vainandy said:

Shango said:

I believe that mainly counts for r&b + hiphop. The current scene of electro and deephouse release fast grooves that people can throw down to.

I haven't heard no good house in years since it turned into trance and that shit is too fast to dance to. I grew up hanging and partying with the black folks and we shook ass and rolled titties till all hours of the night. All you can do to that trance stuff is hop around like someone on speed hopping on a damn pogo stick. I don't do those "American Bandstand" dances and I sure as hell don't dance like that girl in the Bruce Springsteen video either. I want some ass shaking jams!

This might be up your alley ?

Bugz In The Attic - Knock...wnload.com

Bugz In The Attic - It Do...wnload.com

[Edited 8/6/10 18:57pm]

TonyVanDam said:

Shango said:

The brothers shortly left the group after that abum, to release about 2 albums as a duo.

A decade later they perform live as Bootsy's hornsection on his album "Keep The Funk Alive in '95", lol.

They need to reunite with Midnight Star.

Would be awesome !

Militant said:

vainandy said:

Roger had a funky album in the early 1990s also called "Bridging The Gap". I heard the single "Everybody Get Up" maybe three of four times on black radio and that was all.

I love this album. It has some serious jams like "You Should Be Mine", which is up there with the funkiest stuff Roger ever recorded, IMO.

TD3 said:

MrSoulpower said:

Funk is dead?

Are you kidding me? :loll:

Funk has never left ... In fact, today, there are more Funk bands out there than ever before. Between '67 and '71, the most productive era in Funk, was an American phenomena. Very few groups outside of the U.S. were hip to Funk.

But today, because of the internet and globalization, the Funk scene went global. It's a tight knit network of DJs, record collectors, producers and - yes - artists. Today, there are groups in Norway, Sweden, Germany, France, Japan, Australia and even Israel and Russia that play Funk, record Funk and release Funk records. Funk is more alive and kickin' on a global scale than it was ever before.

Y'all are making the mistake to look for Funk in mainstream music. But Funk isn't mainstream .. or it wouldn't be called Funk. This music has always been underground .. most Funk artists never broke into the mainstream, most made only a few records that were sold only on a local level.

When a few Funk groups broke into the mainstream in the early to mid-1970s, the climax of the pioneer days of Funk were long over. Most Funk records were recorded and released in the late 1960s, not the mid-to 1970s or 1980s.

So don't look in the mainstream, because once it's mainstream, it's usually not Funk. Some new Funk artists still enjoy mainstream success - like Sharon Jones & The Dap-Kings, who charted at #15 on Billboard with their new album in April. Even though this was more of a Soul album, make no mistake. This band is a Funk band.

If you want Funk, look in the underground, where it has always been and where it belongs. And you'll find that Funk is very much alive today. In fact, as a Funk DJ, I can hardly keep up with new releases. There is so much new music that Funk DJs can't even play all of it.

The voice of reason. Everyone please, step back from the ledge.

Everything has it's time an place, it's just like those who claim classical, jazz, blues or whatever lost it's audience , is dying, or dead. It's all relative.

As MrSoooulpower mentioned you can't look toward the mainstream radio/media. As much as I love the options of listening to what I want when I want via the cable, the net, Pod-cast, and satellite radio, the problem arise finding "the music" can be like searching for a needle in a hay stack. As with cable TV the umpteen options have stratified listening audience choices, once upon a time to some degree radio and later TV could defined, shaped and marketed music to the masses.

Couple this with mainstream record and radio conglomerate who've narrowly targeted their listening audience and the type of music that's being heard, I doubt Funk music could garner the prominence it once had. Is good music still being made yes in all genres, it's just finding an audience and being able to build on a large fan base because of the options the listeners have impart that seems to be part of the challenge. Just as it's a challenge for the music lover to find artist, music, and bands.

I've heard some of the music MrSoulpower is talking about and yes, it's definately out there. That type of funk ain't really my cup of tea though. I can listen to it and might even enjoy being in a club that played it but it's not really something I'd go out and buy because it sounds more like funk from the late 1960s/early 1970s when it was brand new, rawer, and more primitive sounding to my ears. I'm a young bitch that got into funk in the late 1970s during the disco era. Funk of the mid to late 1970s and early 1980s just sounded more advanced to another level, much less jazz influenced, and very funky and danceable. I guess the best way to explain it is to compare it to the way rock fans love their rock. They rave about their rock beginning with the 1960s with The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones and folks like that but rock was around in the 1950s also but sounded much more primitive. You rarely hear them mention that they love this or that artist from the 1950s.

As for looking to the underground though. I've done that before but have rarely found something that I like. Well, I've found stuff I like but I don't love it enough to spend money on it. But even if I did love it, all I could do with it is listen to it all alone and that's no fun. If I played it for someone else, they wouldn't like it and wouldn't want to hear it because their ears have been polluted to like today's music. And it sure wouldn't be playing in the clubs when you go on the prowl looking for dicks so an evening on the town would still be a boring one because what I like wouldn't be in the mainstream. Those are the advantages of having good music in the mainstream. You can't get no dick sitting at home alone listening to a song that only you like. That's why I say, dammitt, put a firecracker in these dead motherfuckers asses, wake them up, put hot coals under their feet and force them to dance. Once they get that feeling, they'll be wanting more of it and can start back to shaking asses again and bringing home dicks three at a time!

.

.

.

[Edited 8/6/10 18:47pm]

^

Militant said:

vainandy said:

Roger had a funky album in the early 1990s also called "Bridging The Gap". I heard the single "Everybody Get Up" maybe three of four times on black radio and that was all.

I love this album. It has some serious jams like "You Should Be Mine", which is up there with the funkiest stuff Roger ever recorded, IMO.

As for the single - "Everybody Get Up" - wasn't there a remix version of this with EPMD on it? I seem to remember seeing the video. But that version isn't on the album.

I didn't like that remix at all. I liked the album version though. My favorites from the album was "Break Through" and "Victim Of Love".

vainandy said:

Militant said:

I love this album. It has some serious jams like "You Should Be Mine", which is up there with the funkiest stuff Roger ever recorded, IMO.

As for the single - "Everybody Get Up" - wasn't there a remix version of this with EPMD on it? I seem to remember seeing the video. But that version isn't on the album.

I didn't like that remix at all. I liked the album version though. My favorites from the album was "Break Through" and "Victim Of Love".

I really, really dig this album. Actually a lot more than Roger's previous two albums "Unlimited!" and "The Saga Continues".

I even really dig the slow jams on this album - "Take Me Back", "Emotions", and "Love Incorporated".

I own the entire Zapp/Roger discography as well as a bunch of stuff Roger produced like Sugarfoot's "Sugar Kiss" album....and I'd say this album "Bridging The Gap" is probably my favorite. I think it has a wider range than all of the other material with the possible exception of "The New Zapp IV U". I also think Roger's guitar playing was seriously on point with this album.

Of course, I love all their material. But this album had a great vibe and really stands out to me. But like you were saying - it kind of went under the radar. Maybe due to the changing musical climate, I guess. A real shame.

P.S - that last 2 minutes of "Victim of Love" jams SO HARD. When Roger's playing that distorted guitar solo over that tight ass chicken scratch playing, and adlibbing, with the whole "V-I-C-T-I-M" part.....fuckkkkk that shit is jammin.

[Edited 8/6/10 20:24pm]

Militant said:

vainandy said:

Roger had a funky album in the early 1990s also called "Bridging The Gap". I heard the single "Everybody Get Up" maybe three of four times on black radio and that was all.

I love this album. It has some serious jams like "You Should Be Mine", which is up there with the funkiest stuff Roger ever recorded, IMO.

As for the single - "Everybody Get Up" - wasn't there a remix version of this with EPMD on it? I seem to remember seeing the video. But that version isn't on the album.

The best mix of this jam is on the 12" ("Zapp To The Future Mix"). Clocks in at 7:43. It's pretty jammin.

Militant said:

vainandy said:

I didn't like that remix at all. I liked the album version though. My favorites from the album was "Break Through" and "Victim Of Love".

I really, really dig this album. Actually a lot more than Roger's previous two albums "Unlimited!" and "The Saga Continues".

I even really dig the slow jams on this album - "Take Me Back", "Emotions", and "Love Incorporated".

I own the entire Zapp/Roger discography as well as a bunch of stuff Roger produced like Sugarfoot's "Sugar Kiss" album....and I'd say this album "Bridging The Gap" is probably my favorite. I think it has a wider range than all of the other material with the possible exception of "The New Zapp IV U". I also think Roger's guitar playing was seriously on point with this album.

Of course, I love all their material. But this album had a great vibe and really stands out to me. But like you were saying - it kind of went under the radar. Maybe due to the changing musical climate, I guess. A real shame.

P.S - that last 2 minutes of "Victim of Love" jams SO HARD. When Roger's playing that distorted guitar solo over that tight ass chicken scratch playing, and adlibbing, with the whole "V-I-C-T-I-M" part.....fuckkkkk that shit is jammin.

[Edited 8/6/10 20:24pm]

You are on point here. I think that was the most underrated album of that year.

Like you stated Roger showed more range on this album than any of his solo

albums. At that time it seemed like all the old school r&b artists were being scooped

up by Reprise. Cameo released Emotional Violence about 3 or 4 months later and

most of it was shit. Bridging the Gap was tight as the Zapp 3 album.

This Roger solo album was definitely slept on. Take Me Back really hit home with

me because i lost a good girl at that time.

Shango said:

Militant said:

I love this album. It has some serious jams like "You Should Be Mine", which is up there with the funkiest stuff Roger ever recorded, IMO.

I bought that CD for "You Should Be Mine"!

vainandy said:

Shango said:

I believe that mainly counts for r&b + hiphop. The current scene of electro and deephouse release fast grooves that people can throw down to.

I haven't heard no good house in years since it turned into trance and that shit is too fast to dance to. I grew up hanging and partying with the black folks and we shook ass and rolled titties till all hours of the night. All you can do to that trance stuff is hop around like someone on speed hopping on a damn pogo stick. I don't do those "American Bandstand" dances and I sure as hell don't dance like that girl in the Bruce Springsteen video either. I want some ass shaking jams!

Courtney Cox!

BlaqueKnight said:

minneapolisFunq said:

That is completely untrue.

I can pull out a handful of jams from 86-90

Come on, kid. There are many of us on here who were actually around DURING THE TIME THE MUSIC WAS HAPPENING. How are you going to argue with us on that? You weren' there.

The real funk HAD died off by the mid 80s. Of course people can pull a few exceptions out - there are always exceptions. Funk was not what was happeneing in the mid to late80s. Pince himself was trying to get as far away from funk as possible; especially after Purple Rain. 60 and 70s funk, aka the JB funk, aka the REAL DEAL, was not where black music was in the mid to late 80s. There were still traces and there were still songs with funky elements to them but the slap bass, funky horn sections and big ass band sound was replaced by synths. Much of the R&B music then was experimentation with synth sounds.

R&B was just considered R&B, not funk. Also, rap was coming about and gaining popularity, so groups like the Jonzun Crew , Twilight 22 and Soulsonic Force were being mixed in with the R&B of the current time. Everybody was playing with synth sounds. MN funk is a watered down hybrid of what actual funk was in the 70s. Was it cool? Hell yes. Was it pure funk? Hell no. In the late 80s, R&B was experimental but funk as a genre had pretty much died off.

[Edited 8/6/10 10:04am]

You are such an ignorant fucking dumbass

seriously, atleast you finally said what you have been wanting to say ever since U first jumped on my dick. bitch ass old man catching feelings over MY opinions. how sad.

"true funk" and "Pure funk" are subjective terms.

You can't just count out those 'exceptions' because you prefer a different type of funk.

With your logic Prince would have been moving closer to 'real 'funk, he moved away from synths and brought in the live horns.

I can find R&B from that era that Is far from funky, to throw it all into the same category is another stupid generalization. (whats new with you)

The music evolved and sadly it failed to continue its growth in the 90s.

As others have stated, Troutman and a few other select groups still put out some nice jams. 4 example, Bridging the Gap has a grip of dope joints.

*Midas Touch is dope btw, that bassline is off the hook

JamFanHot said:

Militant said:

I love this album. It has some serious jams like "You Should Be Mine", which is up there with the funkiest stuff Roger ever recorded, IMO.

As for the single - "Everybody Get Up" - wasn't there a remix version of this with EPMD on it? I seem to remember seeing the video. But that version isn't on the album.

The best mix of this jam is on the 12" ("Zapp To The Future Mix"). Clocks in at 7:43. It's pretty jammin.

Thanks!! I just tracked down the maxi single with the following tracklist:

01 - (Everybody) Get Up (Roger's Zapp To The Future Mix)
02 - (Everybody) Get Up (EPMD Diesel Remix)
03 - (Everybody) Get Up (Roger's Zapp To The Future In Full Effect)
04 - (Everybody) Get Up (Toke's Dub)
05 - (Everybody) Get Up (Roger's Zapp To The Future Unleaded Mix)
06 - (Everybody) Get Up (EPMD Diesel Low-Lead Mix)
07 - (Everybody) Get Up (EPMD Diesel Instrumental)
08 - (Everybody) Get Up (Album Version)

This was missing from my Zapp/Roger collection. I can't wait to check it out!

Do you know if there were any other maxi-singles or alternative versions of songs from this album?

vainandy said:

TD3 said:

The voice of reason. Everyone please, step back from the ledge.

Everything has it's time an place, it's just like those who claim classical, jazz, blues or whatever lost it's audience , is dying, or dead. It's all relative.

As MrSoooulpower mentioned you can't look toward the mainstream radio/media. As much as I love the options of listening to what I want when I want via the cable, the net, Pod-cast, and satellite radio, the problem arise finding "the music" can be like searching for a needle in a hay stack. As with cable TV the umpteen options have stratified listening audience choices, once upon a time to some degree radio and later TV could defined, shaped and marketed music to the masses.

Couple this with mainstream record and radio conglomerate who've narrowly targeted their listening audience and the type of music that's being heard, I doubt Funk music could garner the prominence it once had. Is good music still being made yes in all genres, it's just finding an audience and being able to build on a large fan base because of the options the listeners have impart that seems to be part of the challenge. Just as it's a challenge for the music lover to find artist, music, and bands.

I've heard some of the music MrSoulpower is talking about and yes, it's definately out there. That type of funk ain't really my cup of tea though. I can listen to it and might even enjoy being in a club that played it but it's not really something I'd go out and buy because it sounds more like funk from the late 1960s/early 1970s when it was brand new, rawer, and more primitive sounding to my ears. I'm a young bitch that got into funk in the late 1970s during the disco era. Funk of the mid to late 1970s and early 1980s just sounded more advanced to another level, much less jazz influenced, and very funky and danceable. I guess the best way to explain it is to compare it to the way rock fans love their rock. They rave about their rock beginning with the 1960s with The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones and folks like that but rock was around in the 1950s also but sounded much more primitive. You rarely hear them mention that they love this or that artist from the 1950s.

As for looking to the underground though. I've done that before but have rarely found something that I like. Well, I've found stuff I like but I don't love it enough to spend money on it. But even if I did love it, all I could do with it is listen to it all alone and that's no fun. If I played it for someone else, they wouldn't like it and wouldn't want to hear it because their ears have been polluted to like today's music. And it sure wouldn't be playing in the clubs when you go on the prowl looking for dicks so an evening on the town would still be a boring one because what I like wouldn't be in the mainstream. Those are the advantages of having good music in the mainstream. You can't get no dick sitting at home alone listening to a song that only you like. That's why I say, dammitt, put a firecracker in these dead motherfuckers asses, wake them up, put hot coals under their feet and force them to dance. Once they get that feeling, they'll be wanting more of it and can start back to shaking asses again and bringing home dicks three at a time!

.

.

.

[Edited 8/6/10 18:47pm]

That's cool ... hardly anyone likes all types of Funk .. I'm not too big on P-Funk and early 1980s Funk like Zapp or Cameo doesn't do anything for me ... There is a reason why these artists broke through into the mainstream - because they watered it down so it became more accessible to the mainstream.

On this website, which is dedicated to a pop artist, most posters are more attracted by the more appealing, commercial Funk. But once again, keep in mind that the big era of Funk was already over by the time these artists hit. Most Funk records were recorded and released between '67 and '71. Most artists in the new Funk movement draw their inspiration from early Funk, not from the late, mainstream Funk. Hence many on this website are ignorant towards the large resurgence Funk has experienced all over the world in the last ten years. It's underground, it's nasty, it's 100% vintage. These new Funk groups record with the same gear as Funk groups did in the late '60s, they often record analog to recreate the old sound ... which is why many wouldn't even be able to tell that these tunes were not recorded in 1970 but in 2007.

Funk is also back on the dancefloors of clubs .. underground clubs, yes, but by today, almost every midsized and bigger city in the world has a local Funk scene with at least one or two clubs and a handful of DJs mainly catering to this sound. Rare Funk records fetch high prices on Ebay (some up to $2,000), which shows there is definitely a demand. And again, today, Funk is global while in 1970 is was just American.

Bottom line, I feel very good with the direction Funk is going today, and more and more people of the younger generations are discovering Funk, they respect it, they curate it and they will pass it on to the next group. Funk isn't gonna die, and because of the internet, more is known about Funk and Funk artists then ever before, and artists who remained obscure and only known to a local or regional crowd in the early 1970s are now known amongst Funksters in the entire world.

[Edited 8/7/10 5:33am]

vainandy said:

Funk of the mid to late 1970s and early 1980s just sounded more advanced to another level, much less jazz influenced, and very funky and danceable. I guess the best way to explain it is to compare it to the way rock fans love their rock. They rave about their rock beginning with the 1960s with The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones and folks like that but rock was around in the 1950s also but sounded much more primitive. You rarely hear them mention that they love this or that artist from the 1950s.

Just had to address this ... I know where you are trying to go with this, but I don't agree. The earliest Funk artist, the man who pioneered it, is James Brown. His early Funk from around 167/68 wasn't primitive .. it remains the tightest and most sophisticated Funk out there, and nobody - I mean NOBODY - beats James Brown when it comes to Funk. Just listen to "There was a time" from the second "Live in the Apollo" album and you'll know what I mean. Late 1970s and early 1980s Funk was more advanced regarding recording technology. But musically, it was much simpler, much more stale and more watered down - thanks to the impact that Disco had on Funk. After all, the music you're referring to was made to appeal to the mainstream, while early Funk was not. Nothing Zapp has ever released will reach the complexity and sophististication of a James Brown horn arrangement, and no drum computer will ever reproduce the energy of drummers like Clyde Stubblefield, Melvin Parker or Jab'o Starks. How you can call that "primitive" is beyond me.

In that sense, early Funk was and is extremely danceable ... believe me, I see it every night on the dancefloor when I DJ. Early Funk has an energy and edge to it that cannot be matched by later Funk ... If you play a set of rare early, high energy Funk and switch to Zapp, it's guaranteed to kill the dancefloor ...

I think that you're a Disco fan ... and you like your Funk disco-ish, but you ignore that Disco was a serious blow to Funk, and it took Funk artists over a decade to recover from the damage Disco has done to this music. For a while, in the 1980s, it really looked like Funk was about to die.

Analising or reviewing a genre/style as "watered down" comes imo all to personal, subjective preference,

and therefor can't be stated as a fact to which everyone automatically might agree. To each their own.

MrSoulpower said:

vainandy said:

I've heard some of the music MrSoulpower is talking about and yes, it's definately out there. That type of funk ain't really my cup of tea though. I can listen to it and might even enjoy being in a club that played it but it's not really something I'd go out and buy because it sounds more like funk from the late 1960s/early 1970s when it was brand new, rawer, and more primitive sounding to my ears. I'm a young bitch that got into funk in the late 1970s during the disco era. Funk of the mid to late 1970s and early 1980s just sounded more advanced to another level, much less jazz influenced, and very funky and danceable. I guess the best way to explain it is to compare it to the way rock fans love their rock. They rave about their rock beginning with the 1960s with The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones and folks like that but rock was around in the 1950s also but sounded much more primitive. You rarely hear them mention that they love this or that artist from the 1950s.

As for looking to the underground though. I've done that before but have rarely found something that I like. Well, I've found stuff I like but I don't love it enough to spend money on it. But even if I did love it, all I could do with it is listen to it all alone and that's no fun. If I played it for someone else, they wouldn't like it and wouldn't want to hear it because their ears have been polluted to like today's music. And it sure wouldn't be playing in the clubs when you go on the prowl looking for dicks so an evening on the town would still be a boring one because what I like wouldn't be in the mainstream. Those are the advantages of having good music in the mainstream. You can't get no dick sitting at home alone listening to a song that only you like. That's why I say, dammitt, put a firecracker in these dead motherfuckers asses, wake them up, put hot coals under their feet and force them to dance. Once they get that feeling, they'll be wanting more of it and can start back to shaking asses again and bringing home dicks three at a time!

.

.

.

That's cool ... hardly anyone likes all types of Funk .. I'm not too big on P-Funk and early 1980s Funk like Zapp or Cameo doesn't do anything for me ... There is a reason why these artists broke through into the mainstream - because they watered it down so it became more accessible to the mainstream.

On this website, which is dedicated to a pop artist, most posters are more attracted by the more appealing, commercial Funk. But once again, keep in mind that the big era of Funk was already over by the time these artists hit. Most Funk records were recorded and released between '67 and '71. Most artists in the new Funk movement draw their inspiration from early Funk, not from the late, mainstream Funk. Hence many on this website are ignorant towards the large resurgence Funk has experienced all over the world in the last ten years. It's underground, it's nasty, it's 100% vintage. These new Funk groups record with the same gear as Funk groups did in the late '60s, they often record analog to recreate the old sound ... which is why many wouldn't even be able to tell that these tunes were not recorded in 1970 but in 2007.

Funk is also back on the dancefloors of clubs .. underground clubs, yes, but by today, almost every midsized and bigger city in the world has a local Funk scene with at least one or two clubs and a handful of DJs mainly catering to this sound. Rare Funk records fetch high prices on Ebay (some up to $2,000), which shows there is definitely a demand. And again, today, Funk is global while in 1970 is was just American.

Bottom line, I feel very good with the direction Funk is going today, and more and more people of the younger generations are discovering Funk, they respect it, they curate it and they will pass it on to the next group. Funk isn't gonna die, and because of the internet, more is known about Funk and Funk artists then ever before, and artists who remained obscure and only known to a local or regional crowd in the early 1970s are now known amongst Funksters in the entire world.

Ok. I'm going to have to take 1 O out of the MrSooulpower.

didn't mean to take out the U though.

[Edited 8/7/10 9:20am]

Just because Zapp doesn't appeal to some people, isn't again a fact that Roger mainly had his mind on recording/producing for the masses. That's like saying his production business was purely a factory. Check some of his early work in the 70's as Roger & The Human Body on Troutman Bros. Records, and tell me again that he was merely a productive factory. It's the musicbiz after all, and besides artists having a passion for creating music, i reckon that there is deepdown some urge for recognition. Check the Zapp-Unsung episode and see with how much passion Roger "lived" in the studio. At one point he needed a private driver because he was too focussed on creating music. Besides his success with Zapp, he produced a number of side-projects (Bobby Glover, Dick Smith, Human Body, New Horizons, Shirley Murdock, Sugarfoot) which didn't have that much high sales (maybe apart from Shirley), and you can hear the passion he did put in those albums and singles. Nevertheless Roger's musical passion, his father taught him at an early stage how to run a business. We can all romantasize the greatness of being an underground & independent musician with a freedom of creativity. In the end there has to come some food on the table, the rent has to come in and what more expenses have to be paid. So Roger's father bought a bunch of instruments for his sons, but with the promise that they eventually would be able to pay their father back. That's how the Troutman brothers started to run their business, setting up real-estate, and still being able to create music in their own builded studio. If a dancefloor is empty when a Zapp-track starts ... from what i'm understanding is that it's an organised early-funk-event, so more people visiting that night and who dig that genre, might of course be less hip to Zapp and other similar jams, but i can't imagine that it should be seen as an overall sign that no one digs Zapp anymore on partynights.

[Edited 8/7/10 7:09am]

Sorry Soulpower - but to say nothing Zapp ever released has the complexity of a James Brown horn arrangement is complete and utter shite.

And Zapp smashes it up at every club I've ever been to, GUARANTEED. Even when it's slowed down on hip-hop songs.

And Drum Machines can easily reproduce the energy of live drummers, provided the person programming them knows what they fuck they are doing. Prince is a great example of that.

MrSoulpower said:

vainandy said:

Funk of the mid to late 1970s and early 1980s just sounded more advanced to another level, much less jazz influenced, and very funky and danceable. I guess the best way to explain it is to compare it to the way rock fans love their rock. They rave about their rock beginning with the 1960s with The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones and folks like that but rock was around in the 1950s also but sounded much more primitive. You rarely hear them mention that they love this or that artist from the 1950s.

Just had to address this ... I know where you are trying to go with this, but I don't agree. The earliest Funk artist, the man who pioneered it, is James Brown. His early Funk from around 167/68 wasn't primitive .. it remains the tightest and most sophisticated Funk out there, and nobody - I mean NOBODY - beats James Brown when it comes to Funk. Just listen to "There was a time" from the second "Live in the Apollo" album and you'll know what I mean. Late 1970s and early 1980s Funk was more advanced regarding recording technology. But musically, it was much simpler, much more stale and more watered down - thanks to the impact that Disco had on Funk. After all, the music you're referring to was made to appeal to the mainstream, while early Funk was not. Nothing Zapp has ever released will reach the complexity and sophististication of a James Brown horn arrangement, and no drum computer will ever reproduce the energy of drummers like Clyde Stubblefield, Melvin Parker or Jab'o Starks. How you can call that "primitive" is beyond me.

In that sense, early Funk was and is extremely danceable ... believe me, I see it every night on the dancefloor when I DJ. Early Funk has an energy and edge to it that cannot be matched by later Funk ... If you play a set of rare early, high energy Funk and switch to Zapp, it's guaranteed to kill the dancefloor ...

I think that you're a Disco fan ... and you like your Funk disco-ish, but you ignore that Disco was a serious blow to Funk, and it took Funk artists over a decade to recover from the damage Disco has done to this music. For a while, in the 1980s, it really looked like Funk was about to die.

James Brown's funk was not primitive. But it is definitely a classic example of horn-driven funk. I say the same thing about Kool & The Gang (pre-JT Taylor) & Tower Of Power.

Now if you're a fan of The Funk at its most primitive state, listen to The Meters. THIS classic funk band had no horn section OR synths neither. And to top it all off, The Meters' funk was downtempo most of the time (hence where Dr. Dre/Warren G. borrowed the downtempo idea from for G-Funk).

Now don't get it twisted. I always liked The Meters, given that they're from New Orleans just like me. But their funk has absolutely no ounce of advance technology in it. To my ears, that is primitive.

Just saying.

Militant said:

Sorry Soulpower - but to say nothing Zapp ever released has the complexity of a James Brown horn arrangement is complete and utter shite.

And Zapp smashes it up at every club I've ever been to, GUARANTEED. Even when it's slowed down on hip-hop songs.

And Drum Machines can easily reproduce the energy of live drummers, provided the person programming them knows what they fuck they are doing. Prince is a great example of that.

That is because the drum machine programmers that know WTF they're doing are the ones that remember to adjust the "swing" level of their beats.

Shango said:

Analising or reviewing a genre/style as "watered down" comes imo all to personal, subjective preference,

and therefor can't be stated as a fact to which everyone automatically might agree. To each their own.

When a musical genre evolves from a raw underground phenomen to a sound that caters to the mainstream and the masses, then yes, usually it is watered down.

The negative impact of Disco on the evolution of Funk cannot be denied. Ask every Funk musician who has recorded in the 1970s.

MrSoulpower said:

vainandy said:

I've heard some of the music MrSoulpower is talking about and yes, it's definately out there. That type of funk ain't really my cup of tea though. I can listen to it and might even enjoy being in a club that played it but it's not really something I'd go out and buy because it sounds more like funk from the late 1960s/early 1970s when it was brand new, rawer, and more primitive sounding to my ears. I'm a young bitch that got into funk in the late 1970s during the disco era. Funk of the mid to late 1970s and early 1980s just sounded more advanced to another level, much less jazz influenced, and very funky and danceable. I guess the best way to explain it is to compare it to the way rock fans love their rock. They rave about their rock beginning with the 1960s with The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones and folks like that but rock was around in the 1950s also but sounded much more primitive. You rarely hear them mention that they love this or that artist from the 1950s.

As for looking to the underground though. I've done that before but have rarely found something that I like. Well, I've found stuff I like but I don't love it enough to spend money on it. But even if I did love it, all I could do with it is listen to it all alone and that's no fun. If I played it for someone else, they wouldn't like it and wouldn't want to hear it because their ears have been polluted to like today's music. And it sure wouldn't be playing in the clubs when you go on the prowl looking for dicks so an evening on the town would still be a boring one because what I like wouldn't be in the mainstream. Those are the advantages of having good music in the mainstream. You can't get no dick sitting at home alone listening to a song that only you like. That's why I say, dammitt, put a firecracker in these dead motherfuckers asses, wake them up, put hot coals under their feet and force them to dance. Once they get that feeling, they'll be wanting more of it and can start back to shaking asses again and bringing home dicks three at a time!

.

.

.

[Edited 8/6/10 18:47pm]

That's cool ... hardly anyone likes all types of Funk .. I'm not too big on P-Funk and early 1980s Funk like Zapp or Cameo doesn't do anything for me ... There is a reason why these artists broke through into the mainstream - because they watered it down so it became more accessible to the mainstream.

On this website, which is dedicated to a pop artist, most posters are more attracted by the more appealing, commercial Funk. But once again, keep in mind that the big era of Funk was already over by the time these artists hit. Most Funk records were recorded and released between '67 and '71. Most artists in the new Funk movement draw their inspiration from early Funk, not from the late, mainstream Funk. Hence many on this website are ignorant towards the large resurgence Funk has experienced all over the world in the last ten years. It's underground, it's nasty, it's 100% vintage. These new Funk groups record with the same gear as Funk groups did in the late '60s, they often record analog to recreate the old sound ... which is why many wouldn't even be able to tell that these tunes were not recorded in 1970 but in 2007.

Funk is also back on the dancefloors of clubs .. underground clubs, yes, but by today, almost every midsized and bigger city in the world has a local Funk scene with at least one or two clubs and a handful of DJs mainly catering to this sound. Rare Funk records fetch high prices on Ebay (some up to $2,000), which shows there is definitely a demand. And again, today, Funk is global while in 1970 is was just American.

Bottom line, I feel very good with the direction Funk is going today, and more and more people of the younger generations are discovering Funk, they respect it, they curate it and they will pass it on to the next group. Funk isn't gonna die, and because of the internet, more is known about Funk and Funk artists then ever before, and artists who remained obscure and only known to a local or regional crowd in the early 1970s are now known amongst Funksters in the entire world.

[Edited 8/7/10 5:33am]

I disagree wholeheartedly. Most funk records took off after that period and believe

me i'm not even referring to the 80's. Outside of James Brown who was the creator, Sly

Stone, and a select few others, funk was still in it's infantile stages. A lot of soul acts like

the Stylistics, the Delfonics, the Spinners, and the Chi-Lites were dominating during this

period. It wasn't until after that period that bands like Parliament-Funkadelic, the Ohio Players,

EWF, and the BarKays drove funk to another level beyond what James Brown and his band

planted long before the synth driven funk of the 80's hit.

Shango said:

Just because Zapp doesn't appeal to some people, isn't again a fact that Roger mainly had his mind on recording/producing for the masses. That's like saying his production business was purely a factory. Check some of his early work in the 70's as Roger & The Human Body on Troutman Bros. Records, and tell me again that he was merely a productive factory. It's the musicbiz after all, and besides artists having a passion for creating music, i reckon that there is deepdown some urge for recognition. Check the Zapp-Unsung episode and see with how much passion Roger "lived" in the studio. At one point he needed a private driver because he was too focussed on creating music. Besides his success with Zapp, he produced a number of side-projects (Bobby Glover, Dick Smith, Human Body, New Horizons, Shirley Murdock, Sugarfoot) which didn't have that much high sales (maybe apart from Shirley), and you can hear the passion he did put in those albums and singles. Nevertheless Roger's musical passion, his father taught him at an early stage how to run a business. We can all romantasize the greatness of being an underground & independent musician with a freedom of creativity. In the end there has to come some food on the table, the rent has to come in and what more expenses have to be paid. So Roger's father bought a bunch of instruments for his sons, but with the promise that they eventually would be able to pay their father back. That's how the Troutman brothers started to run their business, setting up real-estate, and still being able to create music in their own builded studio. If a dancefloor is empty when a Zapp-track starts ... from what i'm understanding is that it's an organised early-funk-event, so more people visiting that night and who dig that genre, might of course be less hip to Zapp and other similar jams, but i can't imagine that it should be seen as an overall sign that no one digs Zapp anymore on partynights.

[Edited 8/7/10 7:09am]

First of all, I never have and will never deny the Troutman brothers talent. These cats were skilled musicians and very talented producers who knew what they were doing. But let's face it, they wanted to make money. Had they been active a decade earlier, we might have heard some nitty gritty, dirty, lowdown Funk from them. The Human Body album hints Roger's admiration for a rawer Funk sound.

Also, I didn't say that "no one digs Zapp anymore on party nights." I said that if you play some high energetic, raw Funk and you follow with Zapp, it usually doesn't go over too well. Because old Funk has a much rawer, more intense energy.

Of course Zapp will always go over well in "regular" clubs where DJs do not venture into Deep Funk. And I'm not saying that Zapp & their kind are bad ... they've made some great records and I definitely enjoyed going to their shows some 18-20 years ago But once I dug a little deeper, they just didn't do anything for me.

phunkdaddy said:

MrSoulpower said:

That's cool ... hardly anyone likes all types of Funk .. I'm not too big on P-Funk and early 1980s Funk like Zapp or Cameo doesn't do anything for me ... There is a reason why these artists broke through into the mainstream - because they watered it down so it became more accessible to the mainstream.

On this website, which is dedicated to a pop artist, most posters are more attracted by the more appealing, commercial Funk. But once again, keep in mind that the big era of Funk was already over by the time these artists hit. Most Funk records were recorded and released between '67 and '71. Most artists in the new Funk movement draw their inspiration from early Funk, not from the late, mainstream Funk. Hence many on this website are ignorant towards the large resurgence Funk has experienced all over the world in the last ten years. It's underground, it's nasty, it's 100% vintage. These new Funk groups record with the same gear as Funk groups did in the late '60s, they often record analog to recreate the old sound ... which is why many wouldn't even be able to tell that these tunes were not recorded in 1970 but in 2007.

Funk is also back on the dancefloors of clubs .. underground clubs, yes, but by today, almost every midsized and bigger city in the world has a local Funk scene with at least one or two clubs and a handful of DJs mainly catering to this sound. Rare Funk records fetch high prices on Ebay (some up to $2,000), which shows there is definitely a demand. And again, today, Funk is global while in 1970 is was just American.

Bottom line, I feel very good with the direction Funk is going today, and more and more people of the younger generations are discovering Funk, they respect it, they curate it and they will pass it on to the next group. Funk isn't gonna die, and because of the internet, more is known about Funk and Funk artists then ever before, and artists who remained obscure and only known to a local or regional crowd in the early 1970s are now known amongst Funksters in the entire world.

[Edited 8/7/10 5:33am]

I disagree wholeheartedly. Most funk records took off after that period and believe

me i'm not even referring to the 80's. Outside of James Brown who was the creator, Sly

Stone, and a select few others, funk was still in it's infantile stages. A lot of soul acts like

the Stylistics, the Delfonics, the Spinners, and the Chi-Lites were dominating during this

period. It wasn't until after that period that bands like Parliament-Funkadelic, the Ohio Players,

EWF, and the BarKays drove funk to another level beyond what James Brown and his band

planted long before the synth driven funk of the 80's hit.

Well, the facts speak against you. Literally 1,000s of Funk 45s were released between '67 and '71. After that, fewer and fewer 45s were made ... Funk artists made the switch to the LP format, and very few artists were actually signed and were fortunate to release an album or two.

I'm a die hard Funk collector (and I do collect releases up to 1980), and I can assure you that the late 1960s were the most vibrant. Never again in the history of black music there were so many small labels that released Funk records. My own catalog at home consists of thousands of 45s, and I've done my research. The output of Funk 45s saw a drastic decrease of releases after 1973, and less and less groups actually put records out. That's a well documented fact .. a look at the Funky Music Lexicon (the most comprehensive catalog of Funk related releases) will show you that "67 to '71 was the golden era of Funk.

You're talking about Parliament-Funkadelic, the Ohio Players and James Brown ... these were among the very few who made it big. Again, there are thousands of releases from obscure groups from all over the country that worked and released music extensively in the late 1960s, and you have probably never heard of them. And you're right - during the early '70s, the Stylistics, the Delfonics, the Spinners and the Chi-Lites dominated black music charts - which exactly proves my point that Funk has always been underground and only very few artists made it into the charts. JB, Sly and the Ohio Players were just the dip of the ice berg.

I suggest you take a peek below water ... there's a whole world of Funk lurking.

TonyVanDam said:

MrSoulpower said:

Just had to address this ... I know where you are trying to go with this, but I don't agree. The earliest Funk artist, the man who pioneered it, is James Brown. His early Funk from around 167/68 wasn't primitive .. it remains the tightest and most sophisticated Funk out there, and nobody - I mean NOBODY - beats James Brown when it comes to Funk. Just listen to "There was a time" from the second "Live in the Apollo" album and you'll know what I mean. Late 1970s and early 1980s Funk was more advanced regarding recording technology. But musically, it was much simpler, much more stale and more watered down - thanks to the impact that Disco had on Funk. After all, the music you're referring to was made to appeal to the mainstream, while early Funk was not. Nothing Zapp has ever released will reach the complexity and sophististication of a James Brown horn arrangement, and no drum computer will ever reproduce the energy of drummers like Clyde Stubblefield, Melvin Parker or Jab'o Starks. How you can call that "primitive" is beyond me.

In that sense, early Funk was and is extremely danceable ... believe me, I see it every night on the dancefloor when I DJ. Early Funk has an energy and edge to it that cannot be matched by later Funk ... If you play a set of rare early, high energy Funk and switch to Zapp, it's guaranteed to kill the dancefloor ...

I think that you're a Disco fan ... and you like your Funk disco-ish, but you ignore that Disco was a serious blow to Funk, and it took Funk artists over a decade to recover from the damage Disco has done to this music. For a while, in the 1980s, it really looked like Funk was about to die.

James Brown's funk was not primitive. But it is definitely a classic example of horn-driven funk. I say the same thing about Kool & The Gang (pre-JT Taylor) & Tower Of Power.

Now if you're a fan of The Funk at its most primitive state, listen to The Meters. THIS classic funk band had no horn section OR synths neither. And to top it all off, The Meters' funk was downtempo most of the time (hence where Dr. Dre/Warren G. borrowed the downtempo idea from for G-Funk).

Now don't get it twisted. I always liked The Meters, given that they're from New Orleans just like me. But their funk has absolutely no ounce of advance technology in it. To my ears, that is primitive.

Just saying.

Well, if you use the word "primitive" to decsribe raw and uncut music free of technological advancements, then OK ... I'd agree. But usually, the word primitive has a rather negative association ... like "unskilled".

For the record, I'm a huge Meters fan, but these guys were a commerical hit compared to most of the obscure Funk artists that recorded in those days.

Militant said:

Sorry Soulpower - but to say nothing Zapp ever released has the complexity of a James Brown horn arrangement is complete and utter shite.

And Zapp smashes it up at every club I've ever been to, GUARANTEED. Even when it's slowed down on hip-hop songs.

And Drum Machines can easily reproduce the energy of live drummers, provided the person programming them knows what they fuck they are doing. Prince is a great example of that.

If it's "utter shite", I'm sure you won't mind elaborating further to support your argument.

Of course Zapp smashes it up at most clubs ... I don't deny that. But if you play Zapp after a set of high energy deep Funk, you'll often see the dancefloor clear because it is a sobering moment ... I take if you haven't been to a deep Funk night yet.And I'm not denying that it has something to do with personal preference .. if you like snynths, polished sounds and drum computers, you'll be in heaven at a Zapp party. But why call that "Funk"? I know it's technicallly Funk .. but where's the raw energy and the stank that gave Funk its name?

And sorry ... drum machines can not "easily reproduce the energy of live drummers". They are machines. A machine can never reflect human emotion, spotenous accenting .. They are being programmed and then they do what the programmer told them to do. They don't take a life of their own, do they? Of course you can create some great music with drum computers, like Prince has done ... but if you say that a Lynn drum beat has the energy of the drumming of a Clyde Stubblefield, then that is, in your own words, "utter shite."

TD3 said:

MrSoulpower said:

That's cool ... hardly anyone likes all types of Funk .. I'm not too big on P-Funk and early 1980s Funk like Zapp or Cameo doesn't do anything for me ... There is a reason why these artists broke through into the mainstream - because they watered it down so it became more accessible to the mainstream.

On this website, which is dedicated to a pop artist, most posters are more attracted by the more appealing, commercial Funk. But once again, keep in mind that the big era of Funk was already over by the time these artists hit. Most Funk records were recorded and released between '67 and '71. Most artists in the new Funk movement draw their inspiration from early Funk, not from the late, mainstream Funk. Hence many on this website are ignorant towards the large resurgence Funk has experienced all over the world in the last ten years. It's underground, it's nasty, it's 100% vintage. These new Funk groups record with the same gear as Funk groups did in the late '60s, they often record analog to recreate the old sound ... which is why many wouldn't even be able to tell that these tunes were not recorded in 1970 but in 2007.

Funk is also back on the dancefloors of clubs .. underground clubs, yes, but by today, almost every midsized and bigger city in the world has a local Funk scene with at least one or two clubs and a handful of DJs mainly catering to this sound. Rare Funk records fetch high prices on Ebay (some up to $2,000), which shows there is definitely a demand. And again, today, Funk is global while in 1970 is was just American.

Bottom line, I feel very good with the direction Funk is going today, and more and more people of the younger generations are discovering Funk, they respect it, they curate it and they will pass it on to the next group. Funk isn't gonna die, and because of the internet, more is known about Funk and Funk artists then ever before, and artists who remained obscure and only known to a local or regional crowd in the early 1970s are now known amongst Funksters in the entire world.

Ok. I'm going to have to take 1 O out of the MrSooulpower.

didn't mean to take out the U though.

[Edited 8/7/10 9:20am]

I apologize if this discussion has gone off track .. this is not a debate on deep Funk vs. synth Funk ... my inital point was the Funk isn't dead ... it's very much alive and vibrant. I just think that a lot of posters here associate Funk only with the "big name" Funk artists who broke into the mainstream in the mid to late 1970s and use those as a standard to apply to Funk's resurgence .. and at the same time, some don't seem to be aware that this isn't all that defines Funk.

Bottom line, if you think that Funk is dead, then .. well, you're not looking. The you're lazy.

MrSoulpower said:

Militant said:

Sorry Soulpower - but to say nothing Zapp ever released has the complexity of a James Brown horn arrangement is complete and utter shite.

And Zapp smashes it up at every club I've ever been to, GUARANTEED. Even when it's slowed down on hip-hop songs.

And Drum Machines can easily reproduce the energy of live drummers, provided the person programming them knows what they fuck they are doing. Prince is a great example of that.

If it's "utter shite", I'm sure you won't mind elaborating further to support your argument.

Of course Zapp smashes it up at most clubs ... I don't deny that. But if you play Zapp after a set of high energy deep Funk, you'll often see the dancefloor clear because it is a sobering moment ... I take if you haven't been to a deep Funk night yet.And I'm not denying that it has something to do with personal preference .. if you like snynths, polished sounds and drum computers, you'll be in heaven at a Zapp party. But why call that "Funk"? I know it's technicallly Funk .. but where's the raw energy and the stank that gave Funk its name?

And sorry ... drum machines can not "easily reproduce the energy of live drummers". They are machines. A machine can never reflect human emotion, spotenous accenting .. They are being programmed and then they do what the programmer told them to do. They don't take a life of their own, do they? Of course you can create some great music with drum computers, like Prince has done ... but if you say that a Lynn drum beat has the energy of the drumming of a Clyde Stubblefield, then that is, in your own words, "utter shite."

Why should I elaborate, when you did not? You are the one making the original argument.

If you can prove to me exactly how a JB horn arrangement is more complex than a Zapp track, then I will provide my counter argument.

Of course, if you playing a Deep Funk set, at a Deep Funk night, the audience will not be expecting to hear Zapp, so it's not going to necessarily work. But I counter that EXACTLY the same thing would happen if you tried to play Deep Funk at a synth-funk night, after playing a bunch of Zapp, Cameo, Prince, Jesse Johnson. So that point is more or less moot.

Play Deep Funk and Synth Funk at a REGULAR club, all mixed up, and see what gets a better reaction.

Zapp and Cameo et al have PLENTY of stank and energy.

And yes - a brilliantly programmed Linn drum can have the energy of a classic human-played drum break. I'd take "777-9311" over "Funky Drummer" any day of the week, month, or year.

Militant said:

MrSoulpower said:

If it's "utter shite", I'm sure you won't mind elaborating further to support your argument.

Of course Zapp smashes it up at most clubs ... I don't deny that. But if you play Zapp after a set of high energy deep Funk, you'll often see the dancefloor clear because it is a sobering moment ... I take if you haven't been to a deep Funk night yet.And I'm not denying that it has something to do with personal preference .. if you like snynths, polished sounds and drum computers, you'll be in heaven at a Zapp party. But why call that "Funk"? I know it's technicallly Funk .. but where's the raw energy and the stank that gave Funk its name?

And sorry ... drum machines can not "easily reproduce the energy of live drummers". They are machines. A machine can never reflect human emotion, spotenous accenting .. They are being programmed and then they do what the programmer told them to do. They don't take a life of their own, do they? Of course you can create some great music with drum computers, like Prince has done ... but if you say that a Lynn drum beat has the energy of the drumming of a Clyde Stubblefield, then that is, in your own words, "utter shite."

Why should I elaborate, when you did not? You are the one making the original argument.

If you can prove to me exactly how a JB horn arrangement is more complex than a Zapp track, then I will provide my counter argument.

Of course, if you playing a Deep Funk set, at a Deep Funk night, the audience will not be expecting to hear Zapp, so it's not going to necessarily work. But I counter that EXACTLY the same thing would happen if you tried to play Deep Funk at a synth-funk night, after playing a bunch of Zapp, Cameo, Prince, Jesse Johnson. So that point is more or less moot.

Play Deep Funk and Synth Funk at a REGULAR club, all mixed up, and see what gets a better reaction.

Zapp and Cameo et al have PLENTY of stank and energy.

And yes - a brilliantly programmed Linn drum can have the energy of a classic human-played drum break. I'd take "777-9311" over "Funky Drummer" any day of the week, month, or year.

I was about to respond to your other points, but when I came accross this ^^ (see bold), I realized that our understanding of Funk and feeling is so fundamentally different, we'll never get to agree.