Dap-Dippin' with Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

real crate diggers don't need it; it's for yuppie nostalgics & others for whom a retro black woman is "warming," or some such shit like that... i ain't doubting Tejas who says they're better than a jillion other attempts that are unbearable even one song at a time but edc is with the Dumps here-- seriously bogus over anything but the briefest "close listening" time. & yeah jenufa & i would rather dance to Vince Giordano-- we'll do the Atomic Dog!!

Yes. I've always been greatly in favour of music developed from the bottom up, by the audience. Anything else smacks to me of someone in authority - be it a genius like Coltrane or Parker, or an insufficiently anonymous A&R man like Mitch Miller or Norrie Paramor - telling me what I should be listening to; and I resent that. And that's what this stuff is, too.

MG

[Alexander]

real crate diggers don't need it; it's for yuppie nostalgics & others for whom a retro black woman is "warming," or some such shit like that... i ain't doubting Tejas who says they're better than a jillion other attempts that are unbearable even one song at a time but edc is with the Dumps here-- seriously bogus over anything but the briefest "close listening" time. & yeah jenufa & i would rather dance to Vince Giordano-- we'll do the Atomic Dog!!

Yes. I've always been greatly in favour of music developed from the bottom up, by the audience. Anything else smacks to me of someone in authority - be it a genius like Coltrane or Parker, or an insufficiently anonymous A&R man like Mitch Miller or Norrie Paramor - telling me what I should be listening to; and I resent that. And that's what this stuff is, too.

MG

How do you figure that? Who is this "authority"? Daptone is an independent lable! Who is stuffing Sharon Jones down our throats? Who?

Is this because the Dap Kings have become a cause-celebre thanks to Mark Ronson and Amy Winehouse?

[Alexander]

real crate diggers don't need it...

"Real crate diggers" are obscurantist snobs who try to out-do one another with rare "finds." According to such people, Erskine Tate is vastly superior to Duke Ellington because fewer people have heard of Tate. It's STUPID. Good is good, no matter who makes it, where it's made, or even why. Good music can be made simply in the name of profits. In fact, it happens more often than people would like to admit...

[analogak]

weren't the dipp kings making efforts to conceal their own "identities"? such as making their albums seemed old, attributed to other "fake" musicians, etc? seems like even they know it is kinda bogus.

but jesus, alexander, it is all in good fun. it's FUN. not particularly substantial. not too deep and it isn't life or death. no need to flip out on people who have most definitely heard a lot of music (not i-i mean clem and MG).

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

real crate diggers don't need it; it's for yuppie nostalgics & others for whom a retro black woman is "warming," or some such shit like that... i ain't doubting Tejas who says they're better than a jillion other attempts that are unbearable even one song at a time but edc is with the Dumps here-- seriously bogus over anything but the briefest "close listening" time. & yeah jenufa & i would rather dance to Vince Giordano-- we'll do the Atomic Dog!!

Yes. I've always been greatly in favour of music developed from the bottom up, by the audience. Anything else smacks to me of someone in authority - be it a genius like Coltrane or Parker, or an insufficiently anonymous A&R man like Mitch Miller or Norrie Paramor - telling me what I should be listening to; and I resent that. And that's what this stuff is, too.

MG

How do you figure that? Who is this "authority"? Daptone is an independent lable! Who is stuffing Sharon Jones down our throats? Who?

Is this because the Dap Kings have become a cause-celebre thanks to Mark Ronson and Amy Winehouse?

I don't know who Amy Winehouse and Mark Ronson are, except that I've read a little bit about them in the thread.

I made no mention of anyone stuffing anything down my throat. Or yours. What I'm talking about is the creation of what's deemed, by someone who has access in the way that most members of the audience haven't, to be quality. It's all very well saying, "good is good" but, if one isn't particularly interested in "good", it don't cut no ice. I'm not interested in what's good, though it's useful to know about, so much as what comes up from the audience - and that's what excites me. A lot of it isn't good. And a lot of it is. But I don't prefer either to the other. Quality is irrelevant (except when I feel like it )

MG

[Alexander]

Mark Ronson played some pretty good guitar on some of Michael Chapman's "Fully Qualified Survivor" (Paul Buckmaster was there too) & also the Rolling Thunder Review.

why the fuck anyone would care about this dip dap pop pap if not "live" or getting ready to hit it from behind--

besides the fact that if NPR says it's "funky," then it sho' is, boss--

when there's the likes of this, largely unheard by ya'll -->

King's Serious Soul

not everythng there scorches-- there are a few unfortunate dogshit nods to hackass Motown sounds-- but most of it beats dap's year in three minutes or less.

Remember, Motown is "hackass" because they sold a lot of records and are beloved by all. Nothing that gains wide acceptance can possibly be good, because (as we all know so well) people are stupid and have terrible taste. Only rare individuals - such as clem - have the ability to separate the wheat from the chaff. The rest of us, alas, are far too stupid. We (chuckle) actually believe that we LIKE things. We think that because things *sound* good to us, that we actually enjoy them. Foolish, foolish us!

So remember, kids...daddy edc knows best!

[Alexander]

real crate diggers don't need it; it's for yuppie nostalgics & others for whom a retro black woman is "warming," or some such shit like that... i ain't doubting Tejas who says they're better than a jillion other attempts that are unbearable even one song at a time but edc is with the Dumps here-- seriously bogus over anything but the briefest "close listening" time. & yeah jenufa & i would rather dance to Vince Giordano-- we'll do the Atomic Dog!!

Yes. I've always been greatly in favour of music developed from the bottom up, by the audience. Anything else smacks to me of someone in authority - be it a genius like Coltrane or Parker, or an insufficiently anonymous A&R man like Mitch Miller or Norrie Paramor - telling me what I should be listening to; and I resent that. And that's what this stuff is, too.

MG

How do you figure that? Who is this "authority"? Daptone is an independent lable! Who is stuffing Sharon Jones down our throats? Who?

Is this because the Dap Kings have become a cause-celebre thanks to Mark Ronson and Amy Winehouse?

I don't know who Amy Winehouse and Mark Ronson are, except that I've read a little bit about them in the thread.

I made no mention of anyone stuffing anything down my throat. Or yours. What I'm talking about is the creation of what's deemed, by someone who has access in the way that most members of the audience haven't, to be quality. It's all very well saying, "good is good" but, if one isn't particularly interested in "good", it don't cut no ice. I'm not interested in what's good, though it's useful to know about, so much as what comes up from the audience - and that's what excites me. A lot of it isn't good. And a lot of it is. But I don't prefer either to the other. Quality is irrelevant (except when I feel like it )

MG

You're not interested in "good." So...what? You're after terrible? Pretty good? What?

What does "come up from the audience" mean, anyway? People don't usually go to a show to hear what "comes up from the audience" but to hear what's going *down* on stage. If you mean that you're interested in "folk" music (as in music that comes from "the people"), I would argue that you're describing pretty much all of American popular music ("popular" in the sense of "from the people" rather than "well liked") including the drek that gets played on "top 40" radio.

[Alexander]

weren't the dipp kings making efforts to conceal their own "identities"? such as making their albums seemed old, attributed to other "fake" musicians, etc? seems like even they know it is kinda bogus.

but jesus, alexander, it is all in good fun. it's FUN. not particularly substantial. not too deep and it isn't life or death. no need to flip out on people who have most definitely heard a lot of music (not i-i mean clem and MG).

You seem to be arguing in favor of "authenticity." These guys play like 60s and 70s soul musicians, but they're really early 21st century kids! They're poseurs! Only "real" soul music is of value. The fact that they play their asses is of little value. In fact, it only makes it worse, since they might actually fool some poor sap into believing that this really *is* classic soul music. And how dare they!

See, your argument only holds water if you actually give a shit about "authenticity." I don't. Ask clem. I'll listen to ANYTHING so long as it sounds good to me. Anything at all. I actually OWN a Christina Aguilera album! The shame!

[analogak]

don't you think it is offensive people toiled to create "music" and then some technically adept people come along years later and are able to ape the music to a tee yet not add much and people like you who have no desire to 'dig in the crates" accept it for what it attempts to be and wants you to see it as rather than the pastiche it actually is? people like you without the desire or knowhow or gumption of someone like clem or MG who do not do this extra work and take what is fed to you, (which is fine)...but the problem is you then defend it to the death whereas you should be smiling and laughing and forgetting about it in three years like your favorite porn starlet of the moment (when will you forget about your treasured aguiliera album?) do you think clem or MG give a dump if you insult something they like? if you tell MG that willis jackson and jack mcduff were a boring and uninspiring duo will he flip out? i doubt it.

[Alexander]

don't you think it is offensive people toiled to create "music" and then some technically adept people come along years later and are able to ape the music to a tee yet not add much and people like you who have no desire to 'dig in the crates" accept it for what it attempts to be and wants you to see it as rather than the pastiche it actually is? people like you without the desire or knowhow or gumption of someone like clem or MG who do not do this extra work and take what is fed to you, (which is fine)...but the problem is you then defend it to the death whereas you should be smiling and laughing and forgetting about it in three years like your favorite porn starlet of the moment (when will you forget about your treasured aguiliera album?) do you think clem or MG give a dump if you insult something they like? if you tell MG that willis jackson and jack mcduff were a boring and uninspiring duo will he flip out? i doubt it.

See, what's funny is that you really don't know anything about me or what I know. I've got more than 3000 CDs in my basement. I've got HUNDREDS of LPs. Some of these things are pop ephemera (I happen to LOVE pop ephemera), and some are exactly the same things that clem and MG listen to. You must have missed the thread where clem challenged me to identify an obscure musician (relatively obscure, anyway) only to find that I not only knew who she was, but owned several of her albums. Once again, I'll listen to ANYTHING that sounds good and I'm always on the prowl for the next thing. Sometimes it's someone really famous and popular (Elvis, the Beatles, Sinatra) and sometimes it's someone who's totally obscure (Frankie "Half-Pint" Jaxson, Dock Boggs, Rabbit Brown). My collection runs the gamut from hip hop to jug bands. I love it all.

Everybody has a hobby horse. Mine happens to be pop music. I see pop music everywhere: in jazz, blues, country, bluegrass, hip hop, funk, punk, ska, reggae, rock steady...you name it, I have it and I listen to it. If I hear something I don't like, I don't turn it off. I listen to it over and over until I FIND something to appreciate in it.

Some people would say that life's too short to make yourself find something worthwhile in music that doesn't immediately appeal to you. I say that there's too much out there to limit yourself.

As to your comment about whether it's "offensive" that musicians like the Dap Kings can recreate a sound that artists in the past worked so hard to create...actually, I don't think it is. At all. I see what the Dap Kings do as an expression of their love and deep appreciation for this music. How else could they learn to play it so well?

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Mark Ronson played some pretty good guitar on some of Michael Chapman's "Fully Qualified Survivor" (Paul Buckmaster was there too) & also the Rolling Thunder Review.

why the fuck anyone would care about this dip dap pop pap if not "live" or getting ready to hit it from behind--

besides the fact that if NPR says it's "funky," then it sho' is, boss--

when there's the likes of this, largely unheard by ya'll -->

King's Serious Soul

not everythng there scorches-- there are a few unfortunate dogshit nods to hackass Motown sounds-- but most of it beats dap's year in three minutes or less.

Remember, Motown is "hackass" because they sold a lot of records and are beloved by all. Nothing that gains wide acceptance can possibly be good, because (as we all know so well) people are stupid and have terrible taste. Only rare individuals - such as clem - have the ability to separate the wheat from the chaff. The rest of us, alas, are far too stupid. We (chuckle) actually believe that we LIKE things. We think that because things *sound* good to us, that we actually enjoy them. Foolish, foolish us!

So remember, kids...daddy edc knows best!

It's funny the way one reads words. To you, "hackass Motown sounds" seems to mean that Motown was a hackass company. To me, it means the hackass sounds created by Motown.

Motown started out doing some pretty interesting stuff. Then, in late 1963, they found a formula, based on great records like "Heat wave" and "Can I get a witness". By '64, the formula was THE thing that Motown was doing - the music became generally unexciting (though with more than a few great things like "Bernadette" and "Shotgun" poking through) until Norman Whitfield got on the scene and broke that mould (and maybe created a new one) - then Marvin Gaye, then Stevie Wonder, then Rick James. Motown wasn't a hackass company but a hell of a lot of that late '60s stuff of theirs was. And it was widely imitated. The thing that was really "hackass" about it was that it COULD be widely and easily imitated.

MG

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

You must have missed the thread where clem challenged me to identify an obscure musician (relatively obscure, anyway) only to find that I not only knew who she was, but owned several of her albums.

I missed that thread (although I don't need to read it to know you've broad tastes, and a good deal more knowledge than I in certain areas) - please link so I can enjoy it!

MG

[JSngry]

Hey, all I'm saying is that that first SJ/DT album sounded good and felt even better. I can take that one to the bank and/or grave And that's the one I started the thread about, btw.

The second one was good enough, but "songwriting stress" was beginning to poke through, I thought.

And I've yet to pick up on the third one, figuring that what they've had to do, they've already gotten done, and from here on out it's "career". No shame in that, but I generally let others pick up the story from there.

Now, as far as "authenticity", "mimicry", etc. Hey. hear me now & never believe me if that's what it takes, but know it to be true anyway - what they did on that first album is damn near miraculous. Fuck "authenticity" and all that, that's just reverse snobbishness if when/if it gets played out in the realm of "easy dismissal" and Othe Ways To Keep You From Having To Confront Reality. Copping a "style" is one thing, and copping somebody else's "groove" is too. But making the shit feel right is a spiritual act. Making it feel "real" is a yet another gimmick, but making it feel right is something you can either do or not do, period. And I will say that on the two SJDT records I've heard, especially the first, the shit feels right. And I'm old enough & experienced enough in playing the "real thing" in it's "natural environment" to be conceited enough to think that I might have half a clue as to what I'm talking about, But then again, hey.

Where the flatline with this whole thing is, as I implied above, material. You can only go to somebody else's well so many times, ya' know? Now, about that I can listen to doubts, cynicism, etc., and about that lies the root of literally millions of chances to walk down the road to hell.

So if we want to talk about specifics like that, hey, ok. But don't come to me with argumets about "in priciple" or other generalities that deal in perceptions about what any peoples should or should not "do", because peoples are some unpredictable-ass motherfuckers sometimes who will make shit happen that by "law" shouldn't exist, especially in the realm of love and musical/spiritual/chronlogical copulations. Chaos theory is real, Jack, and sometimes shit happens that you can deny by theory all you want, and yet there it is, standing in your living room, pissing on your furniture, realer than your daddy's dick.

And yet.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Yes well, coming to this late, I have a different perspective from you. And I think I listened to more recent stuff than the first album, anyway. So I won't say you're wrong.

MG

[John L]

dance music at best-- which ain't bad, if ya'll really gots the shimmy-she-wobble but... OTHERWISE--

That's just the point, Clem. The Dap-Kings are not trying to be anything else. They are just trying to make the best booty-shaking funk that they can in the grand tradition, and they are doing a good job at at. What is wrong with that? They can go into anybody's town and do the people to death. Why does there have to be some additional metaphysical baggage with it all?

Some bands still play good New Orleans jazz in New Orleans. Thank God for that. Why is it a bad thing that a band in the 21st century is playing what is still the favorite dance music of many of us?

I wish that the Sharon and the Dap-Kings were playing New Year's Eve in my town. I would be there for sure.

[JSngry]

Ah, the whole "it's only dance music" thing rears it's head again.

Yeah, whatever. We too cool to dance, right?

When it comes down to it, people who won't dance are dangerous far more often than those who will.

I've seen it, and I believe it.

[Alexander]

Ah, the whole "it's only dance music" thing rears it's head again.

Yeah, whatever. We too cool to dance, right?

When it comes down to it, people who won't dance are dangerous far more often than those who will.

I've seen it, and I believe it.

I wonder if Hitler and Stalin danced. Or if Hitler ever danced with Stalin...

[John L]

Ah, the whole "it's only dance music" thing rears it's head again.

Yeah, whatever. We too cool to dance, right?

When it comes down to it, people who won't dance are dangerous far more often than those who will.

I've seen it, and I believe it.

I wonder if Hitler and Stalin danced. Or if Hitler ever danced with Stalin...

I hear that they did the Polka together in the middle of Poland.

[clifford_thornton]

Can't get with Das EFX, but the Fu-Schnicken scene is hot (hadn't heard them before).

I saw, scrolling thru my sister's iPod, the Dap Kings. I didn't feel like listening myself - was too busy digging on Tony Ortega to be bothered.

So, I remain uneducated in that but moreso in Brooklyn hip-hop.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Stuff. Urgent. Thanks.

MG

[John L]

(or is this too black, too strong for the masses?)

(Or is this too white for the supremely hip cognoscenti?)

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

(or is this too black, too strong for the masses?)

(Or is this too white for the supremely hip cognoscenti?)

Good message! And suddenly no answer in sight.

MG

[JSngry]

Mr. Jim duly notes & more than casually shares edc's "reading of the scene" in this and many other regards. But Mr. Jim also wants it duly noted that Mr. Jim feels that there are some krazy kozmic unpredicktable points at which the individual reality & the collective dogma diverge, violently split, with each being irrevocably true on their own turf, even if both are simulataneously irrevocably true thereon/therein.

Of and by such irreconcilable contradictions does life become interesting as a participatory, rather than a spectator, sport.

[clifford_thornton]

(or is this too black, too strong for the masses?)

(Or is this too white for the supremely hip cognoscenti?)

I've seen him live and he's good.

Dude is actually albino.

[analogak]

that song sounds a little amateur night at the nuyorican.