...




I originally brought this up during tA's thread about "Today's Equivalents in Jazz/Rock/R&B,etc."

Not too long ago, someone posted on both Okayplayer and Rollingstone.com about attending a taping of The TV show, "The Next Great American Band". The poster claimed that after hearing a an extremely kool funk band, the first judge, John Reznik, voted yes, but the second judge, Sheila E (of all people) supposedly said, “I love George Clinton, but I’m gonna have to say no, because Soul & Funk is not marketable!"



and yeah, that's sad and pitiful...but after my initial shock, I thought, hasn't the Music Industry really come to that sorry state now? I guess it's pointless to expect anything from them by now...

But is there anything considered "Soul& Funk" that average people (not connoisseurs and music fanatics) would buy in serious droves these days?

There's still a number of us on the fringe, willing to chase down the latest Soulive, Meshell Ndegeocello, Frank McComb, Mint Condition, or Anthony Hamilton, etc, etc, as well as the latest reissues of classic albums... but we seem to make up a very small part of the public...

But more to the point, does your average person care that much about Music in general? Really, I keep getting the sense that most people just want something to get pumped up to, something to make love to, or something to put in the background and ignore. They seem to be vaguely aware that music on radio, or tv isn't quite as good as it used to be, but not enough to be really bothered by it....






...
[Edited 1/31/08 7:37am]

Check out this thread: http://prince.org/msg/8/259702

Soul and Funk is definetely marketable.

MrSoulpower said:

You know your stuff MrSoulpower

It's an odd view, because as far as I can tell from old statistics, soul and funk records for the most part couldn't really compete with the white music market place in the 70s either. The only way to make the music profitable would be to cut back on recording costs, record the stuff in home studios (probably would mean more drum machines and no horns, but that should be no obstacle for an old school feel). Then move the promotion to internet and have the fans get used to buying records straight from internet distribution outlets and not expect to be able to buy the stuff from the big stores (just like with electronic / other forms of marginal music). It's all about forming collectives who are enthusiastic over what they are doing.
[Edited 1/31/08 9:32am]

Has anybody seen the movie Idiocracy?

(You can watch the whole thing on Youtube in 9 minute segments. Here's the intro: http://youtube.com/watch?v=upyewL0oaWA )

Now before you go saying that this is off topic give it a little thought.

It's not so much that Funk & Soul is not marketable, it's that there's a new breed of consumer out there who has 35 more years of being shaped by the mass marketers whims. In their minds Funk & Soul is passe'.

It's the marketer's job to make markets; in other words, find ways to separate consumers from their cash and like it or not, I have to admit they do a damn fine job of it.

The principle tool in the marketers toolbox is "NEW." Humans are into "NEW", it's what drives (so called) 'progress'.

Now I'm close to 60 years old so that makes me a dinosaur. I was in my 20's in the 70's and jammin' to the Funk & Soul. It was of course, cutting edge and therefore, popular.

But time marches on and the kids coming out of their adolescence must rebel against the status quo. If their parents like it that means they need to like something antithetical. (paligap- I know a little bit of your story so I know this sweeping statement doesn't quite apply in your case, but in general it's true).

Marketers must play upon the conditions of their market to maximize profits. Selling "NEW" is an endless task and I'm afraid, an unstoppable tide, that even changes the perception of we old farts in some areas.

Here's an interesting little test for those of you who were around back in the day when cars with tail fins were as big as yachts- "white rad rides, '65, '67, so glam it's absurd", right?

When you see these cars out on the street today they look so klunky and tank-like but you know damn well that back in the day when they were new they were perceived to be as sleek as rocket ships ferchrissakes.

What happened? The cars are still the same; it's our minds that have changed. They've been reshaped by marketers.

It's all about style and by defintion, styles are tentative, they come and they go and let's face it, Funk & Soul is a style.

No matter that it's bad ass and touches you deep down in your bones and makes ya move ya booty.

To me, it has a substance that can't be touched by the hip hop sounds of today and I know I can get plenty of Amens from the posters around here but the sad fact is that we are in the minority.

It's a new day and whether we old funkateers like it or not there's a new breed of young adult comin' in to do their version of the Popcorn to the sounds of their musical heroes.

Too bad most of it is so shallow and formulaic but at least they are sampling some of the old school funk along with their syntheticly created sounds.

I doubt if any of ya regulars are as old as me but it's not the chronological age that matters here, it's the connection to the real funk that matters and I'm glad y'all are keepin' it real and alive.

Yes there's a market for Funk & Soul (and hopefully there always will be) but it will forever be overshadowd by whatever is perceived to be new and improved.

I was listening to a classical radio station the other day, you know the kind, where the announcer (can't really call him a DJ) talks in that smooth and measured, resonant but cookie cutter voice about how Beethoven was his own worst critic and Mozart never let a clarinet play a melody while somebody else did and how progressive was that.

Well, after the talk about the artists the announcer sets up the next piece by saying that what we are about to hear is a rendition of some famous symphony played completely upon restored museum quality instruments from back in the day so this is the closest thing to how the music must have sounded to a person living 300 years ago.

Interesting.

Can you imagine a hundred years from now on some oldies show the announcer blows the dust off of some '70's funk LP and tells us that they've located something called a turntable in a time capsule and hooked it up to their board and can show us that this is how things sounded back in the day and apologizes for the scratchy lo fi quality and tsk tsks about how unfortunate we were to have to hear our music like that.

Ok, I've rambled on enough but y'all gotta go check out Idiocracy. It's supposed to be a comedy but I'll tell you what, it had me crying real tears that this is what it's come to at the hands of marketers.

^ Very nice post, thanks a lot. Funk and Soul will stand the test of time, because it's timeless. There will always be the new generation of diggers, DJs musicians, publshers or simply lovers who will make sure that this musical legacy will be carried on to future generations.

Man oh man...
This all touches me so deeply that I cant even say anything...
I love Funk..Its in everything I do..from my Job...to my Clothes..to what I watch on my TV..Funk will never die...because it is THE BADDEST "FEELING" MUSIC EVER !!!
but unfortunately people are more accustomed to BOOLSHIT these days..Anytime i can sit an "UNEXPERIENCED" person down and i can play them some real stuff...They come away saying they Really like that music but they only hear it rarely...
Its alive...Its just not the Happy Meal of the moment !

[Edited 1/31/08 12:05pm]
[Edited 1/31/08 14:14pm]

I think when people say they can't market something they mean they can't market using the model that exists in today's industry.

They mean they can't package it and sell it to 14 year olds and twenty somethings that think like 14 yr olds and the mainstream audience. They also mean they can't create a brand like they want to.

In other words, no quick return

I don't think real listeners are a small part of the audience. The fact is real folk have kept the industry alive going to shows, buying old work and new, and basically promoting artists for them.

Dance said:

It's still marketable though, even if not for the 14 year olds. It's really just a matter of the how. It definetely works.

paligap said:

Nice topic.


IMO, a resounding NO!

Popular music has been reduced (the McDonaldization of the business) to a commodity that anyone, with a little effort, can get for FREE.
And the demographic being catered to (the "Yoots"), that's exactly what a large majority of that crowd does.
Hence - Recorded Popular Music = No/Little Value.

Regarding these "Yoots" and the Soul/Funk genre specifically, unless they become students of Popular Music (or are introduced to it via their partents) based on what's being called Soul/Funk present day, they don't have a clue as to what this music is really all about.

If nothing changes, it may be reduced to a Specialty Genre with a small cadre of evangelists similar to the Avant-Garde Jazz/70s Funk/60s Psychedelia/[fill in the blank] crowd.


There's been a great deal of ranting & raving as to whether this modern day access is legal/ethical or not.
The reality is that it's happening big time. Maybe there's a new positive way this can be looked at.
If recorded music in the new age is looked at as loss-leader or a promotional tool for LIVE performances, this may help to separate the wheat from the chaffe in terms of who the complete artists are in the future.

Those that can...PLAY
Those that can't...FAKE PEOPLE OUT WITH RECORDINGS

An oversimplification/generalization for sure, but maybe something to consider.



Meandering rant over...



tA

Tribal Disorder

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

^Nice one TA..

Dance said:

I don't really understand WHY you'd market to 14 year olds anyway. Most of them don't have any money and are fickle as hell. Why would you bet the life of your business on a group like that?

guitarslinger44 said:

Funk ain't dead. It's just in hiding until the fakers stop.

MrSoulpower said:

14 year olds listen to everything that's pushed down their throat. My sister used to only listen to crap like 50 cent, Ne-yo, Ciarra, Bow wow etc but last year I gave her a copy of TTD's wildcard and she loved it.
She still listens to the other crap but now she also has Morgan heritage, Third world (reggae bands), Meshell's comfort woman, Van Hunt' debut, Erro, Roachford and some Prince songs in her collection.
If they see it on BET they will be down with it.

rebelsoldier said:

Very true. But record labels who promote Funk look into investing in a long-term relationship with the listener. And the regular 14-year-old, as you said yourself, is not interested in the because he/she wants something new and different every month. That's part of growing up and developing a taste in music.

MrSoulpower said:

Yup I understand it's a process but at that stage if you don't know what else is out there you settle for anything.

rebelsoldier said:

That's why it's important that you educate the youngsters. But that's not the job of the music industry - they just want to make money.

guitarslinger44 said:

Well given the success of the Whordonnas and Janets as well as the shit hop boom in the mid to late 90s labels were doing quite well.

They'd make cheap simple crap in like weeks and the kids would run out and buy at least a couple mill with their paper route or weed selling money, and then go out and buy clothes, movie tickets, drinks, bandaids, and anything else associated with these artists with their parents money.

And like I said you also have those bunch of early twenties and damn near thirty listeners that operate like the kids only they have that money to burn, and they damn sure spent it.

Now with even kids getting tired of the crap and the popularity of the technology artists not only aren't selling records(as if that was ever big money)they don't have a public identity really. The brands are dying. That's the real problem. They've been coasting on that for a while now.

The main thing is that you dont have people at the labels/radio/video and any other media working "music". Music is more of a business now than it was back in the 70's and 80's. Labels for the most part are not going to sit back and hope someone catches on, they arent looking for someone they can build on, they are looking for someone that will sell right now, not long term. that is the business model and its been in place for about 15 years at least. How else can it be explained that you can go back to the 70's and ramble off names of singer/songwriters and today you would probably be stuck to name 5, im not saying that they dont exist, but the business model is not putting them out their. People can bitch about "mainstream" but not long ago, Prince,Bob Dylan,Springsteen,Sly,Earth wind, stevie,marvin etc...were mainstream, so mainstream isnt a bad word its what its made to be, you can make anything profitable, just change the playing field

Great points from everybody!

Here's a depressing thought I just had---- Funk's heyday, in general terms, was a little more than 10 years, give or take...I know it predates that, and also held on for acouple of years into the eighties, but we're basically talking about the 70's, a decade, before it started getting pushed to the side. In contrast, Hip Hop, as a prescence on radio, tv, the internet and on major labels etc., has been with us for almost 30 years now....d'you think it's a combination of all the factors mentioned earlier, in addition to the economics of actually keeping a band together vs just rhyming over recorded some tracks, etc? Hip hop certainly deserved it's place--but unfortunately, it ended up supplanting everything else...

It's funny, Rock music will always have that band aesthetic, say what you will about the quality. There will always be a guitarist, a drummer, bass player, etc.. But after the 70's, R&B seemd to be treated as something that was only technology and trend driven--all of a sudden everybody had to have the latest digital sounds, the latest production styles, etc. The Hip Hop aesthetic was applied to everything. We got drum machines !! We can sample!! The days of having a band of Funk R&B musicians to interact with one another was gone. I dunno, It just seems like a lot of our culture got thrown in the trash in the name of "progress"...

It used to infuriate me to see some awards show, where they would announce some thirty names of Pop and Rock groups and bands, and then have one Black Guy, the latest Hip-Hop star, and that would be it for the black community, like, "There's your representative!!"

Hell, in the mid 90's I was so glad just to see artists like D'angelo and Meshell come down the pike, I didn't know what to do (and D'angelo didn't just pop up, either -- Kedar Massenburg had to kick some doors down just get him in there...
Executives were probably like, "what are we supposed to do with this? He's playing a Fender Rhodes, fer chrissakes!!! How are we supposed to market that to the kids?????"




...
[Edited 2/1/08 12:52pm]

Two words: Amy Winehouse. What the fuck is her music if it ain't '60s SOUL!! It's straight up Motown for fuck sake. When kids heard it they liked it, and bought it by the bucketload. Two years ago no-one would have said a Jewish chick singing revamped '60s soul would've been marketable, and look how wrong they were. Tons of the hip-hop tracks kids love are based on old tunes, so tastes haven't changed so much as you may think. It's only the narrow thinking of record companies that creates these artificial divisions. Find the right artist, the right material, market it well and it will sell. Jamiroquai also reached millions of people who never had any interest in funk before.

...

midnightmover said:

Well, then there's that question-- does the "right artist" mean you have to look a "certain way" and have a particular image to get the market push? In other words, are the companies selling a particular type of music or are they just selling the image and the look, regardless of the type of music?

If Justin Timberlake does an out and out funk record, loads of people will buy it right now, but I'm not sure that's due to the funk itself.

I'm wondering if ultimately, companies just realized they should just apply the Johnny Bravo factor full force--sell the image regardless of the sound. It seems now as if music is secondary, at best...



...
[Edited 2/1/08 13:31pm]

I saw that statement before in a blog of that band. That's actually an all-Black female band called "The Nu Family Band" (I'm a myspace friend. ). They're really good (a couple of old school chicks in the fold, but they still get down), but it was a slap in face to see Sheila vote no on them. A shock and a surprise considering her background and musical style. And as me and my grandmother were watching the show we were wondering where the Black bands were. There weren't any, I don't think. Not even a white band trying to get funky. So I guess Funk must really be dead in the mainstream sphere and Hip-Hop has claimed the throne of the sound of young Black America. But it's only dead there. Funk is still around, it's just you gotta look a little deeper to find the good stuff.


Believe it or not, some of the funkiest bands out there today are acutally Indie/Dance Punk bands. You know, like The Rapture, !!!, Radio 4, Foals, Bloc Party. I mean, yes, it goes without saying that their primary inspiration was New Wave and Post-Punk. But those styles had elements of Funk and Soul in them, so by way of osmosis you're going to hear that come out of these new bands sound. OK, so you can't really compare them to the greats like JB, George, and our purple hero, but they still make some upbeat and groovy numers and filter it through a Punk/Indie Rock sound.

But those are mostly white hipster artists, sorry to say. And yes, it would be nice to see actual Black bands do the funky thang.


I guess I'm the only guy getting on the good foot.

Me and my band are one of the few Black Funk/Rock bands under 30 here in New York.

paligap said:

Thats a good point, if BEYONCE did an all out classic Disco Funk Donna Summer meets Commodores and Kool and the Gang album, and it gets marketed with hot videos and great magazine spreads, people arent buying it because they are just looking for FUNK.

paligap said:

I would say yes.

paligap said:

I'm inclined to agree with Sheila, although being in a position to influence that circumstance, (however mildly) she chose poorly. It's never been surprising to me that soul/funk music has declined to the point of non-existence in the world of popular music. What is so incredibly sad though, is the level of rejection on so-called 'Black' radio. Which can, in-part, be traced to the diminishing influence of the disc jockey. There was a time when DJ's wielded tremendous influence over musical trends and were sincerely passionate about music. Today's corporate radio has completely extinguished that element and in the process stifled entire genres of music.

Well guess what won the Grammy in the Best Boxed Or Special Limited Edition Package?

What It Is!: Funky Soul And Rare Grooves (1967-1977)
Masaki Koike, art director (Various Artists)
[Rhino]

There's hope!

Samples herea: http://www.amazon.com/Wha...B000GIWS4W

It won over the following competitors:

The Black Parade - Special Edition
Matt Taylor, Ellen Wakayama & Gerard Way, art directors (My Chemical Romance)
[Reprise Records]


A Fever You Can't Sweat Out - Limited Edition Collectible Deluxe Box
Alex Kirzhner, art director (Panic! At The Disco)
[DeCayDance/Fueled By Ramen]


Icky Thump - Limited Edition USB Flash Drive
Robin Bechtel, Taylor Brigode, Bill Mooney & Jack White, art directors (The White Stripes)
[Third Man/Warner Bros.]


Venus Doom
Matt Taylor & Valo, art directors (Him)
[Sire]