Is it just me or do you also get frustrated when trawling through online lists or ebay sales to listen to clips that are often described as Crossover soul or Funk/soul or gospel/funk when in reality they should file under dire bin ends!

 

Also, I have noticed that what me and Karl Heard used to call 'dirty funk edged soul' is now being confused with what I would call FONK. By this i mean the sort of generic funk or FONK thats better played at student nights where they are drunk and want to wobble about a bit.

 

Is the desperate desire to unearth new tunes leading to generic FONK infiltrating many nights? 

...but has misunderstood the topic under discussion...

oh sorry..........thought part of the gist was the tunes being played..........disregard my post then

the louis chachere record is still a funk record.

 

is it a jazz-funk record? probably with the hammond and horn arrangement. but it's still a funk record.

the louis chachere record is still a funk record.

 

is it a jazz-funk record? probably with the hammond and horn arrangement. but it's still a funk record.

Doesn't sound like jazz funk to me Bob. Just heavily syncopated rhythm and blues ie funk. Mik Parry was right when he said it sounds like a New Orleans record. Probably why this Kansas recording got reissued on a Louisiana label: it feels like an Eddie Bo tune.

Here he is by the way.

 

I know about louis chachere, he was part of the derbys revue in KC that had marva whitney, the sinceres, the del montes [later the visitors], etc.

 

anyways it's clearly a funk record. it came out on two KC labels before jewel (forte and MJC).

I think people have got sidetracked by my inclusion of a debatable example. It was listed as soul/funk....whereas maybe 5 years ago it would have been funk.

 

Im suggesting that dealers , sellers,  are creating misleading ad's because they see a fast penny in the emergent soulful funk thing. But they are just banging the label on everything in the hope that some will go for the bait?

 

I certainly don't remember everything being listed as Soul/funk when i think back even 5 years.

 

So is it an emergent tactic or a blurred genre or a confused child?

It's a tactic - As are many descriptions of records........"An absolute must for any Northern Soul D.J"..........."This is the holy grail".......etc, etc......

 

Personally I luv em - they often make me chuckle (defo not a major crime)

 

All the best,

 

Len

Edited June 4, 201410 yr by LEN

I think people have got sidetracked by my inclusion of a debatable example. It was listed as soul/funk....whereas maybe 5 years ago it would have been funk.

 

Im suggesting that dealers , sellers,  are creating misleading ad's because they see a fast penny in the emergent soulful funk thing. But they are just banging the label on everything in the hope that some will go for the bait?

 

I certainly don't remember everything being listed as Soul/funk when i think back even 5 years.

 

So is it an emergent tactic or a blurred genre or a confused child?

 

 

Well! As far as it goes for offering the most minimal of apologies after using a really bad example to prove your point that's a cracker, Paul heheh.

 

Seriously though, the funk/soul description has been used for years. Maybe people are just noticing it now because so called 'funk edged soul' is the flavour of the month? As an example of this, here's a Lee Moses track from Popsike in 2003 that's (accurately) described as "funk soul".

it is soul/funk as is james brown. did someone list it as "funky '70s crossover"?

I think people have got sidetracked by my inclusion of a debatable example. It was listed as soul/funk....whereas maybe 5 years ago it would have been funk.

 

Im suggesting that dealers , sellers,  are creating misleading ad's because they see a fast penny in the emergent soulful funk thing. But they are just banging the label on everything in the hope that some will go for the bait?

 

I certainly don't remember everything being listed as Soul/funk when i think back even 5 years.

 

So is it an emergent tactic or a blurred genre or a confused child?

I do see what you mean. It always happens when a style becomes fashionable - sellers try to shoehorn anything slightly resembling, especially things they're struggling to shift, into the trendy genre.

basically, your basic funk hasnt done anything price wise in 15 years - it's out of fashion with the big spenders at least - so people see some funk records go big, they get high hopes for their straight funk 45s, either not realising that it's only a certain sound that's in fashion, or hoping to sell to people who are flailing around trying to jump on the bandwagon, or maybe, they're just selling them to people who know exactly what sort of funk they are, but like them anyway.

maybe there's people who like to mix their hard edged funky soul with straight-up funk instead of with northern, after all, that was going on in the 90s, when a lot of these funky soul tracks first got played, by Wrighty & co

I

I do see what you mean. It always happens when a style becomes fashionable - sellers try to shoehorn anything slightly resembling, especially things they're struggling to shift, into the trendy genre.

basically, your basic funk hasnt done anything price wise in 15 years - it's out of fashion with the big spenders at least - so people see some funk records go big, they get high hopes for their straight funk 45s, either not realising that it's only a certain sound that's in fashion, or hoping to sell to people who are flailing around trying to jump on the bandwagon, or maybe, they're just selling them to people who know exactly what sort of funk they are, but like them anyway.

maybe there's people who like to mix their hard edged funky soul with straight-up funk instead of with northern, after all, that was going on in the 90s, when a lot of these funky soul tracks first got played, by Wrighty & co

I

 

 

Do you know, I've been thinking about posting a similar topic for a while about the 'Northern Effect'.

 

It struck me that there are hundreds (thousands more likely) of soul, funk, jazz, Latin gospel etc records that have been sought by collectors for years - I'm not talking about new discoveries here, clearly, just established records. When they start to get plays on the Northern scene the price generally rockets out of all proportion - you also see it happen with relatively new records like the Smoove and Turrell, Lefties Soul Connection 45s that have shot up in price in recent years. Meanwhile  funk records that have a sort of classic status and some demand but aren't of interest to Northern collectors (such as Pull My Coat, Black Belt Jones for example)  seem to find a value and more or less settle there. Same with those other genres.

 

I was wondering if the unrealistic price hikes were related to the fact that that the Northern Soul scene was one of the first in the UK where it was commonplace to throw enormous amounts of money at 45s to secure them (and the fact that the majority of collectors these days are mature and financially secure). Average funk collectors, from my experience, aren't necessarily younger, or shorter of cash on the whole, but they tend not have come from that same big spending culture.

 

Same thing you were saying from a slightly different perspective maybe?

 

I still don't think that sellers describing their records as "funk/soul, funky soul" and so on are necessarily au fait with the ebbs and flows of Northern Soul fashion however.

I think people have got sidetracked by my inclusion of a debatable example. It was listed as soul/funk....whereas maybe 5 years ago it would have been funk.

 

Im suggesting that dealers , sellers,  are creating misleading ad's because they see a fast penny in the emergent soulful funk thing. But they are just banging the label on everything in the hope that some will go for the bait?

 

I certainly don't remember everything being listed as Soul/funk when i think back even 5 years.

 

So is it an emergent tactic or a blurred genre or a confused child?

A  bit like   LARRY DAVIS  used to be gritty soul  before r&b became popular......then it was r&b

A  bit like   LARRY DAVIS  used to be gritty soul  before r&b became popular......then it was r&b

I think that as Larry Davis was a blues singer and was effectively covering an r&b standard, originally by bo biddley, it's probably safe to say that 'I've been hurt' always was, is and will be, R&B.

It's purely sales pitch to me and probably due to the times we live in.... The " search engine generation "!

Which works for sellers to cast a bigger net, wider audience etc, I'm a sucker for the genre or term " tittyshaker ".. F###ed if I know what it is but I'm still looking out for it in events guides ;)

I'm a sucker for the genre or term " tittyshaker ".. F###ed if I know what it is

 

https://tittyshaker.com/writtenword.htm