kenny weir Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 Anybody have any predictions/hopes for the new Soulive album, their third for Blue Note and their first live one? I loved their first, Turn It Out; liked just a few bits of the second (Doin' Something on BN); hated the third (also for BN, and the name of which I can't even remember). Turn It Out had some monster grooves. The new, live album is just the trio - so could be it'll be a return to some sort of greasy form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soul Stream Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 I'd like to hear the new one, is it out soon? I've seen them live and was really blown away by the organist's left hand. I've NEVER seen someone with that much funk-dexterity ala' left-hand bass. Live, I liked it a lot. Matter of fact, I rented my organ out for one of their shows....IT BROKE! Wouldn't work at all, found out as they sat down to play. The organist ended up playing the opening act's rhodes with his right hand and played his usual bass-synth for the left. Never broke a sweat or complained a bit, a real pro. And the obstacle never showed in his performance either. I don't have any of their CDs. Had bought their first one on Blue Note and enjoyed it, didn't really give me the same feeling as the band live at all. Too produced and controlled sounding. Never really heard their last one. Once you start adding singers, rappers...I lose interest pretty fast. If their next one is a live trio date, I'm looking forward to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 I keep reading that these guys are the shit live. I haven't been too impressed with their records so far. I agree with the earlier assessment. The first one was pretty sweet, the second (first BN) was ok, the third one was kind of lame. My biggest complaints about them are: 1. Drummer - not very inventive in my book. He seems to play nearly the same groove over everything. 2. Solos - I think they have some neat heads to their tunes, but a lot of times their solos get dull to me. 3. The organ - yes, his left hand is badass, but he never explores the different registrations of the Hammond... he also doesn't play pedals. I just have issues with that. My biggest compliments to the group: 1. Nice heads on the tunes. 2. Funky as hell. 3. They have their own sound. Very hard to do. Just my two cents. I'll definately pick up the new record. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottb Posted March 15, 2003 Report Share Posted March 15, 2003 I have expressed pretty much the same opinions as Soul Stream in the past. 1 They really are much better live, their recent albums have been overpolished 2 the albums are getting worse with each release 3 you lose me with DJs, rappers and singers 4 I was looking foward to this new release as a possible return to roots funk fest. Unfortunately, I checked out the samples on the Bluenote site and were less than impressed. I'll probably pass on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted March 17, 2003 Report Share Posted March 17, 2003 Re: Singers. I have a beef with instrumental groups adding singers on one or two tracks. This trend just irks me. If I buy an Ed Cherry record with Dr. Lonnie Smith on it, I want to hear Ed Cherry and Dr. Lonnie Smith. I don't want to hear some boring singer chew her way through some lazy standard. Same goes with Soulive. It's instrumental improvisational music, right? What do you need a singer for? Of course, I just have a general beef with all modern singers, with very few exceptions. Cassandra Wilson is the biggest exception. But in general, I find "jazz" singers boring. I find pop singers even more boring with very very very few exceptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe G Posted March 17, 2003 Report Share Posted March 17, 2003 (edited) Jim, Why do they need a singer? Simple. It's for those "play a song with words" types! Edited March 17, 2003 by Joe G Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed S Posted March 18, 2003 Report Share Posted March 18, 2003 Along those lines, when I was a staff pharmacist and and worked the 3-11 shift, jazz ruled the pharmacy where I worked (inside a hospital - no customers to worry about) The biggest complaint from the female technicians who also worked and the nurses who came down for medications? - "Doesn't this music have any words?" Anecdotal? - yes. Scientific? - no But I have to believe that the vocals are indeed added to appease or to keep the interest of, as Joe mentioned, for those play a song with word types. Sorry if this comes across as sexist, but if you're a jam band and you're playin' to a predominantly younger crowd at colleges and such, there's going to be a significant number of females in the audience.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed S Posted March 18, 2003 Report Share Posted March 18, 2003 And yes, I'll be checking this one out. I'm interested to hear what all the fuss is about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted March 18, 2003 Report Share Posted March 18, 2003 Ah yes, but the Boogaloo Sisters dig both kinds of music: Those with words, and those without! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.