artists like Marlena Shaw, George Clinton, Maceo, Kim Weston, the Headhunters and many more are constantly touring as well.

There's also an entire network of Funk DJs who tour worldwide constantly.

Of course this global Funk movement is not mainstream - it's an underground scene. But it's a big scene. So if you claim that no one wants to hear organic oldschool Funk, you are utterly mistaken.
[Edited 1/31/08 8:04am]

sosgemini said:

He's okay, but nowhere near...

MrSoulpower said:

So where are these people in the US besides who you've mentioned? I mean is there a physical place that is more open to Funk? I'm only asking because I need to be in a band that understands the power of live funk.

The average person doesn't get my musical obsession that is funk and soul. Every person I try to play with just has no clue. People say, just "incorporate that into the overall style of the band" and I'm disgusted by the thought. No, funk doesn't compromise, soul doesn't get "added" to a classic rock band, the thought is ridiculous.

People I know are like "it's cultural and it's not YOUR culture" and my response is exactly what you've posted here, tell them it's cultural in Asia where they're kickin it live. In Detroit, there's got to be SOMEONE who gets it, doesn't think it's a dated and obsolete music and wants to pound it out on the two and four for the next 20 years of their life.

Slave2daGroove said:

You are based in Detroit? I haven't worked there yet. I just moved back to the States from Europe last May and I've been busy working in Europe and Japan since, so I didn't really have the chance to work here in the U.S.

Generally, there's a Funk scene in every larger American city. Even here in Richmond, we have a couple of hundred Funk nuts who show up at every event we do here. And there's a couple of live bands, too. The Funk crowd is usually based in the college crowd. Younger hip folks, and I'm sad to say, mostly white. When I first moved to the States in the 90s, I went to look for people who dig Funk and I looked at R&B clubs. As you probably know, Funk is dead there. It took me a few months to connect with the right people.

But if you really want me to find out where the Detroit Funk scene (including musicians) hangs out, I can do that. Just a matter of making a few calls.

WildheartXXX said:

Parade ??? Last funk album ???

krayzie said:

That's what happens when you limit Funk to Prince, who, ironically, is not even a Funk artist.

everything prince ever did rock ,jazz ,pop everything had funk stamp on it,he is funk atrist

thebanishedone said:

Sorry man, I strongly disagree. He's a Pop artist who travels through all musical styles, from Rock to Jazz to Blues to Funk. And he definetely knows how to play Funk. But he cannot be considered a Funk artist. And I think he would not want to be viewed as such.

need the original instruments to get that true sound. funk had a look to it. no one is that brave to wear it in my opinion. would be nice though.

chewwsey said:

A lot of Funk bands today use the original vintage equipment. Osaka Monaurail use the same backline as James Brown did in 1971. No drum raiser, same stage polt, same amps, B3 with leslie, no monitors at all. They even have their uniforms custom tailored according to the look of the JB's in '71.

In the 90s, there was a killer Funk band in L.A., the Polyester Players. I used to DJ at their weekly gigs at Luna Park. The brothers all wore vintage outfits .. from Polyester shirts to permanent pressed pants, Afros, platform shoes, fur coats. These guys actually pulled it off without looking ridiculous. The music was tight to. Guitarist and leader G-Mack used to play with Stevie Wonder. I remember many artist coming by and sitting in. Chaka Khan came a few times and played drums. Mica Paris was there.

I don't know what they are up to these days. I heard that their singer, Pretty Terry, got shot and burnt a few years ago. Sad story.

I'm sure that theAudience will know what's going on with the Players these days ..
[Edited 1/31/08 10:47am]

MrSoulpower said:

I've many time stated on this board over the years that a surprisingly low percentage of Prince's songs are actually funk if you systematically would categorize all the individual titles from his released output. However, I do think that he himself wants to be seen as a funk artist if he'd have to pick just one genre to define himself.

novabrkr said:

I agree. I know that some Prince fans claim that he's a Funk artist, but that's wishthinking. Prince has never recorded one straight Funk record. There's funky tracks here and there, but he's never done a Funk album. And even his funky tracks usually mix with other styles ...
[Edited 1/31/08 10:52am]

another great thread..
Mr soulpower..Thank you !
you have been saving my fingers from a hell of a lot of writing lately !
Thanks!

prettymansson said:

Maybe you can orgnote me one day and let me know who you are. Seems like we know a lot of the same people.

To the original question of what can be done to advance FUNK.

Herbie Hancock dropped a few hints...



...Augment the "one-line vamp" with more complex melodic/harmonic/rhythmic/improvisational interest.



tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431

I thought that about prince too. he isn't funk really after soft and wet and songs like that. he just jammed really well.

I didn't know a lot of them instruments are able to be found. I know the beasties cop a lot of that stuff for their music.

mr. soulpower It seems like yall had a great band! we have some bands thaat play old school stuff (funk) but it is with your standard instruments.

chewwsey said:

The choice of instruments can make a huge difference. When we tour with Marva Whitney and Osaka Monaurail (who back her up), we use the real deal backline.

It gotta be a Hammond B3 with leslie cabinet. But sometimes the Hammond XK-2, XK-3 and Korg BX-3 works as well to creat the dirty hammond sound. Then you gotta have two Fender twin amps (you gotta have two guitars to create the authentic James Brown sound), one Ampeg bass amp. For the drums, keep it simple. Many modern Funk drummers think that the more gear you got, the better it sounds. That's the wrong approach. Just a 20"kick drum, snare drum, only one 12" rack tom, 14" floor tom, 14" hi hats, 20" ride cymbal and a 18" crash cymbal - there you get the best funky beat machine you can get. Now you just need a drummer who can play it.
And another thing - don't use effects whatsoever unless you want to play P-Funk.

These guys definitely have a nostalgic throwback, but I always thought a group called Breakestra made some sweet sweet funk, and they are very recent, look em up.

They do like to mash some modern sounds and recording techniques into their sound too.

savoirfaire said:

Breakestra are fantastic and your are right, they do have a very fresh approach to Funk.

Perhaps one way to create new funk is to go back to the main sources of the 'genre' (if so it be) - Gospel, Afro Latin rhythms and sounds, '50s R n'B and hardbop jazz.

One way to 'refresh' the funk for today would imo be for Funk just to be itself - to offer heavy grooves, horns, humour, that strange, compelling power that James Brown at his best brought to it (tho he was unique in his charisima I suppose). But Funk, removed from its original cultural and political place in time and space becomes 'alien', and often 'cheesy'. So, it must talk about today in the language(s) of today. Funk needs to be more a 'lineage' than a slavish copy of its past glories, for it to have any chance beyond the underground.

To get a little theoretical - Funk is imo at heart a modal music, based on rhythm and abstract melody, rather than one based on full chords and fully stated melody, so maybe if musicians drew more on other modal musics in West and North Africa and their off-shoots in Spain (ie Flamenco), there may be possibilities. Middle Eastern sounds are also mode-based and are closely related to older Flamenco forms, but would the audience approve, especially in today's polarised world, I wonder? Similarly, the traditional musics of the British Isles and India are all basically modal. We had a little 'folk funk' before ...

Funk can also mix quite satisfyingly imo with certain forms of country music too, as both come out of the Blues.


For me, the prime source of funk, is, ironically, the black Church. Some preachers and congregations' natural ways of testifyin' and'getting down' to the Lord inspired everything from James Brown and Bobby Byrd's whole act (okay, add Ali's cloak anyway ) to George Clinton's 'rapping' style. As an aside, I once glimpsed ancient film of the Dixie Hummingbirds black gospel group IIRC in full effect, and was stunned. So that's where James got it all from, I thought , However, while the 'Gospel Lineage' has been passed throughout soul and funk music down the ages, the Church may not be the hippest way of bringing Funk to the 'kids' .

On topic once more -

More realistically, Funk, commercially imo had its ten years or so, and was then naturally if unimaginitively absorbed by disco and hip hop. In my experience, few people outside the funk cognescenti are even aware of Funk as a genre nowadays, and seem to view even James Brown as some freaky soul artist with mad hair and great teeth (there is a grain of truth in all this, I suppose). His 'true role' in the development of modern pop music is not widely understood. People laugh if you even quote him as the central inspiration of Michael Jackson (James too 'black' to influence the 'white' Jackson perhaps), Sly seems to be a dimly remembered pop artist with a couple of summer hits and George Clinton is more like 'George Who?' As these are arguably the three central figures in Funk (Larry Graham and Clyde Stubblefield etc aside), what hope is there for any new artists to have major success beyond some one hit wonder novelty?

As Mr Soulpower points out, there are numerous underground Funk scenes around the world, just as there are with less 'commercial' rock, jazz, metal etc.
And imo, that is where most of them will stay, and that is no bad thing. Very few if any music forms have two major heydays decades apart.

And, ironically after all the above, imo it is very important not to think too deeply about Funk if you are trying to play it or take it 'forward', as it is all about 'feel' (as all music should be imo. To get a little Zen Bruce Lee here, there is a place for the mind in Funk, but the mind must be taken to the level of instinct before a single note be played. The mind then informs the 'feel' and the 'feel' informs the mind) But the 'feel' must always rule. Imo, and with due respect to tA's post here, certain (but not all) 'jazz funk' bands of the '70s showed us the pitfalls of over-intellectualising funk ).

Who'd have thought Bruce Lee was an expert on Funk?