51m0n

[quote name='P-T-P' post='424107' date='Mar 3 2009, 01:51 PM']Okay, like Motown, love U2. There's a snag with the Funk Brother's comparison though because really, how many records did they sell when their record company and all it's artists upped and left for LA? Don't get me wrong, these are masterful musicians, but people bought Marvin Gaye/Supremes/Temptations/Stevie Wonder records, not Funk Brother records. And virtually none of the songs on those records were written by the Funk Brothers. And if we're talking about marketing, Motown wasn't exactly backwards in that department and for every gem of a song that came out on that label, there was probably 100 banal offerings to accompany it. I don't mean to put down the legacy of the Funk Brothers at all, but they were a backing band - an extraordinary one for sure - but a backing band nonetheless. Their presence and abilities no doubt helped towards the success of many records, but it was far from the only reason for those records' success. When it comes to U2's record sales, most of everything they've achieved is down to them - their songs, their performance, their decisions on promotion, track orders, sleeve designs etc. Having said all that, the whole sales argument is phoney. As, to be honest, is the whole overrated argument. "One man's meat" and all that. I bet we couldn't even get 100% agreement as to what constitutes "being overrated." What's annoying about it as a U2 fan is that it's always directed at U2 without it ever really being sought out, as evidenced by the beginnings of this whole thread. Okay, so some people don't like U2. I'm sure that's true of pretty much every band, but no other band really has people going out of their way to point out their dislike/hatred of them the way U2 does.[/quote] He asked me who I thought was a great band, he didnt ask for any more than that. The Funk Brothers were a great band. They were responsible for all the musical hooks played on a gazillion sold albums. Where did anyone state they needed to be anything other than a house band? I stand by my point regarding what they did to extend the canon of popular music. Compared to which U2 have frankly done virtually nothing (IMO). As for "how many records did they sell when their record company and all it's artists upped and left for LA? ", well thats just part of the criminal neglect they got as the musicians responsible for putting those songs out. Jamerson invented the basslines, no one wrote them out note for note for instance. So, yeah a lot of people put their creativity into them, and I would rather everyone involved had got what they deserved to out of the success; I dont believe that that happened, but I also believe that that doesn't actually detract from the importance and significance of The Funk Brothers in any way.

[quote name='Linus27' post='424087' date='Mar 3 2009, 01:25 PM']I think your looking to deep into some of my comments as half the stuff you have written above is assuming on what I was thinking which is clearly wrong. Oh and to answer your other question, I like Motown and U2. So much so that only the other day I was saying to dave_bass5 that I would like to play in a Motown covers band. So to answer your question, then Yes.. ME [/quote] If I misunderstood you then I apologise, but thats how to came across when you said "If thats the genre of music you like then its unlikley you would be raving about U2.". Sounded like liking the Funk Brothers means you wouldnt expect me to like U2. What did you mean then???? Especially since you like both so much!?!?! Now you totally confused me.

Thats it, its all done, total class, no point trying to come close to that one, back to the day job; forever Cheers, not much music rates the adjective sublime, but that does.

I've found that rubbing the side of your nose trick to get some greaseyness on the plucking fingers can really work before a particularly fast track....

[quote name='Linus27' post='424081' date='Mar 3 2009, 01:13 PM']Well, all I asked was I would be interested in hearing what music/bands you do consider good/great and well, thats all the answer you gave. Can't blame me for that one.[/quote] No you were fine at that point, and I responded with a band that I consider truly great, and an inspiration to all musicians; this however:- [quote name='Linus27' post='424015' date='Mar 3 2009, 11:57 AM']If thats the genre of music you like then its unlikley you would be raving about U2.[/quote] Is the point where your comment became absurd, since you assumed that liking and admiring the Funk Brothers for any reason at all could in some way prevent me from liking U2, unless of course you consider liking Motown to probably mean I have more discerning taste than to like U2 (which I'm starting to believe may well be the case) So is there anyone out there who likes Motown and U2?? or is Linus27 correct in his assumption that you can like one but not he other?????? Anybody??

[quote name='bass_ferret' post='424046' date='Mar 3 2009, 12:35 PM']Been avoiding the thread but seen it get cross referenced on here and also on other forums so I read the first page. If you dont like U2 - get over it. Likewise Oasis. Seems to me a lot of you just hate success, which makes it cool to like Jaco in a reverse snobbery kind of way. I think U2 made some great albums in the early years - and dont forget that they have been going for years and made lots and lots of albums, many more than other rubbish bands like Led Zep, Beatles and Floyd etc (joke). I am not surprised their creative juices have dried up with such a limited format.[/quote] I've no problem with success, I love loads of successful artists. Thats another sweeping generalisation from all you lovers of Oasis and U2 and the like; if I dont like artist blah, therefore I dont like success. Rubbish. I dont like artist blah, they are, to me and many others, far more successful than anything I have heard from then would or should warrant IMO. Therefore they appear to be over rated. Its not complicated, I dont like their stuff particularly as I dont see much to like, therefore I dont see the mass appeal. If they were reasonably successful I wouldn't comment, but they are staggeringly successful given the quality of their work, hence overrated. Again I'll compare their music to the Funk Brothers since I thought of them already, and the Funk Brothers have better grooves, better tunes, more ideas, better "avg output" etc, just IMO, but thats all this is about anyway, my opinion versus yours. Is liking the Funk Brothers reverse snobbery now? What about Squarepusher, Plus Tech Squeeze Box, The Doors, Suicidal Tendencies, The Young Gods, The Stranglers, Corrosion of Conformity, Bare Naked Ladies, Bob Marley, Ramones, Beautiful South, Johnny Cash, Housemartins, The Banshees, Blondie, Madness, Talking Heads, Bjork, Michael Manring, Ruiner Severhead; I mean when is it reverse snobbery and when is it just something I like cos I like it and enjoy it and think its good music since I find more to move me and or interest me in it than anything I have heard to date from U2 (or Oasis)? I really like the vast majority of output from all the bands I just mentioned, who are you to try and tell me I'm wrong to like or dislike any of them? Who are you to say that since I find less to like in the output of Oasis and or U2 I should think that they are not overrated when they patently are considered so great by so many, yet I find so little to like or admire in what they have produced. Why am I not supposed to think that U2 are overrated? How is their music better than any of that I just mentioned? Just because more people bought into it?? That is your best and most complete argument to say they deserve all the hype so far. In that case enjoy your McDonalds, please remember you will be wanting to super size yours.....

[quote name='Linus27' post='424015' date='Mar 3 2009, 11:57 AM']If thats the genre of music you like then its unlikley you would be raving about U2.[/quote] Oh please, dont for one moment dare to make assumptions about the breadth of my personal taste based upon that response. You have no idea how far and wide that may range, and your assumption is therefore utterly absurd. <TongueInCheek> Why would admiring the band behind Motown in anyway prevent me from liking U2 if they were as fantastic as you say? Could it be cos Motown is significantly better then? </TongueInCheek>

[quote name='bassicinstinct' post='424012' date='Mar 3 2009, 11:55 AM']Here come the sales stats......................................... [/quote] Yeah right, like I could be bothered to figure out how many records they've sold over the last 50 years for countless artists! I bet it would knock U2 into a cocked hat and then some, and then theres the amount of advertising based around there work, or just airplay - but these are not why I put them forward, I really believe they truly added to the popular canon, and therefore are more relvant to me than U2 could ever be.

[quote name='Linus27' post='423961' date='Mar 3 2009, 10:41 AM']Sorry but I have to disagree with you on the point of concentrating solely on the vocal. Peaches by The Stranglers for example is all about the music and the bass primarily. The Doors Light My Fire is based around the keyboard riff. Eric Clapton's Layla is about the guitar riff and Big Country's In a Big Country is based around the guitar riff, Simple Minds Waterfront is based around the bass and keyboard hooks, U2's New Years Day is based around the bass hook and the best of all, New Order's Blue Monday which was just a keyboard demo track is based solely on the music of that demo. Take those elements away and the song would be nothing. Take the vocal away and the song would still remain.[b] Its natural for the listener to follow the vocal, thats the whole point of popular music[/b]. Jazz or clasical is different but not all pop music purely hangs on the vocal. I would be interested in hearing what music/bands you do consider good/great.[/quote] I never said you couldnt have instrumental hooks, the stronger the better, but like you said, and I was saying in pop it is all about the vocal first, you need hooks too, but vocal hooks are all important, and every song you've listed IIRC (with the possible exception of New Order) has a strong vocal hook too.

[quote name='Linus27' post='423961' date='Mar 3 2009, 10:41 AM']I would be interested in hearing what music/bands you do consider good/great.[/quote] How about The Funk Brothers?

Very few people who hang off every album by U2 and aren't musicians have heard of Jaco, much less have heard and listened to Portrait of Tracy. It's sad but true, so to state that the 4 notes of the b-line to With or Without You means more than something they probably never heard is a bit silly, I mean its a fair point in some respects, but then I doubt most of them could even tell you thos four notes either, cos they are concentrating solely on the vocal in fact. Like with every other normal punter listening to pop, its ALL about the vocal. I agree that they wrote a couple of decent songs early on, they are absolute masters of playing the media game to best effect, or their record company are. I don't agree that the average pop listener pays any attention to Adam Clayton at all. Why would they, he deliberately does nothing noticeable, thats, if anything, his style, and it clearly works for them. I reserve the right to have an opinion that apart from one or two reasonable (though not staggering) early songs which I thought were OK when I was 14 or however old, they have done literally nothing that I have enjoyed, liked, thought of as great music or whatever. In that regard then I feel that they are generally over rated. We will all have to agree to disagree, since no amount of your personal enjoyment, or there frankly staggering (in light of their, IMO, mediocre product) record sales will change my mind for a moment. The fact is I clearly have different (not necessarily right or better, just different) criteria for what I consider good/great or simply decent pop music, for me that really isn't U2, and never will be. If you think they are modern messiahs of musical performance and expression I'm pleased you have found what you are looking for. I have found mine elsewhere.

[quote name='Happy Jack' post='423409' date='Mar 2 2009, 04:53 PM']That's over-simplifying because the bass frequencies lose more than the higher ranges, of course, but that just gives you a perfect reason to turn up a bit ...[/quote] Really?? I always find the top end loses more than the bass with every set of ear plugs I've ever worn. The ER20s certainly do that, is it that different with the custom er15s then?

[quote name='johnnylager' post='423358' date='Mar 2 2009, 04:12 PM']Or the cheap & cheerful ER20's...[/quote] +1 I can hear well enough during a gig, take em out afterwards and my hearing is better than before we started. Also I find I am far less tired after the gig too.

+1 for senn md421 or on a different tack I've heard the Heil PR-40 is staggeringly good too if you want something that is of similar quality to the EV RE20 but about half the price. If I had the cash I'd get an EV RE20, failing that I'd go for the PR40, after that the Senn and lastly an SM57. Senn E835 is a very cheap SM57 alike thats rock solid IMO. Certainly good enough for chucking in front of a bass cab, you know since that can be any old rubbish

Try one of these - its Tapco by Mackie, and £50 by it now 4 mono + 4 stereo inputs:- [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Tapco-Mix100-Mixer-Mixing-Desk-By-Mackie_W0QQitemZ250382077404QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Mixers?hash=item250382077404&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1688|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318"]Tapco by Mackie Mix100[/url]

Total personal opinion, cant stand U2, never have. Although the first two songs I heard from them (Sunday Bloody Sunday and something else) I thought were OK at the time, I never felt they really did anything particularly great or all that worthy of amazement. Not once. Having said that I never liked the Smiths either (gets asbestos coat on and ducks). And Bono does his very best to come across as a t*t every time I see or hear anything from him. Last point, just having a huge number of sales doesn't make anything good in this industry - really. It is, and always was, very much a self perpetuating marketing machine, thats why they were on the JR show in the first place, no doubt billed as the saviours of rock and roll. ANd the vast majority of the public have historically bought what they were told to by said marketing machine. So don't quote sales figures to me as they are no indication of musical quality whatsoever. Anyone care to judge the output of Stock Aitkin and Waterman purely on sales? And now apply some musical taste and discretion to you judgment; still the same? Then you sir are IMHO a philistine.

ummglummbuewhnmdnwlklknmcselkm.,m.................................<THUD>

[quote name='The Funk' post='420855' date='Feb 27 2009, 01:15 PM']I'm going to disagree with your theory: Crap bassist + great drummer = sh*te rhythm section + no groove = no funk.[/quote] +LOTS Its definitely the pair of them, Garibaldi is superb though, but some of the stuff he does with the groove even he has stated he thinks he can only do because Rocco is absolutely solid.

[quote name='dlloyd' post='420653' date='Feb 27 2009, 09:55 AM']+1 Rocco's lines [i]sound[/i] simple... It's amazing how difficult they sound when other people play them.[/quote] Absolutely, part of it is his bizarre left hand approach; uses only two fingers and damps/chokes with the rest, moves his hand around waaaay more than you're supposed to. According to an interview in BassPlayer (I think it was) in the 90's he could run his stuff up at 140bpm absolutely on it, no fluffs, still grooving . Anyone out there think he hasn't got technique please post a link to you playing Rub Off, On The Serious Side, Squib Cakes, Stroke or even What Is Hip at that speed as good as he does and I'll eat my hat if you still think it doesn't require serious chops . They may not be the modern version of super chops, but I think you'd be mistaken in thinking those chops equate to that kind of playing as well as his technique does. He is the absolute master of the 16th note fingerstyle funk groove, Bar none. His entire approach to the instrument is based upon that style of playing for a 2 hour set night after night. That changes how you play. Also has anyone seen how hard he plucks the strings?? He certainly likes to whack them compared to most modern fast players IMO, none of that ramp nonsense for Rocco, if he isn't "beatin' on that bass" he ain't feeling it I think....

Ooooh you all beat me to it, I was going to do list part 2 today (in which as u can see there is definitely some Roy Ayers) Roy Ayers: Party Sex (ultimate funky vibes), The Boogie Back (love this one too, and the b-line is as simple as it can possibly get) Trouble Funk: Say What Shotgun: Mutha Funk (old school heavy slappin on this one - lovely) Rhythm Heritage: Theme from S.W.A.T Pleasure: Glide (nuther slap classic - maybe too much?) Ohio Players: Funky Worm (utterly bonkers!) Headhunters: God Made Me Funky Soul Searchers: Funk For The Folks Vibrettes: Humpty Dump Tower Of Power: Maybe It'll Rub Off (dont tell me he aint go no technique, it may not be pretty but he's lightening fast and super accurate) Michael Viner's Incredible Bongo Band: Apache Theme from Starsky and Hutch (zero street cred I imagine, but funky as hell) Wow, that'll do. Listen to everything everyone has put into the thread so far on repeat for six months, you'll be a totally different bassist.

[quote name='thepurpleblob' post='420082' date='Feb 26 2009, 02:05 PM']Set everything flat, plug it in, switch it on, does it make a noise. Good.... my sound. Everybody thinks I'm joking when I say this. I'm not..... [/quote] Thats my ethos too. I do tend to favor the bridge pickup, but in any event I usually pluck at the bridge rather than neck (exception being very slow mellow stuff) so even the neck pickup is nice and tight sounding compared to most. I have eq - I use it to help when the room sucks. Sometimes I break away from my own modus operandi though....

[quote name='dlloyd' post='420184' date='Feb 26 2009, 04:24 PM'][b]Aqua Boogie (A Psychoalphadiscobetabioaquadoloop)[/b] Ha-ah, ha-ah, ha-ah! I am Sir Nose D'Voidoffunk I can't swim EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT (Hit me!) Bioaquadooloop (Ah ho! Ha ha, get down!) Psychoalphadiscobetabioaquadooloops A motion picture underwater starring most of you-loops Ha-ah Ha-ah Ha-ah! (x6)[/quote] Probably the most misunderstood protest song of the 20th Century :wacko:

[quote name='Crazykiwi' post='420182' date='Feb 26 2009, 04:22 PM']is it possible to be a Funk Geek?[/quote] Guilty :blush:

[quote name='alexclaber' post='420148' date='Feb 26 2009, 03:28 PM']Mandate my ass. I think if you really want to get funk then you need to listen to the lyrics. As you may have noticed I ain't so black but I am totally into the attitude and message that drove the funk revolution - "I don't want nobody to get me nothing", "They call it the White House but that's a temporary condition", "But since John Wayne was no longer available, they settled for Ronald Reagan". Almost nothing annoys me more than cheesy whiteboy lameass funk covers bands. Where is the dirt, where is the grease, where is the message? This might sound like party music but it is protest music! "You don't need the bullet when you got the ballot." Alex P.S. Dig your inner afro.[/quote] In all seriousness Alex is spot on. Its too often watered down by the later disco thing, and 80's pop use of slapping to excess by well turned out middle class white boys from the Isle of Wight (mentioning no names here). Real funk is very much the urban protest music of its day. Disco was an anomaly and in some ways an appalling one at that. Funk morphed into hip hop; check out Beat Street by Grandmaster Flash, the b-line is Doug Wimbish I think, and as funky as hell, the whole track is an amazing lyrical protest poem - staggeringly beautiful rhyming about incredibly real and gritty subjects. At least as good as Rappers Delight and Its Like a Jungle. ANd they all owe the sound to funk in the biggest way you can imagine. I was into hip hop in '82 and considered very odd by everyone at school as a result (we were all middle class and white for what its worth, about 3 of us were into hip hop and early electro), think it went downhill as soon as it started being about gangstas and hoes personally rather than real people suffering real life... Would happily play in a funk or hip hop live act any day if the week. Rather than any other style of music, it just moves me. But it would have to be old school either way....

[quote name='alexclaber' post='420148' date='Feb 26 2009, 03:28 PM']As you may have noticed I ain't so black[/quote] Nooooo, tell me it aint so bruther