There's a big difference between playing the correct notes and playing the notes correctly. It's a process. Thanks for sharing that.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Unfunky......
- Thread starter DWBass
- Start date
I didn’t hear anything that couldn’t be fixed after a few run throughs, people just have to get comfortable with material, I dug it!
Like Bootsy says "You can't fake the funk". You are going to have a long wait expecting them to "develop" the funk.
That is a rock song not funk. I never considered Chicago a funk band, a horn band yes.
Jeez, tough crowd. Nothing wrong with this that another 10 runthroughs won't fix. Nothing missing here but a shared sense of purpose. And, after all, they've got you. Seriously, when you start digging in around the 2:15 mark, the band sorta snaps to...for a while. They just need a reason to play.
There is the pocket,if you ain't in it,there ain't no groove. Drummer and bass player have to play in the pocket together or there is no funk! You and the drummer should spend time jamming the songs just the two of you.Funk is groove and feel,you can't play it if you can't feel it. Rehearse just your rythem section ,no vocals,no horns and see what's wrong, then try to fix it or realize it can't be fixed but either way good luck! 
Wow...I don't at all associate this tune with funk - however, the better you are at comprehending funk principles, the better off you'll be in performing this song!
Let's start with the horns...and I know a bit about this genre, having enjoyed 10 years of solid professional trombonist/arranger work after working out horn arrangements for a band (mixed high-school kids and semi-pros) in the early '70's, as a kid. Chicago's horn section was lean and tight - alto sax, trumpet and a very fine 'bone player doing the arrangements. These guys knew how to play with tight, synchronized attacks and releases, good use of dynamics - they never just sit on a whole note, there always would be some degree of sforzando or swell - it was a colorful section, with skillful voicings for the 3 horns. So on your mix I hear two saxes, stuck with inner voice parts that actually may be cool in the context of a 6-horn section, but those note choices - presumably written - are not a great place to start in projecting the vibe of the horn section as a whole. Next, without trumpets or trombone, you don't have the attack impact that comes with brass. Instead, the attacks are soft, and there is all of the "buzz" that comes with saxes being saxes (not for nothing did Quincy Jones periodically decree that there would be no sax buzziness in certain Michael Jackson horn charts). But beyond all of this, the saxes have to get into the spirit of this tune - those original horn lines almost lay like fanfares - punch, punch punch, somewhere between latin, funk and Aaron Copeland's "Fanfare for the Common Man" - and that punch comes from super clean and crisp attacks and releases, even off of the whole-note parts. Personally, I'd find 6 horns kind of lugubrious for Chicago tunes, unless they really play well, play well together, and are skillfully arranged. So there's the funk for you - playing horn parts like part of the rhythm section!
Drums - yeah on tuning - low tuned drums fine for funk, but not for this Chicago bit. Not so sure about pocket comments - my recollection is that Danny Seraphine actually had a bit of an "ahead of the beat" orientation, consistent with his interest and training in latin music, and that this same "ahead of the beat" thing was shared by the horn section. Yeah, funk guys often play a bit behind, but I"m not hearing this generation of Chicago as a funk thing!
Guitar - needs to get crisper on time - attack/release, but solo showed chops and jazz comprehension - promising.
Tempo - perhaps a bit slow?
Overall - simply lacks the immediacy and urgency of the original. Could be newness to the charts and tune, or any number of things.
Net net - with proper direction, could probably come out ok. Folks need to go back and listen to the originals, and readers need to learn the lines, lose the charts, and concentrate on creating some vibe.
Good luck!
Let's start with the horns...and I know a bit about this genre, having enjoyed 10 years of solid professional trombonist/arranger work after working out horn arrangements for a band (mixed high-school kids and semi-pros) in the early '70's, as a kid. Chicago's horn section was lean and tight - alto sax, trumpet and a very fine 'bone player doing the arrangements. These guys knew how to play with tight, synchronized attacks and releases, good use of dynamics - they never just sit on a whole note, there always would be some degree of sforzando or swell - it was a colorful section, with skillful voicings for the 3 horns. So on your mix I hear two saxes, stuck with inner voice parts that actually may be cool in the context of a 6-horn section, but those note choices - presumably written - are not a great place to start in projecting the vibe of the horn section as a whole. Next, without trumpets or trombone, you don't have the attack impact that comes with brass. Instead, the attacks are soft, and there is all of the "buzz" that comes with saxes being saxes (not for nothing did Quincy Jones periodically decree that there would be no sax buzziness in certain Michael Jackson horn charts). But beyond all of this, the saxes have to get into the spirit of this tune - those original horn lines almost lay like fanfares - punch, punch punch, somewhere between latin, funk and Aaron Copeland's "Fanfare for the Common Man" - and that punch comes from super clean and crisp attacks and releases, even off of the whole-note parts. Personally, I'd find 6 horns kind of lugubrious for Chicago tunes, unless they really play well, play well together, and are skillfully arranged. So there's the funk for you - playing horn parts like part of the rhythm section!
Drums - yeah on tuning - low tuned drums fine for funk, but not for this Chicago bit. Not so sure about pocket comments - my recollection is that Danny Seraphine actually had a bit of an "ahead of the beat" orientation, consistent with his interest and training in latin music, and that this same "ahead of the beat" thing was shared by the horn section. Yeah, funk guys often play a bit behind, but I"m not hearing this generation of Chicago as a funk thing!
Guitar - needs to get crisper on time - attack/release, but solo showed chops and jazz comprehension - promising.
Tempo - perhaps a bit slow?
Overall - simply lacks the immediacy and urgency of the original. Could be newness to the charts and tune, or any number of things.
Net net - with proper direction, could probably come out ok. Folks need to go back and listen to the originals, and readers need to learn the lines, lose the charts, and concentrate on creating some vibe.
Good luck!
Last edited:
I see nothing at all wrong with the way you guys played Make Me Smile. I wouldn't change anything...just do it a couple more times and tighten it up a bit. Chicago ain't funk.
The risk of all this discussion though, is that it may end up in the inevitable "white men can't play blues" or "white bassists can't play jamaican reggae" or something like that. Or the other way around. Which we've heard of ad nauseam. If you hear that the "gnarls" are slowly disappearing each rehearsal, then it looks promising. But if you'll have to keep on nagging, and nothing happens, then, split.
There are areas that needs work. That's all. I don't hear huge tempo rushes or drops during fills, or something that weak. But it's aboslutely not the worst I've heard, but I would love to hear the band kick, in any other style, why not a "straight" E-street band number or something similar. "Billy Joel" type of arranged pop. Contemporary adult.
You bet that I had the same problems too, but the other way around. Some latin band I joined years ago. On bass. THEY asked me in the first place to join, because they knew my playing, and knew who I was and so on. Now, they all could cut it, but me. The funny part is, that they thought that I fit in, played in the pocket, while me myself had to struggle. I hate "hearing" struggle within music. It was all about that salsa beat, clave, and lying ahead of the beat with a 16th note. Each and all of the time. I couldn't get into no matter how I woodshed, or trying to hone it. No matter that I heard where the weakness lied within me, none of the others did. It ended up with that I told myself that this is the limit or level where I proudly could walk away with saying, this isn't really my style, and I never rever will be able to feel it, or cut it properly. Even tried to go to courses to learn how to dance salsa, for chrissake...! So, instead of pretending...
The peculiar thing is that even though the band actually consisted of latinos well versed in the style, I opted out, and they were sort of stumped with surprise. I heard things they didn't. Heard them next time around with another bass player, and thought "now you're talking". Simple as that.
my reference was incomplete and awry: standing in tall cotton should/could be a good thing --- unless 'we're standing in some tall cotton without the hands to pick it' = daunting/overwhelming ("over my head!"). which is the way all of my funky associates have used the term. granted, they are (like me) contemporary, urban folk...not antebellum, plantation folk. so: i stand by my use of the term (IME: slang, ironic, maybe even paradoxical), although i admit that my use/reference is no doubt a function of some etymological deterioration.
all i got! thanks for your observation/reference!
OP: sorry for the distraction
Best of luck. Don't wanna be a downer, but don't count on things improving much... especially if your band mates are older. I think funk in particular exposes players who aren't comfortable with the genre -- it's just really easy to sound unfunky when funk isn't a part of your vocabulary. Older musicians will have a harder time learning that vocab -- it's like learning a new language which is known to be more difficult as we age.
Youch. I just read this. Doesn't bode well, DW.
Your situation reminds me of a memorable experience I had. Years ago, I went to Jazz Camp West and had an amazing Brazilian instructor (Marcos Silva). I had him as a combo instructor, and he was teaching the nuances of Brazilian jazz. One night, there was a loose jam happening with some random campers where we were playing old-school funk and R&B -- my comfort zone. I'll never forget him trying to play "I Wish" with us. He had this huge grin as he tried to lock the groove with us, and he was telling us how good we were. I remember thinking a) "Wow, this monster is complimenting us!", and b) "Wow, this monster is having a hard time with this 'simple' (to those of us who grew up with it) groove!"
Despite him being a phenomenal Brazilian musician, the style of play in "I Wish" simply was not part of his vocabulary, and he sounded stiff as a result.
Ooooo! drool
Seriously, that is one of my fave songs ever -- and it ain't easy. Just a fantastic groove with great horns. If your band can play that song in the pocket, you got nothing to worry about -- drums and guitar (and you, of course) gotta be on their A game for that groove.
Last edited:
Have your entire band look up "Leonid and Friends" on YouTube. These Russian guys will show them how to cover Chicago tunes - they are fantastic !
I mentioned that this is not a good example of funk. We are doing some Tower Of Power songs that are definitely funky.
Summertime... is over, and the livin'... it ain't easy. Catfish are in the weeds, under ice... Cotton be any more unfunky than I am.
I came to this thread in hopes I could learn a little bit how to be funky.
Apparently not.
I came to this thread in hopes I could learn a little bit how to be funky.
Apparently not.
If that was, as you say, an "initial run though", I would be pleased. Best wishes.
I usually have more of a problem with tone than pocket/style. A rock guitarist will have way too much distortion for funk, or just use a Wah pedal and say it's funk :/
Or the drummer hits too hard, or the keys player is more like a piano player and being super busy.
I'd say it's important to bring it up - and bring it up often - that you think it still needs work. But be sure to use words like we and us a lot. We need to listen to this genre more, we need to play a bit more funky and in the pocket, we're playing too rock & roll... I always include myself in the critiques as to not piss anyone off, unless of course there's specific problems with a particular player/part. Sounds pretty good though!
Or the drummer hits too hard, or the keys player is more like a piano player and being super busy.
I'd say it's important to bring it up - and bring it up often - that you think it still needs work. But be sure to use words like we and us a lot. We need to listen to this genre more, we need to play a bit more funky and in the pocket, we're playing too rock & roll... I always include myself in the critiques as to not piss anyone off, unless of course there's specific problems with a particular player/part. Sounds pretty good though!
