By SB (205.186.128.132) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 06:56 pm:

Is �Soul� music dying? I know a big part of this equation has been mentioned before � as it related to the question of whether or not much of the music discussed here is gone for good � and whether or not the music made today and in the future will touch and capture our senses and give us the joy we once felt for the songs and tunes of our yesterdays?

Yet � IMO - the question still remains � will the music from our not so distant yesterdays be forever considered the truest form of what Soul Music was and is � and are the two aforementioned words a thing of the past? I understand that the "All Music Guide" has phased Soul Music into the Rock category. Is it because many of the artists that were pioneers and formed the genre called "Soul Music" and put it on the musical map - are no longer w/us. If so then � "Goodbye My Love."

Will listening to the oldies but goodies be as good as it gets for most of us? Many of us agree that we don�t see the good �ole days when we would hear the artists and groups we loved making that beloved music coming back � although some have asked us to give the music of today and tomorrow a chance. Where do we really go from here?

I�ve said it before � and I�ll say it again. I'm thankful to God that I can still turn to the music of our not so distant yesterdays � yet at times � when truly facing the reality of the question and answer, it is not very pleasing to the Soul? On one hand � I know that the oldies but goodies can sustain me � but on the other � I�m reminded that I am not that old � so why should I just conclude that the soundtracks even similar to my yesterdays will never be heard again.

Sometimes it is truly heart wrenching to hear and speak about certain artists/musicians/groups and their music. When thinking deeply about it � it reminds one that many of the them are not making music any longer - and forever reason. And in some cases � it is because they have passed on.

I�m truly sad at times when thinking about all the wonderful artists that are no longer here. (�I�ll Be Missing You� � is a great tribute to these artists) It makes little sense to ask God why he took them so soon � so when I�m tempted to � I�ll just thank Him for having had shared them with us.

Will many of us journey unto the hereafter still remembering and discussing the artists and groups that we loved from the 50�s � 60�s � 70�s and 80�s � and perhaps a couple of handfuls that came after them? If my number was called tomorrow � then I already know the answer. Thinking about the question deeply - really gives me a melancholy feeling when remembering the music related to � �The Way We Were.� At times � I want to cry � because the strength of the �Memories� are too much.

So - I have to remind myself that I shouldn�t feel any despair about the days and music gone by � and that I should continue to rejoice in them. And in that realization � I am able to say � �What A Wonderful World� this is � to have heard, loved and known music that was made many moons ago by many of the artists, musicians and groups that I loved and cherished then and today. And of course � I thank them for it. The music - nor the Souls and Spirits of these artists/musicians/groups - will ever die.

Is Soul Music truly a thing of the PAST? (As in artists of old)

By Eli (151.197.47.171) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 07:37 pm:

Hi SB,
I share your sentiment big time.

Of course, we all know that most of the youth today have nothing to relate to but what they hear on the radio and and what they see in all of those tasteless hoochie mama and thugged out overtly materialistic videos.
They have no musical roots whatsoever and could care less.

Real melody as we know it is "wack" to their untrained ears.
It is a sad, pitiful state out there and its only gonna get worse.
Most of the real record men and older air personalities are either retiring or passing on and...what do we have left???
You got it. A bunch of mindless morons who have no clue as to where their musical roots came from prior to Africa Bambatta or Herc, if at all.

It is like the Armageddon of soul, but as they say , the Phoenix will rise from the ashes and God willing, we will have a rennaissance of quality music.

By moanman (24.44.218.110) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 08:01 pm:

Interesting topic.

I think there's definitely a shifting going on, a sort of changing of the guard in Soul music.

While we who love the genre can bemoan a lack of the same energy & good love feelin'/ heart-breakin' SANGAs, there are some folks on the scene, and still others just emerging that are remembering where the music came from, and give proper R.E.S.P.E.C.T to the elder spokemen & women who paved the way.

Artists like Jill Scott (possesses intelligence, & a dexterity that merges nicely with her pure vocal instrument), Lauryn Hill (has the chops, respect & perspective), Jaguar Wright (a serious soul belter), D'Angelo and Heather Headley, to name but a few, pay homage to the tradition, while adding a few newer ("neo") elements to the game.

And lets don't forget Kelly Price. That sister can blow duh roof off a mother with some primo Aretha/Patti type notes. Serious range there.

"Donny" (grandson of Solomon Burke, so you know this homeboy KNOWS his roots) has a Donny Hathaway/ Marvin vibe and sings about real Black issues from the love of his nappy hair to the state of love or the lack of it in the community. He's good & prolific. His debut album "The Colored Section" is off the hook!

Anthony Hamilton is new just-out-the-box singer with serious pipe-age and is very Marvinesque in sound and sensibility.

Jaheim, no matter the opinions of some, is definitely succeeding in bringing a soul sound to his generation.

Usher, at times manages to tap into an old R & B groove.

This new cat called "Kem" Kemistry is very much a soulful singer/stylist in a Al Jareau sense of the word. He's someone I think will make a BIG noise in the future.

There are others as well, so let's don't give up hope altogether. The bad news is, many of us have probably already lived to see & *hear* the best in Golden Age of Soul Music. The good news is: there's still some hope out there.

As one old Black Revolutionary cat named Adam Clayton Powell once said: "Keep The Faith, Baby!"

By Eli (151.197.47.171) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 08:13 pm:

All we can do is keep the faith.
Every one of the aforementioned artists definitely have what it takes but what is missing are GREAT songs that will transcend the test of time to become classics.

I saw Donnie two weeks ago at the Prospect Park band shell along with Jody Watley who they say is the granddaughter of Jackie Wilson!!

IMO they both gave a good show.
Donnie had a bit of sameness to a lot of his songs but my faves were the title cut and the single which"borrowed" geavily from Superwoman.

The song Colored section could be a classic in the realm of Donny Hathaways Someday well all be free.

By SB (199.183.163.205) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 08:40 pm:

Eli & moanman - I hear you - but I don't see a renaissance of the music we discuss daily being Made/Created again. This is just my opinion of course. How can it really?

There will never be another Berry Gordy - Motown - Supremes - Beatles and many others, and etc, nor will there ever be the great Soul or Pop, for that matter, music - IMO.

I don't want to blame the ones out here now - because evidently it was/is not meant for them to make music the way the generation of their parents and grandparents that went before them made it. IMO - these kinds of things are meant to be or they are not. They didn't come from the same places - nor have the same experiences that these other artists came from and had. They are living in absolutely different times indeed, and there is no question.

I really do believe that Talent and the Times are truly the key denominators in this question. Back then - the talent pool - styles of music - musicians - and you name it - were just a few of the varied tangibles that were evident back then - but not here today.

The artists/groups/musicians that we knew and loved left behind their music and legacies - but they didn't leave behind a written formula for others to follow in order to duplicate a sound - style and time. It was not within them to do so - nor was it meant to be. Besides they had no idea that what they were doing would stand the test of time back then. Most of them just loved what they did and were trying to get paid.

It is not the artists of today's fault that they know not how to do "The Way The Artists Before Them Did The Things They Did & In The Way They Did." They were borne from another time - place and space - and they are not and will never be able to duplicate an art form from which they didn't create - participate in, nor have one single thing to do with.

Eli you made music - so you sprang from that era - but the artists that are now in their twenties and thirties, for the most part, were not even born in when you were in your prime and at your peak. You were also a part of arguably in the best musical era ever made. And that entire experience you had and shared is a very tough act and legacy to follow.

We know there have been some that have gone and snatched a record of old and remixed it - but it will never be as good as the original - IMO. But it is nice to hear some of the old flavor in the songs when I do happen to hear them.

No - it is not their fault that God gave some artists/musicians and groups CERTAIN gifts that He didn't give others. Some folks in all walks of life are gifted w/whatever and some aren't.

For the most part and because everyone is different - we all possess and have been blessed with different gifts. And in acknowledging the above premise, we all have our own specific time, platform and space wherein we share those gifts with others, society and the world at large, or whatever the case may be.

And I agree moanman that we can hope - and it is eternal - but like Quincy said - "Everything Must Change - Nothing Stays The Same." That statement has good and bad aspects to it indeed.

IMO.

By stephanie (68.50.216.139) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 08:50 pm:

Soul music is not dying its the creativity that is...things are still being borrowed and mimicked and sampled..I DO think there will be another outbreak of it. On American Idol and American Idol JR they do the old stuff and even the standards and even classical music is still being taught and people are still going to the opera so I would have to say it has not died.

I hope people will get sick of the rap and hip hop (I dont mean the good stuff) and come back to their senses and with the neo soul movement although it was short there is some hope and I think enough people are interested. I guess people just dont want to play instruements anymore and they are taking the cheap way out..im telling you the human mind goes down the
toilet with this stuff if this craziness does not go away we are in for a very sordid society..
Stephanie

By Thommygirl_70 (205.188.209.109) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 09:52 pm:

This is a very good thread and one that I have looked at and given a bit of thought to before I have decided to post this message. Here is my take on it. Ok, music has always been a reflection of the lifestyle of the time period. As time goes on and the generations change, *we all* as a people change. To me, a lot of it has to do with the fact that we live in such a fast-paced and post-technological society. Most people can and/or has access to just about ANYTHING they want. Because of this, I feel that many in this particular generation tends to not really hold on to things the way others in previous generations had. It's sort of like a lack of innocence and most importantly a lack of 'FEELING'in this day and age becuz there is *SO* much out here now that if you're not interested in something you can surely move on to the next thing if you want to. For example, back in the day, watching groups like the Supremes, the Temptations, etc, on Ed Sullivan was *SUCH* an exciting thing. Fans would literally flock to their television sets to catch a glimpse of their favorite act, especially because it was so rare to see them on television.

Nowadays, with the MTV-generation it doesn't really seem like that much of a big deal because there is so much saturation. Too much of a good thing, can oftentimes become not such a good thing. Now that I think about it, maybe my post will pertain to not only soul music but just the differences in all types of music of today versus the music from previous generations. I think that the difference is with the music buying public, and also with many of the musical artists themselves. Change is obviously inevitable but I think that most people have difficulties with change. Todays generation is a hip hop generation. When I say hip hop, I am referring to not only rapping but also to the 'WHOLE' hip hop culture.(ie the lingo, clothes, style,etc.)
If someone is not a fan of hip hop than they will most likely have problems with this music today. I am not the biggest fan of it and I will surely listen to the Temptations before I listen to B2K or Jagged Edge in a heartbeat,lol!!! Anyway, rap has integrated with all popular genres of music now, from alternative-rock music, to most definitely r'n'b music and with pop music also. To take someone like Jill Scott for example. She is a product of this musical generation as well as older musical generations as well. I remember her saying that not only was her big musical inspirations Aretha Franklin and Sarah Vaughn but also Biggie Smalls(Notorious B.I.G). I think that is the way it is with many of the artists of today. Maybe some people feel that there is perhaps too much focus on the hip hop part and not enough of the soul or 'saaangin' part. I don't want to just use Jill Scott as an example but I am meaning with just all of the artists. To me, what made soul music so....soulful, was not only just the music BUT the voice and the harmonies that went with the music. That I feel is lacking in todays musical market due to the demand of more hip hop bass beats in replace of good vocal technique.

A few years ago, I took a history of Rock Music course at school as an elective. It was a fun course and quite interesting. The class did not go extremely in depth on any one particular artist(except the Beatles) but it did cover the origins of Rock music in the beginning as well as Motown all the way up to the MTV age. My professor connected Rock Music to popular(or pop) music in general thus the class was about all of the musical genres that are of the pop charts status. I am not sure if I think this is correct or fair. What I definitely *do* have problems with is how the words 'soul music' are perceived today. It's like uncool to tell someone that you are a fan of soul music, it seems like it's much cooler to say, 'oh, i listen to r'n'b'. For some reason the word 'soul' is old and outdated and r'n'b is much more hip to say. I honestly, don't know why that is. I've noticed that when young teenagers hang out with their friends and claim the Beatles and Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones as their favorite artists of all time, that is okay *BUT* it seems to be difficult to get most young people to say they listen to say 'Jerry Butler' or Gladys Knight, or even the Supremes just to name a few examples. I don't know if anyone else sees that but for me I have noticed that and it puzzles me. I can probably say more on this topic but maybe I will leave it at this. I hope this post made sense

By Eli (151.197.47.171) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 09:58 pm:

Personally , as a writer and producer, I am not a relic of the past and I am not resting on my laurels, so to speak.

I was blessed to have been part of the glorious past that was the sound of Philadelphia, and I am doubly blessed to be a part of its present and its future.

By janebse (68.63.5.177) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 10:06 pm:

Very interesting, Thommygirl.

I've heard various theories by highly repsected musicians as to the origin of the term "Rhythm and Blues." If we go waaay back to the '60's and people's reactions, I wonder if the Temptations and the Supremes would be regarded as singing "Pop" music or just another form of "Rock-and-Roll" while Jerry Butler and Gladys Knight might be thought of as singing "Rhythm and Blues"? You said "even the Supremes" which suggests a distinction in the way certain groups were received.

Your statement that "soul isn't cool" is probably true in the sense that soul isn't as universally popular as Rhythm and Blues. But if rap is cool, then, Heavens to Betsy, cool doesn't mean much.

By Thommygirl_70 (205.188.209.109) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 10:17 pm:

Mr. Eli, I hope that you did not think that I am saying that you are a product of the past. That is not what I was saying at all. I would never say that about you or anyone and especially mean it derogatory! I am talking about the music of today's generation versus the music of the past generations that were popular amongst the youth

By Thommygirl_70 (205.188.209.109) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 10:30 pm:

Hi janebese. Good points you made! You saw my distinction with the Supremes,hehehe. I did that because they were so popular. To me just as popular to many as the Beatles but for some reason, this generation doesn't talk about them the way they would do the Beatles(at least in my opinion)!I don't know I could be wrong though. I've always been interested in the distinction between r'n'b as opposed to soul. I always used to think that r'n'b meant B.B. King and Muddy Waters,etc. Is this correct? Nowadays, it refers to Destinys Child, Brandy, Usher, etc as well.

By moanman (24.44.218.110) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 10:46 pm:

Mr Eli,

I read your post with much interest. I think you're quite right that there aren't as many "GREAT" there to be recorded, at least not to the degree that they once were. Also, if you remember, even back in the day of the great singers, very few of them ever wrote their own material. Consider the talents such as Gladys, Patti, Roberta Flack, Diana, Dionne, etc. etc., none can be credited with penning their own hits. Even Aretha ( with very few exceptions )was the soulful marionette whose strings were controlled by talented songwriters.

To their credit many of today's recording artists DO actually WRITE/ or have their hand in composing their own material: Lauryn Hill (wonderful writer) Jill Scott, Vivian Green (another up & comer) the gifted india.arie ("Brown Skin" is bound to be a Soul classic in the Nina Simone tradition), D'Angelo, Bryan McKnight, Bilal, Musiq, & yes (don't hate) R. Kelly (say what you will & people will say plenty)-- the brother can weave a catchy R & B tune & even an anthem or two.

My point is, there's a fresh pool of talented entertainers that actually are more involved in their output than many of their counterparts of say, 30 years ago.

Yes, we can question the quality of some of the writing vs. the work of past tunesmiths (that's always debatable). But at least we can give them props for having a more hands-on approach to their artistry.

And yes, you're absolutely right-- we do NEED more winners of the songwriter variety. A few more GREAT writers in the tradition of Carole King, The Brothers Gibb, Bachrach/David, Curtis Mayfield, Lennon/McCartney, Gamble/Huff, Ashford & Simpson, Whitfield/Strong and you, Mr. Eli would be a welcome shot in the anemic arm of today's music. So, in the meanwhile, we can wait for that next great gem.

btw: I believe Jody Watley claims to be the "god-daughter" of Jackie Wilson, so there isn't any real family blood in her soul-line pedigree.

peace

By Eli (151.197.47.171) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 12:09 am:

Hi Moanman!!

Yes , I indeed concur with your aforementioned post .
There are some fine writers out there within their respective genres.

Out of the newer ones I love India.Arie and I though that she should have received the grammys that were (politically) given to the over rated Alicia Keys

India. Arie Imo is right up there with Lauren Hill and I love her wonderful vibe.
Also, I like Kinderd The Family Soul alot.


All Ashanti writes are very elementary and banal "moon June spoon" kind of things.
Did you read her book of "poetry"??
But the consumers who buy that stuff are, for the most part elementary and banal and have the attention span of a small child.

Records today have very little shelf life due in part to the fickle consumer.

It seems that the young folks dont cherish their music in the way that we cherished our 45's and LP's.
Not to sound like an "old fogey" which I am not,
i was brough up in the school of lyrical perfectionism.
It didnt have to be a long, drawn out work of art as in a Dylan type song, just clever, simple and to the point, allwithin the space of 3and1/2 minutes or so.

By Keane (209.87.128.124) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 12:56 am:

Mr. Eli and Forum: I don't see pop music looking to the past for very long so I don't see soul music as we knew it coming back to the general public.
But surely Philly Soul and Memphis Soul and New Orleans R+B and Kansas City R+B are highlights in the history of music. Maybe like blues has been adopted by new performers around the world(and they are pretty authentic) we in the forum can help preserve classic soul and classic r+b and hopefully support new acts to perform classic r+b properly.
IN MY OPINION THAT'SWITH LOTS OF GUITARS AND HAMMOND B3 ORGANS, AND HORNS AND A SINGER WITH THE PROPER MELISMA, IF THATS HOW YOU SAY IT.

By Thommygirl_70 (205.188.209.109) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 12:58 am:

Moanman good points! I do see the artists of today taking more initiative with writing their own songs. Lauryn Hill's 'Miseducation of Lauryn Hill' is one of my favorite albums of all time!!! And her song 'The Sweetest Thing' on the Love Jones soundtrack is one of my favorite songs ever. In my opinion, I think that she is one of the best lyricist and vocal arrangers.

By Eli (151.197.47.171) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 01:12 am:

True dat!!!

Lauren needs to be out there right now.

I dont know what her label affiliation is since Ruffhoue but she needs a new cd soon.
She should have had two more multi platinum cds by now.

Wassup wit dat, I ask?

Yo Chris Schwartz do you readme , yo??

By JoB (204.42.12.2) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 05:59 am:

SB...I feel everything that are saying, I sometimes think the same thing to myself. Only difference between the two of us is, I never really got a chance to experience tthe music that I love most when it was actually being made. Just a couple of hours ago a co-worker said to me (as I was listening to a Gap Band CD), "you know, you were born about 20 years too late!" (cause he always catches me listening to some kind of older music).

One thing I noticed earlier today, I was watching an old Sanford and Son rerun that happened to feature the Three Degrees in this episode, and they started to sing, and they just sounded so beautiful and melodic and the harmony was great to me...now THAT is something that I really wish hadn't gone away...those girl groups that could REALLY SING, where every member had a beautiful voice, studio or live...groups like the Emotions, the Three Degrees, the Honey Cones, Martha and the Vandellas, Supremes, etc...I'm sure you guys probably know a lot more of them than I do...Nothing against Destiny's Child, 3LW, Isyss, etc...but I don't feel the same thing listening to "Bootylicious" that I do when I listen to "Come to Me (Don't ask my neighbors)", and not trying to bash here, but I just don't feel the things listening to Ashanti's "Foolish" that I feel when I listen to Deniece Williams' "Silly".

Is it dying? I'd say suffering, yes, but dead, no, not yet.

By Eli (141.151.17.120) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 12:56 pm:

Hi JoB,

My sentiments prevail throughout .
I played on Silly and Niecy sang a live guide vocal in the booth along with us and it was pure magic.
It may have in fact been "the" vocal that made the final cut.

BTW..that little guitar "wah" kinda thing is me as well as some other simple stuff.

By Des (81.152.91.88) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 07:27 pm:

ThommyGirl / In yr first post,last paragraph you talk of puzzlement concerning the fact that to talk or openly state that you love Soul Music is uncool.I think this is just where Soul is at in the wider merry-go-round of 'what's in' and 'what's not'.
It certainly wasn't cool to love LedZep as recently as 7 years ago and now,as you observe,they're 'Gods of Rock' etc etc
I would add,however,that IMO the only Soul Music Artists who will repeatedly have their 'cool again' phases are those from the 60's/70's who artistically developed and who,to some degree or another,took control of their music and/or their business in the music world i.e. Stevie/Marvin/Smokey/Sly. Those guys had a major international social impact as well as critical,artistic and sales success.
Soul Music Artists who had a few seasons in the sun (sorry for the tasteless simile) won't be cool as often as those guys listed.
Pls recall that had you been considering this thread in 98 and post-Jackie Brown (Tarantino movie) - it was cool then to speak of your love and appreciation of Soul Music.....

As someone else points out later - the artists who write for themselves have a better chance of being reappraised and reborn as a cool phenomenon or just plain cool!!
Songwriting - it's been mentioned here and in many past threads - this is the crucial aspect in all of this.
I feel that the good points made already regarding music reflecting Life etc,are certainly true.All the comments that life and society dictates that sales cannot approach 60's/70's peaks are also true.....and yet,and yet......I agree with Moanman that good music is there if you want to see,hear,understand and enjoy it.
Since reading and writing here on SD,I've returned to selective viewing of MTVBASE to check out some "Lick" programmes and see what's hot.
I'm delighted to say that IMO there are a few great singles out now : Lemar - Dance (With U)
and Pharrell Williams - Frontin'
Both are verging on Pop/Soul and,here in UK,we have our cuddly Gareth Gates whose latest chart-topper 'Sunshine' would have held its place on "Off The Wall".
I can hear all three of these cuts being played at every Holiday-Town club in Spain,Portugal,Canary Islands,Florida,and anywhere that caters for ORDINARY guyzandgalz who are partying on vacation ....... and,you know what,they'll remember this Summer for two or three great 'singles' and write in glowing terms in 20 years time - like we do about pre-83 Soul artists/music.....what goes around comes around.
Check out those songs I'm mentioning and try and remember what it was like to 'get down' to lightweight,expertly played,pop-soul tunes that 'got it right' (Rick Astley/Floaters/Hi-Five/Color me Badd/Hinda Hicks....list is endless and an Appreciation Society in itself).
To list such Artists(?) and frame them positively would be unthinkable to some (they're just charttopping b/sh.. - don't belong on this here Forum etc) -- well,imo,ya could frame similar statements re. some Motown singles ---- those songs subsequently have been recognised as ## works of contemporary art ( ## you could put 'minor' in that last sentence if you want to ).
You got to have an open mind to seek out and hear what's good today.
Soul Music isn't a dying art form.
Whilst singles like I mentioned are out there -- then Pop-Soul is alive and kicking.
If RKelly can produce an album like ChocFactory (plus Craig David/IndiaArie/Musiq/Gerald Levert/Jaheim/Rahsaan-P/Jill-S/Roots/Angie Stone/Omar and so on) then 'proper and serious' Soul Music is also alive and kicking.
Des

By STUBASS (152.163.252.68) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 07:46 pm:

MY TAKE!!!...SOUL MUSIC...FROM AN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE...MAY ULTIMATLY BECOME ASSOCIATED WITH A PARTICULAR ERA (MOSTLY 60'S AND 70'S)...JUST AS BIG BAND SWING MUSIC IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DECADE OF THE 40'S!!!...PEOPLE STILL PLAY SWING...BUT THE GROWTH OF THAT PARTICULAR GENRE HAS BEEN...FOR THE MOST PART...QUITE LIMITED...AS SWING PLAYERS MOVED THEIR CRAFT INTO THE FIELDS OF JAZZ...POP...AND OTHER MUSIC FORMS!!!...MUCH THE SAME HAS HAPPENED IN REGARDS TO WHAT I BELIEVE MOST OF US CONSIDER "SOUL MUSIC"!!!...IT'S HAS BECOME "CROSS-POLLINATED" WITH OTHER MUSIC FORMS (ROCK-POP-RAP-ETC)...IN THAT SOUL MUSIC...AS A SOCIETAL PHENOMONON...MOVED IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS FROM IT'S EARLY INCARNATION'S AS SOCIETY CHANGED!!!...I THINK THAT THE QUESTION IS...WILL CERTAIN FORMS OF MUSIC STILL BE CLASSIFIED AS "SOUL MUSIC"...DESPITE THE FACT THAT IN THE FUTURE...IT MAY BE HIGHLY DISSIMILAR TO WHAT SOUL MUSIC WAS AT IT'S ROOTS???...MUCH THE SAME WITH "COUNTRY MUSIC"!!!...WHILE IT IS STILL CALLED "COUNTRY"...THE SOUND IS MUCH MUCH DIFFERENT THEN WHAT PEOPLE WERE HEARING IN IT'S EARLY STAGES...SO WHILE IT'S KEPT IT'S NAME...THE SOUNDS THAT ARE CULTURALLY AND COMMERCIALLY SUCCESSFUL ARE NOT THE SAME AS "COUNTRY" IN IT'S EARLY DAYS!!!...THAT BEING SAID...THERE IS STILL AN AUDIENCE FOR "SOUL MUSIC"...EVEN IF A LARGE PART OF IT REPRESENTS THOSE WHO GREW UP LISTENING TO AND ENJOYING IT...AND THERE WILL ALWAYS BE PEOPLE WHO LIKE THE ORIGINAL SOUND...BUT WE'VE ASKED THIS QUESTION BEFORE...WILL SOUL MUSIC RETURN TO IT'S ROOTS...AND MY GUESS IS...PERHAPS UNFORTUNATLY FOR MANY OF US...PROBABLY NOT...AT LEAST ON ANY LARGE SCALE KIND OF BASIS!!!...STUBASS

By Des (81.152.91.88) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 08:05 pm:

Mr.Bass / I'm annoyed to admit you nailed an idea I hadn't really considered before - namely,that which you outlined to be 'Soul Music' is likely to be classed as having had a 'classic phase' in the 60's.Comparable to Swing in the 40's.....Stu/ Is this an oft repeated observation in the States?
If so,then I'll be happier it wasn't your great observation and feel I won't have to be so in awe of that post.
In all seriousness Stu/ I don't disagree with large parts of said post and I'd be interested to see what TGirl and others think of yr statements.
Des

By STUBASS (64.12.97.7) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 09:10 pm:

SORRY DES...BUT IN AS MUCH AS MANY OF THE DISCUSSIONS I HAVE HAD HERE AND ELSEWHERE HAVE INFLUENCED MY WAY OF THINKING...THE "SOUL" TO "SWING" COMPARISON CAME INTO MY DENSE BRAIN AS I STARTED CONSIDERING THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS THREAD A SHORT TIME AGO!!!...I CAN'T SAY THAT THIS IS THE GENERAL FEELING IN THE "STATES"...AND I ALSO CONSIDERED (ALBEIT VERY BRIEFLY) THAT THIS POSITION MAY NOT BE POPULAR ON THIS FORUM...SINCE SO MANY OF US HAVE CONNECTIONS TO SOUL MUSIC...AND SOME OF US WOULD POSSIBLY RATHER LIVE IN THE PAST THEN TO ACCEPT PRESENT REALITY AND CHANGE WITH IT (UNLESS OLDIES IS JUST OUR THING)!!!...THAT CLASSIC ERA...AN ERA OF PHENOMONAL CREATIVE EXPRESSION WAS FRESH AND UNADULTERATED WHILE IT WAS HAPPENING!!!...THATS WHY THOSE OF US WHO WERE IN IT...AROUND IT...OR OBSERVING IT FROM A DISTANCE DERIVE SO MUCH PLEASURE DISCUSSING AND RELIVING IT TODAY!!!...BUT HENCE...TIME MARCHES ON AND NOTHING REMAINS THE SAME!!!...STUBASS

By douglasm (68.113.13.31) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 09:12 pm:

Stu....
....just chart the evolution of Motown itself, from "Please Mr. Postman" to, say, "Sexual Healing". By the late '60's, the earlier sound had pretty much dried up and gone away, as had most of the musical styles of the early rock era.

But is it dying? An empatic NO. "Soul Music" as we here define it may not be as energenic as it once was, but I've yet to find a musical form that doesn't have its adherants. Example? I was trading Jim Kweskin songs with a 20 something year old in a music store the other day. He had just purchased a Greatest Hits package, and was happy to find out someone else knew the words to Coney Island Washboard.
Many of us are older and remember the art form from when we first heard it. But look at the number of people on the forum who are younger, and asking questions about the music we talk about. Dying? No way.

doug

By STUBASS (64.12.97.7) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 09:33 pm:

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU DOUG...THAT SO LONG AS PEOPLE LISTEN TO AND ENJOY THIS OR ANY TYPE OF MUSIC...THAT IT WILL NEVER DIE...AND I NEVER MENTIONED DEATH...JUST A CESSATION OF THE GROWTH AND COMMERCIAL POPULARITY THAT SOUL MUSIC EXPERIENCED IN THE 60'S AND 70'S!!!...STU

By SB (205.187.255.122) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 04:44 pm:

I suppose my question had more to do w/when did �Soul� music emerge and who named it. Who decided to make a category calling it �Soul� music back then?

Look below at all the Soul styles listed on All Music:

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=MISS70307121504&sql=C4492

Now if Soul can be divided into many different styles having to do w/that one word � then why can�t it stand by itself?

I�ve read several shorts on where �Soul� came from. Ray Charles � James Brown & Sam Cooke are the ones mentioned most when crediting who developed it. So IMO � if the PsTB in the music industry decided that there should be a word to describe a distinctive style of singing or music back then � what has changed about it now in order for it to be phased out and placed into the Rock category? In other words � are they now saying that there is no such thing as Soul Music?

I remember James Brown singing � �I got soul & I�m super bad.� Now was that before Sam & Dave actually made the song � �I�m A Soul Man?�

I agree w/you all that music where one is singing seemingly w/a lot of Soul will never be over � but what about the category? And if it is to be phased out or ended all together � then again my question is why?

By Des (217.42.15.133) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 05:13 pm:

SB/ I'm not sure if you're more concerned about the loss of the "compartment" or "category"--- a 'problem' to most musicians who don't want to be compartmentalised/categorised.
I also,perhaps,detect that you have a notion as to why Soul appears to be being phased out as a 'selling category' --- I believe you may see "The Man" somehow seeking to deliberately stifle part of the essence of a bygone age of Black Americans and that's deep down annoying you.
I wonder if I'm way off track,SB.
I'm going no further with this observation - it needs you to comment,really -- if I'm wrong about what's in your heart/mind,there's not much more to say......other than to see if someone else reading here believes that there may be some validity to that view.

By soulboy (213.105.224.4) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 05:14 pm:

It would appear to anyone that soul music is indeed a dying ,if not dead art form commercially,but i think the same vibes that created soul music are alive and kicking, for example i was searching for something decent to watch on TV recently when i discovered a channel that was playing gospel music, this music is quite similar in feel to vintage soul music. What it really needs is for some enterprising individual to harness the power of gospel singing with a more commercial type of sound. don't forget that soul music is more of a 'world music' than any other genre,in that elements of it were taken not just from Jazz,blues,gospel,but also from european folk music,classical,and country.
It is because of this i strongly believe that if anyone is determined to re-create 'soul' then they must have an understanding and appreciation of ALL kinds of music not just listen to R&B.

By STUBASS (206.135.204.254) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 05:20 pm:

SB & DES!!! MY POINT IS NOT THAT TRADITIONAL "SOUL SINGERS" CANNOT PRODUCE HIT RECORDS...JUST THAT THEY MAY NEED TO UPDATE THEIR STYLE...OR GEAR THEIR SALES TOWARD TRADITIONAL SOUL FANS!!!...AS SOMEONE ELSE POINTED OUT EARLIER ON THIS THREAD...SOUL MUSIC HAS BEEN ASIMILATED INTO THE ADULT ORIENTED ROCK CATAGORY...SO "SOUL MUSIC" AS WE KNOW IT...FROM THE 60'S ETC...REALLY NO LONGER EXISTS...OTHER THAN OLDIES OR IN TRADITIONAL RECORDINGS...WHICH WILL NOT HAVE THE OUTLETS TO FULLY SHOWCASE THE PRODUCT!!!...STUBASS

By Thommygirl_70 (152.163.252.68) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 05:22 pm:

Hey SB, you have raised some very good questions! Here is my take on it, and anyone out there who has more knowledge of this feel free to refute me because I am not sure, but this is just what I am thinking. Ok, earlier in one of my posts I mentioned that I had taken a History of Rock Music course in school a few years ago. We did not go into depth on any *one* particular musical artist but the class instead covered the roots of 'popular' music all the way up to the modern age, Mtv-period. Popular music, to me, is music that has crossed over to the Pop Charts on Billboard, etc. I just looked at the allmusic link that you put in your post and *my* personal take is that the reason why all of those particular musical genres(like 'soul') are being placed in the 'rock' category is because there is a direct link to all of them, not only because each one of those particular musical genres have charted in the 'pop' charts *but* also there is a 'root' link to them. Each one of those categories, from what I understand, can all be traced back to the roots of gospel first,(with the emergence of the blues) and the blues(mainly) in some way or another.

I think that is a good question as to whether or not the particular word 'soul' is being phased out. My belief is that that particular word isn't being used as much to describe the modern day age, instead when people say they listen to 'soul' music, I often think of the artists that you mentioned like, Ray Charles, James Brown, etc and the artists of that particular era. To me, I think people are more apt to say 'r'n'b' when describing modern day music. I know that the word 'neo-soul' is used today though, but for the most part I think that most people just say 'r'n'b'. I am not sure if anything that I have said has answered the questions that you posted.

By Eli (151.197.127.100) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 05:28 pm:

It is said the the term R&B was coined by Atlantic's Jerry Wexler, who at the time in the very early fifties worked at Billboard magazine and needed a new nomenclature for the then used "race music" which he despised.
So he thought that it was a "rhythmic style coupled with blues overtones and ....voila!!!!!

By Thommygirl_70 (152.163.252.68) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 05:37 pm:

whoops..i forgot to add that, SB, that link that you gave to the 'soul' music term. I looked to the left of it where it said, 'Rock' I clicked on that and it listed the categories that were deemed under the 'rock' category. Those categories that are listed 'Main Types of Rock' was what I was referring to as perhaps all having a direct 'root' link with the blues in someway or another.

By Des (217.42.15.133) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 05:41 pm:

STU/ I wasn't really commenting on that point you make. I just get a feeling that the assimilation you describe is the major irritant to SB -- hence his commentary in his last post ..... and I get the vibe that he just feels that there's something subversively deliberate about that assimilation.
I'd state for the record that I genuinely still get some chills from cuts produced in the last 3 months never mind 30 years --- and it's that ability to find joy in new music(rehashed as it may on occasion be) that keeps me on a positive kick when discussing ANY music.
I genuinely believe the DE-categorisation of musics will continue -- whilst,STU,your other earlier point regarding how Soul will be seen as a 60's/70's phenomenon in the 'style/format' we accept as Soul music will be increasingly adopted and marginalise (a la 'swing music') fans/appreciators of this musical era.
But,hey - WE talk about a lot of music here and WE'RE not being compartmentalised.
Des

By SB (205.187.255.122) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 06:14 pm:

Des wrote:

"I also,perhaps,detect that you have a notion as to why Soul appears to be being phased out as a 'selling category' --- I believe you may see "The Man" somehow seeking to deliberately stifle part of the essence of a bygone age of Black Americans and that's deep down annoying you."

Des - your answer is no. Matter-of-fact - if you read my first post I asked the question on whether or not the Soul category is being phased out because most of the artists that sung it or no longer here, i.e., Sam - Otis - Dusty, and the many others. True that - James and Ray are still here - but again - if James & Ray - were supposedly pioneers and the word Soul had been attributed to them as it pertains to their having developed it - then they are still here are they not? Meaning - if James & Ray make a song that does really well on the market - what category would they be placed in? If back then they were placed under the Soul category - then would they be now?

Btw - this is getting good. Thanks ya'll. It is heating up on the Soulful Detroit centre court.

By Eli (151.197.127.100) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 06:24 pm:

I have mentioned once before that in Philly in the late fifties and in to the early to mid sixties ap of the Black revues as in the ones at the Uptown, the State, the Nixon and Convention Hall were called Rock and Roll shows.
When georgie wods or whoever would advertise , they would say to come see the new Christmas, Easter or whatever, rock and roll show at the(whatever venue apllied)....

By SB (206.214.1.196) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 06:33 pm:

Ok Eli - but when did the "Soul" category come into play & whom named it?

Remember the thread "What Does Soul Mean To You?" Many of us spoke on it - but if there was nothing beforehand to associate it with - then we wouldn't have been able to start at point A.

And this here forum is called "Soulful Detroit." Why? Didn't David already know ahead of time that the word "Soul" had something to do w/it all?

I am not being flippant. I am just curious if you or any others know when - how and why the word got associatd w/Ray - Sam & James - and then scuddles of others?

By Eli (151.197.127.100) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 06:46 pm:

I really cant say "who" coined the term soul, per se only that somewhere around 1965 or so it became an all encompassing euphanism for Black Music.
before that, in Billboard the Black charts were called the R&B charts but I assume that it was too regionally limited, so therefore the term "Soul" was coined to describe an emotion and a deep rooted "churchy" feeling felt by primarily African American artists.

Afterwhile, the term was replaced by the Black charts.

To me, music is music and therefore should not be categorized.

By moanman (24.44.218.110) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 07:18 pm:

Mr Eli,

Glad to find we agree on india.arie's gift as a songwriter. I get the feeling with her, the best is yet to come. Saw her at Radio City back in January (w/Floetry, also two talented up & comers worth attention). Ms. Arie quite frankly laid the place out with her mellow. No need to scream, shake her azz, wear revealing clothes
nor jump around & thrust in a provocative way. And trust when I say, the girl had the place SPELLBOUND! People were singing along with her, FEELING her lyrics.

And yes, as stated Lauryn Hill is a force to be reckoned with. True, she should have more output because it's apparent she has a rare gift for putting it down, & many stories to tell. However, I think motherhood is currently taking much of her time these days. She said back in The Fugees era that wanted to have a mess of kids. The Gods must've listened. So, she seems to be in a more maternal frame of mind. Can't hate on her her for that; it's very commendable. Yet as a fan, I selfishly want more.

And no, I haven't read Ashanti's book, & have no intention on doing so. If her prose is anything like her prosaic lyrics... well, CHECK PLEASE! She's a cutie, & the kids seem to dig her stuff, but frankly it leaves MUCH to be desired to my ear.

peace

By Des (217.42.15.133) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 07:20 pm:

OK,SB - If there's no substance to my gut feel for your latter posts,then I'll go on and try to add to your additional observations.....
I'll now,in turn,refer back to my comments earlier wherein I observed that 'Soul' as a category is currently without cachet(ie prestige) to all but the types that post fondly here in this Forum.This observation is easily dismissed by comments along the lines of 'Well,exactly!! That's why this Site exists to permit/facilitate those that believe that nothing much good exists in the evolved genre that still (laughably,in comparison to what we know) falls into a generally held category known as Soul music'.
Artists who do currently fall into this category are not as vital to Black Americans or,indeed,to 'Young America' the way that Motown was in the mid-sixties. The 'vital' music for young Black(and some young Whites) is Rap/HipHop.
This category doesn't compromise for a broader,White audience - rather,it is somewhat insular and defiant of 'The Man' or perceived White Institutionalised influence on their/our lives. In this,Rap/HipHop is progress of sorts for young Black Americans.Where it seems to be heading for the abyss,is that it's generally selfish,materialistic,non-spiritual and,crucially, Soulless.It also alienates older generations.....I wonder if this has ever happened in the history of music(smile -- thanks Isaiah)
With a few fine,but rare,exceptions,of course.
With Soul Music,as defined in this Thread as being prospectively 'dead/dying',what Black American music/artists are around to support the idea that Soul ain't dead? This is the crunch issue.Because a lot of people,often exemplified on this Forum,can't see past the tasteless aspects of Rap/HipHop,it's not difficult to conclude that no good Soul music currently exists.
I,of course,disagree.
The artists classed in Neo-Soul/Classic Soul or,as I'd prefer to deem them,fine musicianly artists,have assimilated the current popular Rap/HipHop idioms and merged these with,occasionaly,inspired re-jigs/samples of great musical phrases or melodies from decades ago,to produce,again occasionally,very good examples of well-crafted songs......which don't sell in bucketloads and therefore,illogically to me, all too eaily get dismissed as sub-par efforts. The reality of a highly fragmented buying public,in fact,makes it extremely difficult to sell 'bucketloads' of anything --- other than the rare 'crossover' artists who can,miraculously,achieve major sales.This latter phenomenon was best exemplified by Michael Jackson - but he's fading due to well documented weirdness.....Digression-- Michaels' "Butterflies" from his last album(alongside the Rodney Jerkins cuts) were,IMO,every bit as good as "The Way You Make Me Feel" and other very popular MJ cuts.
If a lot of what I've tried to cover here(and there's other things to say that are relevant) can be accepted,just a little bit,then I wholeheartedly believe that no-one could assert that Soul Music is dead/dying....it's just called different things nowadays

By SB (206.214.1.196) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 08:07 pm:

Ok now this is getting sort of confusing. If Soul Music should not have been categorized back then - then why was it? I guess that is my question. And we know that R&B came befor Soul Music.

Btw - I didn't name it. I just know whom I liked that sung w/a lot of Soul. And - I will never lie and say that the majority of the artists I liked weren't African Americans. But that doesn't have anything to do w/why and how it was named in the first place.

I also feel that Soul Food can also be classified as Southern cooking. Am I right or wrong?

By SB (206.214.1.196) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 08:52 pm:

And btw - like I and others have stated - Soul Music will never die as long as we keep playing the music of old - and in that - there is no question.

I would also have to add Curtis "The Master" Mayfield, on the list of pioneers attributed to the music that whomever classified it as "Soul Music."

Hail to thee Curtis. I love you and will always miss you. You are my ultimate hero - indeed. "You & The Impressions - Were Winners."

"You Made Me So Very Happy", Curtis.

By Nish (170.224.224.102) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 06:17 am:

I'm incredibly late on this thread, but I just have to say in terms of soul music being created today, our beloved music is undergoing an "incubation" period. A period in which the music is not progressing. Because it's not progressing, those of us who enjoy it are reverting to what we KNOW - Motown, PIR, Stax, Campark, Scepter/Wand, and all the soul artists of that era to give us that soul music experience. Not a bad thing.

But, just think, if all our favorite artists were not discriminated against because of their age (and therefore given channels to create music and sell it to the mass audience), or if quality of newer artists were higher, we might not be reverting to the old school so much. I'm sure when Aretha F. came out we weren't saying "Where's Ruth or Lavern," because quality wise, Aretha was as good an artist with music as good as what Ruth and LaVern put out. Or when the Tempts came out, people certainly weren't sounding the death knell of R&B vocal groups. Because, they were as good as the groups that came before. So obviously, we perceive some fall-off in quality in the music produced today, so we go to the music that we know is good. In the sense that we know to go to Marvin and Ruffin and Miracles and Bunny and Chuck, soul is not dead. However, since we can't rely on the new artists to mitigate our longing for sounds of old, as my mom's generation did (i.e., the Miracles weren't so terrible that folks said "man, I really miss the Platters"), says our music is in critical condition.

I don't know if I made any sense!

By STUBASS (205.188.209.109) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 09:05 am:

HEY NISH!!!...HOWS IT GOING???...I DON'T KNOW THAT OLDER ARTISTS ARE BEING "DISCRIMINATED" AGAINST PER SE!!!...PERHAPS THE POWERS THAT BE IN THE RECORD AND ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY DON'T HAVE THEIR COLLECTIVE HEADS SCREWED ON QUITE STRAIGHT...BUT WHAT RECORD COMPANY...PRODUCER...OR PROMOTER IN THEIR RIGHT MINDS WOULD PASS ON AN ARTIST WHO COULD SELL LOTS OF RECORDS AND MAKE THEM LOTS OF MONEY BECAUSE OF THEIR AGE!!!...I WOULD THINK THAT IF ANYTHING...OLDER ARTISTS WOULD BE GENERALLY EASIER TO WORK WITH AND HAVE LESS POTENTIAL FOR GETTING INTO TROUBLE...BUT...DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE LIVE IN A YOUTH ORIENTED SOCIETY...YOUNGER ARTISTS AND NEWER GENRES ARE WHERE PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO INVEST THEIR MONEY TO GIVE THEM...THEY BELIEVE...THEIR GREATEST OPPORTUNITY OF RETURN ON THEIR MONEY!!...LOOK AT THOSE GREAT PBS SHOWS ON SOUL MUSIC AND DOO WOP!!!...THEY ALSO DO THEM ON COUNTRY...BLUEGRASS...AND FOLK MUSIC!!!...WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU???...IT TELLS YOU THAT IT TAKES A "NON-PROFIT" VENUE TO PULL THESE SUCCESSFUL SHOWS OFF...SUCCESSFUL FROM AN ARTISTIC POINT OF VIEW...BUT WOULD ANYONE INVEST LARGE AMOUNTS OF THEIR PERSONAL MONEY IN THESE SHOWS EXPECTING A SIGNIFICANT RETURN ON INVESTMENT...LIKE ROCK...HIP HOP...AND RAP PROMOTERS DO ON A DAILY BASIS???...IF SOME OF THE OLDER FORMS OF MUSIC HAVE WIDESPREAD COMMERCIAL APPEAL IN THIS DAY AND AGE...BELIEVE ME...THERE WILL BE PEOPLE TO INVEST HUGE AMOUNTS OF MONEY IN IT...AND I DON'T SEE THAT CASH FORTHCOMING ON ANY TYPE OF SIGNIFICANT BASIS!!!...STUBASS

By Eli (151.197.5.107) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 10:11 am:

The only record company right now who is signing classic soul artists, albeit on a very limited and selective basis is Def Jam Classics helmed by veteran record man Jehryl Busby with Patti Labelle being his first signing.

By Nish (66.119.33.135) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 03:42 pm:

Papa Angel, you're right. I just don't think companies believe they can sell, that assumption is dead wrong.

Oh yeah, I'm fine, thanks for asking, just enjoying the fact that I start my 2nd year two mondays from now, I love being productive. I'm also scared about the summer job search and having to make huge decisions like where I want to live, but I won't dwell on my neuroses here. :-) I hope all is peachy on the left coast. Enjoying the recall circus?

By STUBASS (206.135.204.254) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 04:01 pm:

GREAT TO HEAR NISH!!!...LONG WAY OFF TILL NEXT SUMMER...SO JUST HANG IN THERE!!!...I COULD BE APPOINTING STATE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES OUT HERE IN CALIFORNIA IN THE NEAR FUTURE...AND SUPREME COURT JUSTICE NISH SOUNDS JUST FINE TO ME...ALTHOUGH YOU MAY NEED A BIT OF EXPERIENCE BEFORE I CAN BUMP YOU UP TO CHIEF JUSTICE!!!...OK???...STU

By janebse (68.63.5.177) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 06:24 pm:

I assume each person discussing "soul music" has a specific soul sound in mind. But ALL music is constantly evolving. The country music of today bears little resemblance to the country music of 20 years ago, of 40 years ago,perhaps even five years ago.

New Orleans wants its jazz musicians to play in the style of Dixieland Jazz or Swing because it attracts tourists. But true jazz musicians probably want to evolve just as all musicians do. New instruments come into being. Innovations are made to instruments.

Eventually there comes a point where the jazz you think of as being jazz is no longer played, or the soul you think of as being soul is no longer sung.

You may not like the "new" stuff, but first listen to it. And remember, if something doesn't change, it dies.

By Billy (64.12.97.7) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 07:23 pm:

This coming from a cowboy who grew up on country music:

I got hooked in the 60s by the MoTown Sounds. "My Girl" came out about the same time as I had my first serious relationship/girlfriend. Everytime I hear that song It makes me feel good.

Soul music feels good because it comes from the soul and touches the soul. It brings people together.

The first time I heard Temps/Kendricks: "Just my Imagination" I was on my college campus, I saw the girl who I never had the courage to ask out. Right after I heard this song, I impulsively asked her out and was shocked that she said yes.

Music like this really affects people in a good way. You feel the music, not just hear the music.

This modern hip hop stuff is not soul music, Not only does it not make people feel good, but it elicits anger and prejudice in some instances.

Today's music does not come from the soul ...and it cannot touch the soul.

Thats just my take.

By Des (81.152.238.37) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 07:35 pm:

Janebse/I agree with your post wholeheartedly.

By Des (81.152.238.37) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 07:51 pm:

Billy/ Your post is inferring that HipHop/Rap's the only game in town.
That's not the case.
It's true what you say about those genres,but as often happens here,we're not comparing 'apples with apples'.
The 60's were the 60's (as each decade also finds its' musical place in history).The social climate and the 'newness' of Motown in broader American society cannot be replicated.....same applies to the British invasion(Beatles/Stones etc) and now we have a much more assimilated Black American presence in music and to enjoy exponents of good songwriting/performing in a 'Soul' context is a harder job than when it was 'cutting edge music' that influenced lives in the way that you fondly observe.
Your observations(and others on similar Thread discussions) comment as much on the loss of innocence in American (and Western) society as it does on the perceived 'bad' state of Soul music nowadays.

By SisDetroit (68.42.209.170) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 07:55 pm:

Billy - Great post. I like the story about "Just My Imagination." :o)

By SisDetroit (68.42.209.170) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 07:58 pm:

After listening to and seeing Nelly in action. I'm going to try and listen to whatever genre he sings.

By Thommygirl_70 (152.163.252.68) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 08:50 pm:

Good points, janebese. Music is constantly evolving and changing and it would be kind of odd if it did stay *exactly* the same cuz as generations change, experiences,lifestyles, etc can and will change. I think that is inevitable. I think several people on this thread have mentioned that they are not a fan of rap music. I must admit that I am not a fan of most of it too. I do like some, it depends on what it is. Some of the neo-soul/rnb artists that are out here now, I can dig but I *do not* think it is the same as the 'soul' music in which we speak about here on this forum. It's different cuz they are using different elements in their music that were not used back then. Anyway, last nite I was listening to D'angelo's 'Brown Sugar' cd and I must say that I was most certainly enjoying myself!

By Thommygirl_70 (152.163.252.68) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 09:15 pm:

Oh and Des, when you say:
"The 60's were the 60's (as each decade also finds its' musical place in history)."

I definitely agree with you on that
Although of course nothing(to me) beats that wonderful soulful music of the fifties, sixties and seventies,hehehe!

By janebse (68.63.5.177) on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 09:20 pm:

I was reading the history of music, and the first evidence of the development of music was a word poem with a beat.
"But that's rap," I said to myself. "Don't tell me we're inventing music all over again."

Then the next thing I heard was that a certain person was the first person to add melody to hip-hop. And then I really was perplexed. Are we going to go through all the stages of the development of music all over again?

Are we not really evolving but reliving the history of music? And, if so, why?

By medusa (68.248.38.213) on Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:08 pm:

humm, as long as there R soul sisters and soul brothers, (U can throw it outta your mind),"SOUL Music isn't goin' anywhere. It's like the sun & the moon~~~always & forever~~~~~~~~