Uptown side yo head...Ooops we funked you up!

[Edited 4/6/15 19:17pm]

thetimefan said:

Stylistically it borrows heavily from Morris & The Time

Creatively it's a mixed bag, definitely Zapp inspired with the funk guitar riffs and also some JB with the horns.

But basically it's a homage to 80's funk

Also and was going to add this in the other topic. There's only a finite number of notes and melodies that can be written. Unless someone's going to be really bold and create some really brand new, like a new musical scale as a example, you will get a lot of soundalikes. If you listen to the history of recorded music everything has a beginning. Even the first Christmas songs were adapted from/borrowed from church hymns so everything has its roots somewhere. Some old folk songs or spiritual songs/hymns were also adapted into popular music too. Like 'An American Trilogy' is a blend of 3 19th century songs. Babyface even used 'Moonlight Senerade' by Glenn Miller for 'Together Forever' but I assume the Glenn Miller song is in the public domain now. My only real issue is when someone is blantantly copying song(s) and passing them off as new & as their own without noting the original(s) which is why the Blurred Lines thing was such a big deal because they did use 'Got to Give It Up' by Marvin & didn't give the due credit for it. If they got the sample cleared or said it was inspired by or an interpolation of, there probably wouldn't have been a court case to begin with.

Time: only Prince's long chord in "Jungle Love" (as I assume that Prince played all the keys on the "Ice Cream Castles" CD... The song was more of Jesse's and Morris than any Time song, but...not much else "Uptown" in "Uptown Funk", but the long chord, and Mars saying, "Get the stretch"...

The beat-box bass-line: is more Roger Troutman and Zapp than the bassline on "Jungle Love".

Paying Tribute: After "Blurred Lines"...I doubt that you will hear Mars and Ronson paying tribute to Zapp and others in interviews--like Thicke and Pharrell did to Gaye (that did not help their defense in court later-on)

Musicology, Prince, James Brown, and P-Funk: He has always given thanks publicly and privately to Brown.

In Musicology, he mentions all of the influences... D'Angelo has to...

I not sure that paying tribute-can stave-off a lawsuit, but these artists are older, and Troutman isn't here...

Give 'em a shout. Give 'em some $ early...So, that they can be re-introduced, and their families can inherit the rewards of their fathers and mothers hard work--now that they are not more popular..

Prince and The Time (Morris, Jam & Lewis) got "pop $$$$" and repect..Roger and Zapp, The Gap Band, were just too black, and too early in the 80s to get that mass-recognition.

Show your respect.. Make another hit without much-more their influence, and move-on..

[Edited 4/1/15 7:40am]

[Edited 4/2/15 5:23am]

I think the issue is greater than that of sampling

it's about getting the credit when u deserve to get your credit

the music that has been sampled over the years by the people who actually created it

during the time they created it, they didn't get their props/just deserves for creating it during the time they actually created it

they should not have had to wait 10-15 years down the line to wait for someone to sample his/her music to have received their credit

for if they would have received their credit and exposure during the actual time they made it, and would have not been phased out in attempt from giving their credit

more than likely, their music would have never been sampled to begin with because they would have maintain presence in the recording industry......

that's why sampling was way more than something incidental or coincidental, it became formula driven to achieve a quickers means to the end......

thetimefan said:

Stylistically it borrows heavily from Morris & The Time

Creatively it's a mixed bag, definitely Zapp inspired with the funk guitar riffs and also some JB with the horns.

But basically it's a homage to 80's funk

Also and was going to add this in the other topic. There's only a finite number of notes and melodies that can be written. Unless someone's going to be really bold and create some really brand new, like a new musical scale as a example, you will get a lot of soundalikes. If you listen to the history of recorded music everything has a beginning. Even the first Christmas songs were adapted from/borrowed from church hymns so everything has its roots somewhere. Some old folk songs or spiritual songs/hymns were also adapted into popular music too. Like 'An American Trilogy' is a blend of 3 19th century songs. Babyface even used 'Moonlight Senerade' by Glenn Miller for 'Together Forever' but I assume the Glenn Miller song is in the public domain now. My only real issue is when someone is blantantly copying song(s) and passing them off as new & as their own without noting the original(s) which is why the Blurred Lines thing was such a big deal because they did use 'Got to Give It Up' by Marvin & didn't give the due credit for it. If they got the sample cleared or said it was inspired by or an interpolation of, there probably wouldn't have been a court case to begin with.

I'd say the horns are pure Stone City Band.

SoulAlive said:

I said this in another thread...

thanks to the Blurred Lines lawsuit,we're not gonna hear alot of songs that pay tribute to the past.I think it was great to see artists and bands reaching back and creating music inspired by the good ol' days.We needed to get back to the days of funk,disco and just plain good music...songs with actual grooves! Any time that young music fans can hear something like "Uptown Funk" on the radio,that's a good thing.They desperately need that.But alas,we probably won't get more songs like that anymore.Everyone will be too afraid of getting sued

Funk is a being....

You are funky, or you are not...

It won't be a movement back to funk (my opinion).

I think it is platinum because 2 non-black men who are already famous who are doing a funky pop record, the song is fun, and it is "their time" to throw anything out that is catchy to make music. It's not their 1st record together or seperately. The industry seemed to need something big to hit every year (Like "Blurred Lines", and "Happy")to keep the industry viable..

.. It's not a tribute to funk artists without shout-outs.. Now, to avoid lawsuits, you might see: The Time backing them at The Grammies.., but it takes pressure to get there... Still, it is more Roger and Zapp.

On a funny note: They don't really want The Time or Zapp to be the backing-band on any possible "Uptown Funk" performance at The Grammies (or any other awards or concert).. It would not be fair to their own bands...

[Edited 4/2/15 5:46am]

namepeace said:

Again . . . from a bird's eye view, what are considered "statements against interest" are what sunk Pharrell and Thicke.

They openly talked about doing a song in the tradition of "Got To Give It Up" while in the studio making the song.

Then they produced a song with some similarities to GTGIU. Cue the lawsuit.

Had they kept their mouths shut, my guess is the case would have been harder to win and there would be no talk of bad precedents, floodgates, etc.

Every case will fall on its own facts. The Blurred Lines case had a smoking howitzer that 9 of 10 copyright cases don't and won't have.

..and this and this song will end influences, or talking about them... Sampling, and carefully-re-arranging older hits..

Mr. Wilson just said that his agent told him that: "Uptown Funk You Up, Uptown, Funk You Up" = "Oops Up Side Your Head"...

That type of re-arrangement ends now..

Talking about siting in the studio, and being influenced lessens grately now too..

Linn4days said:

namepeace said:

Again . . . from a bird's eye view, what are considered "statements against interest" are what sunk Pharrell and Thicke.

They openly talked about doing a song in the tradition of "Got To Give It Up" while in the studio making the song.

Then they produced a song with some similarities to GTGIU. Cue the lawsuit.

Had they kept their mouths shut, my guess is the case would have been harder to win and there would be no talk of bad precedents, floodgates, etc.

Every case will fall on its own facts. The Blurred Lines case had a smoking howitzer that 9 of 10 copyright cases don't and won't have.

..and this and this song will end influences, or talking about them... Sampling, and carefully-re-arranging older hits..

Mr. Wilson just said that his agent told him that: "Uptown Funk You Up, Uptown, Funk You Up" = "Oops Up Side Your Head"...

That type of re-arrangement ends now..

Talking about siting in the studio, and being influenced lessens grately now too..

Samples normally require clearance. Different story.

I don't disagree that the precedent could have a chilling effect, but as many scholars have pointed out, the case is an outlier, even if it is upheld on appeal.

Linn4days said:

Paying Tribute: After "Blurred Lines"...I doubt that you will hear Mars and Ronson paying tribute to Zapp and others in interviews--like Thicke and Pharrell did to Gaye (that did not help their defense in court later-on)

This is the worst part of this whole thing for me. People hear these tribute/pastiche/copy/stolen tracks (pick whichever you think fits) and like them--that should be in effect an ad for the genre/artists that originally inspired the new hits. So what should happen, if someone likes "Uptown Funk," is that they hear Ronson and Mars talk about Zapp and the Time and the other acts that sparked the new track, and then that becomes a jumping off point to exploring that music. And, maybe, buying it (no guarantees of that, but I hear it still happens sometimes).

.

That process has always been an important part of how music lovers acquire their knowledge and taste. If performers (even plagiarizing hacks) don't talk about their influences because they're worried they'll be sued, nobody wins. The original artists miss out on new audiences, audiences may miss out on experiencing those artists' music, and truly talented young performers (since all musicians are also part of an audience as well) might miss out on important streams that could lead their work in valuable directions.

[Edited 4/2/15 12:14pm]

EddieC said:

Linn4days said:

Paying Tribute: After "Blurred Lines"...I doubt that you will hear Mars and Ronson paying tribute to Zapp and others in interviews--like Thicke and Pharrell did to Gaye (that did not help their defense in court later-on)

This is the worst part of this whole thing for me. People hear these tribute/pastiche/copy/stolen tracks (pick whichever you think fits) and like them--that should be in effect an ad for the genre/artists that originally inspired the new hits. So what should happen, if someone likes "Uptown Funk," is that they hear Ronson and Mars talk about Zapp and the Time and the other acts that sparked the new track, and then that becomes a jumping off point to exploring that music. And, maybe, buying it (no guarantees of that, but I hear it still happens sometimes).

.

That process has always been an important part of how music lovers acquire their knowledge and taste. If performers (even plagiarizing hacks) don't talk about their influences because they're worried they'll be sued, nobody wins. The original artists miss out on new audiences, audiences may miss out on experiencing those artists' music, and truly talented young performers (since all musicians are also part of an audience as well) might miss out on important streams that could lead their work in valuable directions.

[Edited 4/2/15 12:14pm]

I see it as the exact opposite. Folks with creativity will come 2 the front of the line and the less talented falls by the wayside. Just the way I like it.

Graycap23 said:

EddieC said:

This is the worst part of this whole thing for me. People hear these tribute/pastiche/copy/stolen tracks (pick whichever you think fits) and like them--that should be in effect an ad for the genre/artists that originally inspired the new hits. So what should happen, if someone likes "Uptown Funk," is that they hear Ronson and Mars talk about Zapp and the Time and the other acts that sparked the new track, and then that becomes a jumping off point to exploring that music. And, maybe, buying it (no guarantees of that, but I hear it still happens sometimes).

.

That process has always been an important part of how music lovers acquire their knowledge and taste. If performers (even plagiarizing hacks) don't talk about their influences because they're worried they'll be sued, nobody wins. The original artists miss out on new audiences, audiences may miss out on experiencing those artists' music, and truly talented young performers (since all musicians are also part of an audience as well) might miss out on important streams that could lead their work in valuable directions.

[Edited 4/2/15 12:14pm]

I see it as the exact opposite. Folks with creativity will come 2 the front of the line and the less talented falls by the wayside. Just the way I like it.

But the talented still build on what came before... if the tie to the past is lost because no one ever talks about it, how do the talented people learn the history of music and find their influences?

.

Prince is an incredibly talented musician... but without Sly, Hendrix, Joni, P-Funk...? If all you know is what's now, how do you learn from the past?

.

I'm not sure what "folks with creativity" have ever come to the front without a connection to the past.

EddieC said:

Graycap23 said:

I see it as the exact opposite. Folks with creativity will come 2 the front of the line and the less talented falls by the wayside. Just the way I like it.

But the talented still build on what came before... if the tie to the past is lost because no one ever talks about it, how do the talented people learn the history of music and find their influences?

.

Prince is an incredibly talented musician... but without Sly, Hendrix, Joni, P-Funk...? If all you know is what's now, how do you learn from the past?

.

I'm not sure what "folks with creativity" have ever come to the front without a connection to the past.

There is a big gap between a Prince and the talents of a Pharell..........as an example.

Graycap23 said:

EddieC said:

But the talented still build on what came before... if the tie to the past is lost because no one ever talks about it, how do the talented people learn the history of music and find their influences?

.

Prince is an incredibly talented musician... but without Sly, Hendrix, Joni, P-Funk...? If all you know is what's now, how do you learn from the past?

.

I'm not sure what "folks with creativity" have ever come to the front without a connection to the past.

There is a big gap between a Prince and the talents of a Pharell..........as an example.

I'm not talking about Pharrell... I'm talking about people who are pointed to Marvin and other greats when Pharrell, or Ronson, or Mars talk about where they drew their inspiration. Pharrell's not the well, but if he mentions where he got the water, than somebody better than him can go there.

.

That's what the suit might stop. Not the copying, but the discussing of where the real magic is.

babynoz said:

I love your new avatar.

Linn4days said:

Time: only Prince's long chord in "Jungle Love" (as I assume that Prince played all the keys on the "Ice Cream Castles" CD... The song was more of Jesse's and Morris than any Time song

I think you might mean more Jesse & Prince. It's not clear what Morris's contributions were musically on that track.

lezama said:

babynoz said:

I love your new avatar.

Thankies!

babybrutha said:

wow. The gap band lifted so much from george clinton and p-funk back in the day......same as george lifted so much from sly and JB. whatever...i think the song pays homage more than anything. i don't hear any one thing that can be claimed as stolen

AMEN!!!!!!

what gap band song?