Talk:Funk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject R&B and Soul Music (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Music/Music genres task force (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon Funk is within the scope of the Music genres task force of the Music project, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardise music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the task force guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good and 1.0 standards.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject African diaspora (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Untitled[edit]

For discussion prior to 2006, see Talk:Funk/Archive1.

New Funk/Deep Funk[edit]

I've tried to add a section under recent developments on the New Funk scene. This could use its own page and expansion. Also the Deep Funk collectors scene could use a write up and/or page.

Everytime I've added a link related to deep funk, which involves thousands of people around the world, a user named Ezeu edits them out as spam. None of the sites I added are commercial in nature, and are the most relevant sites to this scene.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.128.95.47 (talkcontribs)


I really must agree with the above. The "underground" Deep Funk scene is very significant and is based mainly on artists who recorded on American independant labels. As a result many of these records were often released in very small numbers and the artists never went on to become famous. However their rediscovery and reissue on 45's and compilations have greatly increased the ownership of such tracks. Some of these tracks are now considered classics of the genre. For example "Sexy Cofee Pot" by Tony Avlon and the Belairs, "Iron Leg" By Mickey and the Soul Generation, or "Baby Don't Cry" by The Third Guitar. I would add this section myself but I think it really should be written by somebody who specialises in collecting funk 45's. Philster 16:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Editorial Note[edit]

Hey, there's some confusing language in the origin paragraph. The sentence reads: "At least as early as the 1930s, jazz songs carried titles such as Buddy Bolden's "Funky Butt." Bolden never played a note in public after 1907; this sentence can be read to say that Bolden was playing/recording in the 30s. Don't know the protocol for editing, and don't much feel like stepping on the author's toes. Just figured I would point this out. Thanks, essvee 206.81.102.145 15:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Thank you. I've solved it. --M@rēino 19:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Chiptune funk[edit]

I removed the chiptune funk section. Chiptunes in general are quite far from funk. Funk is more closely related to Toe Jam & Earl game that was mentioned (that section can be returned in some form). (Also some scenemusicians such as Moby (not that famous Moby) and Nuke made funky MOD-music for Amiga). --128.214.205.5 09:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

African American[edit]

I've reverted an edit that changed "African Americans" in the opening sentence to "blacks". Being neither black nor American, I'm not intimately familiar with the current connotations of either term - I mostly reverted it for the loss of geographical information. If "black Americans" is more neutral, I'd be happy with that too. Ben Ram 11:22, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not happy with "African American" at all. Not only is funk very rhythmically similar to LatinAmerican music, but both James Brown and his drummer of the time, Clyde Stubblefield have stated that Brown got the idea from Fela Kuti when they saw him on one of their African tours, and Fela and his drummer, Tony Allen, have both recalled the event because Brown told Stubblefield to "Go and write down what that drummer's doing". You can find reference to it in Brown's autobiography, Kuti's autobiography, several of Allen's albums, and at least 2 interviews that Stubblefield did with the British music press when he came over here to record an album of break-beats.
Furthermore the band of 'First Americans', Redbone, although listed as a rock band, were playing funky rhythms long before Brown, thanks mainly to drummer Pete 'Last Walking Bear' DePoe, which is interesting inasmuch as my father had a Library of Congress' 78 of "North American Indian" Chief Os-ko-mon performing the rain dance, war dance, and sun dance, except the chief obviously had ambitions of stardom and added a brass and rhythm section to 'Sun dance'. The result was, by the standards of 78rpm recordings, an amazingly funky offering with the Indian drummers fighting it out with the kit drummer and the brass section throwing in a glorious riff that I still remember to this day. No doubt tame by today's standards, but immensely exciting to one being raised on the popular orchestral music of the era.
I think the whole intro needs re-researching and writing again. Deke42 23:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Is it really a good idea to call Funk 'African American'? I take it that this is because most of the people who play Funk music are black. However, I've seen affirmations in other parts of Wiki that music should not be connected to race at all. Wouldn't it be sensible to normalize this with other music articles? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.210.249.9 (talk) 03:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC).


If you can cite sources for the influences that James Brown's band drew upon, by all means add it! Actually i think the whole article would benefit and increase in quality if facts were specifically cited and less uncited opinions were present. Dissolve 00:07, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Bands like "Kriss Kross" are misperceived as "rap," or "R&B" when really they are truly funk. It's really just a style difference, but an important one to distinguish between. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.170.97.171 (talk) 08:43, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

If you want to get technical AFricans in Africa were doing funk before anyone else anyway. European explores even noted the similarities between blues , and negro spirituals back in the 17, and 18 hundreds.

Again this is just another white washing of history. Any time a black person or African creates something, people try to find ways to take the credit away. The same can be said for any music creation by black people. Blacks start it, everyone gets mad, and wants to find a way to say they created it. The first drums were in africa, the first music was in africa. No historian would even dispute that. So it all goes back to Africa anyway. We can go that rout if there are more people like this poster above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkman1984 (talkcontribs) 23:47, 6 December 2010 (UTC) ~Darkman1984~

Dave Thompson's 'Funk'[edit]

According to some reviewers this book contains inaccuracies, especially amongst its album and track listings. Should this be mentioned in the 'Further reading' category? Deke42 21:25, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah it seems like he churns books out covering many genres and is an expert on none of them. I say remove it if it's not a reliable source. Dissolve 00:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

h

Go go[edit]

Someone should write about go go on here, since it's one of two sub-genres listed, and doesn't even get a sentence. I would do it but don't know much about it. --Awiseman 17:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Another glaring omission is a section on Sly & The Family Stone. I can add Go-go and Sly when I get a chance. Dissolve 17:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

protected[edit]

Ok, I semiprotected the article. I'll add it to my watchlist. ---J.S (T/C) 23:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I've made a case on Talk:Spam blacklist for one of the primary anonymous link spammers on this article (and twenty-some other articles) to be blacklisted. If you or any other admin can speed this along it would probably help the situation a good bit. Dissolve 01:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't realy have any standing on meta. ---J.S (T/C) 06:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Uh, no. (Uncited Material on Backbeat etc).[edit]

"Funk music is characterized by intensely syncopated, danceable rhythms with the emphasis falling heavily on the first beat of every measure". A syncopated rhythm, according to the backbeat article has emphasis on beats 2 and 4, so one wonders why the rhythm would have heavy emphasis on the first beat of every measure. One of these articles is wrong. And would a source kill anybody?--I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 19:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe both articles are right and you are just confused. For example, if you are looking for what syncopation is, check syncopation, not back beat. Hyacinth (talk) 00:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
"By the mid-1960s Mr. Brown was producing his own recording sessions. In February 1965, with “Papa’s Got a Brand New Bag,” he decided to shift the beat of his band: from the one-two-three-four backbeat to one-two-three-four. “I changed from the upbeat to the downbeat,” Mr. Brown said in 1990. “Simple as that, really.” "[1] This is an assertion in the NYT from James Brown in 1990 saying that a key to his successful sound was the downbeat. The downbeat is the exact opposite of syncopation.--I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 21:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
He may have said he changed the downbeat for the upbeat but he wasn't speaking specifically about the positioning of the beat, he couldn't have been since you only have to listen to the material to hear the 2/4 emphasis. What he did do was add another beat on 1/3, but it wasn't original, inferior drummers (Dave Clarke, Honey Langtree) had been doing it because they didn't know any better, Roy Orbison did it for special effect on 'Pretty woman', and Otis Redding did it to add to the feeling of urgency on his more uptempo songs. Putting the entire beat on 1/3 sounds completely wrong, if you want to hear what it really sounds like try 'Johnny B. Goode' by Chuck Berry, or 'The royal scam' by Steely Dan.
I personally think that people are getting confused with "On the one". This was simply a bandleader's hip way of saying "Take it from the top", or even "1 - 2 - 3 - 4" and dates back to the jazz years. When Brown shouted "I want it on the one" he meant "I want you all to come in at the right time", there is no great significance in it. By definition, '1' being the initial digit, all music starts on the one. It seems to me that the confusion began with Bootsy, whose style was to start each bar with a giant plonk on the root note, and then fill the rest of the bar with syncopation. I can well imagine people listening to the Bootsy era and thinking "So that's the 'One'!" Deke42 13:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


"Often cueing his band with the command, "On the one!" previously associated with West African poly-rhythmic musical forms, diverse rhythms that all came together on one beat". that's obviously idiotic. music isn't polyrhythmic if it "all comes together on one beat". it's the core principle of polyrhythm. "on the one" beat every few bars, maybe.
the wiki should be fixed up by somebody who actually understands musical concepts, not somebody who heard something written by somebody who once heard something from somebody else about west african polyrhythm. listen to early to mid 70's fela kuti: on the one NOTHING.128.119.170.246 23:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that you yourself know what polyrhythm is so I don't think you should be throwing around words like "idiotic". Hyacinth (talk) 23:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I can see I'm going to have to dig my Fela Kuti book out and maybe borrow James Brown's autobiography from the library. We really need to get this sorted out. The whole thing's in danger of becoming an online argument. --Deke42 19:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Not really. I didn't post the second thing, somebody else did. If you haven't got a source, I'm deleting. And if you have got a source, I really *do* want page numbers.--I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 21:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I have now deleted and replaced the content with reliable sources as I said I would do. Information which contradicts a person widely known as the creator of funk music does not possess verifiability. "You only have to listen to the material to hear the 2/4 emphasis" is original research, Deke. --I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 17:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
If you seriously would rather believe the words of a man who has constantly contradicted himself throughout his life rather than the evidence of your own ears then so be it. Personally I think it's taking 'Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons - This policy states "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth"' one step beyond reality. What is original research anyway? If I get some crazy theory into print and someone else quotes me in Wikipedia does that make it right? I'll take verifiable truth any time. --Deke42 01:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


Re: the dispute above, here are a few relevant passages from some authoritative sources with citations.

Here's the beginning of the genre page on funk from the All Music Guide (with a link at the end):

Named after a slang word for "stink," funk was indeed the rawest, most primal form of R&B, surpassing even Southern soul in terms of earthiness. It was also the least structured, often stretching out into extended jams, and the most Africanized, built on dynamic, highly syncopated polyrhythms.[2]


Here's the first paragraph of the article on funk in Grove Music Online, the online version of the Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians:

An African-American popular music style. It features syncopated interlocking rhythm patterns based on straight quaver and semiquaver subdivisions, a vocal style drawn from soul music, extended vamps based on a single and often complex harmony, strong emphasis on the bass line, and lyrics with frequent spiritual themes and social commentary. The use of the term for a musical style inverts the negative colloquial meaning of strong aromas, particularly of a bodily and sexual nature.

(David Brackett: 'Funk', Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy (Accessed 1 March 2007), http://www.grovemusic.com) (This is the citation format the Dictionary specifically requests.)

A few sentences later in the same article:

He [James Brown] refined his approach in Cold Sweat (1967) by substituting open-ended vamps based on a single harmony for harmonic progressions, and by accenting strongly the first beat of every or every other 4/4 bar, freeing the instruments to play any number of syncopated patterns in which the beats are implied rather than stated.

And here's most of the first paragraph from the Grove entry on syncopation:

The regular shifting of each beat in a measured pattern by the same amount ahead of or behind its normal position in that pattern; in polyphonic textures this may occur in some or all of the parts. Syncopation usually occurs in lines in which the strong beats receive no articulation. This means either that they are silent, as in ex.1 (in this connection, see also Off-beat), or that each note is articulated on a weak beat (or between two beats) and tied over to the next beat, as in ex.2. Because any syncopated musical line can be perceived as contrary to the pulse established by the organization of the music into bars, syncopation is related to, and sometimes used as a synonym for, Cross-accent, Agogic accent and Cross-rhythm.

('Syncopation', Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy (Accessed 1 March 2007), http://www.grovemusic.com)

I hope this is helpful in resolving the issue. InnocuousPseudonym 02:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I think this entire discussion is missing an important point: you can syncopate on a number of different rhythmic levels. Accenting beats 2 and 4 in a 4/4 bar is syncopation on a quarter-note level, and it's usually done by the drums. The syncopation in funk is usually on the sixteenth note level, and it's done by the guitar and bass. (That said, I'm listening to Parliament's "Flash Light" right now, and it uses both types of syncopation!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.98.195 (talk) 17:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I think people should avoid literally interpreting things outside of context. Hyacinth (talk) 23:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Unprotected[edit]

Let's try unprotecting--it's been quite a while, and the worst spam culprit is now on the blacklist. Let me know or post to WP:RFPP if it becomes a problem again. Chick Bowen 06:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Well it lasted 10 days before the idiot crew arrived.... Is this a record? --Deke42 19:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Pod of Funk[edit]

The Pod Of Funk is a blog (no: it's a PODCAST, i.e it contains enclosed media files Deekdeekster 08:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC) DD.) and it does not pass the guidelines in WP:EL. Here are the points in the section of "Sites to normally avoid" that I believe apply to this page:

  • 1. Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article (it does in fact contain unique resources inasmuch as it researches and interviews modern, practising funk musicians and composers Deekdeekster 08:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)DD.)
  • 4. Links mainly intended to promote a website (This is a geniune link to a resource which focusses on Funk. The podcast has been running for 14 months and there is no one website beyond the podcast which this link promotes Deekdeekster 08:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)DD.)
  • 12. Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority - (Recognised by whom? I was interviewed by BBC radio on the event of James Brown's death Deekdeekster 08:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC) DD.)

---J.S (T/C/WRE) 23:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

    • "Funk" is too broad a category for individual music programs to be helpful to an encyclopedia article. Linking these podcasts are comparable to linking a portrait photographer's website from Humans. --Dystopos 00:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, there is the item about a "symmetrical relationship" - but I don't want to try to explain it here... and I don't really like it on WP:EL anyway. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 00:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Note to Deekdeekster: This talk page is the proper place to make the case for your suggested link. Per the guidelines on Conflicts of Interest (WP:COI), you should let other editors decide whether the link makes sense for the article. If there are specific resources at Pod of Funk which meet the criteria of WP:EL (such as a survey, timeline, grand definition, etc) it might be more kosher to link that resource than to just point people at your site. --Dystopos 15:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
  • "Linking these podcasts are comparable to linking a portrait photographer's website from" - nice use of english, but not true in the case of Pod of Funk. There's a lot of analysis which is relevant to definition of the modern genre, or I wouldn't have bothered with Wiki. You'd actually have to listen to the content rather than just take a quick peek at the webpage to see that... despite this I am not certain that I will be able to find the time to contribute in this context - too much like pedantic bickering! blessings Deekdeekster 07:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

1970s and P-Funk[edit]

"Already, in late 1960s, many jazz musicians — among them Horace Silver, Herbie Hancock (with his Headhunters band), Grover Washington, Jr., and Cannonball Adderley, Les McCann and Eddie Harris — had begun to combine jazz and funk. Sometimes this approach is called "jazz-funk". Additionally, in the late 1960s work of Miles Davis (with girlfriend/wife Betty Davis) and Tony Williams helped to create Jazz fusion and influenced funk."

The Headhunters had not even been assembled until '73- It is erroneous to include the group as "late 1960's" pioneers of jazz funk. Of course, Herbie IS a seminal figure in the movement and his name is synonymous with the word 'funk-' but not with the Headhunters in the 60's.

More should be written here about Jazz-Funk.Wahwahwilliam 05:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

indeed.

Herb Bombgarden and the Little Yogurts[edit]

Herb Bombgarden and the Little Yogurts should be added to the list of funk bands. They are very popular in Finland but no one knows about them elsewhere. I went back there this summer and watched a show and it took my breath away

That's far better! Since the last time I looked, the New Funk/ Deep Funk addition, plus that of several other users has greatly improved the article which is now looking cosiderably more accurate. It is a good idea to have a separate page for Deep Funk.

There's a host of world class funk bands out of Scandinavia. It's one of the 'secret stash' sources.Deke42 (talk) 19:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Original meaning of word funk[edit]

Quoting the article : The word "funk", once defined in dictionaries as body odor or the smell of sexual intercourse, commonly was regarded as coarse or indecent. I found that pretty surprising, as I had never heard that before, so I did some quick research online, and I've seen several different meanings for the word, including cowardly, but never that one. Even the very few websites that seemed to be using the word in that way didn't associate it with body odor. I wish there were sources for that, perhaps saying which dictionary defines funk that way. Alessiasakura 13:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

According to American Heritage, there are two words "funk". We are interested in funk(2): "A type of popular music combining elements of jazz, blues, and soul and characterized by syncopated rhythm and a heavy, repetitive bass line." Etymology: "Back-formation from funky(2)".
Funky(2): "1a Having a moldy or musty smell. b Having a strong, offensive, unwashed odor. Word history: "When asked which words in the English language are the most difficult to define precisely, a lexicographer would surely mention funky. Linguist Geneva Smitherman has tried to capture the meaning of this word in Talkin and Testifyin: The Language of Black America, where she explains that funky means '[related to] the blue notes or blue mood created in jazz, blues, and soul music generally, down-to-earth soulfully expressed sounds; by extension [related to] the real nitty-gritty or fundamental essence of life, soul to the max.' The first recorded use of funky is in 1784 in a reference to musty, old, moldy cheese. Funky then developed the sense 'smelling strong or bad' and could be used to describe body odor. The application of funky to jazz was explained in 1959 by one F. Newton in Jazz Scene: 'Critics are on the search for something a little more like the old, original, passion-laden blues: the trade-name which has been suggested for it is "funky" (literally: "smelly," i.e. symbolizing the return from the upper atmosphere to the physical, down-to-earth reality).'" — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 00:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll add it to the article. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 00:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Too much personal opinion[edit]

I'm probably as guilty as everyone else here, but this article is becoming farcical. It's been written by so many people, none of whom can even agree on exactly what 'funk' is, that it no longer makes any kind of logical sense.

Apparently funk is based upon Motown and one of its major practitioners was Curtis Mayfield? Illogical Captain, since the careers of Mayfield and the Motown label ran concurrently. Furthermore some later Motown artists cite Mayfield as an influence. It's also polyrhythmic and another major practitioner is Prince. Can anyone point me to a single Prince song with polyrhythmic accompaniment? Didn't think so. Funkadelic aren't that hot on the polyrhythm front either. Ah, but of course you have to listen to the records to hear that and under the rules listening to the records isn't allowed, you have to find a book written by someone else who's listened to them...

Maybe someone should put a disclaimer on all musical entries stating that the article, almost by default, will contain opinion, since there's very little else written about the subject. Deke42 (talk) 01:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

There is a great deal of garbage, self-promotion, and lists of editors' favorite musicians in the article. Still, there's a core of useful information buried in there among the crap.
Regarding Curtis Mayfield and Motown: contemporary musicians frequently influence one another so there's no inconsistency there, but neither is a particularly good example of funk. James Brown invented funk practically single-handedly, and more than anything it's the emphasis on "The One" that marked early funk. The article gets that right.
It's a stretch to describe much of Prince's music as funk, but when he did/does play funk, it's notable for incorporating new elements into the music.
Rickey Vincent's book is an excellent treatment of funk by a serious fan of the music. I haven't read much of Dave Thompson's book, but I heard it's pretty good too. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 23:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Even James Brown gave up claiming to have invented funk. Go and read his autobiography. He may have popularised it to a large degree but the list of founding funksters that predated him is enormous, including the gentleman that Brown claims was his influence, Fela Kuti, and if you want proof of that go and listen to some of Kuti's recordings from around Brown's 'On the one' period... Oh wait, you can't. Listening to records is original research.
Sheesh. Some of the rules of this place are bollocks. If someone with the loggin 'shawkins' tried to make an entry about time would it be disallowed because he wrote the book? Groo. Deke42 (talk) 20:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Should the article be re-written and strictly sourced with inline citations to reliable sources to establish a neutral point-of-view and eliminate all the original research? Yes. Who has the time to do it? <shrug> A pretty accurate article could be written using Vincent Rickey's and Dave Thompson's books as the primary sources. They are very well researched. dissolvetalk 19:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I would resist any temptation to use Thompson's book, as mentioned above it's full of inaccuracies which throw considerable doubt upon the validity of the man's research. Deke42 (talk) 03:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

If you want to get technical AFricans in Africa were doing funk before anyone else anyway. European explores even noted the similarities between blues , and negro spirituals back in the 17, and 18 hundreds.

Again this is just another white washing of history. Any time a black person or African creates something, people try to find ways to take the credit away. The same can be said for any music creation by black people. Blacks start it, everyone gets mad, and wants to find a way to say they created it. The first drums were in africa, the first music was in africa. No historian would even dispute that. So it all goes back to Africa anyway. We can go that rout if there are more people like this poster above.

Spare your black supremacist comments for another audience please! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.89.33.37 (talk) 22:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

How does funk styles (dance) fit?[edit]

I assume the funk styles article relates here. Paul foord (talk) 02:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate content[edit]

As someone who knows very little about this subject and has just stumbled across these pages i can't help noticing the similarity of content between a lot of the pages within this genre. Specifically Funk rock has identical paragraphs. Could do with a good tidy up, but then couldn't everything... :s extraordinary (talk) 15:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Definition[edit]

Intro says "Funk is an American musical style that originated in the mid- to late-1960s when African American musicians blended soul music, soul jazz and R&B into a rhythmic, danceable new form of music", which suggests that funk is a fusion genre. That's not the case. As we all know funk is simply a harder and more complex version of soul (probably with influenced from jazz and acid rock). And mentioning R&B as on of the sources makes no sense, as funk and soul already are sub-genres of R&B. Netrat_msk (talk) 17:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you need to learn that the term "R&B" was almost exclusively used as a blanket term during the late 1950s to the 1980s, to label any African American sung music. Read R&B article, it clears up the situation, and don't get confused with the statements like "Funk=R&B", they are pretty much the same kind of statements like "Hip hop=Funk". -- 217.21.43.222 (talk) 14:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Funk rock[edit]

The first artist to combine funk with psychedelic rock were the Beck/Page era Yardbirds, on Happenings Ten Years Time Ago. Jimi Hendrix's recorded contribution came later. I have not been able to find a source, but I urge anyone who doubts me to listen to the song, which was released in October 1966. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.130.194 (talk) 07:15, June 24, 2008


A good article let down by those so called "funk categories" towards that end which are laden with inaccuracies and of such dubious significance/truth that they undermine the whole article. Why does the the obsession with rock persist to the extent that it even makes an irrelevant apperance in an article about funk music? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.196.229 (talk) 18:52, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Re my above comment: more specifically I mean "funkcore"/"punkfunk" etc - these are of such miniscule importance/notifiability/significance that what the hellare they doing clogging up a generally good article like this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.196.229 (talk) 18:57, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

A little bit of critique[edit]

  • "History" section lacks huge portions of information on the 1970s and funk, I mean on how funk was overcome by disco in the early 1970s, how it became less "rock" and more danceable to the mid-70s, how it became popular again to the late 1970s, and how it overcame disco in the early 80s.
  • "History" section also lacks information on the formation of hip hop in the early to mid-70s in NY: the introduction of Merry-Go-Round in 1972, first block parties, the application of Jamaican sound system culture to funk etc.
  • The article lacks huge portions of information on the subculture that surrounded funk music - afro hair, african wear, beards among African Americans; it lacks the information about connections of funk with The Civil Rights Movements.
  • I can hardly find any information about the contribution of Latin American community to the formation of funk, on how boogaloo influenced the creation of funk etc.
  • "History" section should be categorised into sub-sections named like "1960s: the formation of funk", "early 1970s: merry-go-round, creation of disco", "mid-1970s: creation of hip hop, funk becomes more danceable" etc., etc., but not into sub-categories like "P-funk", because they make the navigation throught the article more difficult.
  • Funk rock history seems over-biased. I have the passage about "the first funk-rock record" being recorded in "1966" (around the time of formation of funk itself), based on the presence of "funky rhythm" in those records, as if funk is only defined by funky rhythms. I was lucky to hear some British blues-rock from the mid to late 1960s, and some of those blues rock tracks had more "funky" rhythms than any funk recordings I've heard. -- 217.21.43.222 (talk) 14:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure you're right. But do you have good sources for these statements? - see WP:V. If you do, we'd welcome your input - either directly into the article, or here on the talk page if you want to get other editors' involvement first. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure I can find sources for most of the claims I've made above. -- 217.21.43.222 (talk) 05:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

The use of the imperfect tense throughout this article tends to give the impression that funk is defunct (sorry for the bad pun). Surely funk is alive and kicikin'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.89.33.37 (talk) 22:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Drum n bass[edit]

The forgotten thing is Drum and bass —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.101.73.105 (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Influences[edit]

The statement in the subgenre discussion about Earth Wind and Fire being disco-influenced should be questioned since their "funk sound" was prevalent years before disco. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freejazzman58 (talkcontribs) 02:21, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Mistake in the Notes.tif[edit]

In the 2nd line the bar has 5 quarters which doesn't make sense to me. Can anyone explain or is it just wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.177.214.95 (talk) 07:39, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect, unsourced statement removed[edit]

I deleted this from the article:

"However, according to Billboard Magazine, only Sly & the Family Stone and the Ohio Players had singles which made it to #1 on its U.S. singles chart."

That's totally false. Indeed, if nothing else, Billboard Magazine indicates that Stevie Wonder had the following singles that made it to #1 on the U.S. singles chart from 1974 to 1977 (at least one of which is classic "funk"):

1. You Haven't Done Nothin (Tamla Records); hit the Top 40 on August 17, 1974; was on the chart for 14 weeks, including one week at #1.

2. I Wish (Stevie Wonder song) (Tamla Records); hit the Top 40 on December 4, 1976; was on the chart for 15 weeks, including one week at #1. This record is essential "funk".

3. Sir Duke (Tamla Records); hit the Top 40 on April 16, 1977; was on the chart for 13 weeks, including three weeks at #1.

Yours, Famspear (talk) 03:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)