>>52233657 Obscure stuff are not entry level. I just don't understand why anyone would try to search for some obscure stuff when the entry level shit is clearly better. I swear people who do that only like music for the image and not because they really love it.
>>52233691 I never cared about delving "deep enough" because everytime I listen to "obscure" music it's not near as good as the entry level stuff. Never once did I listen do an obscure funk band better than funkadelic, or an obscure jazz musician better than Mingus, or even an obscure rock band better than The Beatles.
Entry level is just the best, that's why it became entry level.
>>52233710 That's because you're an ordinary man with ordinary taste. Not a bad thing though, this probably means you have a better life than 80% of people here. Though you never get bored of those artists? I have a new favorite artist every couple of month because I want to listen to something new.
>>52233723 There are Hidden Jams, but they're still not as good. How about you show me instead of talkign about? what are some hidden gem bands better than the artists i mentioned above?
>>52233728 There are enough entry level artists to never get bored with. And it's not like I hate obscure stuff or something like that, it's just that I always preferred the entry level becuase it's better in mose cases.
>>52233710 I presume you listened to thousands of funk comps and LPs before making this assumption out of the blue, same with the others. oh, that's right, you didn't even try to delve deep, and therefore you are disregarding something you don't know anything about, the lowest possible form of criticism
>>52233752 not better, but different. ehh top of my head supersister bela fleck and the flecktones the legendary pinkdots the bahama soul club the flashbulb cortex el michels affair hidden orchestra dabrye ediT
>>52233803 I listened to enough funk comps and LPs from different decades to know that funkadelic is still the best funk band of all time. And I have been delving, that's why I know that the most popular/entry level artists are usually the best.
>>52233710 Although that's true a lot of the time, the stuff that becomes entry level has to both be good and have a wide appeal, so stuff that's good with a very narrow appeal will stay obscure. You haven't found any obscure artists you like because either your tastes magically line up with the most widespread appeal of every genre or you haven't listened to enough to narrow down your taste further.
>>52233955 There are a lot of other entry level paintings (or paintings in general) that i'll need to se before deciding what I like the most. You said >you will just head directly to Mona Lisa and just get out after seeing it Which is completely wrong because I will never call it the best without seeing a lot of other paintings.
>>52233941 I still don't agree with you. A lot of the most entry level music is also the shittiest music out there. One Direction, Justin Bieber, All these boybands, popular trance, dirty house. Some might say you have to dig a little deeper than entry level to get to the good stuff.
>>52234069 >>52234069 okay okay. i do get what you mean. It just would be a shame to exclude all the other good shit out there. It's just an easy way to find indeed some of the best music out there. There is this kind of talent that's really hard to go around, a guy like James Brown or pianist like Thelonious. They're almost unanimously and immediately praised. Thelonious' playing style was so unique yet impeccable, James Brown's power as an entertainer. Things that almost every human, not even music lover gets. But there's a lot of artists that are more introverted, work on a smaller scale, are too complex, too ahead of their time or simply really bad businessmen. To find these you often have to dig a little deeper... And imo there's a difference between not entry level and obscure. Inbetween there's a lot of really good shit to be found. And I think a lot of subtleties a trained ear does hear, go beyond the casual listener. We live in a society where obviousness often comes before subtlety.
>>52234081 >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoiflmflmD4 Awful bass tone, that bassist's groove is not close to Bootsy's. This sounds too much affected by synthpop and disco, as it lacks that nasty, groovie feeling that funkadelic gives you. I don't understand all of these synths either they sound so out of place and only there because it was a trend to use futiristic sounds in the 80's.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GgVaTGbk8U Much better bassist than the previous song, I dig it. It feels a bit empty though because of the lack of a proper soloist (bernie for example would've played this song so much better). Still a good song though.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcKCbpP_ljE This just sounds like it could've been a James Brown song, only without James Brown. The sax player even tries to play like Maceo.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJPRkJ0INKI This is alright actually, but then again, it's too clean and lacks that nasty feeling that a good funk song gives you. This is basically like taking funkadelic and sucking out it's funkiness.
Most of these songs are good, but please don't tell me anything of them are close to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQFYJXMVxTc
>>52234204 well, maybe your problem is that you have too high standards when it comes to funk as far as I'm concerned, when I listen to funk I am not looking for the perfectly well-oiled groove or anything, just for good music to get down to
>>52234428 Why were you posting then? The guy asked for stuff that is better than entry level stuff like Funkadelic and you posted stuff that isn't. Now you're saying his standards are too high but the premise of you posting them was to prove that there was obscure stuff that would meet his high standard.
>>52234652 maybe I used the wrong words to say it because english is not my first language, but when I was talking about op's too high expectations, I was trying to figure out what could lead to me thinking the songs I posted were good enough to be compared to Funkadelic and him thinking they were not (kind of trying to think with op's mind)
Thread replies: 51 Thread images: 2
Thread DB ID: 27963
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.