60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Do talk back
User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 53502
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Snarfyguy » 22 Sep 2010, 15:24

Nolamike wrote:
pig bodine wrote:
Snarfyguy wrote:one of the first records I ever bought was Boogie Fever. Great tune!


I tried calling in sick at work with boogie fever and another time with love-itis. Both times I was told that if I didn't come in, I was fired.


Everyone knows pigs can't catch boogie fever.

Now swine flu, on the other hand...
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.

User avatar
Hepcat
Posts: 2438
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 21:50
Location: Toronto

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Hepcat » 22 Sep 2010, 15:46

Count Machuki wrote:Earth Hot Air & No Fire.
Vapid pop with big band arrangements for people who can't stand the heat of the funk.


I agree. They always caused me to change the station immediately.

:!:
Image

"That government governs best that governs least."

User avatar
hookfinger
Posts: 6328
Joined: 23 Jan 2008, 18:43
Location: the observation post
Contact:

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby hookfinger » 22 Sep 2010, 15:58

Nolamike wrote:
Man, that "You're a big girl now! No more daddy's little girl!" - that one just slays me. I recently reduced a good friend to tears by giving him some bourbon and playing that track for him the day before his daughter's sixth birthday. :)


I'd cry to if you served me Ancient Age and I knew you were holding out on the good stuff. ;)

I think somehow soul and funk have become interchangeable. I enjoy most older soul but as it turns to funk/boogie I find myself much less enthused.
Oh boy is it getting rough, when my old world charm isn't quite enough.

Piggly Wiggly

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Piggly Wiggly » 22 Sep 2010, 17:01

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:What a depressing thread.


Live and let live.

There's plenty of filler amidst the killer.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 24007
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 22 Sep 2010, 17:13

Sure. There was plenty of filler. But James Brown, Barry White, Al Green, EWF, The Stylistics, etc was not it.
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

User avatar
Nolamike
Posts: 13988
Joined: 05 Dec 2005, 21:31
Location: Heaven, Hell, or Houston
Contact:

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Nolamike » 22 Sep 2010, 17:29

hookfinger wrote:
Nolamike wrote:
Man, that "You're a big girl now! No more daddy's little girl!" - that one just slays me. I recently reduced a good friend to tears by giving him some bourbon and playing that track for him the day before his daughter's sixth birthday. :)


I'd cry to if you served me Ancient Age and I knew you were holding out on the good stuff. ;)


:lol:

Sorry! Only Ancient Age here!

*Hides bottle of A.H. Hirsch Reserve 16 y.o. behind back*
Sir John Coan wrote:Nolamike is speaking nothing but sense here.


Loki wrote:Mike is Hookfinger's shill.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39534
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Count Machuki » 22 Sep 2010, 17:32

Hepcat wrote:
Count Machuki wrote:Earth Hot Air & No Fire.
Vapid pop with big band arrangements for people who can't stand the heat of the funk.


I agree. They always caused me to change the station immediately.

:!:


Cloth ears. Don't you know they made a movie with Harvey Keitel?!




;)



I'm shocked and appalled to find James Brown's name on this thread, by the way. Takes all sorts, etc., but FFS! Have you all never moved?!
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Nolamike
Posts: 13988
Joined: 05 Dec 2005, 21:31
Location: Heaven, Hell, or Houston
Contact:

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Nolamike » 22 Sep 2010, 17:34

Count Machuki wrote:I'm shocked and appalled to find James Brown's name on this thread, by the way. Takes all sorts, etc., but FFS! Have you all never moved?!


From a thread in the Mix Club forum:

John_K wrote:
Nolamike wrote:
John_K wrote:I'll need to adjust my position in a couple of weeks...


Yeah, you definitely don't want to get bed sores. Actually, you should probably adjust your position daily...


I move away from the screen from time to time to use the toilet, although I have considered converting the chair to a commode...

:lol:
Sir John Coan wrote:Nolamike is speaking nothing but sense here.


Loki wrote:Mike is Hookfinger's shill.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39534
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Count Machuki » 22 Sep 2010, 17:37

:lol:

*sings*

"Living with a hernia...."
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

Piggly Wiggly

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Piggly Wiggly » 22 Sep 2010, 18:03

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Sure. There was plenty of filler. But James Brown, Barry White, Al Green, EWF, The Stylistics, etc was not it.


Generally agreed, although I wouldn't blame anyone for cherry picking James Brown or Barry White's catalogs. I used to collect JB's Federal, King, People and Polygram 45s and...I was not horribly put out when I liquidated about a decade ago for venture capital.

The impetus behind a thread like this, I'm guessing, is a very real reaction to a very real blanket Anglo Saxon musical deification of...you know, "Negroes". Blues, soul, funk, gospel, reggae, hip hop - there seems to be a line going all the way back to the Beatles/Stones/Yardbirds British beat boom all the way through yr Dave Marsh types or yr Legend/The Best of P Funk/Bloodsugarsexmagic owning fratboys where this shit is all somehow unimpeachably sacrosanct. At the end of the day, I'm not certain there's anything whiter than wanting to be black.

It's a deep well of some stunning music, but the implication that African Americans have a notably stronger musical batting average than whitey seems no less spuriously canonistic than yr baby boomer classic rock propaganda.

As it happens, I could die happily enough without hearing another note by George Clinton or Aretha Franklin.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 32510
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Matt Wilson » 22 Sep 2010, 18:10

John San Juan wrote:The impetus behind a thread like this, I'm guessing, is a very real reaction to a very real blanket Anglo Saxon musical deification of...you know, "Negroes". Blues, soul, funk, gospel, reggae, hip hop - there seems to be a line going all the way back to the Beatles/Stones/Yardbirds British beat boom all the way through yr Dave Marsh types or yr Legend/The Best of P Funk/Bloodsugarsexmagic owning fratboys where this shit is all somehow unimpeachably sacrosanct. At the end of the day, I'm not certain there's anything whiter than wanting to be black.

It's a deep well of some stunning music, but the implication that African Americans have a notably stronger musical batting average than whitey seems no less spuriously canonistic than yr baby boomer classic rock propaganda.



*Applause*

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39534
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Count Machuki » 22 Sep 2010, 18:28

Jsj...are you sure yr not thinking of Latinos?

;)
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29992
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby toomanyhatz » 22 Sep 2010, 18:30

John San Juan wrote:It's a deep well of some stunning music, but the implication that African Americans have a notably stronger musical batting average than whitey seems no less spuriously canonistic than yr baby boomer classic rock propaganda.


Boy, I'd be nodding my head like crazy if that's what I thought was really going on here. But I seem to have a lot of company here in the fact that I have no desire to hear 90% of post-bop records, and even less desire to hear second-rate hip-hop from the sticks. But the fact of the matter is soul for about a 15 year period, is, by and large, pretty unimpeachable. As evidenced by the fact that, when coming up with stuff from the period they don't like, folks often find themselves grasping at straws.

There's a huge difference between saying "well, I could do without some of..." and the lack of deep interest, by-and-large, shown here for most other forms of black music. It ain't all universally liked by a longshot. Yeah, we have some freaks for the stuff- Davey is obviously one. I will admit to possibly being influenced by the fact that a lot of this was the music that I loved when I was first learning what music was and how it worked. But there's also no reason to deny that 99.9% of it has held up when it has.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2023?

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 32510
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Matt Wilson » 22 Sep 2010, 18:38

toomanyhatz wrote:
John San Juan wrote:It's a deep well of some stunning music, but the implication that African Americans have a notably stronger musical batting average than whitey seems no less spuriously canonistic than yr baby boomer classic rock propaganda.


Boy, I'd be nodding my head like crazy if that's what I thought was really going on here. But I seem to have a lot of company here in the fact that I have no desire to hear 90% of post-bop records, and even less desire to hear second-rate hip-hop from the sticks. But the fact of the matter is soul for about a 15 year period, is, by and large, pretty unimpeachable. As evidenced by the fact that, when coming up with stuff from the period they don't like, folks often find themselves grasping at straws.

There's a huge difference between saying "well, I could do without some of..." and the lack of deep interest, by-and-large, shown here for most other forms of black music. It ain't all universally liked by a longshot. Yeah, we have some freaks for the stuff- Davey is obviously one. I will admit to possibly being influenced by the fact that a lot of this was the music that I loved when I was first learning what music was and how it worked. But there's also no reason to deny that 99.9% of it has held up when it has.


I dunno, I get what you and Davey are saying - that R&B/Soul was so strong in the '60s/'70s that even an average practicioner of the form is a cut above. But I think that this is merely the average BCBer's opinion rather than a qualitative fact, you know?

I mean, most of us love '60s garage rock too, and seek out any band we're unaware of, etc. Surf music is that way with me, maybe reggae is for others. There's probably a little Northern Soul nostalgia for some. I think San Juan's point shouldn't be dismissed, frankly.

Piggly Wiggly

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Piggly Wiggly » 22 Sep 2010, 18:43

toomanyhatz wrote: But there's also no reason to deny that 99.9% of it has held up when it has.


60's/70's soul is as much my "home" as anyone else's, but...I find those numbers more than a little hyperbolic.

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29992
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby toomanyhatz » 22 Sep 2010, 18:45

Oh, I'm not arguing that the scenario JSJ presents doesn't happen- I'm convinced it's behind the enormous popularity of NWA in the 'burbs, for starters. I'm just saying that if the best people here can come up with is dismissing a dash of this and a smidgeon of that- I've yet to hear of anyone coming up with a successful 70s R&B artist that they actually think did crap- then at some point you have to acknowledge that the stuff is quality- or at least that an overwhelming majority of us here think it is.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2023?

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29992
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby toomanyhatz » 22 Sep 2010, 18:49

Oh, and garage band music's in my wheelhouse too. But I ain't going after Rubble Volume 212: the Davenport, IA Scene with much enthusiasm. Whereas I've been getting into collecting these underground funk comps- many of which I've written about here- and I've yet to find one that doesn't introduce me to something amazing that I was thoroughly unfamiliar with. I'm sure if you dig deep enough into 70s soul you eventually stop digging up gold and striking tin. But I've been at it for quite a while now and it ain't happened to me yet.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2023?

The Modernist

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby The Modernist » 22 Sep 2010, 18:50

John San Juan wrote:
Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Sure. There was plenty of filler. But James Brown, Barry White, Al Green, EWF, The Stylistics, etc was not it.


Generally agreed, although I wouldn't blame anyone for cherry picking James Brown or Barry White's catalogs. I used to collect JB's Federal, King, People and Polygram 45s and...I was not horribly put out when I liquidated about a decade ago for venture capital.

The impetus behind a thread like this, I'm guessing, is a very real reaction to a very real blanket Anglo Saxon musical deification of...you know, "Negroes". Blues, soul, funk, gospel, reggae, hip hop - there seems to be a line going all the way back to the Beatles/Stones/Yardbirds British beat boom all the way through yr Dave Marsh types or yr Legend/The Best of P Funk/Bloodsugarsexmagic owning fratboys where this shit is all somehow unimpeachably sacrosanct. At the end of the day, I'm not certain there's anything whiter than wanting to be black.

It's a deep well of some stunning music, but the implication that African Americans have a notably stronger musical batting average than whitey seems no less spuriously canonistic than yr baby boomer classic rock propaganda.

As it happens, I could die happily enough without hearing another note by George Clinton or Aretha Franklin.


Good post.

Apart from the last sentence! :) ;)

User avatar
Foxhound
Posts: 2415
Joined: 04 Sep 2010, 17:52
Location: By the back fence near the tracks.

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Foxhound » 22 Sep 2010, 19:02

John san Juan wrote:The impetus behind a thread like this, I'm guessing, is a very real reaction to a very real blanket Anglo Saxon musical deification of...you know, "Negroes".


Well since I'm not Anglo-Saxon, it might not surprise you that I dislike both Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder.

Ray Charles' music is too jazzy and just isn't funky enough for my taste. I always regarded his music as the kind of respectable negro music that Ed Sullivan and other old farts could say they liked.

And Stevie Wonder just couldn't sing. He lost his voice after puberty. I wish he'd just stuck to playing the harmonica for his own band and left the singing to someone with a less raspy voice - like perhaps Ray Charles.

8-)
Brits out of the Falklands!

Evangeline - living on in our hearts though long removed from our shores.

Beebsy wrote:Fuck off. Wanker.

User avatar
Nolamike
Posts: 13988
Joined: 05 Dec 2005, 21:31
Location: Heaven, Hell, or Houston
Contact:

Re: 60s/70s Soul Artists We Don't Like

Postby Nolamike » 22 Sep 2010, 19:03

Lance Matthew wrote:
toomanyhatz wrote:
John San Juan wrote:It's a deep well of some stunning music, but the implication that African Americans have a notably stronger musical batting average than whitey seems no less spuriously canonistic than yr baby boomer classic rock propaganda.


Boy, I'd be nodding my head like crazy if that's what I thought was really going on here. But I seem to have a lot of company here in the fact that I have no desire to hear 90% of post-bop records, and even less desire to hear second-rate hip-hop from the sticks. But the fact of the matter is soul for about a 15 year period, is, by and large, pretty unimpeachable. As evidenced by the fact that, when coming up with stuff from the period they don't like, folks often find themselves grasping at straws.

There's a huge difference between saying "well, I could do without some of..." and the lack of deep interest, by-and-large, shown here for most other forms of black music. It ain't all universally liked by a longshot. Yeah, we have some freaks for the stuff- Davey is obviously one. I will admit to possibly being influenced by the fact that a lot of this was the music that I loved when I was first learning what music was and how it worked. But there's also no reason to deny that 99.9% of it has held up when it has.


I dunno, I get what you and Davey are saying - that R&B/Soul was so strong in the '60s/'70s that even an average practicioner of the form is a cut above. But I think that this is merely the average BCBer's opinion rather than a qualitative fact, you know?

I mean, most of us love '60s garage rock too, and seek out any band we're unaware of, etc. Surf music is that way with me, maybe reggae is for others. There's probably a little Northern Soul nostalgia for some. I think San Juan's point shouldn't be dismissed, frankly.


These are all interesting points.

As far as why we find so much of it has held up so well... I'm gonna give the wild-ass guess that a good chunk of it was the way these records were made. Unlike most rock bands, which were self-contained, insular units, I'd guess that at least 80 or even 90% of all the soul music that ended up on record featured backing by a house band of pros who knew this style of music inside and out, but still had the pressure to keep it lean and mean so that the primary focus would be on the singer whose album they were making, rather than on the studio musicians. This was the case with Motown, Stax, Hi, Malaco, Muscle Shoals, Fame, all the New Orleans stuff (whether it be Toussaint with the Meters, or Eddie Bo or Wardell Quezerque with a grouping of the other dozen or so guys who played on everything), etc., etc., etc. They all had an identifiable "sound," but they weren't really the focus. These guys didn't have to write "songs," just play on them, often aided by an arranger; any cool little licks they developed, they could just plug into one of the session tunes where appropriate, rather than having to construct something around it.

Add to that the fact that there were a lot of people in the soul music biz who were just songwriters, and only had to focus on writing material that would be in the sweet spot for particular singers - and that this didn't require anything but a basic melody and lyrics, the arrangement would often be left up to someone else.

The whole process was like a well-oiled machine, that seemed to give room for each person to focus on their particular strengths.
Sir John Coan wrote:Nolamike is speaking nothing but sense here.


Loki wrote:Mike is Hookfinger's shill.


Return to “Yakety Yak”